Jan Schakowsky

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New York for her leadership in opposition to H.R. 476. I associate myself with her remarks. One of the most moving experiences of my life was when I met with the parents of Becky Bell, a 17-year-old who died from an illegal abortion after the passage in her State of parental notification laws. We have talked a lot about why children, why girls from families where there is violence and it is, according to the AAUW, about a third of the teens that do not involve their parents in the decision to make an abortion have already been victims of family violence and fear it will recur with the news of a pregnancy. But I want to talk about the Bell family because this was in many ways the ideal family. That is what Karen Bell thought, that they were very close with their children, they were a middle-class family, everything was going great. She favored parental notification laws because she thought certainly Becky, if she had a problem, would come to her as she should, and everyone in this Chamber agrees that that is the way it should be, that children should go to their loving parents. It did not quite happen that way. Becky, because she was so close to her parents, felt she could not disappoint them. She would not tell them. She ended up having an illegal abortion. As Becky Bell lay dying, holding her mother's hand, her mother said, ``Becky, tell mommy what happened,'' and she would not. She would not. It was not until the death certificate was written, until the doctor said what was the cause of Becky's death. Karen would have done anything, paid the fee for her to go to another State, paid for the abortion, anything for Becky not to be dead. This is the reality of life in too many situations. Again, most girls tell their parents. Of course they do. And involve them. The vast majority do. We are talking about those who not only cannot because of violence, but often who will not. The American Medical Association notes that, quote, the desire to maintain secrecy has been one of the leading reasons for illegal abortion deaths. That is what we are talking about, life and death here, that this legislation, as well intended as it may be, is going to cause the death of some young women who feel, for one reason or another, that they cannot tell their parents. We want them to go to a respected adult, to a relative, a grandparent and hope that they will and that those adults can provide the guidance and the care and take them to a place where legally and safely they can have the abortion that they need. I urge a ``no'' vote on this bill.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in remembrance and celebration of the life of Mrs. Mila V. Nolan. Although friends, family, and the City of Chicago grieve in the sadness of her departure, we can celebrate because we know that hers was a life lived in full. Mrs. Nolan began her legacy of public service shortly after she earned her bachelor and master's degrees from Depaul University, preparing to be a music teacher. She volunteered as a ``gray lady'' for the American Red Cross during WW II. Much of her activism was shared with her husband Brian J. Nolan, with whom she spent 35 happy years, before his death. Education was always a priority for Mila, she worked tirelessly to nurture her students, to find ways to encourage success, in and outside the classroom. Mrs. Nolan began her teaching career at CVS (Chicago Vocational) High School in the late 1940s and moved to the city's Northwest Side in 1959, where she started teaching at Taft High School. Mrs. Nolan taught music at Taft from 1959 until she retired in 1985. At Taft, she directed the award-winning Girls Chorus. Upon retiring, Mrs. Nolan was asked to write a column for the Edgebrook-Sauganash Times Review newspaper, to bridge the various parts of the Northwest Side's Edgebrook area. She continued to write ``Bridging Edgebrook'' until the week of her death on March 20, 2002. She became actively involved in many community groups, and dedicated the rest of her life to community service. Mrs. Nolan served more than three years on the Wildwood School Local School Council as a community representative. She was a past president of the Edgebrook Woman's Club, also a member of the Portage Park Woman's Club, and was completing her year as president of District 7 of the Illinois Division of the General Federation of Woman's Clubs. She was one of the first women members of the Logan Square Lions Club and a member of the Jefferson Park Lions Club. She was a long-time volunteer for the American Cancer Society and went on to head the Edgebrook- Sauganash Unit, and later on the board of the Northwest Unit for several years. She also was active at St. Mary of the Woods Catholic Church, she participated in almost everything, including service as a fill-in musician for morning services and funerals. Additionally, Mila also participated on the boards of the Northwest Action Council, the 41st Ward Democratic Women's Organization and the North Edgebrook Civic Association. She also served as an election judge for her precinct through her retirement years, missing only the final election, March 19, when she was too ill to work. Mrs. Nolan's life was full of devotion, full of compassion, and full of service to her community. As a public servant, I look to those I serve for inspiration. The life of Mrs. Nolan serves not only as an inspiration for me, but as a model of how best to use the blessings of life as a resource for others. Mrs. Mila Nolan leaves behind a sister, a son, grandchildren, nieces and nephews. To them and her community, she is irreplaceable--they grieve now and will no doubt miss her presence in their lives. Nonetheless, they will always find comfort in knowing that Mila now lives through her works and deeds. The family can find comfort in the fact that she left a legacy of contributing her time, her energy, and her talent to the progress of her community. On behalf of the United States Congress, I thank Mrs. Mila V. Noland, for a lifetime of service and dedication.