José Serrano

Mr. SERRANO

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. SERRANO

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to the Highbridge- Woodycrest Center, a community-based organization in the Bronx, which, at a ceremony tomorrow in the Cannon Caucus Room, will receive a $50,000 Women's Health Initiative grant from the Fannie Mae Foundation. The Highbridge-Woodycrest Center is dedicated to educating AIDS- infected and HIV-positive women in shelters and prison to help them reduce high-risk behavior and seek appropriate health care support. In an expansion of its activities, the center is also creating a day treatment center for women with HIV and AIDS. Mr. Speaker, more than 1,000 organizations from around the country applied for this grant. A national advisory committee of women's health experts selected the Highbridge-Woodycrest Center and nine other programs to receive this award under Fannie Mae's women's health initiative, which will provide $1 million over the next 5 years to support women's health services in underserved communities throughout the United States. I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating the Highbridge- Woodycrest Center, whose vital contributions to women's health have earned it the generous support of the Fannie Mae Foundation.

Mr. SERRANO

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Speaker, on December 7 of last year a truly remarkable event took place in New York City. A young man from the Bronx climbed over the guard rail of the George Washington Bridge with the intention of jumping to his death. He had brought with him a cellular telephone to place one last, desperate telephone call. Mr. Speaker, that telephone call--to New York radio personality Howard Stern--saved the young man's life. In one of his most important performances, Howard Stern talked to the young man and kept him smiling and engaged until help could arrive. Mr. Speaker, such is the popularity of Mr. Stern's radio program, that it was Stern's audience which came to the rescue. A listener named Helen Trimble, who heard the event unfold on her radio while driving on the bridge, pulled her car over at the sight of Prince and enveloped him in a bear hug. Port Authority police Lt. Stanley Bleeker, hearing the exchange between Howard Stern and the jumper on his radio, immediately sent officers to the scene. The young man was soon brought to safety. Mr. Speaker, it is rare that an individual has this great an impact upon another's life. On this occasion, Howard Stern came face to face with a situation for which no one can prepare. Mr. Stern's humanity showed through at this crucial moment, and as a result a human life was saved. Mr. Speaker, I ask the House to join me in congratulations and thanks to Mr. Howard Stern for his wonderful humanitarian achievement.

Mr. SERRANO

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, this whole issue of the balanced budget amendment and the three-fifths super majority is one that if you really analyze it can confuse you a lot. First of all, we all come here with an equal vote and now we are being told in order to accomplish something legislatively we have to get a special super majority. How is it going to end? Any time we find an issue we do not have the courage to deal with ourselves we are going put forth a super majority so that everybody can deal with it that way and then throw it off to someone else? The other issue that seems to create a problem here is that we cannot still get the truth from the other side, from the proponents of this bill, what it is they intend to do once they balance the budget the way they want to balance the budget. This whole issue of Social Security that some people think we are trying to scare some folks here, this is a honest issue. This is a truthful issue. Why will people not tell us what is going to happen to Social Security and Medicare once this constitutional amendment takes effect? When I was much younger the airline industry went out to try to get new customers and they said ``fly now; pay later.'' What I am being told to do now is vote now and find out later. If we vote now we are going to find out later that we are going to be in deep trouble on the real contract, besides the Constitution, which is the only contract we have with America. The real contract was with senior citizens about their Social Security and their Medicare and now we are going to sell them this approach: We will balance the budget hopefully someday, and then next year and the year after we will tell you how we hurt you. I think that is not right and that is not fair. We do not need a balanced budget amendment. We need to balance the budget and I am for that. We do not need a three-fifths super majority. We need to respect each individual vote in this House. We should not be afraid to exercise our right here. We should not support this amendment.

