Charlie Rangel

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I just want to point out, since we all are singing the same song as to how these taxpayers were pushed by inflation into this difficult situation, the question that we are raising on the floor, to make it abundantly clear, is what are the Republicans' priorities for relief? We had an opportunity to have $70 billion to give relief. This problem has been gnawing at all of us to do the right and equitable thing. It was not included in the Republican reconciliation bill. In fact, it was rejected when offered in the full committee by the Democrats. So I can see the awkward political position that you find yourselves; and you know from the bottom of my heart, I sympathize with your political dilemma, not only in this area but in many other areas. But the question still remains, by putting it under the suspension calendar and sending it over to the other body, it does not have the same protection as the bill that you really want to make certain is there, and that is capital gains tax cuts and corporate dividends tax cuts. So all we are trying to say as the minority party is that we thought there was a better way to do it to protect these people, not to put it on the suspension calendar, which limits the debate, which restricts the Democrats in trying to improve upon it, but to put it on a road that could be a road to nowhere. There are no protections on this bill when it reaches the other body. And we really, truly believe that this is serious enough, and having this cloud over hardworking voters, you should have given it a priority rather than just to put it on the suspension calendar without the legislative process protection that you have given to other issues. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, certainly we agree on the substance of the bill. But you do not have to blindfold the American people to say that you did not give it the same protection as you have given other tax priorities. Let's face it, the $56 billion tax cut bill that you are going to bring up later, we know how you pay for that. You pay for it by going after the most vulnerable people that we have in the United States by cutting these social services. The rest of it goes into the deficit. So why will somebody not have the courage to say where are we going to get the $33 billion for this? I am certain that Americans are prepared to make the sacrifice because, after all, this was an unintentional event by Republicans and Democrats, unintentional by liberals and conservatives. So we all agree with that. All I am saying to the distinguished member of the committee from Florida is that you know when we send this, it could be on the road to nowhere, not paid for. And unless you intend to ask the Senate to cut further in social services, it means that you have agreed on the concept, but you did not give it the same priority or the same legislative protection. And you say you would like to see it abolished forever. Well, I guess with your lack of respect for the deficit, another $1 trillion, we can do that. So bring it on. Include it with the war cause, which is $6 billion a month. I mean, if there is no respect for anything, if we cannot work together as Republicans and Democrats and try to consider what our priorities are, but to come up in the middle of the night and say do I have a gimmick for you, we will put it on the suspension calendar, nobody is going to vote against it and whatever happens in the Senate happens, that is not the way we are supposed to legislate. Democrats and Republicans are supposed to work together and try to work out their differences before we send things over to the other body. There is not one Member on the other side of the aisle that can say that there is any way they are going to do both, their priority bill in terms of capital gains cuts, their cuts in corporate dividends, and this bill too, and fix it and put it into reconciliation. We did not put it into reconciliation. Why do you think that they are going to take your priority bill?

Mr. RANGEL. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I fully support this bill. I hope that the gentleman from Louisiana would understand how those of us on the committee would have a lot of concern about so many of these tax issues coming up under the suspension calendar. This is so since the ones that we agree on and are concerned about are subject to unanimous consent in the Senate. Therefore, it does not have the same type of protections it would if it was included in the reconciliation bill. I say that not from a partisan viewpoint, but from a respect and appreciation of the work that is done by Republicans and Democrats on the Committee on Ways and Means. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), the ranking member of the Budget Committee.

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would like to say to my friend from Arizona that while we do not have any problem with the substance of the bill, it is just unfair to talk about the timetable of the other body. We have a responsibility to deliberate and to legislate and to do what we think are in the best interests of the people of the United States of America. We should not be guided by the lack of time the people on the other side have. As a matter of fact, by sending this piece of legislation over there, albeit that it is not paid for, they only need unanimous consent. Any Member of the Senate can stand up and just object to this and then the good work is just wiped out. What I am suggesting is that when we do try to work in a bipartisan way, this should always be included in a House bill that is protected by the House Members and not left to arbitrary decisions by people on the other side. Mr. Speaker, in closing, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. McCrery) is a hardworking member of the Committee on Ways and Means, and while we may have differences on legislation and policy, that we all have to protect the integrity of that committee. That is the only committee outlined in the Constitution to provide the ways and means to run this great republic, and I just do not like to see the Rules Committee making decisions on what has fiscal implications not only for the Congress and the Members here, but for the entire country. I do not have any objections to this, and I encourage Members on both sides of the aisle to support this suspension.

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the distinguished gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin) and request unanimous consent that he be allowed to yield time.

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I think working out the details in this bill is a classic example as to how we can be bipartisan when we really try. There is no question that foreign policy and trade should not be a Republican or Democratic issue. And the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin) made up his mind that we were going to stick to it to make certain that some of our concerns about the basic protection of workers was going to be included in the bill. And while the language is not specifically in the bill, in talking with the representatives from the Bahrain government, especially the ambassador that showed us a sincere desire to make certain that he accommodated not Republicans or Democrats, but his respect for this body, we were able to persuade most of the Members on our side that this was something worth doing, not only because of economic reasons, but because of the courageous acts that were taken in the Middle East by this very small country. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 minutes to the distinguished gentlemen from California (Mr. Stark) and request unanimous consent that he be allowed to manage the time.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce into the record the obituary of Preston Robert Tisch written by Douglas Martin which appeared in The New York Times Wednesday, November 16, 2005. Mr. Tisch died at his home in Manhattan yesterday. He will be greatly missed by the people of New York City. New Yorkers called Mr. Tisch ``Bob.'' Bob Tisch was generous to New York City. He made his fortune in New York in real estate and other enterprises, but he shared his money, his impressive business talents and generous spirit by with thousands of people who would never meet him personally. Many New Yorkers, young and old were touched by his civic leadership and continue to be touched by his generosity even though he is gone from us physically. In May 2005, Mr. Tisch was interviewed by Joan Baum, Ph.D. for the online edition of Education Update magazine. Dr. Baum extolled Bob Tisch ``extraordinary life of public service and philanthropy'' mentioning his service as Postmaster general of the United States, his service in the '90s, at the request of then Mayor David Dinkins, as New York City's Ambassador to Washington, chairing NYC Public Private Initiatives, a partnership program to fund community programs, sitting on the board as a founding member of Citymeals-on-wheels, and as a driving force behind the new Giants Stadium. Ms. Baum pointed out, that Bob Tisch cited among his proudest achievements ``programs that have benefited public schools, particularly among them ``Take the Field.'' This program is one that Bob Tisch founded in 2000 and has already restored 41 of 43 athletic fields for New York public schools. By May 2005, Bob Tisch's efforts had raised $135 million in private and public funds for Take the Field. His goal was to rebuild athletic facilities in order to promote health, academic performance and pride. In his interview, Bob Tisch acknowledged that Take The Field was as much about investment in youth and communities as it was about sports. When the schools' updated facilities are not being used by the schools they are used by the communities in which they are located. Ms. Baum wrote about her interview in May 2005: ``Bob Tisch chuckles when he recalls how the owners of the two-story homes surrounding Forest Hills High School went out of their way to assure him they were going to `watch over their field.' Other communities with new athletic facilities also watch over their fields. Bob Tisch's interest in education is present in the Tisch School of the Arts at New York University and the Preston Robert Tisch Center for Hospitality, Tourism and Sports at NYU, which has recently added a Master's program. I believe what was so special about Bob Tisch was the passion and love he brought to each of his projects. His ideas were brilliant, his projects successful and his profits in business high. But his distinguishing characteristics that were the true foundation of all his successes were his passion and his compassion. Bob Tisch was one of-a-kind. I will miss him. New York City will miss him. What is wonderful to know is the students of New York City will continue to benefit from his ideas and his passion for education for a long, long time. Because of this I am positive his spirit is still with us and his soul is with God. [From the New York Times, Nov. 16, 2005] Preston Robert Tisch, Owner of Loews Hotels and Giants, Dies (By Douglas Martin) Preston Robert Tisch, who with his older brother built a multibillion-dollar business empire and who himself was postmaster general, half-owner of the New York Giants football team and leader of many of the city's top business groups, died yesterday at his home in Manhattan. He was 79 and also had a home in Harrison, N.Y. The cause was a brain tumor, said Jeffrey Stewart, spokesman for the family. Wellington Mara, the co-owner of the Giants with Mr. Tisch, died on Oct. 25. Mr. Tisch was sometimes called ``the other Tisch'' to differentiate him from his older brother, Laurence, who was known as a no-nonsense financial strategist, partly from being the fiercely cost-conscious chairman of CBS from 1986 to 1995. He died in 2003. But it was more often Preston Robert Tisch, universally known as Bob, who seized the public view, first as a persuasive marketer for hotels and other companies owned by the Loews Corporation. As operations chief, his attention to detail once included personally hiring all bellmen for Loews hotels. He saw them as his best salesmen. Mr. Tisch freely gave his talents to New York City. He served as Mayor David N. Dinkins ``ambassador'' to Washington; was chairman of host committees for the 1976 and 1980 Democratic National Conventions; and led the way in building a new convention center on Manhattan's West Side. His last campaign, Take the Field, to revitalize the ragged athletic fields of the city's public high schools, raised $140 million in donations. He said he could have written a check himself, but wanted a broad base of continuing support. Mr. Tisch's enthusiasm for convening the city's movers and shakers began during the city's fiscal crisis in the 1970's with breakfasts at his Park Avenue hotel, the Regency. Major players in that municipal drama--the labor leader Victor Gotbaum, the real estate mogul Lewis Rudin and the investment banker Felix G. Rohatyn--were the first regulars. ``Stop over for breakfast, and you'll meet a lot of people,'' Mr. Tisch was famous for saying. Many credit Mr. Tisch with coining the term ``power breakfast,'' and the Regency continued to attract the likes of Beverly Sills, Henry Kissinger and Mr. Dinkins who said in an interview, ``When you think of Bob Tisch, you smile.'' In recent months, Mr. Tisch continued attending power breakfasts, as well as meetings at Giants Stadium and sports events there and elsewhere. Among the city organizations he headed were the New York City Convention and Visitors Bureau, the New York City Partnership and the New York City Chamber of Commerce and Industry. When he joined with Mr. Rudin and other executives to form the Association for a Better New York in 1971, he and other soon-to-be billionaires posed delightedly with brooms. His speaking schedule was so full that when President Ronald Reagan named him postmaster general in 1986, friends wondered if the job might really be ``toastmaster general.'' Larry and Bob Tisch were known for their generosity, not least their gifts to New York University where the medical center and arts school both bear the family name. So does a gallery at the Metropolitan Museum of Art and the children's zoo in Central Park, not to mention namesake institutions at the University of Michigan, Tufts University and elsewhere. The Tisch brothers add up to a quintessential Big Apple success story, beginning with playing stickball on the streets of Brooklyn and building to a financial conglomerate with annual sales of more than $15.2 billion and assets of $73.7 billion. Their holding company, the Loews Corporation, ranks 127th on the Fortune 500, and has subsidiaries engaged in various kinds of insurance, the production and sale of cigarettes and watches, and the operation of hotels and oil and gas drilling rigs. Preston Robert Tisch was born in the Bensonhurst section of Brooklyn on April 29, 1926, to parents who came from Russia. His father, Abraham Solomon, known as Al, owned a garment- manufacturing business and bought two summer camps in New Jersey, Laurel and Lincoln, which his wife, the former Sayde Brenner, helped him operate. As teenagers, Larry and Bob worked at the camps. ``My parents were middle class and like everybody else in Brooklyn at the time, they worked hard and tried to move up the scale,'' Mr. Tisch said in an interview with Newsday in 1991. The family moved every three years to get three months of free rent, a common practice even among the middle class. This meant Mr. Tisch attended DeWitt Clinton High School in the Bronx for one year and Erasmus Hall High School in Brooklyn for three. Mr. Tisch joined the Army after briefly attending Bucknell, and enrolled at the University of Michigan after his discharge in 1944, earning a bachelor's degree in economics. His wife, the former Joan Hyman, recalled him selling keychains for a dime, or two for 15 cents, in front of the university's football stadium. They married in 1948. Besides his wife of 57 years, he is survived by two sons, Steven and Jonathan; and a daughter, Laurie. In 1946, Larry, then a student at Harvard Law School, saw an advertisement for a sleepy resort in Lakewood, N.J., called Laurel-in-the-Pines, and persuaded his parents to put up $125,000 to buy it. A family friend threw in another $50,000 and took a one-fourth interest. The Tisches refurnished the hotel, added amenities like a swimming pool and dreamed up promotional schemes that included importing three reindeer from Finland to pull sleighs in the snow. By the time Mr. Tisch joined the business in 1948, the hotel was prospering. The family began investing profits in small hotel operations in Atlantic City, almost literally playing Monopoly on the boardwalk. They then took positions in Manhattan hotels. They typically found unprofitable properties, made improvements and raised rates. The brothers, personally and in business, could not have been closer. Their families socialized together, they went to temple together, played tennis together and even commuted to work together. In business, Larry made deals, Bob ran companies. Bill Rudin, comparing the Tisches to his father Lewis and uncle Jack, the New York real estate magnates, said in an interview ``They both sketched out a role that each of them wanted to play, and each ran with the ball.'' In 1956, the brothers were ready to build their own hotel, the Americana at Bal Harbour, Fla. They did not borrow a cent to build the $17 million hotel. It did $12 million in business the first year, in large part because of Mr. Tisch's success in getting convention business. With $65 million from their thriving hotels, the brothers started buying into the Loews Corporation. An antitrust decree had separated the company's theaters from its filmmaking unit, and the brothers recognized that many of the theaters occupied prime real estate. By January 1961, they gained total control of Loews. They knocked down the old Loews Lexington theater and used the site to build the 800-room Summit, the first hotel built in Manhattan in 30 years. They built the Americana, which at 50 stories was the world's tallest hotel upon completion in 1962. Other hotels followed, and Loews became a leading chain. The Tisches decided to recast the company as a conglomerate. In 1968, they acquired Lorillard, then the nation's fifth-largest cigarette company. In 1974, they bought the CNA Financial Corporation, a nearly bankrupt Chicago-based insurance company. Within a few years, it had assets of $16.5 billion and an A+ credit rating. In 1979, they purchased the troubled Bulova Watch and turned a profit. By 1980, Loews had revenue of $4.5 billion and earnings of $206 million, and all its segments were doing well. Luck mixed nicely with strategy. When the brothers sold the Traymore Hotel in Atlantic City in 1956, they retained a parcel of its land. They were able to take advantage of the casino boom that began in 1978. In the early 1980's, the Tisches bought five supertankers for $25 million when the oil market was depressed. The deal had no risk because even if oil prices did not rise, the scrap value of each tanker was $5 million. Mr. Tisch was postmaster general for almost two years, beginning in 1986. He used his marketing skill to come up with the idea of selling stamps by phone, and stressing sales of commemorative stamps, which are financially advantageous for the Postal Service because collectors seldom use them as postage. Mr. Tisch, whose net worth was $3.9 billion in 2003, according to Forbes, relished such hands-on personal involvement. Not only did he help found Meals-on-Wheels and serve as its president for 20 years, he many times personally delivered meals to elderly patrons. His habit of working Sundays prevented him from seeing a professional football game until 1961, but he made up for it. After buying the Giants in 1991, he loved to attend practices and confer with coaches. Mr. Tisch improved the Giants' business by sharpening marketing strategies, and, just as he had raised hotel rates, increasing ticket prices. He remarked that for all his business success and his oversight of the world's largest civilian work force at the Postal Service--and even his considerable civic and philanthropic contributions--he found people most admired his ownership of the Giants. That made sense to him. ``I want to be part of the fraternity and live out my life as a Giants owner,'' he said in 1991, shortly after acquiring a share of the team.