Bobby Rush

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, tonight, I rise to give tribute to the late John N. Sturdivant, President of the American Federation of Government Employees. John died last week, after a heroic battle with leukemia. Family, friends, and co-workers said farewell to John Sturdivant this week at a memorial service. He will be deeply missed. John Sturdivant dedicated his life to working people, especially government workers. As leader of AFGE--178,000 members representing one-third of our federal workforce--John fought tirelessly to transform the union into a dynamic advocate for the working and middle class Americans who make up the D.C. and federal workforce. John led a vigorous national campaign for pay raises, better benefits, and working conditions. He worked hard with legislators at all levels, to encourage ``locality pay.'' This promotes a salary system that makes sure that federal workers are paid at a comparable level with private sector workers. John was at the forefront of a struggle that my constituents who are public service and federal workers face daily: the fight against privatization. He also fought for the use of ``official time,'' and was a champion of the struggle to protect federal workers' retirement benefits. We will remember John Sturdivant for many contributions. He championed the right of federal workers to have a voice in politics. Working in a bipartisan manner, John Sturdivant worked to secure reforms to the Hatch Act. These changes now allow federal workers to contribute money, attend fundraisers and do volunteer election work such as staffing phone banks. I have worked closely during my years in public service with AFGE. It will be hard for the union to replace John. But I know that his example, courage, and leadership have made the union and the entire labor movement stronger. I offer my deepest sympathy to John Sturdivant's companion Peggy Potter, his daughter, Michelle, his mother, Mrs. Ethiel Jessie, and his brothers. I thank you for this chance to remember an outstanding American, an outstanding African-American labor leader, and an outstanding human being truly committed to social justice for all.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, on October 26, 1997, the Sweet Holy Spirit Full Gospel Baptist Church will come together to honor a great man. Their senior pastor, Bishop Larry D. Trotter, will celebrate 16 years of leadership within this august body and almost a lifetime of service to the community as well. As a child, Bishop Trotter had an extraordinary desire to serve God. He attended Sunday school regularly and dedicated his life to Christ at the young age of 12. His unwavering dedication continued throughout high school and into adulthood. It was not until 1981 that Bishop Trotter was called to minister at Sweet Holy Spirit Full Gospel Baptist Church. Once there he led the body from a membership of only 20 active parishioners to one with over 3,000 parishioners. Bishop Trotter's work extends far beyond the church. His ministry has taken him around the world to countries such as Uganda, Kenya, Belgium, and Israel. Bishop Trotter developed a C.A.R.E.--Counseling, Activity Resource and Education--Center and organized several antidrug and anticrime marches throughout the city. Bishop Trotter has maintained these and other commitments while having time to reach out to thousands through his weekly radio and television broadcasts. I am pleased to be here today in honor of Bishop Larry D. Trotter. I with the bishop and the Sweet Holy Spirit Full Gospel Baptist Church many continued years of growth and success.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor an extraordinary group of people from the 1st Congressional District of Illinois. They are part of the Englewood Community Block Club located at 61st and Sangamon Drive in Chicago, and they have dedicated their lives to community service. Block clubs have a rich history within the city of Chicago, and the Englewood Community Block Club has made a significant contribution to that history. Many of the founding members remain as an integral part of the organization, and many others have served for the past 30 years or more. I was honored to have the opportunity this past weekend, to take part in their 40th anniversary celebration. I would like to recognize several individuals who received awards during the celebration banquet for their outstanding work over the years. Mr. Horace C. Broy, Sr., received the Superior Presidential Award for his work as president in the block club. Mr. Broy is one of the original founding members of the Englewood Block Club and implemented a number of community service programs during his tenure. Dr. Horace and Betty Broy received the award for Superior Achievement by a Husband and Wife in Education. The couple has been married for the past 27 years. Mr. Henry Sanders received the Outstanding Treasury Service Award, for his role as treasurer for the past 25 years. Deacom Albert Bailey, Sr., was presented with the Outstanding Christian Community Leadership Award. Deacon Bailey has actively served his community through a number of activities for the past 40 years through the Little League Program, the Chicago Public Schools system, and as a Sunday school teacher. Mr. Roderic Pierce, Sr., received the Outstanding Community Businessman Award. He is a lifelong resident of Englewood, and has provided job opportunities within the community through his business establishments. Ms. Sybil Hunley is the recipient of the Julia Broy Educator Award. Ms. Hunley is a teacher in the Chicago Public School System and has taught three generations of students over the past 37 years. Ms. Patricia Ann Hill was awarded the Adult Education Achievement Award. As a single parent who returned to school and earned a bachelor of arts degree from Chicago State University in 1987, Ms. Hill is an inspiration to other students who may be struggling with their decision to return to school. The Appreciation Award for Outstanding Service to Block Club was presented to Mrs. Eva Graves. Mrs. Graves served as vice president of the Block Club for 35 years, and is a founding member. Mr. Speaker, we are all fortunate that dedicated individuals such as these, are part of our communities today. I wish each of them and the entire Englewood Block Club organization continued success in the future.