Charlie Rangel

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark), a senior member of the Ways and Means Committee and a hardworking member.

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman said the Wall Street Journal says we are doing well. The Main Street Journal says people are going into bankruptcy. They are losing their pensions; they are losing their health insurance. It depends on what paper you read. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin), an outstanding member of the Ways and Means Committee. (Mr. LEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin), a senior member, hardworking member, in the Ways and Means Committee. (Mr. CARDIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), our outstanding minority whip.

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I do not know what kind of water they drink on the other side of the aisle, but back where I come from, you get a check that tells you how much you have earned and how much is deducted, and what is deducted is a tax and what you take home is net. So you can call it payroll, you can call it income tax, but a tax is a tax is a tax. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from the State of Washington (Mr. McDermott), an outstanding member of the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I am glad to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis), the conscience of the Congress, from the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal), an outstanding member of the Ways and Means Committee. (Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett), a hardworking member of the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. RANGEL. Yes, in its present form.

Mr. RANGEL. Yeah, that next bill will probably be $100 billion. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Pomeroy), an outstanding member of the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Jones), who makes outstanding contributions to the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Emanuel), an outstanding, valued member of our Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, for those who say that we will not have an opportunity to vote for a fair alternative minimum tax, I would like to share with you that on the motion to recommit that we give instructions that we will have an opportunity to do that. Why are the Republicans so excited about enacting the cuts and interest rates and capital gains taxes for something that does not expire when 17 million, 18 million people need help? I don't know, but they want to give this $50 billion tax cut to people who are not screaming for it. Where are they going to get the money? They are going to borrow the money in order to give the tax cuts, so that on our motion to recommit we set aside these tax cuts for the rich and concentrate on the middle class. This is really where your vote should be counted. Do you want to deal where 50 percent of this tax cut is going to the top 1 percent of the country, or are you really concerned with the alternative minimum tax that we Democrats have been advocating for the last few years that these people were not supposed to be caught up in this, and so we don't want them caught up in this. We don't pay for it, we borrow money to do it. It is paid for. It just seems to me that as we talk about the economy booming, that as we go home, I hope we talk with the people that worked in the factory. The increase that we have had in job creation, 50 percent of it has been an expansion in government jobs. I am certain that this is not what the other side is so proud of. But as you walk the street and ask the people that work every day that are concerned about their pensions, concerned about their health care, the Delta pilots on strike, our automobile industry in jeopardy, why don't you ask these people about this great economic boom that you are talking about, and now you got to promise them more. I am glad that we have come to this time in this session that we can distinguish between Republicans and Democrats and we can see the difference between us. I think what you are saying if you give these enormous tax cuts to the richest people, sooner or later it will leak down to the people who are working on the jobs. I can understand how some people do not believe that a Medicare tax or that a Social Security tax is a tax. You may call it a fish, you may call it a fishing pole. But when people work every day and they know what their salary really is and they see what they take home, they think what is taken out is a tax. Maybe in November we will see who is right and who is wrong. Meanwhile, this is an opportunity for America to distinguish do we borrow money for tax cuts and do we cut those people off that are relying on Medicaid and Medicare and reduce their services that we are supposed to give them. I think this is a classic case as we see more and more poor people becoming poor statistically and more of the rich people getting rich and more of the middle class people losing that status, and the people know who they are. If the old folks really think that they have gotten a fair shake by the other side, well, then, they can be heard. They have an opportunity to be heard. But right now what we are talking about is fairness, we are talking about equity, we are talking about services. Clearly, we are talking about $70 billion or at least $50 billion of that going to the richest people that we have in this country. The AMT should have been handled separately, and we hope that the motion to recommit will carry, and therefore we would see what honest Americans really believe as to where the relief is going to be. The biggest fault that we have probably on our side is that we don't rub shoulders with the billionaires and millionaires that you are doing this for. But we do work for the American people. We do know what they want, and I have not received one letter from people asking me to give more relief in that upper income tax bracket. I, for one, refuse to wait for this to leak down and be able to help the middle class people that made this great republic the great country that it is. People who work hard every day, not just cutting coupons to make this country great, people who volunteer to fight this great war, which we are paying $500 billion a month, these are the people we should be supporting and not the richest of the rich that make no sacrifice at all. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, again I rise to offer yet another much deserved tribute to the Harlem Congregations for Community Improvement, Inc. (HCCI) and to also enter into the Record the wording directly from a New York State Assembly Citation proudly bestowed upon the HCCI in recognition of the HCCI's exemplary contributions to the citizens of Harlem. The HCCI, founded in 1986, is a diverse inter-faith consortium of more than 90 congregations established to revitalize the Central Harlem community. Needless to say, the HCCI continues to make a substantial impact in Harlem. To sing the praises of this dynamic organization I will reiterate some of the initiatives they have successfully launched and maintained over the last twenty years. The HCCI is responsible for developing low and moderate income housing, creating supportive health and human services facilities and programs, providing commercial development opportunities for local businesses, expanding cultural programs, and providing assistance to families and individuals living with disabilities by providing housing and support facilities. On April 27, 2006 during the HCCI's 20th anniversary gala dinner celebration held at the Rockefeller Center's Rainbow Room in New York City, HCCI honored the Bank of New York with their ``Community Development Award'' recognizing the bank's support of HCCI's comprehensive community development initiatives in Harlem, in particular, the bank's operating support for the organization and mortgage financing to HCCI clients. The Bank of New York offers affordable mortgage loan products for first time homebuyers, homeowners seeking refinancing, home renovation, reverse mortgages and also provides construction loans to both not-for-profit and for-profit housing developers. The bank, through its program support, has been instrumental in contributing to the remarkable revitalization initiatives in Harlem. As Lloyd Brown, executive vice president of the Bank of New York stated during the award acceptance speech . . . ``We congratulate HCCI on its 20th year of community service in Harlem . . . (HCCI) is an organization that is successful in building affordable housing, creating commercial and job opportunities and providing health and social services to the people of Harlem.'' I join Mr. Brown to add my heartfelt congratulations. Mr. Speaker, lastly, I would like to acknowledge and enter