Mr. SERRANO

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to Jonathan Cohen, a brave young African American whose quick and selfless action prevented a fleeing suspect from escaping a tragic subway murder early this month. Jonathan Cohen lived in the Bronx until he was 10 and attended P.S. 48 in my Congressional District. He was descending the escalator to the platform at the 34th Street station on January 4 when he saw a man push an elderly woman into the path of an oncoming subway train. While the other onlookers froze, Mr. Cohen had the presence of mind to follow the man he saw commit the crime, call out to others to call the police, and then grab and hold the suspect when he reached the token booth. Mr. Speaker, when teachers at P.S. 48 read about this incident, they recalled the young boy named Jonathan Cohen who had attended their school 20 years ago. After doing some checking, they were able to ascertain that the hero of January 4 was a grown-up version of the boy they remembered. Mr. Speaker, on Friday, February 17, P.S. 48 will hold a Black History Month program. The annual theme of this year's celebration, which had been established well in advance of the events of January 4, is ``Growing Better Citizens.'' How fitting it is, Mr. Speaker, that Jonathan Cohen, who has grown into such an outstanding citizen, will speak at this event. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me and the P.S. 48 community in priase of Jonathan Cohen for the shining example he sets for all Americans.

Mr. SERRANO

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to House Joint Resolution 1, proposing a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Virtually every Member agrees that we must reduce the Federal deficit. We began in the 103d Congress with responsible steps to raise revenues in a limited way and to reduce spending, and those efforts must continue. But passing a constitutional amendment to require a balanced budget is not responsible. There are two possible outcomes, neither of which is desirable. One is that a balanced budget amendment will be ignored and the respect due our Constitution will be eroded. The other is that a balanced budget amendment will be obeyed, harming the economy and limiting the Federal Government's ability to meet national needs. But I don't only oppose House Joint Resolution 1 because it is a balanced budget amendment; I oppose it because it is a bad balanced budget amendment. House Joint Resolution 1 puts the entire range of Federal activity, from responding to hunger and homelessness, to protecting health and safety, to investing in education, training, research and development, and infrastructure for long-term growth, at risk, along with the contracts the United States has made with our senior citizens, our veterans, our states and cities. The populations most reliant on federally supported income support programs are our elderly and our children. But, however earnestly some Members promise to keep Social Security off the table, there is nothing in House Joint Resolution 1 to protect it when the time comes to balance the budget. The Children's Defense Fund estimates that, if Social Security and defense are protected, the BBA would force cuts in other Federal spending of 30 percent. The impact on children would be devastating. If the cuts simply reduce caseloads, 6.6 million children could lose Medicaid health care coverage, and 4.3 million could lose food stamps; in New and nearly 300,000 would lose food stamps. But programs for poor children, like those for other poor and underserved people, may not see cuts held to 30 percent; having no votes and no highly paid lobbyists, our most vulnerable people may be hit even harder. House Joint Resolution 1 does not permit a waiver of the balanced budget requirement when the economy is weak, so it is likely to have a countercyclical effect. As unemployment rose and our people's need for federal assistance grew, tax receipts would be falling, and spending would have to be cut even deeper to meet the BBA's requirements. Recessions would become more frequent and deeper. House Joint Resolution 1 does not provide for unforseen situations such as natural disasters--the recent flooding in California. Tax increases or spending cuts would be required to offset spending to meet emergencies. A disaster would bring suffering on many more people than its immediate victims. The requirement of supermajority votes for raising taxes undermines the principle of majority rule, giving excessive power to a minority of the Members of each House. It also distorts the process of achieving a balanced budget and is likely to lead to indiscriminate cuts and possible elimination of critical Federal programs. Mr. Chairman, beyond these issues, there are many unanswered questions about and deficiencies in House Joint Resolution 1. Democratic Members of the Judiciary Committee tried to deal with these questions and deficiencies by preparing amendments for full Committee markup and the floor, but amendments offered in Committee were defeated on party-line votes, markup was cutoff before more than half of our amendments were offered, and the Rules Committee denied us the right to offer them on the floor. I can only note that, had these changes been made, House Joint Resolution 1 would be much longer and much more detailed--an even clearer argument against making economic policy in the Constitution. Mr. Chairman, Congress already has the tools to reduce the Federal deficit and has been using those tools for the last 2 years. We know the choices will be extremely difficult, but making those choices is the only way to bring the deficit down. We do not need a constitutional amendment, and we most emphatically do not need House Joint Resolution 1. I urge my colleagues to vote against this and any other balanced budget amendment to the Constitution.