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise today to recognize an outstanding woman from the city of Chicago and my district, and First Congressional District of Illinois. Her name is Jamesetta J. Harris, and she has been chosen to receive the Ameritech Award of Excellence in Crime Prevention on behalf of the National Crime Prevention Council. Ms. Harris is 1 of 8 winners selected from a group of 140, who has worked diligently to turn her community around. Jamesetta J. Harris held high expectations, as any new homeowner would, for her soon-to-be home. She looked forward to a neat, clean neighborhood, a yard; a few trees. But Ms. Harris was not expecting the reality of life in Englewood. She was not looking forward to the rampant crime that plagued the neighborhood, nor the violent gangs that ruled the streets. She was not aware that neighbors were afraid to go outdoors and cowered in their kitchens at night in fear of stray gunfire. Rather than abandon her new home, or succumb to the pressure of fear that engulfed her community, Ms. Harris decided to fight. Her first step was to organize the Concerned Citizens of 5500 South Marshfield Block Club, to organize fellow residents and send a message that the community would no longer be victimized. She next created the 5500 South Marshfield Newsletter to improve neighborhood communication and reach those neighbors who were afraid to attend meetings. Not long after the formation of the block club, the police department organized Chicago's Alternative Policing Strategy [CAPS]. The Englewood district was chosen as one of the prototypes for the CAPS program and Ms. Harris gladly partnered with the police to collaborate efforts to reduce crime in Englewood. Ms. Harris continued her fight to save the community by organizing neighborhood improvement projects, such as repairing sidewalks, replacing stop signs, and collecting abandoned cars and garbage. Ms. Harris was able to accomplish so much and inspire so many because she was wise enough to realize one thing: when people have something that they are proud of, they will do anything to protect it. Her work has been so successful that she and the Englewood community have been featured in a number of programs dealing with community policing, including a television special by the Arts and Entertainment network that highlighted some of the best policing projects in the United States. Ms. Harris is an inspiration for all communities, black and white, across this Nation. She has truly shown the value of one caring person, and how their willingness to work hard can positively affect an entire community of people and their quality of life. I commend Ms. Harris for her work, and I commend Ameritech and the National Crime Prevention Council for recognizing such an extraordinary individual with this award.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2248, to authorize President Clinton to present his all Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople with a congressional gold medal to honor his leadership in promoting world peace and interfaith understanding. Patriarch Bartholomew has promoted peace in the war torn countries of the Balkans, helping to advance reconciliation among the Catholic, Muslim, and Orthodox communities. He has been a leader in defense of human rights worldwide, in promoting global environmental protection and in strengthening interfaith relations. Patriarch Bartholomew has been a champion of religious unity and cooperation, encouraging interfaith dialogue between the Orthodox Church, the Roman Catholic Church, leading Protestant denominations and Muslim leaders. He has also sought to strengthen bonds between Judaism and Orthodox Christianity. In 1994 he worked with Rabbi David Schneier and the Appeal of Conscience Foundation to cosponsor the Peace and Tolerance Conference. He has been a dynamic leader in efforts to ease Greek-Turkish tensions and to promote international cooperation and adherence to international law. He also cares deeply about the environmental legacy we will leave our children, cosponsoring an annual conference devoted to the protection of the environment. I am honored to be a co-sponsor of this bill. Patriarch Bartholomew is truly an outstanding world leader whose dedication to promoting religious tolerance and unity is an inspiration to all of us.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of Representative Goodling's amendment to bar funds for the national testing initiative as it currently exists. I hope that my vote, and that of other Members, especially those of the Congressional Black Caucus and Congressional Hispanic Caucus, sends a signal that such initiatives must become more inclusive and equitable. I truly endorse the concept of standards in education. Our children have the right to obtain the core skills and knowledge they will need to compete in a global marketplace. However, I cannot support President Clinton's voluntary national testing program in its present form. I share the views of several prominent national civil rights groups including the NAACP Legal Defense Fund and the Leadership Council on Civil Rights. Congress ought to support a Federal initiative that creates higher academic standards, but in manner that is participatory and equitable. The Federal Government has a responsibility to watch out for the education of our students, especially those in poor communities. But national standards and assessment must be accompanied by funding to support curriculum development and teacher training so students of all backgrounds can do their best on the tests. The reality is that students taking these tests do not start out on an equal ground. Because public schools rely significantly on local property taxes, some school districts are better funded than others. Any Federal standards and testing initiative must address these gaps. Unless Federal funds are earmarked for making sure that poorer children have an opportunity to learn, the federal testing program will discriminate against poor and minority children. Additionally, parents, students, and teachers need assurance that the tests will not be misused. The Department maintains that the tests will be used for information purposes only. But the misuse of standardized tests is widespread. In my own district, I know of honor roll students who were not allowed to graduate 8th grade because they missed the passing test score by less than one point. Federal guidelines should urge school districts not to use the results of these tests as the sole factor in making high stakes decisions about a student's educational progress such as tracking, ability grouping, and retention. Finally, there is the issue of making sure that national tests are developed with respect to the growing diversity of our Nation's 35 million school children. The growing multiculturalism of our communities, and hence, our public schools, demand that we respect diversity and different learning styles. National Assessment should identify the knowledge and skills students already possess rather than their deficiencies. We should always strive to build on students' strengths, not their weaknesses. As Federal funding for low-income disabled children shrinks, especially due to Federal welfare reform, national testing must accommodate the special needs of these students. I also support the position of my colleagues in the Congressional Hispanic Caucus who point out that high standards should be established for all children. In its present form, the national test is designed to exclude limited English proficient [LEP] students from the reading test. This policy discriminates and cannot be tolerated. The national tests are supposed to tell us how our school districts are doing. But how do we hold them accountable to LEP students and their families if these very students are excluded from taking these test? I cannot support the administration developing tests that exclude a growing segment of the student population. The education of our children is among our Nation's top priorities. Despite my vote today, I will continue to work with my constituents, including parents and schools in the first congressional district, and the administration to do whatever is necessary to fulfill our children's right to a first-class education based on respect.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, on Thursday, September 11, 1997, on rollcall vote No. 392, I was unavoidably detained. If I were present, I would have voted, ``nay.''