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I take great pleasure in rising before you today to recognize one of the world's greatest and most admired entertainers--Tony Bennett who was honored by the Kennedy Center on December 4, 2005. World-renowned as an ``individual of unequaled excellence,'' Tony Bennett has remained for over 5 decades, one of our leading male singers of traditional pop songs who has entertained all age groups with his magnificent voice and dynamic performances. Indeed, he is an American icon whose talents are timeless and who continues to be an inspiration to all generations. It is said of Tony Bennett that he is a superb performer, a true legend of American music, and a national treasure. While all that may be true, Tony is all those things and so much more. In addition to entertaining audiences through song, Tony Bennett is also an accomplished painter and author, as well as a devoted philanthropist. Throughout his career, he has participated in many humanitarian causes and concerns. He has raised funds for the American Cancer Society, the Juvenile Diabetes Foundation, and the Hospice of Baltimore. He has worked with the Center for Handgun Control and has supported environmental issues through such organizations as Save the Rainforest and the Project for Walden Woods. His charity concerts have also benefited many causes, namely the preservation of the Apollo Theater in my Congressional District of Harlem in New York City. What many people may not know is that Tony Bennett served as a foot soldier in World War II, and was an active participant in the liberation of a concentration camp. In 1965, he participated in the March on Selma with the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and refused to perform in South Africa during the era of apartheid. Tony Bennett is a lifelong New Yorker born in the Astoria section of Queens. He attended the High School of Industrial Arts in Manhattan where he continued nurturing his two passions--singing and painting. Tony's extraordinary and enduring career, took off shortly after Bob Hope discovered Bennett in a New York nightclub in 1949. That discovery has resulted in scores of albums, ten Grammy awards, a Lifetime Achievement Award, and induction into the Black Entertainment in Sports Hall of Fame. Mr. Speaker, I thank you for this opportunity to pay tribute to Tony Bennett, an extraordinary entertainer, a true humanitarian, and a champion for all people. Legions of fans of all ages and musical tastes applaud his genius, and we can be assured that the legacy of Tony Bennett will live forever.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the passing of a dear friend and prominent citizen of New York City, Mr. Maurice S. Paprin. Mr. Paprin was not only a successful real estate developer in New York City as president of Douglass Urban Corporation and other companies, but also a tireless advocate for affordable housing and comprehensive social dialogue. He personified the definition of ``Renaissance man,'' having an affinity and talent for many fields, succeeding in all he touched. Mr. Paprin graduated from the City College of New York in 1939 and obtained a Master's degree in history from the University of Wisconsin. A lifelong champion of public education, under his leadership, the City College of New York bought a building from the B. Altman department store, transforming it into the current Graduate Center for the City University of New York. He also dedicated time to teaching history at New York University. Mr. Paprin entered the real estate field in the 1950s, ascending to president of the Douglass Urban Corporation before starting his own real estate development firm, Paprin Realty Organization. A true pioneer in the field of affordable housing, Mr. Paprin oversaw the construction of countless apartment buildings in Harlem, part of my district, including the Schomburg Plaza in 1974, which partnered public and private interests to provide housing for low and moderate income families. While Mr. Paprin left his fingerprints across the New York City real estate landscape, his efforts in the arena of political action and advocacy are also a significant part of his legacy, equaling his business prowess. A paragon of the American ideal that one person can make a difference, he founded and led a number of advocacy groups in New York City. As president of the Associated Builders and Owners of Greater New York, Mr. Paprin pushed for more affordable rental housing, housing subsidies and competent tax policy. In order to foster debate and positive political action, he also founded the Foundation for Social Change, the Fund for New Priorities in America and the Business Labor and Community Coalition of New York. These groups exist solely to explore new ideas about good governance and the role of government in society. Aside from his overwhelming professional and social achievements, Mr. Paprin loved as he lived--with unmatched zeal and abandon. He is survived by his wife, Jacqueline, three sons, Seth, Yale and Frederick, a daughter, Judith, a sister, Eugenia Gunier, two stepsons, Steven Stuchin and Miles M. Stuchin, and 12 grandchildren. He was preceded in death by his first wife, Rita. Maurice Paprin lived an amazing life, leaving behind a legacy of positive contributions to society and business. He was a New York City icon, a titan among titans. His forward thinking and influence will be sorely missed, both within New York City and elsewhere. It is my privilege to honor him for his accomplishments and for his example of how to be a true American patriot.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to enter into the Record ``Witness for Justice #223'' entitled The Sons and Daughters . . . published on July 18, 2005, by the United Church of Christ of Cleveland, Ohio. The article eloquently written by Bernice Powell Jackson, the Executive Minister of this Church on 700 Prospect Avenue in Cleveland, addresses an issue that should be in the hearts and on the lips of every minister, rabbi and imam when he or she stands before a congregation. The subject of The Sons and Daughters article was the difficulty the U.S. Army was having recruiting enough men and women to meet recruiting goals. At the time Minister Jackson wrote this article the Army was experiencing sufficient difficulty that they were raising the promise of higher sign-up bonuses, dropping standards and, as could be found, as she put it, circling ``vulnerable young men and women like hawks flying over little chicks.'' Minister Jackson did not question the patriotism of the young people failing to sign up with recruiters. She speculated the young people had gotten wiser. Perhaps she thought these men and women were looking at certain realities about the pre-emptive war they would fight if they enlisted. At the time of this article these young people had experienced 2 years ``of watching a war which has so far resulted in nearly 1800 deaths and ten times that many injuries.'' Perhaps they were thinking how much life they had before them at the age of 18, 19, 20 or 21. Maybe they knew someone who had been burned beyond recognition or had lost both of his or her legs and faced a life time of disability at the age of 21. Or, Minister Jackson thought, perhaps these young people had begun to detect the varying rationales and purposes stated by the Bush administration for why the United States was fighting in Iraq. The purpose of the War, according to the President, was to save our country from ``immenent danger'' from weapons of mass destruction that might come in the form of a ``mushroom cloud.'' But 2 years on, there were no weapons of mass destruction and no immenent danger; so different reasons for the war were being substituted for the war in Iraq. We were fighting in Iraq to stop the terrorists. However, many were saying the American presence in Iraq was creating terrorists. Of course, Minister Jackson speculated that these young people might not want to sign up for a war when the statements of the Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, could not be relied upon for any certainty about when they would come home. Secretary Rumsfeld's statements about how long the United States would be in Iraq changed almost daily. Secretary Rumsfeld could not articulate a coherent plan for the war and neither could the President of the United States. Young people, Minister Jackson speculated, might be frightened by the tactics used by recruiters to pressure young, vulnerable youths whose personnel information, including their names, social security numbers, race, ethnic background and telephone numbers the Defense Department received because one of the provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act was being shared by the Defense Department with a sharing with a private contractor who sold goods and products to young men about the age of those being recruited. The tactics of the Pentagon are enabled by the No Child Left Behind Act as currently written. Minister Jackson pointed out that parents have to opt out of the program to get the military to leave their child off the potential recruitment list. Some in Congress have tried to change this law so that the parents would have to opt in so their child would be on the recruitment list. Those attempts failed because they were voted down by the Republican hawks in Congress. Minister Jackson noted in a column by Bob Herbert of the New York Times the statement: ``There are always plenty of hawks in America. But the hawks want their wars fought with other people's children.'' Minister Jackson wrote ``our young people are in danger.'' She advised all of us to write our President, Secretaries of Defense and Education, our Congressperson and Senators and let them know about these recruiters and these lists. This statement by Minister Jackson goes to the heart of what is wrong with this war. The entire burden is shared by a tiny percentage of citizens of this country. Not one tax cut has been repealed and absent a draft only those who are poor, underemployed or with no hope of a job or college are enlisting. The people of this country do not see the flag draped coffins at Dover Air Force Base. They do not see the young soldiers who have lost their sight and their limbs or who are in comas from head wounds or burned beyond recognition. They do not give up a job to sit by the bedside of a son who does not recognize them or at the bedside of a daughter who has lost her legs at the age of 24. They do not attend the funerals of a 20 year old or an 18 year old who is dead just out of high school. For most people in this country there is no war. There were complaints of how veterans were treated when they returned from Vietnam. Think of how veterans returning from Iraq must feel when they realize no one in their country felt any impact of a war in which they lost so much.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, this is a sad day for me as an American, as a Member of Congress, to see that we have reached a point that those who want to be critical of the President's entrance into this war and how it is being conducted now have to be called cowards and we are cutting and running and we are not deserving of being called Americans. The vicious attacks that are taking place by people who never served their country is really something that is really painful. The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) has earned the right to have an opinion. The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) has served this country. The gentleman has served not only in the Army but he served right here in this Congress. And what is he up against? Who are these people making these dirty, nasty remarks against his character and those who support him? They are people who say that we are going to stay in this war until we win; that we are going to fight and die in this war until we win; and we are not going to leave until we win and not one day sooner. Fight who? Who is going to surrender? What are the conditions? If you can be critical of what the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) is going to say, how can you not be critical of the confused way in which we are getting involved in this war where we do not know what the enemy looks like, we do not know what flag they carry, we do not know who is going to surrender. It is time for us to be civil. If you want to be concerned about our troops, you have to be concerned about why they are there. And for the President of the United States on Veterans Day, the day that all of us veterans hold so true and that brings us together, to attack his political opponents on that day and then to send out with his tuxedo-clad Vice President as someone to attack other people, other Americans, this is a sad day. But the bottom line is if you love these troops like the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) loves these troops, you will be supporting this legislation.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with a heavy heart to enter into the Congressional Record my observations regarding the shameless acts of the Republicans who have hijacked the House of Representatives and have become so arrogant, so deaf to any voices but their own they do not hear the voices of the American people. My friend and colleague, John Murtha, a true American patriot and decorated Marine Corps veteran of Vietnam combat, spoke from his heart yesterday on behalf of those he cares most about: the men and women wearing the uniform of the United States of America and the people of this country he has served all his life. Congressman John Murtha, the leading Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee's defense committee, reached a point where he felt this country's continued occupation of Iraq was a source of the violence in Iraq. Congressman Murtha had the courage to do what few have been able to do. He faced the people at a press conference and described how he had come to the conclusion that: ``The United States and coalition troops have done all they can in Iraq, but it is time for a change in direction. Our military is suffering. The future of our country is at risk. We can not continue on the present course. It is evident that continued military action in Iraq is not in the best interests of the United States of America, the Iraqi people or the Persian Gulf Region.'' Congressman Murtha supported his conclusions by the now familiar truths we know. The reasons we were given for going to war were all false. There were no weapons of mass destruction and no nuclear weapons; there was no imminent danger. We were not welcomed by flowers in Baghdad. We had not brought Democracy in Iraq. Congressman Murtha cited the key indicators in order to assess the ``progress'' of Iraq. According to reports recently submitted to his committee by the Secretary of Defense, Congressman Murtha learned some disturbing news. ``Oil production and energy in Iraq are below prewar levels. Our reconstruction efforts have been crippled by the security situation. Only $9 billion appropriated for reconstruction has been spent. Unemployment remains at about 60 percent. Clean water is scarce. Only $500 million of the $2.2 billion appropriated for water projects has been spent. And most importantly, insurgent incidents have increased from about 150 per week to over 700 per week in the last year.'' Congressman Murtha pointed out that the American people do not want us in Iraq. A British poll found that 80 percent of Iraqis do not want us occupying their country. Of the 80 percent of the Iraqis who don't want us in Iraq, 44 percent felt attacks on Americans were justified. Drawing on his experience in Vietnam, Congressman Murtha said there is no way to win a war with insurgents when the people tell the insurgents what moves you are going to take. Congressman Murtha repeated what he has been saying. The war in Iraq cannot be won militarily. The administration is now saying the same thing. Congressman Murtha stated that our military has done its duty, but the war continues to intensify. Congressman Murtha's proposal was not to ``cut and run'' as the Republicans have said. His proposal provides for re-deployment from Iraq, the safety of our troops, and a rapid deployment force to deal with any genuine terrorist threat in the region. To equate a criticism of the President's failed policy with a lack of support of our troops is beneath contempt. It is appalling to see the President, the Vice President, and Secretary Rumsfeld smear John Murtha with accusations of cowardice. I think Congressman Murtha said it just right when he was asked at his press conference yesterday how he felt about Vice President Cheney's attempt to tell him what was good for the troops. He said he welcomed a man with five deferments attempting to tell him what was good for troops in battle. It was easy, Murtha said, to sit in air- conditioned offices, and decide what the troops were going to do, but our soldiers have it very hard in Iraq. Very hard. When a man with the combat record of Congressman Murtha talks about men and women in battle, I think he deserves to be heard. Instead, the President blasted him from as far away as China. And today, the Republican House leadership pulled one of their dirtiest tricks. The Republicans introduced and put up for a vote a mockery of the Murtha Resolution, with no discussion, no consideration in committee and no input from the American people. It was a calculated move by Republicans designed to make it appear to the American people that Murtha's reasonable resolution was a proposal to undermine the troops. With this move, Republicans made a mockery of the people's House and the people's wishes. They smeared an American hero and a man who cares about the military and his country. The leadership of the Republican House of Representatives, acting in lock step with a failed President is perpetuating, in John Murtha's words, a ``failed policy wrapped in an illusion.''