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I applaud the children, families, and teachers of Afghanistan for celebrating their first back-to-school day to welcome both girls and boys since the fall of the Taliban regime. I would especially like to honor the female teachers and students of Afghanistan who were not allowed to teach or go to school for the past five years, and the many who continued to do so despite the risk to their own lives. In our mission to eradicate terrorism, the U.S. has recognized the importance of supporting education in Afghanistan. In addition to $2 million pledged to UNICEF for their Back-to-School campaign, $6.5 million of the $296 million we designated for reconstruction has gone to printing textbooks. I commend the UNICEF-sponsored Back-to-School campaign for working hard on the ground to get over 1.5 million children into a learning environment by March 21, the first day of school across the country. Their logistical efforts included delivering kits of over 50 separate teaching and learning tools to schools, teachers, and students; providing 40,000 stationery kits, 10,000 School-in-a-Box kits, 7.8 million textbooks, and 18,000 chalkboards to schools across the country; having all Afghan children vaccinated for the measles; combating malnutrition among Afghan children; and communicating the positive message of the campaign to all parents in the country. I praise the Afghan Interim Government for playing a critical role in this campaign and making education a priority. It has been heartbreaking to hear about so many girls having to take tremendous risks to sneak to school while their country was under Taliban rule and the horrific punishments they endured if caught. I was in awe of the courage of so many female teachers who ran underground schools because of their commitment to educating children. It has been so inspiring to hear stories of Afghan girls so eager to learn that they weathered harsh conditions to return to school as soon as the Taliban left town, well before the official first day of school. As the children and teachers in Afghanistan embrace this renewed opportunity for education, we must realize that this is just the beginning and view our continued support as critical. I urge this body and this government to continue to enhance our efforts to ensure that each year all children in Afghanistan can celebrate back-to-school day with joy and anticipation, without fear.

Mr. SCHAKOWSKY

Mr. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in solidarity with Jews across this nation and around the world to pay tribute to those who perished at the hands of the Nazis during the Holocaust. Today in the nation's Capital, we gather to pay our respects with our Days of Remembrance ceremony. My district, the 9th Congressional District of Illinois, is home to perhaps the largest concentration of survivors in the country and certainly in the state, and this day holds deep meaning for those individuals and the entire community. Recent events in the Middle East and around the world underscore the importance of this day. Anti-Semitic and anti-Israel rhetoric and demonstrations continue in numerous countries. And while we respect the right of every person to be heard, the hateful displays throughout the world that are directed at the Jewish people remind us that ``Never Again'' is not a guarantee, but a promise that we must uphold through education, dialogue, and determination. It also reminds us that we must continue to strengthen the U.S. commitment to the security of Israel. Moreover, we must redouble our efforts to bring lasting peace to the Middle East. ``Never Again'' means that we must combat hate wherever it exists. We must never turn a blind eye to terror or discrimination. We must demand that our government hold those who carry out acts of needless brutality accountable. While we must honor those who were lost during the Holocaust by carrying on and living honorable and productive lives, we must also honor them by carrying out measures to bring to justice those who were implicated and who profited from their suffering. And we must do everything within our power to provide the utmost measure of restitution for those who survived the Nazi's evil plan. The Holocaust was the most horrific human atrocity the world saw during the last century and perhaps in the history of the planet. Millions of Jews and others were brutalized, raped, beaten, dehumanized, enslaved, robbed, and murdered. While it is hard to grasp how terrible those events must have been, what all of our children, and us must do is to listen to the stories of those few remaining survivors of the Holocaust and ensure that their stories and their suffering are a permanent part of history. The Holocaust was not only the worst murder case in history, but it was also the biggest exploitation and theft. Jews and others were enslaved-worked literally to death for various companies. The Nazis liquidated millions of insurance policies with the assistance of insurance companies, and millions of bank accounts were seized. I am sad to say that, to this date, there has been no restitution for the bulk of those crimes. Every year we observe Yom Ha-shoah, we are also reminded of those survivors of the Holocaust who have passed away during the previous year. Negotiations to repay stolen assets are ongoing. But, unfortunately, the process is slow and many have been deprived of at least some measure of justice after enduring so much. Real and overdue progress on this front requires the complete cooperation of foreign governments and multinational corporations, who have yet to own up to their role in the crime of the last century. The fact that some still deny responsibility or refuse full compliance with negotiations only adds to the suffering and prolongs the justice those survivors deserve. As members of Congress, a critical responsibility we have this year is to closely evaluate the status of efforts to gain restitution for insurance policies that were sold to victims and survivors of the Holocaust but were never paid. There are still some 10, 000 survivors in Illinois and roughly I 100 of them have filed claims for insurance. To my knowledge, only a handful, 14 have received offers for payments. This is an issue that is beyond urgency. There are serious problems that need to be resolved and Congress has a responsibility to make sure that is done so that those who have lived to recall the Holocaust may also have some measure of justice and dignity paid to them while they are still alive. We can not even attempt to repay them for the suffering and the loss. What we can do is honor holocaust victims and survivors first, by never allowing our children and future generations to forget what happened and by denouncing in the strongest of terms, rhetoric and behavior that are tainted with the reminiscence of the Nazi era. Today we honor and mourn those who perished. We vow to live our lives in a way that pays tribute to their memory and ensures others will not suffer their fate.