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to oppose the balanced budget agreement. This deal is praised as a bipartisan victory--that we have balanced the budget and increased spending for some social programs. Nothing is further from the truth. This balanced budget deal was achieved primarily by drastic cuts-- $115 billion from Medicare--the major health program for the elderly, and $13 billion in savings from Medicaid--the major Federal program providing health care for poor people. The budget gets balanced by cutting Medicare payments to doctors, hospitals, and other health care providers. The budget deal freezes Medicare payments to hospitals at the fiscal year 1997 level--even though we all know that the demand and costs are rising. And this deal reduces Medicare and Medicaid payments for hospitals that serve a disproportionate number of low-income patients--the very poor--the uninsured. These include public hospitals like Cook County Hospital in Chicago and the University of Chicago Hospital in the First Congressional District. And the cuts also hurt those whose very breath depends on home oxygen. The budget cuts payments for oxygen and oxygen equipment. This budget deal was paid for with another deal--generous tax cuts that favor those who are better off. Only a quarter of these cuts go to people making less than $100,000 a year. Thirty-six percent of these cuts go to the top 1 percent of income earners. With due respect to the President, and my colleagues on both sides of the aisle--this budget does contain some hard-won provisions--but let's not forget they were fought for and won--by poor people, working people, and advocates for children and immigrants. This bill does include expanded health insurance for poor children. The bill restores benefits to legal immigrants who become disabled and it guarantees minimum wage and workplace protections to workfare participants. But 5 million children who need health insurance will not be covered. Legal immigrants will not receive food stamps. And our Nation's schools that need serious rebuilding so they can move our children into the 21st century and get connected to the information superhighway do not have the funds they need. Last spring, I cast my vote for the Congressional Black Caucus [CBC] Budget. I was proud to vote for that budget. That budget both balanced and fully funded vital safety net programs like WIC and Head Start. The CBC budget protected the constituents of the First Congressional District. I represent a district where 20 percent of my constituents live in poverty. Thirty-six percent of the children under 18 in my district live in poverty. How could I vote for a budget deal like this when mothers in my district like Grand Boulevard watch their babies die at three times the national average? My decision to vote ``no'' on this budget agreement is not a close call. I believe it is a disgrace. It is a betrayal of our basic democratic ideals.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to thank the chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus for yet another example of her sterling and illuminating leadership, her commitment to the cause of freedom, justice and equality here in America, and let me also extend my thanks to the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Hastings], whose spirit and whose words today certainly pay tribute in a most eloquent way to Justice Brennan. The gentleman from Florida [Mr. Hastings] certainly embodies the spirit of Justice Brennan, and I say thank you for this special order. I rise today to pay tribute to the late William Joseph Brennan, Jr., former Supreme Court Justice. Mr. Justice Brennan's progressive voice was heard for 34 years on the Court, spanning eight Presidential administrations. He was widely recognized as a chief strategist behind the Court's civil rights revolution. Most, if not all, Americans have been touched by the legacy of Justice Brennan's rulings. His vision was that the essential meaning of the Constitution was not found in the past but in the current everyday life of America. He championed human rights, he championed individual rights beyond what was spelled out in the text of the Constitution. He called the Constitution, ``a sparkling vision of the supreme dignity of every individual.'' I repeat: ``a sparkling vision of the supreme dignity of every individual.'' He used it as a tool for social justice and racial equality. Justice Brennan's litmus test for offering legal protection was simple. His litmus test was whether the bill of rights explicitly prevented him from doing so. My, my, what a simple yet profound litmus test. He always favored the individual and put the burden on the Government to show that something in the Constitution disallowed protection. Justice Brennan and his friend, colleague, and as mentioned earlier, judicial soul mate, Justice Thurgood Marshall, were often outvoted, and they were usually on the defensive. Though he was frequently in dissent, his role on the Court transcended that of a defender of the liberal faith. Term after term he defied the odds in his ability to pull together majorities, though often narrow majorities, for sustaining or even advancing the principles in which he so strongly believed. In civil rights cases Justice Brennan's decisions enforced schools' desegregation plans, upheld affirmative action programs designed to help minorities overcome past discrimination and sought to ensure constitutional equality for women. Additionally, his rulings established rights for welfare recipients and illegal aliens and created the one-man, one-vote rule for representation in voting districts which is indeed a landmark opinion which, as stated earlier, opened the doors for so many to be seated in this Chamber today. My predecessor, former Congressman from the first district of Illinois, former appeals judge and former White House Counsel, Abner Mikva, defined what he called a Brennaness as one who influences his colleagues beyond measure. A Brennaness is one who influences his colleagues beyond measure. His ability to bridge differences through good will distinguished Justice Brennan's career on the high Court. Justice Brennan had an unmatched ability to build a consensus. His knack for compromise and his ability to hold legal decisions that were acceptable to his colleagues regardless of their judicial philosophies was and is his legacy. Although he never served as Chief Justice, Justice Brennan was a pivotal force in his three plus decades on the Court. He authored milestone opinions and was a prime mover behind many others. When he did not prevail, his voice in dissent was strong and illuminating. Justice William J. Brennan, Jr., should be and will be remembered for the enduring constitutional principles he so fervently championed during his three plus decades on the U.S. Supreme Court. Again, Mr. Speaker, I am honored, privileged and pleased to be a part of this special order honoring our friend, our champion, the former Supreme Court Justice William Joseph Brennan, Jr., and again I thank my colleagues.