into the Record the wording from the prestigious citation bestowed upon the Harlem Congregations for Community Improvement, Inc. by the New York State Assembly. New York State Assembly Citation Whereas, Harlem Congregations for Community Improvement (HCCI) was founded in 1986 as a consortium of 16 Harlem Churches, whose first president was the late Bishop Preston R. Washington, Sr. and today has a membership of over 90 Churches, Mosques and a Synagogue; Whereas, HCCI began as a grassroots planning and organizing initiative, that has raised millions of dollars through ecclesiastical, entrepreneurial, and educational partnerships throughout the years. HCCl's interminable drive to improve the quality of life of all Harlemites, and dedication to community service is evidenced in the reversal of urban blight and deterioration concurrently, block by block; Whereas, quality affordable housing has been the centerpiece of HCCl's services to the community from the beginning and to date has over 2,000 units of truly affordable housing built through innovative cross sector collaborations including elected officials, housing departments and banking institutions; Whereas, HCCI has enhanced the livelihoods of many through adult education programs, welfare to work training literacy, trades and construction and computer technology and programming with proven success in job readiness and placement; Whereas, HCCI has taken the leadership in addressing health issues affecting the community, most notably is the pilot program Community Organizations and Congregations for Health that offers technical assistance to faith based institutions to start non-profits that sustain HIV/AIDS prevention services; Whereas, a Great State is only as great as those persons who give exemplary service to their community, whether through participation in voluntary programs, through unique personal achievement in their professional or other endeavors or simply through a lifetime of good citizenry; and Whereas, such services, which is truly the lifeblood of the community and state, so often goes unrecognized and unrewarded; now, therefore, be it Resolved, that as a duly elected Member of the State Assembly of New York, I recognize that in Harlem Congregations for Community Improvement we have outstanding citizens, ones who are worthy of the esteem of both the Community and the great State of New York.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the life of Earl Woods, a gentleman who was more determined to raise a good son than a great golfer. As a testament to his legacy I submit that he achieved both goals. Sadly, Earl Woods passed away today at the age of 74. Earl Woods was born March 5, 1932, in Manhattan, Kansas, the youngest of six children. His parents died by the time he was 13. His father wanted him to play for the Kansas City Monarchs in the Negro Leagues, and his mother stressed education. He eventually attended Kansas State, graduating in 1953 with a degree in sociology and he also fulfilled his obligation to play baseball. More than a dedicated father, Earl was a true mentor, a dedicated soldier, an author and a coach extraordinaire. During his lifetime, Earl Woods played catcher for Kansas State; the first black to play baseball in the Big Eight Conference. He was also a Green Beret in the U.S. Army Special Forces. He served for two tours in Vietnam rising to the rank of lieutenant colonel. His second tour shaped the latter part of his life. He met his soon-to-be second wife Kultida Punsawad, a receptionist in Thailand and they wed in 1969. He fought alongside a Vietnamese friend who he nicknamed because of his courage and bravery. Earl promised Tiger Phong that he would name a son after him. Eldrick ``Tiger'' Woods was born December 30, 1975. Earl Woods was instrumental in helping his son establish the Tiger Woods Foundation and he also wrote a book, ``Training a Tiger: A Father's Guide to Raising a Winner in Both Golf and Life'' to share his experiences of guiding and nurturing his son. Most people identify with Earl Woods as Tiger Woods' father. Yes it is true that Earl Woods had done a remarkable job raising a son who was empowered to chose his direction, accept responsibility, and stay committed, focused and honest as he journeyed into becoming a role model with great character. Earl Woods made sure that Tiger had tools essential to his development as he grew into a good person first and a championship golfer second. Earl Woods was extremely proud of his youngest son. I know he can rest assured that his legacy will live on. He devoted countless hours to shaping and molding his son's character and making sure that Tiger was ``mentally strong.'' He told Tiger, when he was a young man, ``You'll never run into another person as mentally tough as you.'' Tiger believes his dad. In a statement made by Tiger today he admits, ``I wouldn't be where I am today without (my father), and I'm honored to continue his legacy of sharing and caring.'' This statement is a true testament to how the love and dedication of Earl Woods was the reason for Tiger Woods' success. Mr. Speaker: I send heartfelt condolences to Kultida, Tiger, and the rest of the Woods family as they mourn the passing of their loved one. I pay tribute to an extraordinary man who left an indelible impression in his own right.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of an article published in the New York Carib News urging passage of the ``American Dream Act''. This act has bipartisan support in Congress and it needs much more support so that it can be passed in the House. The act enables U.S.-raised immigrant students to go to college which will put them on the correct path toward citizenship. The National Council of La Raza (NCLR) is the largest national Hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization in the U.S., has expressed a great amount of support for this very important piece of legislation. There are many students in the country who have little to look forward to after high school. The article points out that every year 65,000 young people who are brought to the U.S. by their parents cannot seek higher education after high school due to their status as immigrants. That fact of life hinders them from further enjoying the wealth and opportunity of our Nation. I fully support the passage of this bill in the House. Passage of this bill will allow for talented students to have access to higher education, something they otherwise would not have. This will show our strong-willed commitment to offering the best opportunities for those that work hard. Everyone deserves an equal chance for an education. We cannot delay any longer the passage of this bill since graduation is just around the comer for many students. We need to further encourage our young people to achieve more and to better their lives and the lives of their families. Americans must understand that the power of the American Dream is that it is extended to all those who seek it. It shall be available today just as it was for their forbearers' centuries ago. I enter into the Record this article for highlighting the importance of an effective and comprehensive immigration reform policy. This country is about allowing all those who wish to work hard to advance their status the opportunity to do so. It should be in the best interest of our nation and the people to provide education to the children of immigrant families and to extend the same assistance that we would want extended to us in time of need. NCLR Supports ``The American Dream Act'' and Urges New Legislation To Improve Access to College Washington, DC--The National Council of La Raza (NCLR), the largest national Hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization in the U.S., expressed strong support to ``The American Dream Act'' recently introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives by Representatives Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R- FL), Howard Berman (D-CA), and Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-CA) . . . This bipartisan legislation will enable U.S.