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the United Nations International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. As the world celebrates this day, we must reflect and take action against the existing discrimination and hate within our borders. Since the terrorist attacks on September 11th, thousands of assaults have been reported across the country on people of South Asian, Arab, Muslim, Sikh, and Jewish backgrounds. By October 11th, the Arab Anti- Discrimination Committee had already collected more than 700 reports of hate crimes in the month following September 11th. People have been physically and verbally attacked, others shot and killed, temples were firebombed, and houses were vandalized. Innocent Americans, touched by the devastation of September 11th like the rest of us, must not be singled out for hate just because of their skin color or religious beliefs. We in Congress condemn this hate and violence. But we must do more. It is time to take the next step and strengthen our current laws to protect victims who are chosen because of their gender, sexual orientation, race, religion, or disability. It is our duty. It is especially important that our children learn that hate crimes will not be tolerated. This is why we must pass H.R. 1343, The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2001, which would elevate the status of hate crimes within federal law and ensure that state governments and local police have the tools needed to fight and prosecute these crimes. This bill would not take away the ability of state and local authorities to continue prosecuting most hate crimes. It would allow federal officials to assist overstretched states and local officials investigate and prosecute these crimes. It would also provide states and localities with grants designed to combat hate crimes committed by juveniles. Sadly, the prevalence of hate crimes goes beyond the backlash from September 11th. The Southern Poverty Law Center estimates that last year alone, over 50,000 hate crimes took place. In the summer of 1999, the Midwest, including my district in Illinois, was rocked by the killing spree of Benjamin Nathaniel Smith. A follower of the World Church of the Creator, Benjamin Smith killed Ricky Byrdsong, an outstanding role model in the community and a constituent, and Won Joon Yoon, a student at Indiana University. The Jewish Community in my district was also assaulted on the Sabbath with rounds of gunfire. The weekend after the September 11th attacks, I marched in solidarity with the South Asian, Arab, Muslim, Sikh, and Jewish communities to stand against the terrorist attacks and the attacks on the community. I saw not only overwhelming sadness, but the fear of violence on the faces of those walking with me. Members of my community and the district that I represent were afraid to send their children to school. They did not want to leave their homes even to go grocery shopping. But I also saw the commitment from community members to combat bigotry and racism. Those who commit hate crimes perpetuate the sense of terror in our communities and undermine the ideals of our nation. This is why it is so important that hate crimes be recognized for what they are and punished accordingly. These crimes not only devastate victims and their family and friends, but they devastate the community to which the victim belongs. This community becomes stricken with grief as well as the fear that they could be next. The violence inflicted on those based solely on skin color or religion violates the very essence of what our nation is about. Our country represents tolerance and acceptance. We must pass the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act. I am proud to represent one of the most diverse districts in the nation and I will work to protect and honor the civil rights of all our people, without any exceptions.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 2341, the ``Class Action Fairness Act.'' The Republican sponsors of this legislation falsely claim that it will rein in ``frivolous lawsuits.'' This bill is not about lawyers and lawyers' fees; it is about whether consumers will have legal rights when corporate wrongdoing, dangerous practices or faulty products injure them. This bill would take away legal rights that consumers need. Class action lawsuits are one of the few protections consumers have against corporate fraud and abuse. In fact, anyone who wants to lower the cost of health care for consumers should oppose this bill. Class action suits are an important tool for health care consumers who have been forced to pay exorbitant prices for prescription drugs and medical bills. For example, in Iowa, Blue Cross/Blue Shield negotiated ``secret discounts'' with hospitals and providers but charged the full amount to consumers, pocketing the difference. Many policyholders ended up paying 10 to 20 percent more than they should have. In response, three state court class action lawsuits were filed against Blue Cross/Blue Shield. Eventually Blue Cross/Blue Shield agreed to pay $14.6 million to settle the claims. The tens of thousands of consumers affected by the lawsuit received reimbursements for all claims over $50. Since the settlement agreement, Blue Cross has changed its billing practices to lower the cost for consumers. The money lost was not enough for any one policyholder to bring suit on his or her own. But through a class action lawsuit, all policyholders were able to be protected against this practice. This case would have never seen the light of day if the bill before us today were the law of land. This legislation will take money out of people's pockets and will make consumers even more vulnerable to abuses by HMOs. For the sake of everyone who relies on health care insurance please join me in opposing this ill-conceived piece of legislation.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to add my support for this resolution recognizing the 100th anniversary of the Census Bureau. The census data paint a picture of America, including information on economic status based on age characteristics. It is because of the census that we know how successful the Social Security program has been in raising senior citizens out of poverty. The census numbers show that in 1999, 9.7 percent of people age 65 and older lived in poverty, the lowest percentage ever. The census numbers tell us that Social Security provides over half the total income for the average elderly household. For one-third of women over age 65, Social Security represents 90 percent of their total income. Without this program, half of older women would be living in poverty. The resolution states the Census Bureau gives us the data that is essential ``in the distribution of funds and in the formulation of public policy.'' The Census Bureau numbers will play a critical role in the public policy debate on Social Security. I believe that the census numbers will demonstrate the folly of privatizing Social Security. According to the Census Bureau, the number of persons 65 and older will grow from 35 million in 2001 to 82 million in 2050. In 2050, the number of women over age 85, those most dependent on Social Security, will be four times the number today. They are depending on us to continue the promise of Social Security. I believe the census data prove that we can make modest changes in Social Security, like raising the earnings cap, and maintain the guarantee. The census data on income, poverty and wealth show that Social Security has been instrumental in improving the financial security of seniors and families across this country. Privatization will reverse that trend and threaten the financial security of many retirees, particularly older women. It is important to recognize the value of the Census Bureau today, but it is even more important to debate and reject Social Security privatization, to protect current and future beneficiaries. I urge the Republican leadership to schedule that debate soon.