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment. Electrometallurgical treatment or pyroprocessing is finding answers to our most difficult nuclear fuel disposal problems. This process will greatly reduce the volume and the level of toxicity of spent fuel. Spent nuclear fuel is not amenable to geological disposal because of its nature. It ignites upon contact with air and explodes upon contact with water. Pyroprocessing changes the composition of spent nuclear fuel so that it may be disposed of by safely separating the uranium and the plutonium contained in it. As a matter of fact, this process changes the spent fuel to sodium chloride, more commonly known as table salt. Furthermore, the Department of Energy has stated that the plutonium produced by this process is not suitable for making nuclear weapons. DOE has further stated that the material produced from this process is not attractive to those who might want to make a weapon. Pyroprocessing is entirely consistent with the administration's nonproliferation policies. This is not an issue of nuclear proliferation. It is about developing a process that will allow for safe disposal of nuclear wastes. Some wrongfully argue that the uranium produced as a result of this process could be used to build nuclear weapons. This could not be further from the truth. Pyroprocessing changes the condition of uranium in such a way that it is no longer capable of being used in nuclear weapons. Some may argue that nuclear power should be done away with. Well, I am not here to argue the merits of that position, but I will make one point. I will point out that until such alternatives become reality, we must make every effort to ensure that waste produced by nuclear plants is disposed of safely. Pyroprocessing makes the disposal of spent fuel safer. The National Research Council has stated that pyroprocessing is the result of well-established science that is technologically feasible. The National Research Council has further stated that this research has the capacity to become the basis for a larger global waste management plan. In light of these facts, it would be irresponsible for us to cut funding at this time. Nuclear waste is a reality of our modern age. As responsible leaders, it is incumbent upon us to support innovation and technology which will benefit our constituents. Pyroprocessing is such a technology. This is not corporate welfare. ET, electrometallurgical treatment, is being developed to deal with DOE's own spent fuels. The research is being performed by the nonprofit Argonne National Laboratory operated by the University of Chicago on behalf of the DOE. It seeks to carry out the congressionally authorized mission to clean up sites across this country that supported our Nation's defense missions and to protect human health and the environment now and in the future. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise to plead with the Members of this body, to plead with the sponsor of this amendment, to plead with him on behalf of poor citizens who reside in the First Congressional District. Mr. Chairman, this bill that we are discussing, the Community Development Financial Institutions Act, the CDFI, did not happen accidentally. This bill came into existence primarily because folks who live in districts like mine, the First Congressional District of Illinois, could not get adequate loans, could not get adequate credit for their homes and their businesses. We were indeed what one calls a classical credit-starved community. Shore Bank, without the support of any governmental institution, decided that they were going to stand up and turn what most had viewed as being a lemon, turn it into lemonade. They began to develop an approach to providing credit to communities and to people that could not get it heretofore. They began to reach out and say to the people in South Shore, Jackson Park Highlands, Woodlawn, Grand Boulevard, other communities in my district that, notwithstanding the heartlessness and the callousness of the major banks in this city, we will indeed take your plight and your cause up and we will develop the kind of approach where you can get loans for your businesses and loans for your homes. They started this approach. They created this vehicle. Mr. Chairman, when I was elected in the 103d Congress, when I came here in 1993 and served on the Committee on Banking and Financial Services, when this bill was discussed I was most proud. Most proud. As a matter of fact, this was the high point of my brief career, to have been able to work with other Members on both sides of the aisle on the Committee on Banking and Financial Services to make this bill a law. Mr. Chairman, I have one pen, one pen where a President signed a piece of legislation, one letter engulfed with that pen, and that is the pen that the President gave to me when he signed this legislation. I think it is symbolic, Mr. Chairman, for a person who fought all their lives on behalf of poor people to be able to vote and to work on a piece of legislation that this body passed into law to create this particular bill, to create this particular measure. Mr. Chairman, we can talk about a few Federal employees who might have done the wrong thing and, yes, we should look at them. If they did wrong, then they should be fired. But let me tell my colleagues the other side of this.