-raised immigrant students to go to college and start on the path to citizenship. ``This bill will give thousands of young people who have worked hard in school and have demonstrated a willingness to contribute to this country the chance to follow their dreams to college,'' stated Janet Murguia, NCLR President and CEO. ``We are pleased that Republicans and Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee came together to include the language of the `DREAM Act' (S. 2075), which also broadens access to college, as part of the immigration legislation now under debate. We urge the House to follow the Senate's lead and approve `The American Dream Act' as soon as possible.'' Every year, 65,000 young people whose parents brought them to the U.S. as babies or toddlers graduate from American high schools. While they have the academic credentials to pursue a higher education, their immigration status bars them from opportunities that make a college education affordable--in- state tuition rates, loans and grants, most private scholarships, and the ability to work legally to earn their way through college. ``The American Dream Act'' and its companion legislation in the Senate will significantly increase access to college for talented young people who otherwise would not be able to seek higher education. ``With graduation around the corner, Congress cannot delay in passing this bill. Otherwise, high school will be the end of the road for thousands of students who have worked hard in school and aspire to contribute to our society as productive, tax-paying workers. These young people are certain to add to the great abundance and economic vitality of this country. Congress must not fail these students and their families by continuing to keep the doors to college and the American Dream closed to them,'' concluded Murguia.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in acknowledgment of a recent opinion editorial in the Washington Post and an editorial in the New York Times which called for comprehensive immigration reform and the fair treatment of undocumented immigrants in this country. It is clear to me that this is only the beginning and that much more is coming. On May 1st there was a Latino national strike in which tens of thousands of people did not show up for work in support of their cause. Strikes took place in cities such as New York, Chicago, Denver, Atlanta, and Los Angeles. Millions are taking to the streets to make sure that their voices are heard. They want to make Americans nationwide understand that they are not here to harm anyone, but to work and support their families alike. These are people with values like our own and who also share our ethics of working hard to support oneself. Many in this country are not willing to take the necessary time to assess the struggle that immigrant families go through. Why is it that their contributions to our society are often ignored while their exploitation goes unnoticed? These are the people that make our meals, trim our hedges and construct our buildings, yet will we continue to regard them forever as second- class citizens? We must no longer continue on this dangerous path. The op ed in the Washington Post noted that, ``something important is happening--something that goes beyond the debate on Capitol Hill about immigration reform'', and that statement has never been more valid than now. There is a serious desire of immigrants to become members of our community, through hard work and patriotism, fundamental principles we all hold close to our hearts. The goal of this government should not be to erect barriers that hinder people from contributing and achieving the American Dream, but to help those who seek our assistance so that they can become productive members of our society. We must take decisive action to ensure a fair and equitable immigration policy. We must make it so that no one in this country feels like a second-class citizen. We must make it so that everyone has a equal footing for advance and prosper. This movement should be a way to bring our minority communities together, especially the African American community. We should see this as an opportunity to help others who have experienced something we all have in common, discrimination. I enter into the Record, these opinion editorials by Eugene Robinson and the New York Times editorial for their different perspectives on such a controversial topic. This is truly an issue that has started to divide our country instead of unite it. We must come to this issue of immigration with a clearer view, one that does not include our cultural biases and hatred for those different than ourselves. The editorial asks if the message has sunken in yet with the American people. We are hearing their message and I hope that it starts to sink in. [From the New York Times, May 2, 2006] A Wave's First Strike (By Eugene Robinson) The construction sites I drove past on my way to work yesterday were abnormally quiet, almost tranquil, without the usual bustle of organized chaos, Every once in a while, a crane indolently traced its arc; every once in a while, a truck arrived or departed. But the basic activity involved in putting up an office building--picking stuff up and carrying it from here, where the crane or the trucks left it, to there, where it's needed--went largely undone. In Washington's Mount Pleasant neighborhood, long a magnet for Latino immigrants, it felt almost like a Sunday morning. Few people were out and about, and only about half the local businesses were open. On the padlocked doors of a pharmacy, a dental clinic, a barbershop, a wire transfer office where immigrants send money home to their families, and other offices were taped identical fliers, with a notice in Spanish and English: ``We will be closed on Monday May 1st in support of the Latino national strike.'' Two middle-aged women who identified themselves as Maria and Sonia (neither would give a last name) strolled past, pointing out all the closed businesses. ``This action is a good idea, a very good idea, because we have to support all the people who are here without papers,'' said Maria, who, like her friend, is from El Salvador. ``We came here to work hard, not to harm anyone. Salvadorans are hard workers. We're not criminals.'' All morning local Spanish-language radio hummed with urgent news and advice. There would be a demonstration in the afternoon at Malcolm X Park. This was to be a day of peaceful solidarity. No one should jeopardize his or her job; if you have to go to work, join the demonstration later. It's too early to judge the impact of yesterday's nationwide ``Day Without Immigrants'' protest, but it's past time to recognize that something important is happening-- something that goes beyond the debate on Capitol Hill about immigration reform. At this point it's harder to say just what this nascent Latino movement is than to point out what it is not. It's certainly not a monolith. There has been spirited internal debate, for example, over ``Nuestro Himno,'' the Spanish-language version of ``The Star-Spangled Banner'' that was released by an all-star chorus of Latino recording artists last week. Some heard a genuine expression of patriotism; others heard an unnecessary and unwise provocation. Maybe it was neither. Maybe ``Nuestro Himno'' was a step in forging and tempering a stronger pan-Latino identity and political consciousness. Black people have skin color as a factor to unite us; Latinos, who can be of any race, have Spanish. But let me be clear: We can also say that the movement whose birth we are witnessing is not a clone or even a descendant of the civil rights movement that won for African Americans our place in this society. There's just no way to compare a group of people whose ancestors were brought here in chains, forced to work as slaves and then systematically classified as second-class citizens for more than a century with another group of people, however hard-working or well- meaning, who came to the United States voluntarily. That said, I am convinced that the nation's two biggest minorities are natural allies, not rivals, and that a crucial task over the coming months and years will be to find ways for African Americans and Latinos to work together. Our histories may be different, but we have at least one big thing--discrimination--in common. For the two groups to fight over low-skilled, low-wage jobs would be a tragic waste of time and effort. The issue is how both African Americans and Latinos can claim a fair share of this nation's vast wealth and opportunity, not how we can wrestle the scraps from one another. The issue is who gets to occupy the corner office during working hours, not who gets to clean it at night. Congress may do something reasonable on immigration, giving the estimated 12 million people already here without papers a chance to become citizens or legal residents, but there's no guarantee. It may be that there's no common ground among the president, the House and the Senate--at least not in an election year. But if you take the long view, I'm not sure that Capitol Hill is where the real news is happening. Yesterday the news was happening at construction sites, where it was demonstrated that steel, lumber and glass will not move from here to there on their own. [From the Washington Post, May 2, 2006] They Are America Warnings of a crippling immigrant boycott did not come true yesterday. The economy survived. But what may not survive--we hope--is people's willful misunderstanding of the nature of the immigrant-rights movement. The worst among our citizens and politicians are