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, we could have no higher goal than to protect and improve the financial security of retirees, survivors, dependents, and disabled workers. For 67 years, Social Security has been the bedrock of that security. Nearly 46 million people living in one out of every four households in this country today receive monthly benefits from Social Security. Social Security provides critical insurance protections against the future loss of income due to retirement, death, or disability for 96 percent of all workers, their spouses, and their children. Social Security provides over half of the total income for the average elderly household. For one-third of women over age 65, Social Security represents 90 percent of their total income. Without this program, half of older women in this country would be living in poverty. It is our responsibility to ensure that the Social Security program guarantee is here today, tomorrow, and for generations to come. It is our job, as elected officials, to enact the policies needed to maintain that guarantee and to reject policies that undermine Social Security; it is not our job to spend taxpayer dollars to send out worthless paper certificates designed to provide a false sense of security to American seniors and their families. We should not be engaged in a public relations campaign, but rather in a serious policy discussion that lets us debate how best to continue the Social Security commitment, to guarantee lifelong and inflation-proof benefits. I understand why the Republican leadership may want to delay that debate until after the next election. I can understand why they want to distance themselves from recent history. First, there is the budget record. Despite all the rhetoric about putting Social Security revenues in a lockbox, the lock to that box has been picked by Republican budgets. It is true that the lockbox resolution passed in the House provided certain exceptions, such as war or recession, but it is not true that one of those exceptions was providing tax breaks to the wealthy. The Congressional Budget Office has indicated that the single largest factor in the disappearing budget surplus is last year's tax cut. As Members know, the Congressional Budget Office has estimated that even without new taxes or spending, we will take $900 billion from the Social Security trust fund over the next 9 years. Now President Bush is proposing new tax cuts of $675 billion over 10 years and $343 billion to make last year's tax cuts permanent, most of which go to the wealthiest, money that will come out of Social Security and Medicare. The Bush budget proposes to take $553 billion of the Medicare surplus and $1.5 trillion of the Social Security surplus over the next decade, and I doubt that any certificate will assure senior citizens that Social Security solvency is a priority, given those figures. Second, there are those unfortunate statements by Treasury Secretary O'Neill. Last May, in an interview with the Financial Times, Secretary O'Neill stated that ``Able-bodied adults should save enough on a regular basis so they can provide for their own retirement and, for that matter, health and medical needs.'' In July, Secretary O'Neill stated that ``The Social Security trust fund does not consist of real economic assets.'' Again, it is hard to argue that those are ringing endorsements of Social Security. If the Treasury Secretary believes that the assets in the trust fund are just worthless paper, why should Social Security beneficiaries have any faith in a certificate or in an administration to protect their best interests? Most important, there is the President's Commission on Social Security. All of those appointed to the Commission last May were supporters of privatization, which may explain why none of those appointed to the Commission last May represented recognized senior, disability, women's, or minority organizations. The three plans put forth by the Commission last December all include variations on the privatization theme. All the plans would jeopardize the Social Security guarantee in one way or another. Privatization would drain between $1 trillion and $1.5 trillion from the Social Security trust fund over the next decade alone. Privatization would shorten the life of the trust fund. One plan would increase the long- term Social Security deficit by 25 percent. Another tries to deal with the deficit by transferring $6 trillion from the U.S. Treasury between 2021 and 2054 to make up the deficit. Taking general revenues might help Social Security, but it would also eliminate resources necessary for Medicare, Medicaid, the Older Americans Act, job training, education, and other essential programs. Privatization would jeopardize benefits to current and future beneficiaries. One of the Commission's proposals would cut benefits for future retirees by calculating initial benefits on the basis of growth in CPI rather than wages, which would greatly reduce the standard of living. Privatization would force workers to work longer in order to maintain benefits. What we should be doing is rejecting privatization of Social Security. We should be working to strengthen it, and we should be strengthening Social Security, not privatizing it.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act. This is important legislation that builds up our security against future terrorist attacks. I am, however, disappointed in the scope of the 245(i) extension included in this bill. I believe this 245(i) extension is insufficient in time and stingy in scope. The White House has continually stated support for an extension of 245(i) for 6 to 12 months. This new proposal of a limited 4-month extension with restrictions is not consistent with the spirit of President Bush's letter where he advocated for policies that strengthen families and recognized that there was not enough time with the previous four-month extension. In December 2000, when Congress passed a 245(i) extension that expired April 30, 2001, it took the INS over 3 months to issue the new regulation, causing great panic and confusion among immigrants and creating an opportunity for unscrupulous and fraudulent immigration ``advisors.'' While this new provision will help some individuals and families, it will need new regulations and there will be delays and chaos similar to what happened last time. A 245(i) provision helps people in this country who otherwise qualify for legal permanent residency. It is not an amnesty, but rather a way for people with deep roots in this country to reunite their families and work their way towards citizenship and full participation in their adopted country. A meaningful extension must go beyond 4 months and should not impose new arbitrary requirements. At this time, I support this proposal because it is a step in the right direction, but I urge my colleagues to continue discussions and continue to work to pass and implement a comprehensive solution for families that are separated from their loved ones.