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Chairman, what my colleagues are attempting to do right now is to stop a young businessman in my community right now who is struggling. He is a successful entrepreneur, has a clothing store, Jacob's Store for Men, he has been located on 79th Street in my district for about 5 years, and he has been a success. He has got five employees, all working people with families, and his business has been so successful that he wants to expand. He has gone around to all the major banks in the city asking them, pleading with them, look, I have been in business 5 years, I have got employees, I have got five employees with a family, my business is good, will you give me a loan so I can expand? Each time, the door has been closed on Jacob and his store for men. Shore Bank is the only one that right now is considering giving this small businessman an opportunity, a leg up, to help expand his business and keep that success going and also in order to make sure that he continues to have families fed because they are in his employ. This particular example can be multiplied time and time again. I would invite the gentleman from Alabama [Mr. Bachus] and anybody from the other side, anybody on this floor and in this body, if they doubt the success and the impact of Shore Bank, let me take them into my community. Let me have them walk down the streets of South Shore and look at the apartment buildings where they have invested their moneys and turned apartment buildings around. Let me take them to the factories where they have helped factory workers. Do not throw the baby out with the bath water. If my colleagues have a problem with how this program is being run, let us correct the problem. Let us not target South Shore Bank because that is what it is all about, is South Shore Bank. Do not target South Shore Bank. Let us solve the problems and keep this money and keep this budget and keep this agreement alive.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to voice unqualified support for one of the Nation's most vital housing programs--the Low Income Housing Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act [LIHPHRA] of 1990 and its predecessor, the Emergency Low Income Housing Act of 1987. This program has, without qualification, preserved the homes of thousands of low- and moderate-income families and senior citizens. Yet, the HUD-VA appropriations bill that we have before us today includes zero funding for this popular and effective program. In Chicago, there are presently 600 units of housing that have been approved by the Department of Housing and Urban Development for preservation. These apartments involve sales to community-based nonprofit organizations that are awaiting funding. But they will not be preserved as affordable housing if this Congress fails to provide funding for the LIHPHRA Program. In the First Congressional District, there are presently 418 units approved for preservation and awaiting funding. Since its inception, LIHPHRA funds have contributed to the preservation of 1,500 apartments in the First Congressional District and 7,500 units in Illinois. This includes the recent transfer of a 312-unit senior citizen property on Chicago's south side--Cambridge Manor--to resident nonprofit ownership. Just weeks ago I had the opportunity to share in the celebration of this achievement with residents of the community. LIHPHRA has proven a cost-effective approach to preserving affordable housing in our financially strapped cities. The national average cost to acquire and rehabilitate housing under LIHPHRA is $40,000 per apartment. This compares to an average cost of $80,000 to $120,000 per unit for total replacement of housing in the First Congressional District. Regrettably, the actions of the HUD-VA Appropriations Committee will result in hundreds of prepayments of HUD-assisted mortgages. The end result will be the conversion of quality housing stock that has been financed with taxpayer dollars to market-rate uses. In place of continued and expanded LIHPHRA funding, the committee is recommending the use of housing vouchers. But experience shows that in Chicago, at least 20 percent of tenant-based assistance is returned to the housing authority unused because of economic and racial barriers faced by tenants who try to use the certificates. Clearly, the voucher alternative does not offer a workable viable vehicle to preserve housing stock as a source of low-income housing for current tenants and future generations. I regret that the VA-HUD appropriations bill reported by the committee failed to include funding for the preservation program. I urge my colleagues in the Senate and the conferees to ensure that funding for the LIHPHRA Program is restored.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the Reverend Willie T. Barrow Wellness Medical Center of the Doctor's Hospital of Hyde Park that is being dedicated today in Chicago, IL. Originally founded in 1916 as the Illinois Central Railroad Hospital, the Doctor's Hospital of Hyde Park proudly serves more than 7,000 patients a month with a range of comprehensive community health services. And today, the hospital officially names The Wellness Center in honor of an electrifying community and spiritual leader, Dr. Willie T. Barrow, chairwoman of Operation PUSH. The dedication of the Reverend Willie T. Barrow Wellness Medical Center marks a victory for residents of the first congressional district and the south side of Chicago. As the health care industry grows more complex and costly, and community hospitals are shuttered, it is vital that poor and working people, the very young and the very old, continue to have access to quality, preventive health care. And in a community where the infant mortality rate soars above 20, this is critical. The hospital and the center are models of what community health care should be. Open 7 days a week, the hospital serves all in need. People without insurance, walk-ins, the homeless--all walk through the doors and receive quality care by a hard-working, well-trained staff. The hospital and center are truly committed to the community. When the Hyde Park Community Hospital faced financial difficulties a few years ago, the leadership and perseverance of Dr. James H. Desnick assured that the hospital remained in the community, preserving more than 500 jobs and preserving health care services for residents. Today, Dr. Desnick and the community officially name the Wellness Center in honor of Rev. Willie T. Barrow. Reverend Barrow exemplifies dedication in her life's work. As chairwoman of Operation PUSH, a founder of the Coalition of Labor Union Women, copastor of Mount Vernon Church of God in Chicago, and a long-time resident of the