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce into the Record the commentary entitled ``War must be a local issue'', written by Jimmy Breslin in the November 9, 2005 issue of Newsday. Jimmy Breslin's writing cuts to the heart of an issue and this article does just that. He focuses on how the President's lies are perpetuated at the local level, in this case by Mayor Michael Bloomberg; and how some in the Congress and we as citizens accept those lies because we are living ``in a time of National Alzheimer's.'' Mr. Breslin wrote of the funeral of a 26-year-old marine, Riayan A. Teheda at which Mayor Bloomberg spoke two years ago. According to Mr. Breslin, the Mayor pronounced of the marine killed in Iraq: ``He died to keep the weapons of mass destruction out of the hands of . . .'' After those words, Mr. Breslin said ``you heard no more.'' Speaking of Mayor Bloomberg, Mr. Breslin wrote: ``He was up there in the presence of a gallant New Yorker and he spread a lie and for me it was the start of his campaign and it ended with me not voting for him . . .'' The funeral of Riayan A. Teheda was at St. Elizabeth's Catholic Church on Wadsworth Avenue in Washington Heights, which to Mr. Breslin was ``more than somewhat local.'' He reports that he had been to the funerals of other kids in the Bronx, Ridgewood and in Brooklyn. Mr. Breslin concluded: ``If a kid who gets killed is local, then--the war is local.'' When President Bush ``comforts'' the families who have lost their sons, daughters, sisters, brothers, fathers and mothers by telling them the deaths of their loved ones honors those have died before them, he cannot really provide comfort. The parents of a fallen soldier would never ask that another family suffer what they have suffered. The parents I have met don't believe their sons and daughters need the deaths of other sons and daughters to prove their children have died honorably. They believe their children died for their country. They have died for their country. To quote Mr. Breslin again: ``They die in the splendor of bravery, the prayer of valor. And fall in vain because the government causes them to die in vain.'' What Mr. Breslin identifies is national leadership that is, ``a fake and a fraud and a shill and a sham'' who has now, unwittingly perhaps, admitted he was wrong but blames the Democrats who voted to go to war because they made the mistake of believing what he told them. American soldiers and Iraqis are still dying. The President has still not told anyone the real reason we are in Iraq. He has not told the truth about the intelligence he and a chosen few had when he took this country to war. Jimmy Breslin is one of New York's most talented writers. His description of New York and of the Nation as having Alzheimer's is strong but descriptive in a way hard to put in to other words and have the same effect. The people in this country do not know there are two wars being fought by a tiny fraction of this population and that their sacrifice is being inflicted and endured out of the sight of the Media and the American public. [From Newsday, Nov. 9, 2005] War Must Be a Local Issue (By Jimmy Breslin) The church was empty at dusk. You stood in the stillness and looked at the place, right there on the side of the altar, where Michael Bloomberg spoke over the casket of a fallen aristocrat of the city, Riayan A. Tejeda, Marine, dead in Iraq at age 26. Bloomberg pronounced, ``He died to keep the weapons of mass destruction out of the hands of . . .'' You heard no more. He was up there in the presence of a gallant New Yorker and he spread a lie and for me it was the start of his campaign and it ended with me not voting for him last night. He says of Iraq, ``It is not a local issue.'' This was almost 2 years ago at St. Elizabeth's Catholic Church on Wadsworth Avenue in Washington Heights, which is more than somewhat local. By myself, I have been at the deep grief of another soldier's funeral in the Bronx, one in Ridgewood, another in Brooklyn. If the kid who gets killed is local, then--the war is local. This war continues without an official protest that would call out the will of the people of the City of New York and might count in a Nation that by now realizes it has been the victim of a president who is a fake and a fraud and a shill and a sham and now is going around with the blind staggers. Only the other night, in a television appearance with the opponent, Ferrer, Bloomberg was asked about withdrawing troops from Iraq and--heavens!--you can't do that. Why, that would mean that New York's fallen military would have died in vain. And why you could never say that about the three or four who would be killed on the day after that, and tomorrow and tomorrow. They die in the splendor of bravery, the prayer of valor. And fall in vain because the government causes them to die in vain. Around this great city yesterday, the day went into the heart of the night without excitement. There was an election for mayor and the streets should have been loud with the shrieks of people crying for your vote. Bloomberg last night finished spending at least $70 million to get re-elected and the money suffocated the election. That is not democracy. Every one of those dollars should form the seeds of a revolt. He is the mayor in a time of National Alzheimer's, and New York, too, is stricken. We have Bloomberg silent on a war. And once in this State we had as senators at the same time, Robert F. Kennedy and Jacob Javits. Look at the citizenry here accepting as United States senators, Clinton and Schumer, who both supported the war. The coin has cheapened and no outcry is heard. How can Mike Bloomberg be the mayor of this city and not try to put his voice and weight into saving lives? Bloomberg follows the smirking, deadly lies of a president who had people getting killed for what? For oil, for Dear Old Dad, for a racist disdain for a guy in an alley with a rag on his head. Bush saw the rag but never noticed the gun the guy carried. Last night, Julio Cesar Tejada, the dead Marine's father, stood in the swarms of people going past his building at 602 W. 180th St. He is 53 and stocky, with short black hair and a pleasant face. On the sidewalk next to him was the small, permanent grotto to his son. A photo. Flowers. Candles. Prayers in Spanish and English. ``How has it been?'' he said. He patted his chest. ``My heart fell apart. I cannot work. I spend all the days going to the doctor.'' ``The wife?'' He shook his head. ``It is very bad for her.'' He said he had to get the Con Edison bill paid. ``They turn off the lights if you don't.'' At the corner, a young woman, a college student, asked him about Bloomberg clinging to the war. Now I mentioned the speech at his son's funeral. Julio shook his head. ``I was too mixed up at the funeral.'' He said then he was going to vote. ``For whom?'' He shook his head. ``I don't know 'til I get there.''

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay special tribute to my friend, John Dominick Benedetto, who died August 29, 2005, in Jupiter, Florida. His memory lives on in the loving embrace of his family and many friends. John brought a breath of love and beauty to everything he touched, whether in music, the arts, in the preparation of foods, or in his creativity as an entrepreneur. In World War II, he served his country in the U.S. Air Force. But his appreciation for this land was manifest most deeply in his heartfelt concern for all of its people. He truly believed that every man, woman and child was due--without distinction--the fairness and justice that are America's promise. In his unassuming way, John personified for me the great Godly virtue taught to us in the Gospel of Matthew: As you have done it unto one of the least of these, you have done it unto me. My love and condolences go out to Patricia, his faithful and loving wife of 28 years, their five daughters and two sons, their seven grandchildren, and of course, his brother, Tony. For the information of my colleagues I submit the following obituary which was published in the South Florida Sun-Sentinel on August 30, 2005. Benedetto, John Dominick, was born on March 18, 1923 in New York City, died August 29, 2005 in Jupiter, FL. He is survived by his loving wife of 28 years Patricia, his brother Tony, five daughters, two sons and seven grandchildren. As a young boy, John sang with the Metropolitan Opera Company, where his beautiful tenor voice resonated through the hills of Italy. His talent and creativity was a mainstay throughout his life, and manifested through his passion for music, life, art, and family. After returning from his tour with the U.S. Air Force during WWII, John became an entrepreneur whose passion for invention was nurtured through the development of many ideas and opportunities. As an innovative thinker, John thought about ways to make the world a better place to live and to foster positive social change. John loved to bring people together, whether it was for a small family gathering where he would create amazing meals with love, or simply sitting on his dock and fishing with a friend or relative. His travels and life's path brought him many experiences that were colorfully shared In anecdotes over a card game or an expertly mixed drink. John's charm and charisma attracted many friends, and allowed him to touch many people. John will be greatly missed. A private service will be arranged by the family for a future date. In lieu of flowers, the family thanks all who can please donate to the TRIPPS organization: 263 Shamey Lane Kennesaw, GA 30144 http://www.tripps.org/.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask that we enter into the Congressional Record a letter written under the auspices of Rabbis for Human Rights North America in February 2005 (corresponding to the Hebrew Year Adar 5765) to President Bush and Members of Congress entitled: Rabbinic Letter Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, and Degrading Treatment of Detainees. I wish to enter into the Record as well the names of all the signatories to the letter. This letter was written of behalf of Rabbis for Human Rights of North America and was written ``out of a deep sense of concern about the erosion of American's longstanding commitment that torture is absolutely reprehensible.'' ``We understand that the most fundamental ethical principle, which results from our belief in God as Creator of the World and Parent of all humanity, is that every human being is seen as reflecting the Image of God. Torture shatters and defiles God's Image. The purpose of torture is to remove a person's pride, humiliate that person, or make his or her life so painful that the person does or says whatever the interrogator wants. Torture `works' by attempting to deprive a human being of will, spirit and personal dignity. The humanity of the perpetrators, as well as the victims, is inevitably compromised by the use of torture.'' ``We are particularly appalled by the infliction of sexual humiliation on prisoners under United States custody. Jewish tradition upholds a high standard of personal modesty. Indeed the Bible's term for prohibited sexual behavior is to `uncover the nakedness' of another. However, even non-sexual acts that overpower people and attempt to break their will and diminish their dignity are acts of humiliation that Jewish tradition abhors.'' The Rabbinic Letter specifically calls on the U.S. Government to state in unequivocal terms that the use of any tactics of physical abuse, the deprivation of food, water, sleep, disorientation, religious degradation or purposive humiliations of a prisoner is prohibited. This must be the basis understanding for the treatment of any captive, whether or not he or she originates from a country or belongs to a group that is a signatory to the Geneva conventions.'' Despite the statements of President Bush that ``We don't torture,'' the American People know that we do. Not only have we seen the pictures of the handcuffed, naked prisoners at Abu Ghraib and male prisoners being sexually humiliated; not only have we been stained by the image of the Hooded Man attached to wires at Guantanamo; not only has the International Committee of the Red Cross reported that we subject detainees to torture; now we learn we have a system of secret prisons run by the F.B.I. in which we keep detainees that have been disappeared. We don't know who they are or what has been done to them. An article by M. Gregg Bloche, a law professor at Georgetown University who is also a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution and Jonathan H. Marks, a barrister in London, as well as a bioethics fellow at Georgetown and Johns Hopkins, revealed that mostly unredacted F.B.I. email shows that interrogation techniques used on detainees