eager to depict illegal immigrants as criminals, potential terrorists and alien invaders. But what we saw yesterday, in huge, peaceful rallies in Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Chicago, Denver, New York, Atlanta and other cities, were regular people: the same types of assimilation-minded moms, dads and children we wistfully romanticize on holidays devoted to, say, St. Patrick and Columbus. If these extraordinarily positive events were a protest of anything, it was the idea of the immigrant as temporary and unwelcome guest worker. The marches flew in the face of theories that undocumented workers want nothing but to labor unnoticed and separate from the nation that employs them to make its meals, trim its hedges and slaughter its beef. These immigrants, weary of silent servitude, are speaking up and asking for something simple: a chance to work to become citizens, with all the obligations and opportunities that go with it. Our lawmakers, to their discredit, have erected barriers within barriers, created legal hurdles and bureaucratic hoops, and dangled the opportunity for lowly guest-worker status without the citizenship to go with it. It is an invitation to create a society with a permanent underclass deprived of any ladder to something better. It is a path to creating a different, and lower, vision of our country and ourselves. It is not only the border-obsessed Minutemen who should be shamed by yesterday's joyous outpouring. Lawmakers who have stymied comprehensive immigration reform with stalemated name-calling and cold electoral calculation should listen up. A silent, shadow population is speaking with one voice. The message, aimed at Washington but something the whole country should hear, is clear: We are America. We want to join you. It's a simple message. It should be sinking in by now.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to praise New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg for taking the initiative of bringing the issue of gun violence to the forefront. This is truly an important topic for discussion. Mayor Bloomberg is aware of the many problems caused by gun violence and he knows first hand the commitment needed to adequately address it. Mayor Bloomberg knows just how serious this issue has become in major cities across America. As a result, just this past week, he called for a conference in New York City of a few big city mayors in what was labeled ``national leadership in the war on gun violence''. Gun violence in many of our nation's cities is on the rise, and will continue to be if no serious action is taken. Mayor Bloomberg feels that since neither the White House nor Congress has taken any real steps toward addressing the issue, it must fall to state and local governments to handle. I want to stress the fact that this responsibility should not fall solely on state and local governments, but equally on us in the Congress. Congress needs to see what can be done to assist those in our home districts dealing with gun violence. Have we forgotten about them? We should be able to provide our cities with any type of assistance that they need, especially on an issue so vital. Congress needs to reinstate the assault weapons ban act of 1994 which sadly expired in September of 2004. Allowing this law to expire does not show our resolve on gun trafficking and I believe that it renders us irrelevant. Mayor Bloomberg is a Republican and has teamed up with Democratic mayors in particular Mayor Menino of Boston and has in essence left the partisanship at the door for the sake of the people they were elected to serve. Mayor Bloomberg and Mayor Thomas Menino of Boston have made the case that this is in no way an attack on the culture of hunting, a sport practiced by many in this country. However, they realize that ``it's a difference in how guns are used''. In rural areas, guns are used for collection and hunting, but in inner cities, guns are ``used almost entirely to threatened or kill other human beings''. I enter into the Record the opinion editorial by E.J. Dionne, Jr. published by the Washington Post for the new insight it presented and acknowledgment of various big city mayors for the efforts to control guns. The mayors are leading the way toward stronger gun control and we must find ways to support this growing movement. [From the Washington Post, Apr. 28, 2006] A New Gun Argument--Mayors Turn the Political Issue to Saving Lives (By E.J. Dionne, Jr.) New York.--Have you noticed that Washington politicians have given up on thinking about new solutions to gun violence? New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has noticed, and he's angry. Good for him. Bloomberg is a Republican, if hardly a partisan sort, and it may take a Republican to restart a debate that many Democrats have fled after a careful examination of the electoral map--and years of exhaustion from demagoguery on the issue. Teaming up with Boston's Democratic mayor, Thomas Menino, Bloomberg brought 13 other big-city mayors together here on Tuesday to call for ``national leadership in the war on gun violence.'' ``If the leadership won't come from Congress or come from the White House, then it has to come from us,'' said Bloomberg. The mayors, Menino said, do not want to meddle with the rights of hunters. They are concerned about the trafficking of illegal guns and the powerlessness of individual cities to enforce their own weapons laws because of loopholes in federal rules and because criminals can easily obtain weapons in jurisdictions with looser regulations. Our dysfunctional political system has become especially dysfunctional on gun violence. The National Rifle Association regularly says that we don't need new laws and should simply enforce the regulations on the books. But if many of the existing laws are unenforceable, that statement is meaningless. Opponents of even modest gun regulation win the upper hand rhetorically by invoking two words: freedom and elitism. None of us is really free, the argument goes, unless all of us have essentially unfettered access to weapons, and any new gun laws are seen as leading down a slippery slope to a total ban on gun ownership. Supporters of gun regulations are always cast as metropolitan highbrows lacking in respect for the way of life of law-abiding country folks. At a structural level, Congress has a deep bias in favor of the rural point of view because the Senate is stacked in favor of rural states. Idaho, Wyoming and Montana have two senators each, and so do California, New York and Illinois. According to the latest Census Bureau estimates, the six senators from those three rural states represent 2,874,060 people. The six from the three states that include big urban and suburban populations represent 68,150,148 people. By these figures, you might calculate the rough odds against gun regulations at 24 to 1. Changing the political argument is easier than changing the Senate. Mayors--joined soon, Menino hopes, by suburban county executives--are the right people to start the work. Yes, there is a cultural difference between big cities and rural areas, but it's a difference in how guns are used. Rural people treasure their guns mostly for hunting and recreation, and as collectors. In inner cities, guns-- especially handguns--are used almost entirely to threaten or kill other human beings. ``There are neighborhoods where if you say `duck,' people get out of the way because they're worried they'll be shot,'' Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett said in an interview. ``But there are other parts of the country where if you say `duck,' people will grab their rifles to go duck hunting.'' We desperately need a new politics of gun regulation in which law-abiding gun owners see the fight for tougher laws not as a form of disrespect for their culture but as an acknowledgment that if our gun rules are an unenforceable hodgepodge, illegal guns will inevitably get into the hands of kids and criminals in the cities and suburbs. ``I'm fighting for freedom, too,'' said Barrett. ``I'm fighting for the freedom of a grandma to sit on her front porch and not get hit when there's a drive-by shooting. I'm fighting for the freedom of kids to play in the park without being caught in a crossfire.'' The mayors have to act for another reason: Democrats have lost their nerve on the gun issue. Barrett traces this to the passage of the assault weapons ban in 1994. (Congress let it expire in September 2004.) Many Democrats who supported the ban were defeated in that fall's election. ``So Democrats who might be inclined to do something are now inclined to stay away from the issue,'' said Barrett, a Democratic member of Congress at the time. ``And most Republicans aren't inclined to do anything at all.'' Railing against this state of affairs is useless. Better that a savvy group of mayors takes the lead in the difficult struggle to change the underlying politics by reminding Americans that this issue is about saving the lives of innocent kids--and of grandmas in their rocking chairs.