south shore community, Reverend Barrow truly serves the people. And in Chicago, she will be long remembered for her tireless work to elect Harold Washington, Chicago's first African-American mayor. Her commitment to human rights, civil rights, women's rights, and workers' rights inspires people across the Nation and across the globe. As Congressman of the first congressional district, I send my heartiest congratulations to Dr. Desnick, the hospital board, the Community Advisory Board, and the 700 staff members, on the occasion of the dedication of the Reverend Willie T. Barrow Wellness Medical Center. I am honored to represent the district that is home to the Reverend Willie T. Barrow Wellness Medical Center and to my good friend, Rev. Willie T. Barrow. And I pledge to continue my fight both in Congress and the city of Chicago to protect the survival of health programs like the center that promise to be a model for comprehensive community health care for people in need. I am proud to offer these words of congratulations.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to House Joint Resolution 79, China, disapproval of most-favored-nation [MFN] trade treatment for China. My vote against this resolution--a vote to continue MFN for China--is not without deliberation. I am deeply concerned about the continuing allegations that China has not made sufficient progress in their human rights and democracy reform efforts. Both the State Department and prominent international organizations such as Amnesty International cite the persistence of jailed and exiled Chinese dissidents. However, I believe that the human rights issues must be approached independently of our trade relationship with China. MFN is not foreign aid. The United States grants MFN--which is normal trade status--to nearly 100 countries, and every President since 1980 has annually renewed MFN for China. MFN to China means that we grant them normal tariff status. This is a policy that the United States grants to all but a handful of countries--Cuba, North Korea, Afghanistan, Laos, and Vietnam. In fact, countries such as Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Burma--where many believe there continues to be abuse of human rights--receive MFN treatment. I want to see the administration work more aggressively to encourage human rights and religious freedom in China. But I do not believe that denying MFN to China will achieve that goal. Cutting off normal trade relations with China will only further isolate a country with one- quarter of the world's population. China continues to grow as one of the United States' main trading partners. U.S. exports to China have almost quadrupled in the last 10 years. Exports to China support more than 17,000 jobs in the United States that, on average, pay 13 to 16 percent more than nonexport jobs. As key industries in the United States, such as telecommunications, grow, we need to maintain trade policy that will increase market access and ensure that U.S. companies have opportunities in those emerging markets. Illinois, for example, has benefited from trade with China. Over the last 2 years, exports from Illinois to China have increased 9 percent to $1.6 billion. And this trade growth contributes to nearly 600,000 export-related jobs in the State. And while these benefits are significant, I continue to be concerned about the data regarding China's reliance on prison labor to manufacture many of its exports. Since the early 1990's, in responses to charges that Chinese political prisoners were used to manufacture goods for export to the United States, the administration--through the Customs and State Department--began investigating these charges. Our Government signed a memorandum of understanding [MOU] with China in 1992 to facilitate inspection of Chinese prisons. And continued allegations of using prison labor led the administration to tighten procedures for investigations and visits under the memorandum. I am aware that Chinese cooperation in implementing the memorandum falls short of being satisfactory. But the administration is committed to fully enforce the terms of the agreement. Since the MOU took effect, U.S. Customs officials have made 58 referrals to the Chinese Ministry of Justice for further investigation. And according to the administration, Customs has obtained two prison labor-related convictions. I believe that continuing normal MFN for China will facilitate the enforcement of the MOU. As a Member of Congress, I will vigilantly monitor the progress of human rights, workers' rights, and political democracy in China. I am deeply committed to these values. However, I do not believe that the resolution we are voting on today, is the proper arena to debate these issues; nor is revocation of MFN the most effective way to influencing internal Chinese policies. I believe that a more comprehensive approach will serve as a better means to bringing about a change in Chinese policy, particularly in terms of human rights. In America's dealings with China, history has shown that a more moderate approach is most effective.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Chairman, I rise tonight to oppose House Concurrent Resolution 84, the so-called bipartisan budget resolution agreement. This budget resolution fails to adequately protect millions of disenfranchised and disadvantaged Americans, both those who are unemployed, and those who work, but cannot rise out of poverty. I cannot support a budget resolution that calls for tax cuts of $85 billion that include cuts in capital gains and estate tax relief that will benefit the richest 5 percent of our country. Speaker Newt Gingrich has made it clear that this budget is another step in the Contract on America--which is a Contract on Poor People. According to the New York Times, which obtained a copy of a May 16 memo from Mr. Gingrich to Republicans, Speaker, Gingrich makes it clear that the Republican's top priority is giving tax breaks to the rich. And the Speaker minces no words in saying that ``there is no limit on the size of the capital gains and estate tax relief'' in the budget resolution. I cannot support this budget when unemployment in some communities in the First District of Illinois exceed 20 percent, especially for African-American youth. Instead, I am proud tonight to support the Congressional Black Caucus budget. This budget is truly a budget for the people. And I thank my colleagues, Congresswoman Maxine Waters from California, and Congressman Bennie Thompson, for leading the caucus in forging this more socially and fiscally responsible framework. In contrast to the budget deal, the CBC budget balances the budget 1 year earlier--in 2001. And it does so by making no tax cuts until the budget