at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo were from the SAVE program invented by the Red Army and used on Americans captured in Korea and in Vietnam. These interrogation techniques are used only to break the will and spirit of a prisoner so as to get false confessions from them. In these techniques, truth is beside the point. I support the McCain amendment. That amendment embodies everything the Rabbinic Letter calls for and everything that people of faith everywhere call for. It calls for America to renew its character and banish the stain caused by the Bush embrace of torture. February 2005. Dear President Bush and Members of Congress: On behalf of Rabbis for Human Rights North America, we write out of a deep sense of concern about the erosion of America's longstanding commitment that torture is absolutely reprehensible. All of us have been shocked by the published pictures of the behavior of some American soldiers at Abu Ghraib. We applaud the fact that this administration is prosecuting some of the worst offenders there as well as several soldiers who were responsible for the deaths of Afghani prisoners under their protection in that other theater of war. What is most disturbing, though, is that the documents that have been made public as these cases move forward demonstrate that the use of torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment had been approved at the highest levels of the Administration, that commanders in the field have permitted much of this behavior, that directives from the Department of Defense appear to advocate the use of torture and other abuses, and that even today the position of the Administration is that the members of AI-Qaeda and other terrorist groups are not covered by the Geneva Conventions. Recent reports from the Red Cross and from FBI agents, for example, raise new concerns about American treatment of detainees at Guantanamo. We are not addressing the technical legal arguments that characterize this discussion. Rather, we want to express our moral concerns about the human situation--concerns that stem from the heart of America's values, the essence of democracy, and the soul of Jewish tradition. We understand that the most fundamental ethical principle, which results from our belief in God as Creator of the world and Parent of all humanity, is that every human being is seen as reflecting the Image of God. Torture shatters and defiles God's Image. The purpose of torture is to remove a person's pride, humiliate that person, or make his or her life so painful that the person does or says whatever the interrogator wants. Torture ``works'' by attempting to deprive a human being of will, spirit, and personal dignity. The humanity of the perpetrators, as well as the victims, is inevitably compromised by the use of torture. Jewish tradition calls for humane treatment even of one's adversaries. In the Book of Exodus (23:4), the Bible teaches, ``When you encounter an enemy's ox or donkey, you must take it back to him.'' Here the religious test is, strikingly, not how one would treat a friend, but how one relates to one's enemy. Classical Rabbinic texts are rigorous in prohibiting acts of humiliation. In Jewish tort law, an additional penalty is assessed against one who has physically injured another person when it is found that the victim also suffered, humiliation (boshet), while being wounded. Even verbal humiliation is said to be the equivalent of shedding blood. We are particularly appalled by the infliction of sexual humiliation on prisoners under United States custody. Jewish tradition upholds a high standard of personal modesty. Indeed the Bible's term for prohibited sexual behavior is to ``uncover the nakedness'' of another. However, even non-sexual acts that overpower people and attempt to break their will and diminish their dignity are acts of humiliation that Jewish tradition abhors. It is significant that nowhere in the 3000-year long corpus of Jewish law is there any allowance for acts of physical coercion in interrogations. Consider the ruling of the Supreme Court of Israel, which outlawed the use of torture in interrogations, despite the fact that terrorist organizations have Israel's annihilation as their express goal, carry out attacks that murder scores of men, women, and children, and do not distinguish between civilian and military targets. Despite this constant reality of cruelty and merciless savagery, the Supreme Court of Israel found no reason why tactics other than face-to-face interrogation should be allowed against any prisoner. After the. fact, if/when an interrogator is charged with a violation, he is permitted to raise a defense of necessity-- i.e., his actions were necessary to prevent an imminent attack endangering human life; but no permission is given before the fact, even in a country facing life-threatening terror. At the conclusion of their decision, the Israeli jurists acknowledge that forswearing inhumane means such as torture, even for honorable ends, ``* * * is the destiny of democracy, as not all means are acceptable to it, and not all practices employed by its enemies are open before it. Although a democracy must fight with one hand tied behind its back, it nonetheless has the upper hand. Preserving the rule of law and recognition of an individual's liberty constitutes an important component in its understanding of security. At the end of the day, they strengthen its spirit and its strength and allow it to overcome its difficulties.'' First, as Jewish leaders representing all the movements of our Jewish community, in consonance with world consensus and with the teachings of Jewish tradition in every age, we call for a complete repudiation and prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment for any purpose, in any instance. We call on the U.S. government to state in unequivocal terms that the use of any tactics of physical abuse, the deprivation of food, water, sleep, disorientation, religious degradation or purposive humiliation of a prisoner is prohibited. This must be a basic understanding for the treatment of any captive, whether or not he or she originates from a country or belongs to a group that is a signatory to the Geneva conventions. All those in the custody of U.S. military, military contractors, or intelligence officials must be provided with visits by the International Committee of the Red Cross, in accordance with U.S. obligations under international law. Secondly, we note that in the trial of Specialist Charles A. Graner, Jr., his defense lawyers argued that he was simply following the lessons he had learned in civilian life as a prison guard. It is shocking to think that the prelude to Abu Ghraib may have been the treatment of our people in our own prisons. The demonstration of the administration's commitment to human dignity must begin at home, to insure that the same principles of human dignity we are urging the administration to adopt regarding foreign captives be equally applied to American prison inmates. Otherwise, we become what we claim to abhor. Lastly, we call for full investigation of all allegations of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment committed in settings under United States control or direction and for proper legal sanctions to be applied against individuals who are found to have committed acts of torture. We support the creation of a bipartisan commission to investigate and report on the detention and interrogation procedures of U.S. military and intelligence agencies and to set a course of corrective action. We look forward to hearing your views on this question and hope that you will provide much needed moral leadership for our nation. With blessings of Shalom, Rabbi Gerry Serotta, Chair. Rabbi Brian Walt, Executive Director RHR Honorary Advisory Council: Rabbi Brad Artson, Rabbi Elliot Dorff, Rabbi Amy Eilberg, Rabbi Arthur Green, Rabbi Susan Grossman, Rabbi Sid Schwarz, and Rabbi David Teutsch. Executive Committee: Rabbi Ellen Lippmann, Rabbi Simkha Weintraub, Rabbi Alana Suskin, Rabbi Edward Feld, Rabbi Roberto Graetz, Rabbi Joyce Galaski, Rabbi Mordechai Liebling, and Rabbi Arthur Waskow. List of Signatories to Rabbinic letter Rabbi David Ackerman, Tiferet Bet Israel, Blue Bell; Rabbi David Adelson, East End Temple, New York; Rabbi Richard Agler, Congregation B'nai Israel, Boca Raton; Rabbi Ron Aigen, Congregation Dorshei Emet, Hampstead; Rabbi Morris Allen, Beth Jacob, Mendota Heights; Rabbi Rebecca Alpert, Temple University, Philadelphia; Rabbi Thomas Alpert, Temple Tifereth Israel; Malden; Rabbi Renni Altman, Temple Beth-El, Great Neck; Rabbi Sharon Cohen Anisfeld, Newton Center; Rabbi Stephen A. Arnold, South Easton; Rabbi Melanie Aron, Congregation Shir Hadash, Los Gatos; Rabbi Daniel Aronson, Reconstructionist Rabbinical College, Wyncote; Rabbi Bradley Shavit Artson, Ziegler School of Rabbinic Studies, Los Angeles; Rabbi Raphael Asher, Congregation B'nai Tikvah, Walnut Creek; Rabbi Craig Axler, Congregation Beth Or, Spring House; Rabbi Chava Bahle, Suttons Bay; Rabbi George Barnard, Northern Hills Synagogue, Cincinnati; Rabbi Samuel Barth, Congregation Agudas Achim, Austin; Rabbi Lewis M. Barth, Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion, Los Angeles; Rabbi Eliot J. Baskin, Evergreen; Rabbi David Dunn Bauer, Jewish Community of Amherst, Amherst; Rabbi Pamela Frydman Baugh, San Francisco; Rabbi Dennis Beck-Berman, Congregation Brith Achim, Petersburg; Rabbi Shelley Kovar Becker, Temple Sholom, Floral Park. Rabbi Micah Becker-Klein, Congregation Ahavas Achim, Keene; Rabbi Leonard Beerman, Los Angeles; Rabbi Marc J. Belgrad, Congregation Beth Am, Buffalo Grove; Rabbi Haim Beliak, HaMifgash, Rabbi Moshe Ben Asher, Gather the People, Rabbi Allen Bennett, Temple Israel, Alamedia; Rabbi Philip Bentley; Rabbi Peter Berg, Temple Beth Or, Twp. of Washington; Rabbi H. Philip Berkowitz, Rabbi Marc Berkson, Congregation Emanu- El B'ne Jeshurun, Milwaukee; Rabbi Donald R Berlin, Temple Oheb Shalom, Pikesville; Rabbi Sandra Berliner; Rabbi Phyllis Berman, Philadelphia; Rabbi Marjorie Berman, Philadelphia; Rabbi Howard A. Berman, Chicago Sinai Congregation, Jamaica Plain; Rabbi Donna Berman, Charter Oak Cultural Center, Hartford; Rabbi Leila Gal Berner, Congregation Bet Mishpacah, Washington; Rabbi Amy Bernstein, Temple Israel, Duluth; Rabbi Jonathan Biatch, Temple Sinai of Glendale, Glendale; Rabbi Binyamin Biber, Machar, Washington+E9; Rabbi Debra Reed Blank, Rabbi Herman Blumberg, Temple Shir Tikva, Wayland; Rabbi Rena Blumenthal, Vassar College, Poughkeepsie; Rabbi Elizabeth Bolton, Congregation Beit Tikvah, Baltimore; Rabbi Stephen Booth-Nadav, B'nai Havurah: CJRF, Denver. Rabbi Jill Borodin, Har Zion Temple, Narbeth; Rabbi Neal L. Borovitz, Temple Sholom, River Edge; Rabbi Barbara Borts, Temple Adath Yeshurun, Manchester; Rabbi Daniel Brenner, Director of the Center for Multifaith Education Auburn Theological Seminary, New York; Rabbi Daniel Bridge, Seattle; Rabbi Deborah Brin, Grinnel College, Grinwell; Rabbi Herb Brockman, Congregation Mishkan Israel, Hamden; Rabbi Caryn Broitman, Martha's Vineyard Hebrew Center, Vineyard Haven; Rabbi Bruce Bromberg, Smith and Amherst Colleges, Northampton; Rabbi Lester B. Bronstein, Bet Am Shalom Synagogue, White Plains; Rabbi Deborah Bronstein, Congregation Har HaShem; Rabbi Jonathan Brumberg-Kraus, Wheaton College, Norton; Rabbi David Brusin, Rabbi Janet Burden, West Central Liberal Synagogue, London; Rabbi John Bush, JD, Temple Anshe Hesed, Erie; Rabbi Debra Cantor, Congregation B'nai Sholom, Newington; Rabbi Kenneth Carr, Rabbi Carie Carter, Park Slope Jewish Center, Brooklyn; Rabbi Susan Bulba Carvutto, Temple Beth El, Augusta; Rabbi Donald Cashman, Albany; Rabbi Joshua Chasan, Ohavi Zedek Synagogue, Burlington; Rabbi Kenneth Chasen, Leo Baeck Temple, Los Angeles; Rabbi Carl Choper, Temple Beth Shalom, Mechanicsburg; Rabbi Jonathan Cohen, Mishkan Torah, Greenbelt; Rabbi Debrah Cohen, The Abramson Center for Jewish Life, North Wales. Rabbi Ayelet S. Cohen, Congregation Beth Simchat Torah, New York; Rabbi Alan Cohen, Congregation Beth Shalom, Kansas City; Rabbi Michael Cohen, Israel Congregation, Manchester Center; Rabbi Heidi Cohen, Temple Beth Sholom, Santa Ana; Rabbi Howard Cohen, Congregation Beth El, Rabbi Hillel Cohn, Rabbi Emeritus, Congregation Emanu El, Rabbi, Adat Ari E., Las Vegas, NV, San Bernadino; Rabbi Neil Comess-Daniels, Beth Shir Sholom, Santa Monica; Rabbi Steven Conn, Congregation Beth Shalom, New York City; Rabbi David J. Cooper, Kehilla Community Synagogue, Berkeley; Rabbi Howard Cooper, Finchley Reform Synagogue, London; Rabbi Fredi Cooper, Jewish Reconstructionist Federation, Elkins Park; Rabbi Mychal Copeland, Hillel at Stanford, Atherton; Rabbi Scott Corngold, Temple Emanu-El of