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to enter into the Record an article submitted by the Congressional Black Caucus entitled ``Christensen Urges Managed Health Care Execs to Help Close Disparity Gap'' which addresses the disparities in health care as experienced by minorities in this country. On April 20, 2006, during the Capitol Summit: Politics in Healthcare event, Congresswoman Donna Christensen, in her role as the chairperson for the Congressional Black Caucus's Health Braintrust, addressed a group of managed health care executives to discuss the challenges facing health care organizations. Congresswoman Christensen focused on the disparities in care for all ethnic minorities in this country. As you will see as you read the submission, there are many challenges to overcome to ensure quality health care for all Americans. Ms. Christensen's statements are not all inclusive; they actually touch on the tip of the iceberg. We need to engage in much more dialog to keep this issue in the forefront and to make sure these messages reach not only corporate executives but everyone, particularly those who can directly affect a more positive outcome. To quote member Christensen: ``Lack of insurance and the resulting poor health undermines everyone else's health care''. I strongly agree that progress can be made through reinforcement of prevention and comprehensive care initiatives. We must all do our part to ensure that ``wellness is within the reach of everyone living in this country.'' Christensen Urges Managed Health Care Execs To Help Close Disparities Gap (April 20, 2006--Washington, D.C.)--Joining the efforts to reduce disparities in health care should be the business of all businesses big and small, according to Congresswoman Donna M. Christensen, who chairs the Congressional Black Caucus's Health Braintrust. Christensen addressed a gathering of managed health care executives on Thursday afternoon at the Capitol Summit: Politics in Healthcare event where executives examined and discussed the challenges facing healthcare organizations today including persistent disparities in the care that ethnic minorities receive in this country. ``Businesses can help to reduce their costs if they launch efforts to reduce and eliminate racial and ethnic health disparities,'' Christensen said. ``When employees receive inadequate or lower quality health care, costs are assumed by companies and businesses in increased rates of absenteeism or being sick at work, which results in lower rates of productivity, as well as in increased health care costs. `` Christensen applauded the group for including the issue of health disparities on their agenda. ``I am hopeful that your interest and the pressures that you are under regarding the provision of health care and its increasing costs will be the impetus for the change we need not just to heal our minority populations but the entire country,'' she said. ``Industry is coming to realize ahead of policy makers that early detection and management of some chronic and acute conditions may reduce the amount of health care needed and improve quality of life and improve outcomes.'' Christensen commended some businesses that have ``looked at health disparities among your own employees and the costs of care and are beginning to institute programs to improve both their health and your costs.'' Christensen said that it should be a matter of conscience that ``in the richest, most technologically advanced and supposed humanitarian country in the world . . . there are an estimated 100,000 annual preventable, premature, excess deaths in African Americans.'' Similar statistics exist in the Hispanic, Native American and Asian and Pacific Islander communities. ``For years politicians, community activists, advocates and organizations have been calling for an appropriate response to such devastating but preventable disease, disability and death in communities of color,'' she said. ``We have argued on the humanity of it, on the right and God-fearing thing to do.'' Christensen pointed to the role that un-insurance and underinsurance play in the persistence of health disparities and the effect that it has had on the wider community. She pointed to the fact that many communities, including her district of the U.S. Virgin Islands have struggled to determine the fairest way to provide coverage for employees in businesses large and small. ``Lack of insurance and (the) resulting poor health undermines everyone else's healthcare,'' she said, emphasizing that it is only through ``prevention and comprehensive care for which providers are adequately compensated that the rising cost of health care will be controlled and reduced.'' She urged the executives to ``use their corporate influence'' to ensure that ``wellness is within the reach of everyone living in this country.'' Other speakers on the Summit's agenda included former Secretary of State Colin Powell, former Senator John Breaux, author Glenn Hubbard and members of the McGlaughlin Group. (For more information contact Monique C. Watson at 202-226- 7973 or Britt Weinstock at 202-226-7974)

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in acknowledgment of a recent article in the New York Times which detailed the declining health of Hurricane Katrina survivors. The piece reiterated that we must act now to aid the many sufferers in Louisiana. Eight months since the disaster and many are still without prescription drugs, adequate housing, food, and security. This is not the type of problem that will heal itself in the matter of a few weeks or months, but of a timetable unknown to us. It is a glaring contradiction to say that we as members of the federal government have served the people of New Orleans to the best of our ability. Not when the rates of mental disorders, and many chronic conditions such as asthma are on a steady rise as the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University and the Children's Health Fund concluded in their study of the health impacts upon the Katrina survivors. Because of the lack of prescription medications and health insurance, people are not able to get the medical treatment that they need. Among the findings in the study, 34% of displaced children suffer from disorders such as asthma, anxiety and behavioral problems, compared with 25% in urban areas of Louisiana before the storm. 14% of those children have gone without prescription medication at least 3 months before this study which was conducted in February, compared to 2% before the storm and the numbers do not lie. We have children in Louisiana who have missed huge blocks of class time because families are moving so much to provide better lives for them, with an average of 3.5 times since the storm. There is no reason why a woman caring for seven school-age grandchildren, none who were in school during the time of the survey, was battling high blood pressure, diabetes and leukemia without any medical treatment. She was later admitted to the hospital for pains that she has had since January. She said that it had become ``unbearable'', and nothing is making it easier for people just like her. We must make it easier for people to receive the necessary care that they need. The study highlighted the fact that both Congress and the State of Louisiana eased eligibility requirements for Medicaid after the storm, and because each state sets its own guidelines, some families who got food stamps and assistance in other states were no longer eligible when they returned home and that is just unacceptable Trauma related disorders caused by Hurricane Katrina will have lasting impact on the lives of these children. Future American generations will have to shoulder the burden left behind from the previous. Dr. Irwin Redlener, the director of the National Center for Disaster Preparedness at Mailman and co-founder of the Children's Health Fund made it clear that ``children do not have the ability to absorb six or nine months of high levels of stress and undiagnosed or untreated medical problems'' without long-term consequences. Our mental health system is not prepared to handle the amount of care it now faces unless more treatment dollars are funneled into the system. I enter into the Record this article from the New York Times published on April 18, 2006 for its insightful look at the real problems in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. The longer we wait to enforce legislation the more suffering these Americans will have to endure. I think it is safe to say that the study told us in conclusive numerical evidence what we already knew in story form according to Erin Brewer, the medical