is balanced. In distributing tax cuts, the CBC budget does this in a fair manner. The CBC budget includes $187.5 billion in cuts for corporate welfare. The CBC budget invests in vital social programs. In contrast to the budget resolution, the CBC budget fully funds proactive programs that ensure the future of our youth and communities. These include Head Start, WIC, section 8 housing, chapter I education, and summer jobs. This latter is particularly important. Just last week, this Congress passed a job training bill that eliminates distinct funding for the summer youth employment program. And while the bipartisan budget resolution does include new, significant initiatives such as coverage for 5 million uninsured children, the CBC budget goes further. The CBC budget proposes a child health initiative that would cover 10 million uninsured children. The CBC budget is the only budget alternative that offers the promise of protecting future generations. This budget proposes to restore the safety net that welfare reform dismantled. It assures that millions of Americans who are struggling to make the transition from welfare to work have that chance. I am proud to cast my vote tonight for the CBC budget.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Quentis B. Garth Foundation, Inc., which has served youths in the Chicagoland community for the past 2 years. This foundation has worked hard to see that the dream of a college education is not out of the grasp of any deserving young student. From its inception in May 1995, the foundation has granted annual scholarships to academically gifted and underprivileged students pursuing a college education. This year the foundation's $15,000 scholarship award will be granted to 5 academically gifted students in Chicago-area high schools, and another $75,500 will be distributed among 15 1995-96 scholarship awardees, currently pursuing studies at some of the most prestigious universities in the Nation. These awards have been a blessing to many students and their families, but the benefits of this scholarship program reach far beyond the individual student's home. The surrounding community and our Nation at large will benefit from the quality education and training that these students receive. It brings me great pleasure to honor the Quentis B. Garth Foundation today. I am certain that their good work will continue to enrich all of our students and our lives for many years to come.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I proudly rise today to pay tribute to a man of inspirational vision and stellar commitment. This is a man who has dedicated his life to the service of his community, and to the work of the Baptist Church. The man I am here to honor is the Reverend Dr. Eddie Robert Williams, Jr. The work of Reverend Williams has touched the lives of area residents in many ways over the past 28 years. He assisted in the design, renovation, and development of new church facilities, and in the development and management of multifamily and senior citizen housing. In his professional life, Reverend Williams has been equally active in the service of his community. He reached tenure as a member of the Northern Illinois University [NIU] faculty in 1976, and has also achieved the rank of captain as the Navy's campus liaison officer at NIU. Last but definitely not least, I am proud to announce that Reverend Williams will be installed as pastor of the South Park Baptist Church in Chicago, IL. I, along with several of his family and friends, will celebrate this joyous event later on this week. I am certain that Reverend Williams will follow in the footsteps of his father, the last Rev. Eddie Robert Williams, Sr., who was also pastor of South Park Baptist Church and a bedrock of our city, State, and Nation. I am pleased to be here today to stand for Reverend Williams and to highlight his tireless work before the Congress.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to vigorously call for defeat of H.R. 2--The Housing Opportunity and Responsibility Act--or, more appropriately, Dooms Day Legislation. H.R. 2 is another example of the ``Contract on America.'' And we know that the Contract on America is a contract on poor people-- more than 1.4 million families who live in public housing across our country. I oppose this draconian bill for many reasons. They include the new power that the bill gives to local public housing authorities to raise rents. This will drive thousands of low-income working families out of public housing. Public housing must be preserved for low-income people who need it most. But let me discuss a major reason I oppose H.R. 2. It does absolutely nothing to move public housing residents closer to real jobs at real wages. Section 105--one of the more vicious parts of this bill--is the provision to require forced volunteerism and to establish ``self- sufficiency contracts.'' H.R. 2 requires that nonelderly and nondisabled residents of public housing who cannot find jobs have to perform 8 hours a month of something called ``community service.'' The bill also requires that residents and the public housing authority sign an agreement as part of the lease. This ``agreement'' is supposed to set goals for self-sufficiency. And one of the goals is a timetable for families to leave public housing when they become self-sufficient. But how are millions of public housing residents supposed to become self-sufficient, when Congress refuses to appropriate money to rebuild our communities? Now that would create real jobs at real wages. Instead of passing H.R. 2, this Congress ought to be holding hearings this week on H.R. 950--The Job Creation and Infrastructure Restoration Act of 1997. This bill, cosponsored by more than 45 Members of Congress and over 100 organizations, including city councils, calls for $250 billion to launch a major public works program that could put millions of people to work rebuilding schools, roads, hospitals, and highways. Self-sufficiency contracts make no sense. No public housing residents should be forced to sign such contracts when H.R. 2 contains no money for jobs or supportive services to help people find jobs. And why is this Congress considering a law that requires community work in return for receiving Federal assistance? Do we require ``volunteer work'' in exchange for the right to receive other types of Federal assistance such as farm subsidies, LIHEAP, corporate welfare, or loan guarantees? Section 105 of H.R. 2 is a threat to working people, especially low- wage workers. The ``forced volunteers'' required by section 105 threatens to displace thousands of low wage workers currently employed by public housing authorities. If Congress passes a law that requires millions of hours of free labor by public housing residents, then public housing authorities will find no need to pay wages and benefits to other workers who currently perform vital security, maintenance, and other jobs. Mr. Speaker, you can count on my vote against H.R. 2. And you can count me in to continue to fight with public housing residents across this country to preserve the people's right to affordable housing. Thank you very much.