Lynbrook, Lynbrook; Rabbi Laurie Coskey, Interfaith Committee for Worker Justice, San Diego; Rabbi Rachel Cowan, Institute for Jewish Spirituality, Morristown; Rabbi Jonathan Crane, University of Toronto, Toronto; Rabbi Meryl M. Crean, Martins Run Senior Community, Media; Rabbi Menachem Creditor, Temple Israel of Sharon, Sharon; Rabbi Eric Cytryn, Beth El Temple, Harrisburg; Rabbi Julie Hilton Danan, Congregation Beth Israel, Chico; Rabbi Justin David, Congregation B'nai Israel, Northampton; Rabbi Braham David; Rabbi Jerome Davidson, HUC-JIR, Great Neck; Rabbi Joshua Michael Davidson, Temple Beth El, Chappaqua; Rabbi Geoffrey Dennis, Flower Mound. Rabbi Lavey Derby, Cong. Kol Shofar, Tiburon; Rabbi Shoshanah Devorah, Congregation Kol HaEmek, Redwood Valley; Rabbi James S. Diamond, Center for Jewish Life at Princeton University, Princeton; Rabbi Barry Diamond, Temple Emanu-El, Dallas; Rabbi Robert Dobrusin, Beth Israel Congregation, Ann Arbor; Rabbi Art Donsky, Ohav Shalom, Allison Park; Rabbi Elliot N. Dorff, University of Judaism, Bel Air; Rabbi Ellen W. Dreyfus, B'nai Yehuda Beth Sholom, Homewood; Rabbi George B. Driesen, Bethesda; Rabbi Joseph A. Edelheit, Hopkins; Rabbi Laurence Edwards, Congregation Or Chadash, Chicago; Rabbi Lisa Edwards, Beth Chayim Chadashim, Los Angeles; Rabbi Dan Ehrenkrantz, Rabbi Amy Eilberg, Yedida Center for Jewish Spiritual Direction, Medota Heights; Rabbi Colin Eimer, Senior Rabbi: Southgate & District Reform Synagogue Finchley Reform Synagogue; Rabbi Serena Eisenberg, Community Jewish Youth Foundation of the East Bay, San Francisco; Rabbi Richard Eisenberg, Orange; Rabbi Jeffrey Eisenstat, JRF, Gladwyne; Rabbi Ed Elkin, First Narayever Congregation, Toronto; Rabbi Sue Levi Elwell, Union of Reform Judaism, Philadelphia; Rabbi Daniel Epstein, Fair Lawn; Rabbi Lewis Eron, Jewish Geriatric Home, Cherry Hill; Rabbi Theodore G. Falcon, Bet Alef Meditative Synagogue, Seattle; Rabbi David Feder, Tree of Life Congregation, Morgantown. Rabbi Michael Feinberg, Executive Director, Greater New York Labor-Religion Coalition, New York; Rabbi Charles Feinberg, Congregation Beth Israel, Vancouver; Rabbi Dena Feingold, Beth Hillel Temple, Kenosha; Rabbi Edward Feld, Jewish Theological Seminary, New York; Rabbi Marla J. Feldman, Union for Reform Judaism, New York; Rabbi Fern Feldman, Kadima: A Progressive Jewish Community, Seattle; Rabbi Susan Fendrick, Newton; Rabbi Natan Fenner, Bay Area Jewish Healing Ctr., San Francisco; Rabbi Michael L. Feshbach, Temple Shalom, Chevy Chase; Rabbi Michael Fessler, Congregation B'nai Tikvah, Turnersville; Rabbi Brian Field, Judaism Your Way, Denver; Rabbi David Fine, Shaarei Tikvah, Atlanta; Rabbi Steven Fineblum, Temple Sinai, Cinnaminson; Rabbi Gary Fink, Oseh Shalom Congregation, Laurel; Rabbi Tirzah Firestone, Congregation Nevei Kodesh, Boulder; Rabbi Reuven Firestone, Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion, Los Angeles; Rabbi Frank Fischer, Retired; Rabbi Adam D. Fisher, Stony Brook; Rabbi Nancy Flam, Northampton; Rabbi Alan Flam, Brown University; Rabbi Yael Flusberg; Rabbi Jeffrey Foust, Spiritual Life Center Bentley College, Newton Centre; Rabbi Bob Freedman, Israel Congregation, Manchester Center; Rabbi John S. Friedman, Judea Reform Congregation, Durham; Rabbi Dayle A. Friedman, Reconstructionist Rabbinical College, Wycote. Rabbi Barry Friedman, Retired, Hopatcong; Rabbi Elyse Frishman, The Barnert Temple, Franklin Lakes; Rabbi Stephen Lewis Fuchs, Congregation Beth Israel, West Hartford; Rabbi Nancy Fuchs-Kreimer, Reconstructionist Rabbinical College, Wyncote; Rabbi Ruth M. Gais, Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion, New York; Rabbi Joyce Galaski, Congregation Ahavas Achim, Westfield; Rabbi Rachel Gartner, Bnai Keshet, Montclair; Rabbi Lisa B. Gelber, Rabbi David Gelfand, The Jewish Center of the Hamptons, East Hampton; Rabbi Laura Geller, Temple Emanuel, Beverly Hill; Rabbi Jonathan Gerard, Temple Covenant of Peace, Easton; Rabbi Neil Gillman, Jewish Theological Seminary, New York; Rabbi Joshua Ginsberg, Rabbi George Gittleman, Congregation Shomrei Torah, Santa Rosa; Rabbi Gordon Gladstone, Temple Beth Am, Bayonne; Rabbi Rosalind Glazer, Philadelphia; Rabbi Ilyse Glickman; Rabbi Gail Glicksman, Reconstructionist Rabbinical College, Wyncote; Rabbi Robert Gluck, University at Albany, Albany; Rabbi Shai Gluskin, Jewish Reconstructionist Federation, Elkins Park; Rabbi Neal Gold, Anshe Emeth Memorial Temple, New Brunswick; Rabbi Rosalind Gold, Retired, Reston; Rabbi Laura Gold, New York; Rabbi Michael Goldberg, Shir Shalom, Sonoma; Rabbi Dan Goldblatt, Beth Chaim Congregation, Danville. Rabbi Rachel Goldenberg, Temple Emanu--El, Dallas; Rabbi A. Bruce Goldman, Center for Creative Jewish Living, New York City; Rabbi Seth Goldstein, Temple Beth Hatfiloh, Olympia; Rabbi Andrea Goldstein, Congregation Shaare Emeth, St. Louis; Rabbi Rafael Goldstein, Congregation Kol Haneshama, Irvine, California, Phoenix; Rabbi Paul Golomb, Vassar Temple, Poughkeepsie; Rabbi Evan Goodman, Beth Israel-Judea, San Francisco; Rabbi David Gordis, Newton; Rabbi Maralee Gordon, McHenry County Jewish Congregation, Crystal Lake; Rabbi Leonard Gordon, Rabbinical Assembly Social Action Committee Chair; Rabbi Debora Gordon, Congregation Berith Sholom, Troy; Rabbi William Gordon, Jewish Home for the Aging, Cranston; Rabbi Mel Gottlieb; Rabbi Lynn Gottlieb; Rabbi Roberto D. Graetz, Temple Isaiah, Lafayette; Rabbi Lina Grazier- Zerbarini, The Slifka Center for Jewish Life, New Haven; Rabbi Caryn Michelle Greenberg, Temple Jeremiah, Northfield; Rabbi Fred Greene, Congregation B'nai Israel, Bridgeport; Rabbi Ellen Greenspan, Temple Micah, Lawrenceville; Rabbi David Greenstein, New Hyde Park Jewish Community Center, New Hyde Park; Rabbi Suzanne B. Griffel, St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago; Rabbi Susan Grossman, Beth Shalom, Columbia; Rabbi Marc A. Gruber, Central Synagogue of Nassau County, Rockville Centre; Rabbi Eric S. Gurvis, Temple Shalom of Newton, Newton; Rabbi Joshua J. Gutoff, Solomon Schechter H.S. of New York, New York. Rabbi Steve Gutow, Saint Louis; Rabbi Rebecca Gutterman; Rabbi Fred B. Guttman, Temple Emanuel, Greensboro; Rabbi Kevin Hale, Assiyah, Leeds; Rabbi Richard Hammerman, Congregation B'nai Israel, Cincinnati; Rabbi Vered Harris, Leawood; Rabbi Maurice Harris, Temple Beth Israel, Eugene; Rabbi Abraham Havivi, University of Judaism, Los Angeles; Rabbi Alan Henkin, Regional Director, Pacific Southwest Council, Northridge. Rabbi Arthur Hertzberg, Former vice-president of the World Jewish Congress; Rabbi Garson Herzfeld, Beth EI Congregation, Hamilton; Rabbi Jay Heyman, Shalom Spiritual Resources, San Francisco; Rabbi Aryeh Hirschfield, Congregation P'nai Or of Portland, Portland; Rabbi Linda Holtzman, Reconstructionist Rabbinical College, Philadelphia; Rabbi Margaret Holub, Mendocino Coast Jewish Community, Little River; Rabbi Mark Hurvitz, Congregation Etz Chaim of Ramona, Poway; Rabbi Yitzhak Husbands-Hankin, Temple Beth Israel, Eugene; Rabbi Shirley M. Idelson, HUC-JIR, New York; Rabbi Shaya Isenberg, University of Florida, Gainesville; Rabbi Alan J. Iser, Congregation Or Shalom, Berwyn; Rabbi Brett R. Isserow, Beth EI Hebrew Congregation, Alexandria; Rabbi Lisa Izes, Woodlands Community Temple; Rabbi Steven Jacobs, Woodland Hills; Rabbi Jill Jacobs, Jewish Council on Urban Affairs, Chicago; Rabbi Burt Jacobson, Kehilla Community Synagogue, Berkeley. Rabbi Devorah L. Jacobson, Jewish Geriatric Services, Longmeadow; Rabbi Jennifer April Jaech, Temple Israel of Northern Westchester, Croton-on-Hudson; Rabbi Norman Janis, Harvard Hillel, Cambridge; Rabbi Beth Janus, Temple Beth El, Aptos; Rabbi Paul Joseph, Long Beach; Rabbi Eitan Julius; Rabbi Bruce Kadden, Temple Beth El, Tacoma; Rabbi Yoel H. Kahn, Jewish Community Centre of San Francisco, San Francisco; Rabbi Deborah Kahn-Harris, Rabbinic Recruitment Officer, Leo Beack College, London; Rabbi Mark Kaiserman, Temple Emanu-El, Livingston; Rabbi Jeremy Kalmanofsky, Congregation Ansche Chesed, New York; Rabbi Sylvan Kamens, Temple of Aaron, St. Paul; Rabbi Debra Kamin, Congregation Am Yisrael, Northfield; Rabbi Shoshana Kaminsky, Beth Samel Jewish Center, Ambridge; Rabbi Jane Kanarek, University of Chicago, Chicago; Rabbi Susan Kanoff, Hospice, Wynnewood; Rabbi Raphael Kanter, Tifereth Israel Congregation, New Bedford; Rabbi Harley Karz-Wagman, Temple Beth OR, Everett; Rabbi Peter Kasdan; Rabbi Debra Kassoff, Goldring Woldenberg Institute of Southern Jewish Life, Jackson; Rabbi Alan Katz, Temple Sinai, Rochester; Rabbi Amy Wallk Katz, Jewish Federation of Greater Kansas City, Overland Park; Rabbi Joshua Katzan; Rabbi Hillel Katzir, Temple Shalom Synagogue, Auburn; Rabbi David Kay; Rabbi Leora Kaye, Brooklyn. Rabbi Stuart Kelman, Congregation Netivot Shalom, Berkeley; Rabbi Stanley Kessler, Rabbi Emeritus, Beth El Temple, West Hartford; Rabbi Jason Kimelman-Block, PANIM: The Institute for Jewish Leadership and Values, Rockville; Rabbi Ralph Kingsley, Rabbi Emeritus, Temple Sinai of North Dade, Aventura; Rabbi Paul Kipnes, Congregation Or Ami, Calabasas; Rabbi David Klatzer, Temple Ner Tamid, Peabody; Rabbi Stephen Klein, Scarsdale Synagogue-Tremont Temple, Ardsley; Rabbi Jason Klein, Reconstructionist Cong. Beth Emeth, Hewlett; Rabbi Jonathan Klein, USC Hillel Foundation, Los Angeles; Rabbi Amy Klein; Rabbi Andrew Klein, Hevreh, Great Barrington; Rabbi Sharon Kleinbaum, Congregation Beth Simchat Torah, New York; Rabbi Adam Kligfeld, Congregation Eitz Chaim, Monroe; Rabbi Jonathan Kligler, Woodstock Jewish Congregation, Woodstock; Rabbi Marc Aaron Kline, Temple Adath Israel, Lexington; Rabbi Myriam Klotz; Rabbi Shelley Kniaz, Teaneck; Rabbi Norman D. Koch, Temple Sholom, New Milford; Rabbi Douglas Kohn, Congregation Emanu El, San Bernardino; Rabbi Debora Kohn, Reutlinger Community for Jewish Living, Danville; Rabbi Debra Kolodny; Rabbi David Kominsky, Portland; Rabbi Neil Kominsky, TempleTemple Emanuel of the Merrimack Valley, Lowell; Rabbi Ira Korinow, Temple Emanu-El, Haverhill. Rabbi Emily Korzenik, Rabbi Emerita of the Fellowship for Jewish Learning, Scarsdale; Rabbi Michael Kramer, Temple Judea, Massapequa; Rabbi Douglas Krantz, Congregation B'nai Yisrael, Armonk; Rabbi Allen Krause, Temple Beth El of South Orange Country, Aliso Viejo; Rabbi Leonard Kravitz, Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion, New York; Rabbi David Krishef, Congregation Ahavas Israel, Grand Rapids; Rabbi Charles Kroloff, Past president, Central Conference of American Rabbis, New York; Rabbi Irwin Kula, CLAL-The National Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership, New York; Rabbi Judith Kummer, Jewish Chaplaincy Council, Newton Centre; Rabbi Claudio Kupchik, First Hebrew Congregation, Peekskill; Rabbi Harold S. Kushner; Natick; Rabbi Gail Labovitz, University of Judaism, Bel Air; Rabbi Susan Laemmle, Ph.D., University of Southern California. Rabbi Lynne Landsberg, Washington; Rabbi Gilah Langner; Rabbi Alan LaPayover, Congregation Beth Am Israel, Narberth; Rabbi Shoshana Lash, Temple Ner Tamid, Bloomfield; Rabbi Michael Latz, Kol HaNeshamah, Seattle; Rabbi Alex Lazarus; Rabbi Barry J. Leff, Congregation Bnai Israel, Toledo; Rabbi Allan Lehmann; Rabbi Michele Lenke, Wellesley; Rabbi Michael Lerner, The Tikkun Community, Berkeley; Rabbi Joshua Lesser, Congregation Bet Haverim, Atlanta; Rabbi Sarra Lev, Philadelphia. Rabbi Amy Levin, Temple Torat Yisrael, Hamilton; Rabbi Robert Levine, Cong. Rodeph Sholom, New York City; Rabbi Joshua Levine- Grater, Pasadena Jewish Temple and Center, Pasadena; Rabbi Yael Levy, Congregation Mishkan Shalom, Philadelphia; Rabbi Sue Levy, Webster; Rabbi Chai Levy, Congregation Kol Shofar, Tiburon; Rabbi Sheldon Lewis, Congregation Kol Emeth, Palo Alto; Rabbi Justin Jaron Lewis, Congregation Iyr HaMelech, Kingston; Rabbi Phil Lieberman, Congregation Kol HaNeshamah, Englewood; Rabbi Elias Lieberman, Falmouth Jewish Congregation, East Falmouth; Rabbi Mordechai Liebling, The Shefa Fund, Philadelphia; Rabbi David Lilienthal, Emeritus Rabbi Liberaal Joodse Gemeente Amsterdam, Amstelveen; Rabbi Rebecca Lillian, Miami; Rabbi Jonathan Lipnick, New York City; Rabbi Serge Lippe, Brooklyn Heights Synagogue, Brooklyn; Rabbi Ellen R. Lippmann, Kolot Chayeinu, Brooklyn; Rabbi Jane Litman, Congregation Beth El, Berkeley; Rabbi Richard Litvak Temple Beth El, Aptos; Rabbi Alan Litwak, Temple Sinai of North Dade, N. Miami Beach; Rabbi Daveen Litwin, Northampton; Rabbi Mark Loeb, Beth El Congregation, Baltimore; Rabbi Neal Loevinger, Temple Israel, Swampscott; Rabbi Alan D. Londy, Temple Beth Sholom, Smithtown; Rabbi Tamar Malino, Temple Adat Shalom, Poway; Rabbi Jonathan Malino, Guilford College, Greensboro. Rabbi Jonathan Maltzman, Kol Shalom, No. Bethesda; Rabbi Harry