director of the Office of Public Health at the Louisiana Department of Health. The facts are clearly laid out and we no longer can afford to ignore them. [From the New York Times, Apr. 18, 2006] Evacuee Study Finds Declining Health (By Shaila Dewan) Families displaced by Hurricane Katrina are suffering from mental disorders and chronic conditions like asthma and from a lack of prescription medication and health insurance at rates that are much higher than average, a new study has found. The study, conducted by the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University and the Children's Health Fund, is the first to examine the health issues of those living in housing provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Based on face-to-face interviews with more than 650 families living in trailers or hotels, it provides a grim portrait of the hurricane's effects on some of the poorest victims, showing gaps in the tattered safety net pieced together from government and private efforts. Among the study's findings: 34 percent of displaced children suffer from conditions like asthma, anxiety and behavioral problems, compared with 25 percent of children in urban Louisiana before the storm. Fourteen percent of them went without prescribed medication at some point during the three months before the survey, which was conducted in February, compared with 2 percent before the hurricane. Nearly a quarter of school-age children were either not enrolled in school at the time of the survey or had missed at least 10 days of school in the previous month. Their families had moved an average of 3.5 times since the storm. Their parents and guardians were doing no better. Forty- four percent said they had no health insurance, many because they lost their jobs after the storm, and nearly half were managing at least one chronic condition like diabetes, high blood pressure or cancer. Thirty-seven percent described their health as ``fair'' or ``poor,'' compared with 10 percent before the hurricane. More than half of the mothers and other female caregivers scored ``very low'' on a commonly used mental health screening exam, which is consistent with clinical disorders like depression or anxiety. Those women were more than twice as likely to report that at least one of their children had developed an emotional or behavioral problem since the storm. Instead of being given a chance to recover, the study says, ``Children and families who have been displaced by the hurricanes are being pushed further toward the edge.'' Officials at the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals said the study's findings were consistent with what they had seen in the field. ``I think it told us in number form what we knew in story form,'' said Erin Brewer, the medical director of the Office of Public Health at the department. ``We're talking about a state that had the lowest access to primary care in the country before the storm. And a population within that context who were really, really medically underserved and terribly socially vulnerable.'' Ms. Brewer said that some of the trailer sites were regularly visited by mobile health clinics, but acknowledged that such programs were not universally available. Neither Congress nor the State of Louisiana eased eligibility requirements for Medicaid after the storm, and because each state sets its own guidelines, some families who received insurance and food stamps in other states were no longer eligible when they returned home. While state officials said $100 million in federal block grants was in the pipeline for primary care and mental health treatment, the study's authors said the need was urgent. ``Children do not have the ability to absorb six or nine months of high levels of stress and undiagnosed or untreated medical problems'' without long-term consequences, said Dr. Irwin Redlener, the director of the National Center for Disaster Preparedness at Mailman and co-founder of the Children's Health Fund. The households included in the study were randomly selected from lists provided by FEMA. They included families living in Louisiana in hotels, trailer parks managed by the disaster agency and regular trailer parks with some FEMA units. A random sample of children in the surveyed households was selected for more in-depth questioning. For comparison, the study used a 2003 survey of urban Louisiana families conducted by the National Survey of Children's Health. David Abramson, the study's principal investigator, said it was designed to measure the social and environmental factors that help children stay healthy: consistent access to health care and mental health treatment, engagement in school, and strong family support. In the Gulf Coast region, where child health indicators like infant mortality and poverty rates were already among the highest in the country, Dr. Abramson said, ``all of their safety net systems seem to have either been stretched or completely dissipated.'' The study's authors raise the prospect of irreversible damage if children miss out now on normal development fostered by stable schools and neighborhoods. One couple told interviewers their three children had been enrolled in five schools since the hurricane, in which one child's nebulizer and breathing machine were lost. The equipment has not been replaced because the family lost its insurance when the mother lost her job, they said, and the child has since been hospitalized with asthma. In another household, a woman caring for seven school-age grandchildren, none of whom were enrolled in school at the time of the survey, said she was battling high blood pressure, diabetes and leukemia. That woman, Elouise Kensey, agreed to be interviewed by a reporter, but at the appointed hour was on her way to the hospital, where she was later admitted, ``I've been in pain since January, and I'm going to see what's wrong,'' she said. ``It's become unbearable.'' One woman who participated in the survey, Danielle Taylor, said in an interview that she had not been able to find psychiatric care for herself--she is bipolar--or her 6-year- old daughter, who not only went through the hurricane but had also, two years before, been alone with Ms. Taylor's fiance when he died. The public clinic Ms. Taylor used to visit has closed since the storm, she said, and the last person to prescribe her medication was a psychiatrist who visited the shelter she was in four months ago. No doctors visit the trailer park in Slidell, La., where she has been staying, she said. Ms. Taylor said that her daughter, Ariana Rose, needed a referral to see a psychiatrist, but that her primary care physician had moved to Puerto Rico. ``She has horrible rages over nothing,'' Ms. Taylor said. ``She needs help, she needs to talk to somebody.'' The survey found that of the children who had primary doctors before the storm, about half no longer did, the parents reported. Of those who said their children still had doctors, many said they had not yet tried to contact them. The study's authors recommended expanding Medicaid to provide universal disaster relief and emergency mental health services, as well as sending doctors and counselors from the federal Public Health Service to the region. The Children's Health Fund, a health care provider and advocacy group, is not the only organization to raise the alarm about mental health care for traumatized children after Hurricane Katrina. A report issued earlier this month by the Children's Defense Fund said youngsters were being ``denied the chance to share their bad memories and clear their psyches battered by loss of family members, friends, homes, schools and neighborhoods.'' Anthony Speier, the director of disaster mental health for Louisiana, said that while there were 500 crisis counselors in the field, the federal money that paid for them could not be used for treatment of mental or behavioral disorders like depression or substance abuse. Instead, he said, much of their effort goes into short one-on-one sessions and teaching self-help strategies in group settings. ``The struggle for our mental health system is that our resources are designed for people with serious mental illnesses and behavior disorders,'' Dr. Speier said. ``But now the vast population needs these forms of assistance.'' Dr. Speier continued, ``What we really, from my vantage point, could benefit from is a source of treatment dollars.'' According to the study's authors, the post-storm environment differs significantly from other crises because of its uncertain resolution. ``This circumstance is being widely misinterpreted as an acute crisis, somehow implying that it will be over in the near term, which is categorically wrong,'' Dr. Redlener said. ``This is an acute crisis on top of a pre-existing condition. It's now a persistent crisis with an uncertain outcome, over an uncertain timetable.''