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I offer a resolution (H.R. 118) and I ask unanimous consent for its immediate consideration.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on the subject of my special order today.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his eloquent and outstanding remarks. His remarks certainly captured Charlie Hayes and captured the plight of working people, both in the days of Charlie Hayes and also the working people in their plight today as we speak on this floor. Mr. Speaker, much has been said about Charlie Hayes, much has been said about the kind of leader that he was; not only as a labor leader, as a political leader, but also as a community leader. Mr. Speaker, his leadership goes back as far as, as I indicated earlier, 1938, when he originally started organizing a group of workers at the E.L. Bruce Flooring Company in Cairo, IL, and how at the tender age of 20 he became the president of the local, Local 1424. Mr. Speaker, we jump to 1942, and he had moved to Chicago and an uncle helped Charlie land a job as a fresh pork laborer at Wilson & Co. there in Chicago at the old stockyard, and he soon became a leader in a long and bitter struggle which culminated in 1944 with the recognition of Local 25 of the United Packing House Workers of America as the official bargaining unit for 3,500 Wilson workers; black workers and white workers and Hispanic workers and Asian workers. This effort marked the beginning of an end to segregated facilities and discriminatory hiring and promotion practices that were pervasive there at that particular plant. In the 1948 packing house workers' strike at Wilson & Co. Charlie was framed on charges of violence and was fired. He won reinstatement as the result of the National Labor Relations Board arbitration in 1949. By then he had, in the interim, accepted a position to represent the union's 35,000 employees in district 1 as the international field representative, where he led successful fights for job benefits, including paid sick leave and vacations and holidays. In 1954 he was elected director of district 1 of the United Packing House Workers of America, and he again, with his energy and his resolve and his commitment and his dedication and his courage, he had an immediate long-term and far-reaching impact on the American labor movement. We can go on and on and on. Chicago was known to have historically troublesome racial relationships, and there was a riot in 1949 in Chicago at Trumbull Park Homes there, and Charlie led the effort to raise money for those families that were in critical and crisis situations as a result of the race riot there in Trumbull Park. Also, during this same period of time, Charlie Hayes led the charge to raise money to assist in the prosecution of the murderers of Emmet Till, a young African-American from the South Side of Chicago who had ventured down to Mississippi and was found murdered, floating in a river. Charlie Hayes was moved and used his position in the labor movement, took up the call, involved himself in a fight that was highly controversial and certainly not within the purview of a defined role for a labor leader. Charlie Hayes, when the AFL-CIO emerged in 1955, he became the international vice president and director of district 12, representing a union which was at that time the largest labor union in this Nation, representing 500,000 members. He became the vice president because he was unparalleled in terms of his courage and in terms of his commitment. Mr. Speaker, the civil rights movement, this movement that saw black Americans and white Americans and others come together to talk about basic civil rights for all Americans, this movement that was spearheaded in the South by Dr. Martin Luther King and others, this movement that captured the imagination of this Nation because it showed this Nation that there was a part of this Nation where just basic rights, rights to public accommodation, rights to vote, just rights to speak up and stand up, even a right to ride on public transportation in the front, where this was a right that was not shared by many citizens of this Nation, Charlie Hayes took up the call, took up the charge, raised money, provided support, critical support for Dr. King and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference in their fight for equal rights. Mr. Speaker, I can go on and on and on, but let me wind up this particular special order. Charlie Hayes was a civil rights leader, labor leader, political leader, but he was also a devoted family man, a devoted husband. His wife Emma passed in 1973. Charlie Hayes' family, his children, Charlene and Barbara, and his grandchildren, all have in their father, in their grandfather a man who is a role model for all in this world, for all in this Nation. This man who came from the killing floors of a packinghouse, who came through the labor movement, who served here in this country will always be held in the highest of esteem by all freedom loving people of the world, and his example serves as a sterling example and a beacon for all of us who are fighting to end discrimination of all types and are fighting for a world where all people can have equal rights and justice.

Mr. RUSH. If the gentleman would yield for just a moment, would the gentleman please expound on how he thinks that Congressman Hayes would have felt about welfare reform and the onerous effect that it has on people, particularly welfare reform without even the possibility, remote possibility, of getting a job?

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. We have the gentleman from New York, Mr. Owens, who also served as a colleague of Congressman Charlie Hayes and who shared some of his ideas about the world and ideas about labor, the esteemed Member from the State of New York Mr. Major Owens.

Mr. RUSH. Very appropriate. Thank you so much for sharing that with us. That is a grand, in Charlie's style, that is a grand, grand poem. Thank you very so very much. Mr. Speaker, we have bipartisan words of memorialization for our fallen colleague. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Hastert] the majority whip, another colleague of Congressman Hayes, who has asked to be allowed to give some remarks and his reflection of the outstanding individual, Charles A. Hayes.