Manhoff, Temple Beth Sholom, San Leandro; Rabbi Natan Margalit, Cambridge; Rabbi Shana Margolin, Beth Jacob Synagogue, Montpelier; Rabbi Marc Margolius, Kaiserman Jewish Community Center, Wynnewood; Rabbi Bonnie Margulis, Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, Washington; Rabbi Randall Mark, Congregation Shomrei Torah, Wayne; Rabbi Jeffrey Marker, Brooklyn; Rabbi Susan Marks, New College of Florida, Sarasota; Rabbi Dow Marmur, Rabbi Emeritus, Holy Blossom Temple, Toronto; Rabbi Simeon Maslin, CCAR, Philadelphia; Rabbi J. Rolando Matalon, Congregation B'nai Jeshurun, New York; Rabbi Vivian Mayer, B'Nai Israel, Danbury; Rabbi Paul Menitoff, Executive Vice President, Central Conference of American Rabbis; Rabbi Andrea Merow, Rabbi Margaret Meyer, Cincinnati; Rabbi Maurice Michaels, SWESRS, Ilford; Rabbi Bennett Miller, Anshe Emeth Memorial Temple, New Brunswick; Rabbi Mordecai Miller, Brith Sholom Kneseth Israel, Santa Clarita; Rabbi Joshua Minkin, Temple Emanu-El of Canarsie, Brooklyn; Rabbi Michelle Missaghieh, Temple Israel of Hollywood, Los Angeles; Rabbi David Mivasair, Vancouver; Rabbi Jack Moline, Alexandria; Rabbi Adam Morris, Temple Micah, Denver; Rabbi Jay Moses, New York. Rabbi Tracy Nathan, Congregation Beth Sholom, San Francisco; Rabbi David Nelson, Bergen County YJCC, Township of Washington; Rabbi Daniel Nevins, Adat Shalom, Farmington Hills; Rabbi Jeffrey Newman, Rabbinic Development Foundation, London; Rabbi Nomi Oren, Havurah of South Florida, Rabbi Sue Oren, Brooklyn; Rabbi David Osachy, Jacksonville; Rabbi Shaul Osadchey, Congregation Or Ami, Houston; Rabbi Norman Patz, Temple Sholom of West Essex, Cedar Grove; Rabbi Sheldon Pennes, Jewish Hospice Project-LA, Los Angeles; Rabbi Barbara Rosman Penzner, Temple Hillel B'nai Torah, West Roxbury; Rabbi Carl Perkins, Temple Aliyah, Needham; Rabbi Michael Pertz, South West Essex and settlement Reform Synagogue, London; Rabbi Bruce Pfeffer, The Jewish Hospital, Cincinnati; Rabbi Marsha Pik-Nathan, Philadelphia; Rabbi William Plevan, Rabbi Jack Nusan Porter, West Newton. Rabbi Amber Powers, Reconstructionist Rabbincal College, Wyncote; Rabbi Marcia Prager, Philadelphia; Rabbi Sally J. Priesand, Monmouth Reform Temple, Tinton Falls; Rabbi Sanford Ragins, Leo Baeck Temple, Los Angeles; Rabbi Lawrence Raphael, Sherith Israel, San Francisco; Rabbi Geela Rayzel Raphael, Jewish Family & Childrens Services, Melrose Park; Rabbi Paula L. Reimers, Center for American & Jewish Studies, Waco; Rabbi Michael M. Remson, Kenosha; Rabbi Steven Reuben, Pacific Palisades. Rabbi Yael Ridberg, West End Synagogue, New York; Rabbi Moti Rieber, Congregation Beth Shalom, Naperville; Rabbi Seth Riemer, Adath Israel, Middletown; Rabbi Debra Robbins, Temple Emanu-El, Dallas; Rabbi Norman T. Roman, Temple Kol Ami, West Bloomfield; Rabbi Brant Rosen, Jewish Reconstructionist Congregation, Evanston; Rabbi Tracee Rosen, Congregation Kol Ami, Salt Lake City; Rabbi James Bruce Rosenberg, Temple Habonim, Barrington; Rabbi David Rosenn, Avodah, New York; Rabbi Morton Rosenthal, Rabbi John L. Rosove, Temple Israel of Hollywood, Los Angeles; Rabbi Donald Rossoff, Temple B'nai Or, St. Louis; Rabbi Jeff Roth, Co-founder of Elat Chayyim, New Paltz; Rabbi Sandy Roth, Kehilat HaNahar, New Hope; Rabbi Michael Rothbaum, Reconstructionist Temple Beth Israel, Maywood; Rabbi Sylvia Rothschild, Wimbledon Synagogue in England, Rabbi Eliseo Rozenwasser, Morristown; Rabbi Steven Rubenstein, Congregation Beth Shalom, Kansas City; Rabbi Gloria Rubin, Rabbi Rachel Sabath, Hebrew Union College, Jerusalem; Rabbi Douglas Sagal, Temple Emanu-El, Westfield; Rabbi Joanna Samuels, Congregation Habonim, New York; Rabbi Neil Sandler, Ahavath Achim Synagogue, Reseda; Rabbi David Saperstein, Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, Washington; Rabbi Marc Saperstein, George Washington University, Washington. Rabbi Marna Sapsowitz, Congregation Dorshei Tzedek, West Newton; Rabbi Elizabeth Sarah, Rabbi, Brighton & Hove, Progressive Synagogue, Brighton & Hove; Rabbis Dennis & Sandy Sasso, Congregation Beth-EI Zedeck, Indianapolis; Rabbi Scott B. Saulson, Jewish Family & Career Services, Atlanta; Rabbi Julie Saxe-Taller, Congregation Sherith Israel, San Francisco; Rabbi Rabbi Richard Schachet, Valley Outreach Synagogue, Henderson; Rabbi Zalman Schachter-Shalomi, Aleph, Boulder; Rabbi Fred Scherlinder Dobb, Adat Shalom Reconstructionist Congregation, Bethesda; Rabbi Chaim Leib Schneider, California Community Chevre, Santa Cruz; Rabbi David A. Schuck, Pelham Jewish Center, Pelham; Rabbi Jeremy Schwartz, Temple Bnal Israel, Willimantic; Rabbi Barry L. Schwartz, Congregation M'kor Shalom, Cherry Hill; Rabbi Arthur L. Schwartz, Kehillath Shalom Synagogue, Cold Spring Harbor; Rabbi Sidney Schwarz, Panim, Rockville; Rabbi David Seidenberg, Academy for Jewish Religion, Los Angeles; Rabbi Rabbi Hugh Seid-Valencia, Reconstuctionist Rabbinical Association, San Jose Bruce; Rabbi Bruce Bromberg Seltzer, Smith College, Northampton; Rabbi Gerald Serotta, Temple Sholom, Chevy Chase; Rabbi Isaac Daniel Serotta, Lakeside Congregation for Reform Judaism, Highland Park; Rabbi Drorah Setel, Congregation Havurah, Buffalo; Rabbi Judy B. Shanks, Temple Isaiah, Lafayette; Rabbi Mark Shapiro, Sinai Temple, Springfield; Rabbi Noach E. Shapiro, Congregation Shomrei Emunah, Montcalir; Rabbi Rona Shapiro, Ma'yan, Brooklyn; Rabbi John M. Sherwood, Temple Emet of Woodland Hills, CA, Oxnard. Rabbi Dan Shevitz, Congregation Mishkon Tephilo, Venice; Rabbi David Shneyer, Am Kolel, Rockville; Rabbi Stephen Shulman, Bronx; Rabbi Sheila Shulman, Beit Klal Yisrael, London; Rabbi Hanna Tiferet Siegel, B'nai Or, Boston, W. Roxbury; Rabbi Jodie Siff, RSNS, Plandome; Rabbi Reuven Silverman, Manchester Reform Synagogue, Manchester; Rabbi David Wolf Silverman, Princeton Jewish Center, Princeton; Rabbi Suzanne Singer, Temple Sinai, Oakland; Rabbi Steven Sirbu, Temple Emeth, Teaneck; Rabbi Scott Slarskey, Jewish Community Center of San Francisco, San Francisco; Rabbi Jonathan Slater, Institute for Jewish Spirituality, Hastings On Hudson; Rabbi Eric Slaton, Beth Israel Synagogue, Toms River; Rabbi Amy Small, Congregation Beth Hatikvah, Chatham; Rabbi Joel Soffin, Temple Shalom, Succasunna; Rabbi Ruth H. Sohn, Milken Community High School, Los Angeles; Rabbi Myra Soifer, Temple Sinai, Reno; Rabbi Felicia L. Sol, Congregation B'nai Jeshurun, New York; Rabbi Rav A. Soloff, Lansdale; Rabbi Eric M. Solomon, Congregation Tehillah, New York; Rabbi Mark Solomon, Liberal Jewish Synagogue, The, London; Rabbi Marc Soloway, Bonai Shalom, Scarsdale; Rabbi Hesch Sommer; Rabbi Scott Sperling; Rabbi Aaron Spiegel, Indianapolis Center for Congregations, Indianapolis. Rabbi Adam Spilker, Mount Zion, St. Paul; Rabbi Jonathan Spira-Savett, Forest Hills; Rabbi Toba Spitzer, Congregation Dorshei Tzedek, Lexington; Rabbi Sonya Starr, Columbia Jewish Congregation, Columbia; Rabbi Howard Stecker, Temple Israel, Great Neck; Rabbi Margot Stein, Bala, Cynwyd; Rabbi Peter Stein, Temple Sinai, Cranston; Rabbi David Steinberg, Temple Beth Israel, Plattsburgh; Rabbi Naomi Steinberg, Temple Beth EI, Eureka; Rabbi George M. Stern, Northwest Interfaith Movement, Philadelphia; Rabbi Benjamin Sternman, Congregation Beth Israel, Austin; Rabbi Jeffrey B. Stiffman, Congregation Shaare Emeth, St. Louis; Rabbi Ira Stone, Rabbi Ariel Stone- Halpern, Congregation Shir Tikvah, Portland; Rabbi Michael Strassfeld, Society for the Advancement, New York; Rabbi Andrew F. Straus, Temple Emanuel of Tempe, Tempe; Rabbi David Straus, Rabbi David Straus, Main Line Reform Temple Beth Elohim, Wynnewood; Rabbi William Strongin, Kehillat Ahavat Achim, New Paltz; Rabbi Leah Kurtz Sudran, Congregation B'nai Israel, Petaluma; Rabbi Alvin M. Sugarman, The Temple, Atlanta; Rabbi Yaaffa-Shira Sultan, Reconstructionist Rabbinical College; Rabbi Jeff Sultar, Mishkan Shalom, Philadelphia; Rabbi Alana Suskin, Adas Israel Congregation, Washington; Rabbi Daniel Swartz, Greater Washington Interfaith Power and Light, Takoma Park. Rabbi Robert Tabak, Hospital of The University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; Rabbi Joshua Taub, Temple Emanuel, St. Louis; Rabbi Dov Taylor, Congregation Solel, Highland Park; Rabbi Elliott Tepperman, Bnai Keshet, Montclair; Rabbi David Teutsch, Reconstructionist Rabbinical College, Wyncote; Rabbi Carla Theodore, Witnesses for a Sustainable Economy, Sperryville; Rabbi Robert Traer, Dominican University of California; Rabbi Lawrence Troster, Coalition on the Environment and Jewish Life, Teaneck; Rabbi Theodore Tsuruoka, Temple Isaiah of Great Neck, Great Neck; Rabbi Gordon Tucker, Temple Israel Center, White Plains; Rabbi Jason Van Leeuwen, B'nai Tikvah Congregation, Los Angeles; Rabbi Burton L. Visotzky, New York; Rabbi Andrew D. Vogel, Temple Sinai, Brookline; Rabbi David Vorspan, Conregation Shir Ami, Woodland Hills; Rabbi Moshe Waldoks, Temple Beth Zion, Brookline; Rabbi Brian Walt, Rabbis for Human Rights-N.A., West Tisbury; Rabbi Philip Warmflash, Jewish Outreach Partnership of Philadelphia, Melrose Park; Rabbi Andrew Warmflash; Rabbi Arthur Waskow, The Shalom Center, Philadelphia; Rabbi Michael Wasserman, The New Shul, Scottsdale; Rabbi Mira Wasserman, Congregation Beth Shalom, Bloomington; Rabbi Pamela Wax, Kehillat Chaverim, White Plains; Rabbi Deborah Waxman, Reconstructionist Rabbinical College, Wyncote; Rabbi Joshua Waxman, Or Hadash, Philadelphia; Rabbi Nancy Wechsler-Azen, Congregation Beth Shalom, Carmichael; Rabbi Elyse Wechterman, Congregation Agudas Achim, Attleboro; Rabbi Sheila Weinberg, Amherst; Rabbi Daniel A. Weiner, Temple De Hirsch Sinai, Seattle. Rabbi Simkha Weintraub, The National Center for Jewish Healing, New York; Rabbi Samuel Weintraub, Kane Street Synagogue, Brooklyn; Rabbi Mimi Weisel, Jewish Community High School of the Bay, San Francisco; Rabbi Lew Weiss, IHC, Indianapolis; Rabbi Zari Weiss, Rodef Tzedek, Seattle; Rabbi Michael White, Temple Sinai of Roslyn, Roslyn; Rabbi Nancy Wiener, Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion, New York City; Rabbi Dan Wigodsky, Riverdale; Rabbi Jeffrey Wildstein, Temple Israel, Minneapolis; Rabbi Avi Winokur, Society Hill Synagogue, Philadelphia; Rabbi Irvin Wise, Adath Israel Synagogue, Boulder; Rabbi Jonathan Wittenberg, The New North Masorti London Synagogue, London; Rabbi Jeffrey Wohlberg, Adas Israel Congregation, Washington; Rabbi Arnold Jacob Wolf, Rabbi Emeritus, K.A.M. Isaiah Israel Congregation, Chicago; Rabbi Joseph Wolf, Havurah Shalom, Portland; Rabbi Peretz Wolf-Prusan, Congregation Emanu-El, San Francisco; Rabbi Bridget Wynne, Kehilla Community Synagogue, Berkeley; Rabbi Moshe Yehudai; Rabbi Daniel G. Zemel, Temple Micah, Washington; Rabbi Moshe Zemer, Director, Institute of Progressive Halakhah, Tel Aviv Israel; Rabbi Irwin Zeplowitz, The Community Synagogue, Port Washington; Rabbi Shawn Zevit, Jewish Reconstructionist Federation, Elkins Park; Rabbi Laurie Zimmerman, Congregation Shaarei Shamayim, Madison; Rabbi Michael Zimmerman, Congregation Kehillat Israel, Lansing; Rabbi Henry Zoob, Temple Beth David, Westwood; Rabbi David J. Zucker, Shalom Park, Aurora. Cantors Cantor Shoshana Lash, Temple Ner Tamid, Bloomfield; Cantor Barbara Ostfeld, American Conference of Cantors, Williamsville; Cantor Jodi Schechtman, Temple Beth Am, Framingham; Cantor Kerith Spencer-Shapiro, Congregation Adas Emuno, Leonia; Cantor Iris Beth Weiner, Kehillat Mevakshei Derech, Jerusalem. Rabbinical Students Student Susan Averbach, Kol Hadash--Society for Humanistic Judaism, San Francisco; Student Leah Doberne-Schor, Hebrew Union College--Jewish Institute of Religion, Brooklyn; Student Joshua Feigelson, Riverdale; Student Daniel Friedman, Yeshivat Chovevai Torah, New York; Student Will Friedman, Yeshivat Chovevei Torah, Rego Park; Student Alexandria Shuval-Weiner, Hebrew Union College--Jewish Institute of Religion, Manhattan Beach.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, we are not dealing tonight with 30 pieces of silver, but we are dealing with tax cuts. And the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal) would like to explain in non-biblical terms where the 30 pieces of silver have gone. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal), an outstanding member of the Ways and Means Committee, to share with us his views. (Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts 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 Washington (Mr. McDermott) to share with us some of the reforms that the poor will have to suffer under. (Mr. McDERMOTT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. How is this working? I mean, we have made some serious accusations about what these people are doing to the poor, and we have not heard from them; and three of us have spoken. I mean, is the public not entitled to hear something in response to what we say they are doing to the country? I am asking, if they do not want to speak, then I would like to yield the remainder of the time to the gentleman from California who might share our concerns about the poor and believe that those who God has blessed should be sharing some of those blessings with the rest of our citizens. Mr. Speaker, I yield the rest of the time remaining to the gentleman from California (Mr. Becerra).