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend the now retired Citigroup chairman Sanford I. Weill for achieving the status as one of the most powerful financiers this Nation has ever seen. Mr. Weill is credited as being the architect of a global financial powerhouse from his many business deals and mergers, especially the merger of Citigroup and Travelers in 1998. Sanford I. Weill is the true embodiment of the American dream. A youth growing up in Brooklyn during the 1940s, Weill changed the way business deals were brokered. The retirement of Sanford I. Weill has been called by many as an ``end of an era'', a time when Wall Street seemed to be increasingly dominated by hedge funds and private equity firms run by nameless and faceless yet powerful financial brokers. Weill is among the last of the classic deal makers who broke many of the rules and rewrote history on Wall Street as never seen before. Mr. Weill does not plan to return to Citigroup and has since passed on the corporation to his successor, Charles O. Prince III the current chief executive. Retirement for Mr. Weill now consists of an array of philanthropic endeavors such as doing work for the National Academy Foundation, a nationwide network of career-themed ``schools within schools'' that he established, Carnegie Hall, where he has been chairman for the last 15 years and the Weill Cornell Medical College. Weill also wishes to involve himself in health relief efforts for people in Africa, a continent with compelling needs to which Mr. Weill's compassion and success has been drawn and which can only benefit from his commitment and energy. I am pleased to enter into the Congressional Record an article published in the New York Times on Tuesday April 18, 2006 entitled, ``A Farewell to Citigroup'', for its recognition of Mr. Weill for the many years that he has put into Citigroup and also for his commitment to philanthropy thereafter. A Farewell to Citigroup (By Julie Creswell and Eric Dash) Entering his sun-filled office in Citigroup's Manhattan headquarters, Sanford I. Weill punched a few buttons on a computer near a window before looking over his shoulder and smiling broadly. When asked if he had just looked at Citigroup's stock price, he shrugged his shoulders as if to suggest he could not help himself. ``It's up 35 cents; it's a good day,'' he noted. For years, Mr. Weill and Citigroup were, for all intents and purposes, synonymous. During decades of deal making, he built one of the most powerful and influential financial institutions in the world. Today, at the annual Citigroup shareholder meeting at Carnegie Hall, Mr. Weill, 73, will cross the stage and take his final bow as chairman. Looking tan and fit thanks to a new diet regimen (exercise, no bread, no butter and, for good measure, no gin), a spirited and joking Mr. Weill insisted that while he intended to keep a close eye on the company and its stock price, he was ready to retire. ``I think it's now time for me to turn the page and go to the next chapter of my life,'' Mr. Weill said yesterday. ``I've hung around long enough as the chairman, and I think the company will be well served by having the chairman and the C.E.O. being the same person.'' Mr. Weill's successor, Charles O. Prince III, the chief executive, assumes the post of chairman today. Citigroup, to be sure, is not sending Mr. Weill away with nothing more than a gold watch and a big thank-you. A black-tie invitation-only party was held last night at the Temple of Dendur in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. About 350 of New York's political, financial and cultural elite were expected to attend, including James Dimon of J. P. Morgan Chase; Philip J. Purcell, the former chief of Morgan Stanley; the Rev. Jesse Jackson; and the cellist Yo-Yo Ma. Guests nibbled on tiny treats and toasted Mr. Weill's storied career. The celebration was as much about Mr. Weill's charitable activities--for Carnegie Hall, the Joan and Sanford I. Weill Medical College of Cornell and a national education initiative--as it is about his leadership of Citigroup. The party also seemed to suggest the passing of an era. At a time when Wall Street seems to be increasingly dominated by hedge funds and private equity firms run by nameless and faceless yet undoubtedly powerful financiers, Mr. Weill, once a volatile and insecure boy from Brooklyn, is a throwback. He is among the last of the classic deal makers who broke many of the rules and rewrote history on Wall Street. As for Mr. Weill's retirement nest egg, it is all but layered in gold. After earning nearly $1 billion from salary, bonuses and options cashed in over the last decade, Mr. Weill will receive a pension worth more than $1 million a year. Under a 10-year consulting contract with Citigroup, he will earn a daily rate of $3,846 for dispensing advice for up to 45 days a year. Citigroup will also cover the costs of a car and driver, health and dental insurance for him and his wife, Joan, and rent for an office in the General Motors Building, as well as administrative support. Mr. Weill, meanwhile, will continue to fly at no charge on Citigroup jets for the next 10 years. (He voluntarily reduced that benefit, which originally was to allow him free access to the Citigroup fleet for life.) One thing Mr. Weill insists he is not going to do in retirement is start a private equity fund. Last summer, Mr. Weill landed in a white-hot media glare after he approached the board about starting such a fund. The board decided that such an endeavor would be competitive and told Mr. Weill that, if he left early to pursue it, he would have to forgo some retirement perks. Mr. Weill ultimately decided not to pursue the venture, and he said he had not changed his mind. ``They ended up doing me a big favor. Knowing my personality, whatever I'm going to get involved in, that rush is going to come again that we have to do it the best,'' Mr. Weill said. ``I wanted to do something different, and this gives me the opportunity to do it.'' Despite reports last summer of growing tensions between him and his successor, Mr. Weill said he believed the company--and his legacy--was in strong hands.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce into the Congressional Record a piece by New York Times columnist Paul Krugman because I believe it is well worth our reading and consideration because of its thought- provoking attempt to discuss the discontent felt by the American people regarding the Bush Administration. He mentions a point in time when Americans will realize that, ``their good will and patriotism have been abused, and put a stop to this drive to destroy much of what is best in our country''. Krugman rightly calls this hope of his, ``The Great Revulsion''. With Bush's poll numbers in constant decline, are Americans finally getting the picture, he asks? Bush, at the time after the September 11th attacks in New York and Washington, D.C., scored with the American people at a solid 70 percent approval. However, Bush's numbers are only at a declining 33 percent today according to the latest Fox News poll. Some of the reasons for Bush's poor numbers are because of failure to adequately respond to the enormous need caused by Hurricane Katrina, the prescription drug debacle as Krugman called it and the disaster in Iraq. With the recent resignation of Scott McClellan as President Bush's Press Secretary, there is a sign that something terribly has gone wrong. It certainly is not surprising to see so many jumping ship from the embattled administration. The piece also acknowledged the stark reality that the Bush Administration has no real policy on Social Security. His idea about privatizing Social Security was one issue that the American public put up strong opposition to and it failed. The American people are realizing the potential power that they have. There indeed is a need for a ``Great Revulsion'' to wake up this nation from its deep sleep of blind faith in President Bush and his Republican leadership team. I enter into the Record the article published in the New York Times by Paul Krugman for its push to make the American people aware of their strength. To instill within them the understanding of the wrongs committed by the Bush Administration and his supporters. Krugman is calling for a move toward accountability, if not from the Congress, then from the American people as November approaches. [From The New York Times April 21, 2006] The Great Revulsion (By Paul Krugman) ``I have a vision--maybe just a hope--of a great revulsion: a moment in which the American people look at what is happening, realize how their good will and patriotism have been abused, and put a stop to this drive to destroy much of what is best in our country.'' I wrote those words three