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I want to extend my congratulations to Taina Rodriguez, a Chicago resident and member of my staff who was recently featured in ``Latina'' magazine. Her boundless energy and enthusiasm make Taina a star. Taina has Marfan's syndrome and has overcome a tremendous number of physical obstacles. This has made her a powerful advocate. Taina was an intern at Access Living, a Chicago group fighting for people with disabilities, and now I am proud to have her as a member of my staff. I am proud that Taina will be able to use her fighting spirit to benefit the residents of the 9th district. I urge all of my colleagues to read the inspirational article about Taina in the January/February issue of ``Latina'' magazine. Real Love Starts With You (By Anamary Pelayo) Some people have a knack for blaming everyone but themselves when things go wrong. Others have a flair for always finding fault in something that they think they did wrong, then feel burdened by guilt. What would it take to release all of that guilt? The answer may lie in learning to love yourself, experts say. ``You have to be ready to look in the mirror and see all the positives and the negatives,'' says Araceli Perea-Salas, a domestic-violence counselor in southern California. But that's not always easy. Once self- love disappears, it takes a lot of reflection and determination to get it back, says psychologist and author Ana Nogales, Ph.D. ``The key is took within yourself to find your good qualities and build from there. If you don't you'll never be capable of extending love to others.'' Still, the process is difficult and can sometimes take years. It's why thousands of women find themselves stuck in unhealthy situations for long periods, unable to take control of their lives. The following woman confronted adversity, found the strength to pull herself out of the dismal hole of self- blame, and emerged with a shared revelation: The key to turning your life around is learning love yourself. Despite this woman's hardships, she says her life is better and more hopeful than ever. OVERCOMING PHYSICAL HURDLES--Taina Rodriguez, 21, Chicago My wheelchair has been one of my accessories for 11 years now. We go everywhere together. The chair is as much a part of my life as the Marfan's syndrome that put me in it. This genetic disorder caused my spine to curve and damaged my corneas. As a child, I wore thick glasses, and my body was tall and lanky. I was a prime target for teasing. I remember being called everything from four eyes to banana back. For years I was ashamed of my appearance, my wheelchair, and my inability to do things for myself. Then, in high school, I met Mari. She would do my hair, and she and I would go shopping together. We would even go to clubs, and I'd wiggle in my wheelchair while she danced next to me. My friend was never embarrassed by me, she didn't seem to care that I was stuck in a wheelchair, so why should I? Instead of feeling ugly, I felt lucky. Maybe I couldn't do everything Mari did, but I almost always found a way to participate, even if it had to be as a spectator at times. For the first time in my life, I felt like a normal teenager. Unfortunately, my health wasn't as resilient. Three years ago, a grueling 18-hour surgery to repair a ruptured heart valve left my in a coma for five days, near death. When I woke up and learned that I had almost died, I was shocked. I couldn't believe my body was strong enough to pull itself out of a coma. I realized what I had slowly been coming to terms with for the past two years: that I had great inner strength and that there was more to my body than its attachment to a wheelchair. Instead of hating my body for its weaknesses, I felt blessed to be alive and eager to get back to my new life. I learned to drive and bought a car. I also got an internship at Access Living, a nonprofit organization in Chicago that champions rights for the disabled. There, two women and I started the Empowered Fe-Fes, a group for young women with disabilities to talk about issues such as body image and sexuality. I later won a national award for my service to the disabled, and my internship led to a job as an assistant in the Chicago office of Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky (D-Illinois). I don't think my relationship with my wheelchair will ever be perfect. I still wish I could dance and drive with the full use of my legs, but I have made peace with that. My wheelchair is, after all, a source of mobility, and it doesn't hold me back from living the life I love.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, this week I will be introducing a bipartisan resolution recognizing and supporting the goals of International Women's Day celebrated March 8 every year. We should commemorate this day by honoring the women around the globe who have contributed enormously to the struggle for gender equality and the advancement of women. That struggle continues today. While the right to vote has been won here in the United States, there still remain women in many countries fighting for their voices to be heard and for representation in their political process. Furthermore, women still earn less, own less property and have less access to education, employment and health care than men. Our war against terrorism should include ending violence against women. The U.N. estimates that one out of every three women and girls has been beaten or sexually abused in her lifetime. Each year there are 1 million to 2 million women and children illegally trafficked across international borders, with 50,000 transported to the United States. It is estimated that 130 million girls and young women have been subjected to female genital mutilation, with at least 10,000 girls at risk of this practice here in the United States. It is unacceptable. I urge the Congress to pass this bipartisan resolution commemorating International Women's Day.