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want everyone to remember this date, November 17, because in the final analysis the debate that is taking place obviously between Democrats and Republicans will be decided not due to the eloquence of the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle) who obviously is leaving the House, but will be decided by the American people. There is an old western song, ``You Picked a Fine Time to Leave Me Lucille.'' To be the chairman of the Budget Committee and to try to find just what tax breaks can we give to the richest people that we have, and then to try to find out how you can really help the deficit by taking the two or $300 billion that we are paying for the war in Iraq and not even include that, and then to really try to look for the programs that deal with the most vulnerable people that we have, the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle) is leaving the floor. I can understand that. But he does not have to leave the Congress. When the people start looking and seeing what happens, they will be looking for the chairman that drafted this, and you will not be in Washington. And the reason I want people to remember November 17 is because November 17 is going to be an historic day. Oh, true, the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle) did not see reporters up there, but it is going to be reported tomorrow who voted on which side. So we ought to say it with a great bit of pride that old civil rights song, Which Side Are You on? And I tell you, we are so proud on this side that when the final vote is counted, those kids that are in foster homes that just have a little hope that maybe their lives could be better, the people on SSI that are disabled and everyone has left them, the kids who are trying to get a decent education and we are hitting them too, have we no shame on the other side as to what do we have to do in order to maintain the tax cuts? I would like to believe that this was something that could have been worked out. I would like to believe that Democrats and Republicans should not have to vote party line. But it is shameful when you look at the deficit, you look at the war, you look at the tax cuts and then you decide that you are going to reform this system. You try to reform Social Security and we looked at your cards and we found out that you are really trying to privatize it. Now every program that deals with the poor, every program that deals with those people that the Congress should be helping you want to reform. Well, let me say to the other side, I think when the votes are taken tonight people would know who have the compassion, who has the plan, and who has hopes for the future. And you are making it abundantly clear as you leave this body to do whatever you want to do, that you have given us a chance, I say to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle), to present to the American people which side are they on? I personally would like to thank you for it, because it could not be made more clear as to the difference between our parties. No matter what religion you are, each one of them has some kind of verse that says as human beings, we have an obligation to help those people who are the lesser of our brothers and sisters. There is not a church and not a synagogue that has not looked on your reforms and they believe that you have forgotten the lesser of our brothers and sisters. I am not a very religious man, but I do believe that we will have a religious moments when it comes to the next election, and wherever you go, my prayers will be with you, I say to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle). Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, this coming weekend, between November 10 and 13 I and more than 20 of our colleagues in the House will be meeting and participating in the 10th annual Caribbean Multi-national Business Conference sponsored by the New York Carib News in St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands where we will be enjoying the hospitality of Carib News publishers Karl and Faye Rodney and Delegate Donna Christian Christensen. Over the last decade the conference has brought together elected officials, civic leaders, entrepreneurs, and executives of major corporations to explore opportunities for growth and expansion in the emerging markets and developing economies of the Caribbean. The conference has significantly contributed to the building of closer working relationships and personal ties between Caribbean leadership and the Members of Congress who have participated. As we approach this year's conference, I wish to recognize and pay tribute to an outstanding Caribbean leader, Dame Billie Antoinette Miller by placing in the Congressional Record the text of a proclamation to be awarded at the conference: A Proclamation Celebrating the Accomplishments of Dame Billie Antoinette Miller Whereas, It is a long and honorable tradition for elected Officials to recognize the outstanding contributions of those individuals whose Life Has made an important difference to people Everywhere, especially in their own communities; and Whereas, Such persons serve as role models and an Inspiration to people at home and abroad; and Whereas, Dame Billie, a national of the independent nation of Barbados in the Caribbean, is unquestionably such a major contributor; and Whereas, Dame Billie Miller is being cited and honored at the annual Caribbean Multinational Business Conference 2005 in St. Thomas in the U.S. Virgin Islands for service to Barbados, the Caribbean and the international community, serving as a member of her nation's parliament for more than 25 years; Deputy Prime Minister for almost a decade; Minister of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade since 1994; was the first woman to sit in the cabinet of Barbados, for several years was the only woman serving as an attorney at the private Bar of Barbados, and holds the distinction of being the first woman to be elected Chairman of the Executive Committee of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association since its establishment in 1911; and Whereas, Dame Billie, one of the Caribbean's longest Serving cabinet ministers, was President of the 32nd Regular Session of the General Assembly of the Organization of American States in 2002; was Chairman of the Inter-American Development Bank's Advisory Council on Women and Development in the Western Hemisphere; and in 1998 was President of the African, Caribbean and Pacific States Council of Ministers and is the current chairman of the Inter-American Parliamentary Group on Population and Development in the Western Hemisphere; now, therefore be it Resolved, That we salute and commend Dame Billie Miller for her distinguished and unblemished record of service to humanity.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to appreciate the career and character of Ted Koppel, who is retiring after 25 years as a stalwart and honest news reporter on the show ``Nightline.'' Upon his retirement, he expressed some thoughts in the November 8, 2005 issue of the Washington Post. I applauded him then and I applaud him now for showing the photographs and naming the fallen in Afghanistan and Iraq on his show when others called him unpatriotic for that act to honor those killed in Afghanistan and Iraq. I applaud him for his statement in the Washington Post today. He remarked on the unshared burden of the war in Iraq. This is a topic I have brought up again and again. One tiny fraction of this nation bears the entire burden of this war. Ted Koppel put it this way: ``You don't fight a war and allow just a tiny fraction of the population to carry the burden. It's hard to make a case that the rest of us are sharing the burden of being at war when our taxes have been cut, not increased. There are no victory gardens. No one is being asked to do anything, really. That's why I thought it was important to show all those photographs and read all those names. . . .'' Ted, thank you. You have done a wonderful job for 25 years. Your honest reporting will be missed. [From the Washington Post, Nov. 8, 2005] His Night in the Sun After 25 Years, Ted Koppel Is Leaving the Show That Did It His Way (By Howard Kurtz) Given all the heat Ted Koppel took last year for reading the names of the hundreds of Americans killed in Iraq, he could be forgiven for claiming vindication over the huge coverage when the death toll hit 2,000 late last month. The ``Nightline'' anchor believes a meaningless milestone was overplayed by the media--and is happy to tell you why. ``If the administration was really doing what it ought to be doing, they--everyone from the president on down--would have explained we have to remain in Iraq with such clarity that everyone would understand the sacrifice of 2,000, or even 20,000, lives is essential,'' he says. ``My complaint is that the administration has done a poor job of explaining why we're in Iraq. You don't fight a war and allow just a tiny fraction of the population to carry the burden. It's hard to make the case that the rest of us are sharing in the burden of being at war when our taxes have been cut, not increased. There are no victory gardens. No one is being asked to do anything, really. That's why I thought it was important to show all those photographs and read all those names, not as a way of saying the war is wrong.'' It is classic Koppel: tough-minded, eloquent, focused on world affairs and sometimes, it seems, conducting his own foreign policy. As he prepares to relinquish the helm of the ABC program he launched 26 years ago, when his focus was entirely on Iran and the Americans held hostage there, it is hard to avoid the end-of-an-era language that followed the departures of Tom Brokaw and Dan Rather and the death of Peter Jennings. ``This is easily perceived as the fourth 20-year-plus anchor stepping aside, and that's not the case,'' says Executive Producer Tom Bettag, who plans to launch a reporting venture with Koppel after they leave ABC. Perhaps their greatest accomplishment, Bettag says, is that the program will continue after Koppel's last night, Nov. 22, with an anchor triumvirate of Cynthia McFadden, Terry Moran and Martin Bashir. ``A number of people said once Ted goes, there goes `Nightline.' '' One thing that will be lost with the new incarnation's wide-ranging format is what Koppel, 65, always has boasted about: an in-depth look at one subject each night. Does that bother him? ``I don't want to begin by prejudging what's going to be done, because it may be terrific,'' he says. ``I don't want this to be interpreted as Ted saying the new approach ain't going to work.'' Koppel announced his resignation in March after ABC News President David Westin decided he wanted ``Nightline''--the ratings of which have been slipping in recent years--to be live at 11:35 p.m. Koppel had no desire to work such a schedule, and always has argued that the program is live when it needs to be live and otherwise there is no point in having guests wait around all evening. ``At some point, it would probably be time to pull out anyway,'' says Koppel, who served notice five years ago that he and Bettag wanted to phase themselves out gradually. Koppel had hoped that Chris Bury would succeed him as anchor--Bury and John Donvan will remain as correspondents, most likely joined by Vicki Mabrey from CBS--and that former producer Leroy Sievers would replace Bettag. But management, which hired British journalist James Goldston to run the program, had other ideas. ``It's their broadcast in the final analysis,'' Koppel says. ``I've always taken the position it's our job to make the program as attractive to the audience as we could possibly make it, but there are limits. You don't bring on dancing girls.'' That's not an entirely frivolous comment, given that Koppel's competition includes Jay Leno and David Letterman. In fact, ABC tried to junk the show three years ago by luring Letterman from CBS. Koppel fought back, criticizing ABC and parent company Disney in a New York Times op-ed. ``I never questioned the corporation's right to do that,'' he says. ``This is an industry, it's a business. We exist to make money. We exist to put commercials on the air. The programming that is put on between