years ago in the introduction to my column collection, ``The Great Unraveling.'' It seemed a remote prospect at the time: Baghdad had just fallen to U.S. troops, and President Bush had a 70 percent approval rating. Now the great revulsion has arrived. The latest Fox News poll puts Mr. Bush's approval at only 33 percent. According to the polling firm Survey USA, there are only four states in which significantly more people approve of Mr. Bush's performance than disapprove: Utah, Idaho, Wyoming and Nebraska. If we define red states as states where the public supports Mr. Bush, Red America now has a smaller population than New York City. The proximate causes of Mr. Bush's plunge in the polls are familiar: the heck of a job he did responding to Katrina, the prescription drug debate and above all, the quagmire in Iraq. But focusing too much on these proximate causes makes Mr. Bush's political fall from grace seem like an accident, or the result of specific missteps. That gets things backward. In fact, Mr. Bush's temporarily sky-high approval ratings were the aberration; the public never supported his real policy agenda. Remembering, in 2000 Mr. Bush got within hanging-chad and felon-purge distance of the White House only by pretending to be moderate. In 2004 he ran on fear and smear, plus the pretense that victory in Iraq was just around the corner. (I've always thought that the turning point of the 2004 campaign was the September 2004 visit of the Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi, a figurehead appointed by the Bush Administration who rewarded his sponsors by presenting a falsely optimistic picture of the situation in Iraq. The real test of the conservative agenda came up after the 2004 election, when Mr. Bush tried to sell the partial privatization of Social Security. Social Security was for economic conservatives what Iraq was for the neocons; a soft target that they thought would pave the way for bigger conquests. And there couldn't have been a more favorable moment for privatization than the winter of 2004-2005: Mr. Bush loved to assert that he had a ``mandate'' from the election; Republicans held solid disciplined majorities in both houses of Congress; and many prominent political pundits were in favor of private accounts. Yet Mr. Bush's drive on Social Security ran into a solid wall of public opposition, and collapsed within a few months. And if Social Security couldn't be partly privatized under these conditions, the conservative dream of dismantling the welfare state is nothing but a fantasy. So what's left of the conservative agenda? Not much. That's the prediction for the midterm elections. The Democrats will almost surely make gains, but the electoral system is rigged against them. The fewer than 8 millions residents of what's left of Red America are represented by eight U.S. senators; the more than eight million residents of New York City have to share two senators with the rest of New York State. Meanwhile, a combination of accidents and design has left likely Democratic voters bunched together--I'm tempted to say ghettoized--in a minority of Congressional districts, while likely Republican voters are more widely spread out. As a result, Democrats would need a landslide in the popular vote--something like an advantage of 8 to 10 percentage points over Republicans--to take control of the House of Representatives. That's a real possibility, given the current polls, but by no means a certainty. And there is also, of course, the real prospect that Mr. Bush will change the subject by bombing Iran. Still, in the long run it may not matter that much. If the Democrats do gain control of either house of Congress, and with it the ability to issue subpoenas, a succession of scandals will be revealed in the final years of the Bush Administration. But even if the Republicans hang on to their ability to stonewall, it's hard to see how they can resurrect their agenda. In retrospect, then, the 2004 election looks like the high- water mark of a conservative tide that is now receding.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 40th anniversary of the independence of the nation of Guyana from Great Britain and to enter a tribute to the relationship between Guyana and the United States into the Congressional Record. On May 26, 1966 the people of Guyana rejoiced in their newfound freedom status and embarked on their journey of establishing independent statehood. Guyana officially became a republic on February 23, 1970. The transition to independence was not an easy one but the people of Guyana persevered and sustained as their nation evolved into a country of peace and prosperity. The Caribbean is a diverse region that includes some of the hemisphere's richest and poorest nations. Among the 16 independent nations of the Caribbean, Guyana sits poised on the north central coast of South America. United States interest in Guyana and other Caribbean nations include economic, political and security concerns. Guyana has long been recognized as a vital partner to the U.S. on security, trade, health, the environment, education, and regional democracy. Mr. Speaker: In the spirit of friendship and cooperation I congratulate Guyana on the occasion of their 40th anniversary of independence and I enter into the Congressional Record a statement submitted by the Ambassador of Guyana, the Honorable Bayney Karran. The Tribute As a former British colony Guyana shares a similar historical, linguistic, religious and socio-political heritage with the United States. Moreover, as a member state of the Organization of American States (OAS), Guyana is a solid partner and ally of the United States at the hemispheric and the wider international levels in advancing mutual interests and addressing common challenges. In remarking upon the status of the bilateral relationship in 2003, President George W. Bush stated, ``The United States and Guyana enjoy a strong and productive partnership. . . . (The interests of the Guyanese people) and those of the United States are closely aligned. . . . Working together to further our shared goals, we will build ever stronger bonds between our two countries''. Those bonds were evident when Guyana, aided by the combined efforts of former Presidents George H.W. Bush and Jimmy Carter to bring about free and fair elections, emerged from the clutches of authoritarianism and returned to the fold of democratic nations in 1992. Guyana has always collaborated unstintingly with the United States to combat the scourges which pose challenges to democracy, development, human rights, peace and security. The following are some useful indicators of Guyana's level of friendship and cooperation with the United States: The Fight Against Drugs: Guyana recently extended an invitation to the DEA to open an office in Guyana after the DEA was made to depart neighboring Venezuela. The United States has responded positively to the invitation. Guyana has also concluded a Shiprider Agreement with the United States. Free Trade: Guyana and the United States were in mutual agreement at the Fourth Summit of the Americas that the Free Trade Area of the Americas should proceed to be implemented. Good Governance and Governability: Guyana's classification as a Threshold Country by the Millennium Challenge Corporation underlines its determination to improve its performance in ruling justly, investing in people and encouraging economic freedom. Terrorism: Guyana suffered proportionately the heaviest losses in human casualties of any country including the United States from the 9/11 airplane attacks. Of a population of 750,000, 25 Guyanese nationals perished at the World Trade Center and one at the Pentagon. HIV/AIDS: Guyana is a beneficiary country under the PEPFAR (President's Emergency Plans for AIDS Relief) Program. Trafficking in Persons: The 2005 TIP Report which elevated Guyana from a Tier 3 to a Tier 2 country referred to appreciable progress by Guyana in complying with standards for the elimination of trafficking in persons. International Criminal Court: Guyana has signed an Article 98 agreement with the Unites States. Inter-American Agenda: As a member of the Inter-American System, Guyana shares policies and programs with the United States and other states in the hemisphere as set out, for example, in the OAS Charter, the Inter-American Democratic Charter, the Declaration on Hemispheric Security and other Conventions of the Inter-American System. Above all, however, lasting bonds of friendship and cooperation between Guyana and the United States have been nurtured and strengthened by our respective people. The United States is home to a large Guyanese Diaspora which makes significant contributions to both Guyanese and American societies. Bayney Karran, Ambassador of Guyana.