Mr. SCHAKOWSKY

Mr. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing the Battered Immigrant Family Relief Act. Violence against women is a profound and extremely pervasive problem, striking across economic, cultural and ethnic backgrounds, and across all age groups. It is an epidemic that affects not only women, but children and families as well. We, in Congress, should be proud that we were able to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act last session. I was particularly pleased with the inclusion of critical provisions of relief to battered immigrant women that came from my bill, H.R. 3083, the Battered Immigrant Women Protection Act. However, there are still important groups that were left out of last year's negotiations. That is why this legislation is so critical. There are still battered immigrants, like asylees and the elderly, who are forced to remain in abusive relationships, unable to appeal for protection from law enforcement and the courts for fear of deportation. The Battered Immigrant Family Relief Act will allow them to safely escape their abusers without fear of deportation or other negative immigration consequences. This legislation would also provide a safety net for battered legal immigrants and their children by allowing them access to health insurance, food, and other benefits required to escape their abuser and gain economic self-sufficiency. We can no longer allow immigration status to be used as a tool of control in abusive situations. I urge my colleagues to support this effort and this bill. While there is still even one women out there who endures violence, our work will not be complete.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my colleagues' attention to an Op-ed in the Chicago Tribune (February 17, 2002), by the highly esteemed Dr. Quentin Young, ``President puts military funds ahead of those for health.'' As the head of Physicians for A National Health Program and the Health and Medicine Policy Research Group, Dr. Young reports on the uncertain and frightening future of a disintegrating public health system. With a $340 million reduction in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's expenditures not devoted to ``anti-terrorism,'' the Bush Administration is abandoning needed support for our public health system. Dr. Young highlights how the Bush Administration has subordinated public health to military priorities, through $57 million slash in the program for chronic disease prevention and health promotion, a $10 million cut for infectious disease control, and a $9 million cut for Medicaid funding. We have made great strides in public health over the last 150 years with strong focus, and fiscal and political support. Life expectancy in our country has doubled, from 40 years to 80 years, through ``. . .[t]he separation of sewage from drinking water, mass immunization, discovery and elimination of insect vectors of disease, improved nutrition, prenatal care, purification of the food supply, addressing ambient pollution, and diminishing workplace hazards.'' But in recent decades, we have neglected critical public health needs, eroding our ability to protect communities and individuals. We cannot allow emerging issues to destroy our nation's efforts to enhance the health status of the population. If we continue to divert funds from critical investments in public health because of short-term goals and a ``military first'' attitude, we will inevitably harm our nation's health in many other areas. A single-minded focus on bioterrorism that neglects ongoing public health needs is a shortsighted and dangerous policy. I strongly urge my colleagues to read the enclosed full text of Dr. Young's very informative op-ed. [From the Chicago Tribune, Feb. 17, 2002] President Puts Military Funds Ahead of Those for Health (By Dr. Quentin Young.) Americans, still on the threshold of the 21st Century, confront an uncertain, even frightening, future, not least because their public health system is diving headlong into errors of the past. On Feb. 4, President George W. Bush presented his FY 2003 budget to Congress. Its health provisions repeat the dangerous errors of the past, especially with its focus on defense. To truly strengthen the public health system, millions should have been added to the budget of the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention. Instead, CDC would take a $340 million reduction in expenditures not devoted to ``anti-terrorism.'' A sampling of the reductions indicates a $57 million slash in the program for chronic disease prevention and health promotion, $10 million for infectious disease control, $9 million for Medicaid funding. On the other hand, there is a 33 percent increase in funding for abstinence-only-until- marriage education. The decision to increase community health center support by $114 million was helpful; it probably should have been more. Our public health system needs serious invigoration based on adequate funding at all levels. The president, however, has debilitated the system by removing support for programs with proven success and doing nothing to rally independent public support for the mission of public health. Finally, he has moved a long way toward repeating the 1950s blunder: subordinating the public health system to military priorities. The nation may pay dearly for this strategy. A good way to approach an understanding of the place of contemporary public health is to look backward a century and a half. Such an examination will define our current situation and how we got there. It can illuminate the wisest decisions we can make based on science and practice. In the past 150 years, life expectancy in our country has doubled, from 40 years to nearly 80 years. This astounding extension of life in such a brief time has no precedent in the human experience. It was achieved fundamentally by public health triumphs: the separation of sewage from drinking water, mass immunization, discovery and elimination of insect vectors of disease, improved nutrition, prenatal care, purification of the food supply, addressing ambient pollution, and diminishing workplace hazards. The public valued these gains. The decline