those commercials is simply the bait we put in the mousetrap. ``If it is true that David Letterman can draw a lot more viewers than `Nightline' and Ted Koppel, if you can make an extra $30 million or $50 million a year, I absolutely understand they not only have the right but the fiduciary obligation to do that. I just don't think they did it the best way in terms of the handling of it. We were among the last to learn about it. You just don't do that to people who have worked hard for you for a long time.'' In his 42 years at ABC, and especially in his quarter- century at ``Nightline,'' Koppel seemingly has conducted every kind of interview. He's talked to Nelson Mandela and Muhammad Ali, Larry Flynt and Ginger Rogers, Chuck D and Buzz Aldrin. He famously quizzed Gary Hart about adultery, told Michael Dukakis he just didn't get it and swatted down the racial views of baseball executive Al Campanis, who lost his job over the interview. He also has reported from around the world--a foray to South Africa in the 1980s made news worldwide--and, more recently, covered the 2003 Iraq war amid the tanks in the desert. Just last week, ``Nightline'' did a show on Zimbabwe ruler Robert Mugabe's devastating impact on his country--not the sort of thing other programs are clamoring to cover. Television executives, Koppel says, ``live under the misapprehension that Americans don't care about foreign news. They don't care about boring news. If you present it in a boring fashion, then they don't care about foreign news. What really dictates here is the cost of foreign news. At a time that we really have to worry about what's going on in the rest of the world, what people in other countries think of us, we are less well informed by television news than we have been in many years. ``If the only time you cover foreign news is when you send someone, every foreign story is going to cost you a lot of money when you do it and likely to be less well informed than in the days when you had people who lived in the country for two, three, five, 10 years and understand the culture.'' In a been-there-done-that media culture, Koppel relished the idea of returning to his signature issues again and again: the Middle East, South Africa, AIDS, racism, crime and punishment. Asked whether evening newscasts do the same thing, he says: ``There's a huge difference between coming back to a story and devoting 2\1/2\ minutes to it, and the next time 1:45, and what we have done when we focused on an issue for two, three or four programs.'' Taking the show to such places as Congo--which Koppel says has ``an invisible war which barely exists even in newspapers''--boosted the ratings and burnished the program's reputation. ``But it's a very expensive thing to do and it's also thoroughly exhausting.'' Koppel relishes the contrarian role. In 1996 he created a major stir by packing up and leaving the Republican National Convention in San Diego, saying no news was being committed there. ``In the intervening years,'' he says, ``guess what? Everyone's come to the conclusion that conventions really aren't worth covering, except on cable.'' Last week Koppel committed news himself when he appeared to endorse Charlie Gibson, the ``Good Morning America'' co-host who has been doing part-time duty on the evening news, as ABC's next anchor. Koppel says he was just responding to a specific question about Gibson from a TV Guide reporter. ``I do think Charlie Gibson would make an absolutely splendid anchor,'' he says. But noting the rise of ``GMA'' under Gibson and Diane Sawyer, he says, ``Those morning shows are moneymaking machines. Changing such a successful equation could cost you tens of millions of dollars.'' Koppel and Bettag say they will not make a deal with another media outlet until their departure--although they have had talks with HBO--but say there is a vacuum in long- form reporting that they intend to fill. Still, they are leaving a very big stage. ``You can't help but have mixed feelings,'' Bettag says. ``Trying to wean yourself away from the daily news adrenaline is no small thing. But this is something we've planned for a very long time. Ted is very much at peace with this.'' Koppel plans to take a few months off, but ``I'm not going to slide into semi-retirement,'' he says. ``Nothing lights my fire more than a big story out there and going out to cover it.''

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to raise my voice against the use of torture by the United States of America against any human being for any reason. I believe torture in any for, including cruel and inhuman and degrading interrogation of human beings in the custody of the United States of America violates everything we stand for as Americans. The Senate recently passed the McCain amendment to a military appropriation bill by a vote of 90 to 9. The McCain amendment is very telling in terms of whether the United States has been battling terrorisms or fighting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in lawful ways. The McCain amendment bans ``cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment of persons under the custody or control of the United States Government.'' This amendment has passed the Senate twice; the first vote was 90 to 9. The second time it passed was after the disclosure of the secret CIA prisons. Senator McCain made a strong anti-torture speech. He said the CIA should not be running prisons. The second time the McCain amendment passed the Senate it did so by a voice vote. I support the McCain amendment and will vote for it when it reaches the House of Representatives for a vote. I find it unbelievable that the President in a speech today, November 8, 2005, in Panama City, Panama stated: ``We do not torture.'' The evidence of torture in Abu Ghraib and the prison at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba has been documented by the International Committee of the Red Cross, Amnesty International, eyewitness testimony of American Military officers and photographs and tapes, some of which the Department of Defense is still attempting to keep from the public. This should not be shocking to me, but still it shocks. The statements of President Bush are a natural outgrowth of the unnatural power he was given by his lawyers and Justice department lawyers because of their willingness to overlook or disregard the United States Constitution on the grounds that this war and this enemy was ``special.'' Congress was lied to, about the reasons for the war; but Congress gave away its Constitutional Power under Article 1, Section 8 when it authorized the President to declare war, a power reserved solely to the Congress by the Constitution. Less well known and just as ignored is that Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, gives Congress and only Congress the decision of how to treat prisoners. Just as the President declared a pre-emptive war on a country not involved in the attacks of 9/11, this President and Vice President decided how prisoners, even those ``suspected'' of being terrorists, were to be treated. This President has abused his power, ignored the Constitution and misled the American people. The policies on treatment of prisoners which have included torture and interrogation techniques that are ``cruel, inhuman, and degrading'' were born with the Bush Administration. President Bush asked his Justice Department, then run by John Ashcroft and a man of ideas named John Woo; his trusted Counsel, Alberto Gonzales who gave him the answers he liked when President Bush was Governor of Texas. President Bush asked these lawyers for guidance on whether the United States had to afford protections of the Geneva Accords to Taliban and al Qaeda prisoners. He also asked his civilian advisor in the Pentagon, Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, how far American military and intelligence personnel could go in questioning these prisoners. The answer from these civilians, people who had never served in the military, was the prisoners did not need to be afforded any of the protections of the Geneva Conventions. John Woo, who worked directly for John Ashcroft took the position that the President could do anything he wanted. This was a very popular position and the one Alberto Gonzales passed on to the President. Within the Bush administration, the advisor who knew the most about the Military, Colin Powell was against these policies. President Bush decided the military advice was not what he wanted to hear or follow. The professional military people who disagreed with the ``war president'' found themselves silenced or ``retired.'' On November 7, 2005, the Washington Post reported ``Over the past year, Vice President Cheney has waged an intense and largely unpublicized campaign to stop Congress, the Pentagon and the State Department from imposing more restrictive rules on handling terrorist suspects.'' Before the news of Vice President's secret CIA prison system was disclosed by the Washington Post, Mr. Cheney had offered a ``deal'' to Senator McCain. He would stop opposing the McCain amendment the amendment did not include the CIA from torturing non-Americans. Senator McCain turned the Vice President down. In light of what we now know about America's secret CIA prisons and Vice President Cheney's insistence that the CIA should be exempt from any ban on torture, I am very concerned about what has happened and is still happening to prisoners in the custody of the CIA. I doubt whether anyone who has experienced war would have to be convinced to support an anti-war amendment proposed by my noble friend John McCain, a veteran subjected to torture for more than five years in a North Vietnamese prison. So I take issue with Vice President Cheney, a man who received five deferments during the Vietnam War, who has lobbied fiercely and shamelessly against the McCain amendment. I take issue with President Bush that because we have an enemy he thinks ``lurks and plots and plans and want to hurt America again,'' we can disregard the concerns of the human rights organizations, the European Union and the millions of Muslims who view Americans through the lens of Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay and the Hooded Man attached to electric wires. The practices approved by the President, the Vice President, Porter Goss and whomever knew in the Senate and the House; anyone complicit in the torture of prisoners in the custody of the United States has shamed us all. Richard Cohen got it right when he said in an opinion piece in the Washington Post today entitled ``Torture, Shaming Us All.'' We in the United States not only have our torture and humiliating interrogation practices on the internet, but we have had to reassert 200 years of U.S. principles. The real shame is that the President of the United States has threatened to use his veto for the first time if the McCain amendment comes to his desk as part of a bill. There are compelling reasons to support the McCain amendment. The first is that torture results in bad intelligence; second it endangers our troops; and third; it is causing us to lose the war of ideas. According to President Bush and his supporters in Congress, this war in Iraq is about bringing democracy and freedom to Iraq. Muslims around the world see handcuffed naked men at Abu Ghraib and the orange jump suit hooded men of Guantanamo Bay, Cuba when they see the United States. This abuse of Muslims is what they see of ``democracy'' American style. The people throughout the world know that prisoners in the custody of the United States have been tortured even if President Bush denies it. As Richard Cohen points out, many countries torture prisoners but none admit to the practice. The United States has never had to consider a ban on torture before because this country has never tortured prisoners as a matter of policy. The Uniform Code of Military Justice is clear about how prisoners in the custody of the United States should be treated. This country has signed the Geneva Conventions and in 1994 ratified the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which prohibits such treatment under all circumstances including ``a state of war.'' According to David Cole, the legal affairs correspondent of The Nation, the Bush Administration argued that the ban does not apply to foreign national being held and interrogated abroad. According to Mr. Cole, this interpretation runs against the central purpose of the Torture Convention, which is to protect all human beings, regardless of location and nationality. Because of the Bush Administration and its abuse of power, we must, for the first time in our history, ban torture. And for the first time in our history, we have a President who is threatening to veto the ban and further shame us all.