in the perils to life was palpable. A grateful citizenry accepted the rules and regulations that the preventive discipline required. Fiscal and political support were there for the array of measures--from compulsory immunization to meat inspection--needed to improve the nation's health. Until the 1950s. Then, three powerful currents emerged and converged to undermine the vigor and the readiness of the public health establishment. The recent panicky response to the anthrax letters and the legislative fixes being proposed will achieve the necessary safeguards only if we recognize how we blundered in midcentury and if we resolve not to repeat history's mistakes. The first blow came, paradoxically, from the success of the system. In a recent article, Lawrence Gostin and M. Gregg Bloche captured this turnaround: ``Americans saw these [public health] activities as vital to their security, no less so than military force or police and fire protection. Taxpayers supported the needed spending. Lawmakers empowered local health authorities to move robustly when contagion threatened. Destruction of buildings, killing of infected animals and even restraints on the movement of infected people were provided for by law and widely accepted by citizens.'' ``But after World War II, American public health fell victim to its own success. Thanks to city-planning and sanitation campaigns of the early 20th Century and the antibiotic revolution of the 1940s, fear of infectious disease waned. The conquest of polio through vaccination in the 1950s delivered the coup de grace for public health's middle-class constituency.'' Despite awesome accomplishments, public health was now the Cinderella--nay the Caliban--of our health system. Although exploding health expenditures reached $1.4 trillion by 1999, less than 2 percent was allocated to all activities in public health. The workforce, the facilities, the technology--all of the basics--fell behind. The second undoing of progressive growth of public health was essentially political. This derived from the hard fact that it is a governmental function, totally dependent on fiscal and legislative policies. Because the designated leaders--from the local and state health department directors on up to the surgeon general--are all political appointees who serve at the pleasure of an elected chief executive, an effective independent professional advocacy did not and perhaps could not develop. These health chieftains were locked into a loyalty to their sponsors. They cannot question the budgetary and policy devolution openly and expect to keep their jobs. At the local, state and federal levels, the reward for public health successes was reduction of support from the public treasury. The third major element in the decline in U.S. public health over the past half-century is a cautionary tale. It is quite pertinent to the re-emergence of concern with bioterrorism, which is the deliberate use of lethal pathogens on your opponents. It was Alexander Langmuir, chief epidemiologist at the CDC, who was the architect of the dramatic shift in research and funding to look at what was called biological warfare in the midcentury realpolitik. The irony of the resource shift lies in the reality that we have not developed reliable defenses against hostile use of organisms. We have a gigantic capacity to create these weapons, but the option to use them is illusory. Nor do our weapons offer deterrence to enemies who are not powerful nation-states but an elusive network of terrorists who claim to welcome death in the service of injury to us. An unintended consequence of Sept. 11 is an overdue appreciation and enthusiasm for the vital functions of public health. We have not been at all steadfast in this regard in the past five decades. Indeed, we have been heedless. In all quarters the question arises: Can we now build a public health capability that is robust and responsive, independent of volatile political swings? Above all, can we avoid the trap of reducing our focus to garrison state protection functions? The system should be developing defenses against all threats to the public's health, including bioterrorist ones. However, we should recognize the folly of neglecting or abandoning the great array of other crucial functions. Public health has been defined as those things society as a whole does together to enhance the health status of the population. This tradition grows out of premises that include equity, social justice, confidence in government capability in a democratic society, and reliance on observation and scientific validity to guide practice in the community. When the system works efficiently and compassionately, it generates the solidarity and confidence much needed in a time of confusion and polarization. To achieve the benefits of a vigorous, fully developed public health system, our strategy should not repeat the major errors of the past: Do not abandon sustained support of public health because of short-term achievements; Decouple the subordination of public health leadership to politicians; introduce a tradition of independence from partisan politics by developing an informed citizenry acting as public health advocates; Do not let the system become simply an auxiliary to the military.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I would like to highlight a recently released study entitled: ``Chicago's Undocumented Immigrants: An Analysis of Wages, Working Conditions, and Economic Contributions.'' This report details the importance of the undocumented immigrant labor force to the local economy and the poor working conditions that many endure. I have included a Washington Post article that appeared on February 10, 2001 and the Executive Summary from the study, which underscores some of the study's most significant findings. This study was carried out during the 3rd quarter of 2001 through 38 community based organizations, community colleges, social service providers, and churches. In total, over 1,600 immigrants were surveyed in the Chicago area. The results revealed that the estimated 220,000 undocumented immigrants in the Chicago area contribute close to $5.5 billion to the local economy. Furthermore, undocumented immigrants create more than 31,000 jobs, make up about 5% of the labor force, and 7 out of 10 or 70% pay income taxes through payroll deductions. The overall impact on the economy is dramatic considering immigrants without legal documentation earn anywhere from 22-36% less than those here legally. This study provides a glimpse into the urban picture of the enormous contributions undocumented immigrants provide to our economy and the deplorable conditions under which they are subjected to work. With close to 6 million undocumented immigrants working and living in the United States, the potential impact on the national economy and the potential to improve the lives of this population through a legalization program are immeasurable, but they all point in the right direction. I urge my colleagues to look through this study and see for themselves. [From The Washington Post Feb. 10, 2002] Chicago's Undocumented Immigrants (By Robert E. Pierre) The push for the legalization of undocumented immigrants was put on the back burner after September's terrorist attacks. But a study released last week reopens the question of what they contribute to the U.S. economy. The estimated 220,000 undocumented immigrants in the Chicago area add nearly $ 5.5 billion to the local economy, creating more than 31,000 jobs, according to the study by the Center for Urban Economic Development at the University of Illinois at Chicago. These undocumented workers make up about 5 percent of the labor market, the survey indicated--and seven out of 10 pay income taxes through payroll deductions taken by their employers. Still, the survey of 1,653 legal and illegal immigrants living in Chicago and five surrounding counties also found that those without legal documentation generally are paid less than those who are legally in the United States. That's true regardless of their education, skill level and English proficiency, particularly among immigrants from Latin America. ``You can have two workers with exactly the same characteristics, and one will earn 20 to 25 percent less because they don't have legal status,'' said Chirag Mehta, a UIC research associate. The Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights urged amnesty for such immigrants: ``Such findings confirm the importance of a new legalization program and the positive impact that undocumented immigrant labor has on the United States,'' it said in a statement.

Mr. SCHAKOWSKY

Mr. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing the Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault Housing Assistance Act of 2002. This bill has broad bipartisan support with over 100 cosponsors. It authorizes $50 million for transitional housing assistance for those escaping the terror of violence in their homes and in their lives. At this time when we are devoting extensive resources to ending terror around the world, let us not forget to address the terror of domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking that plagues women's lives. In October 2000, Congress passed the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act and re-authorized the Violence Against Women's Act (VAWA). As part of VAWA, Congress agreed to support $25 million for transitional housing assistance. Though this amount would have served too few, the money was never even appropriated to this program. The rates of violence against women are astounding. According to the Department of Justice, 960,000 women annually report having been abused by their husband or boyfriend. The actual number is significantly higher due to difficulties in reporting. According to estimates by the McAuley Institute, $50 million in funding for transitional housing would provide assistance to at least 5,400 families. Though this is not enough, we must start somewhere. Violence against women is an epidemic that affects not only women, but their children and families as well. Every year, thousands of women flee abusive situations with few financial resources and often nowhere to go. Lack of affordable housing and long waiting lists for assisted housing mean that many women and their children are forced to choose between abuse at home or life on the streets. Furthermore, shelters are frequently filled to capacity and must turn away battered women and their children. The connection between continued abuse and lack of available housing is overwhelming. A Ford Foundation study found that 50% of homeless women and children were fleeing abuse. Furthermore, almost 50 percent of the women who receive Temporary Assistance to Needy Families funds cite domestic violence as a factor in the need for assistance. The problem of high need is compounded by the lack of adequate emergency shelter options. The overall number of emergency shelter beds for homeless people is estimated to have decreased by an average of 3 percent in 1997 while requests for shelter increased on the average by 3 percent. Emergency shelters struggle to meet the increased need for services with about 32 percent of the requests for shelter by homeless families going unmet. In fact 88 percent of cities reported having to turn away homeless families from emergency shelters due to inadequate resources for services. Transitional housing assistance will not only provide immediate safety to women and children but it will also help women gain control over their lives and get back on their feet. There are critical services available at transitional housing shelters such as counseling, job training, and child care that these women need to help them along the road to economic self-sufficiency. It is now essential that we not only pass this legislation but also appropriate $50 million for transitional housing assistance and provide this critically needed safety net for women seeking to escape abuse. We must be supportive of individuals who are escaping violence and seeking to better their lives. I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting this legislation and work for its passage.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, President Bush will be traveling to the People's Republic of China on Saturday, February 16, 2002 to meet with the leaders of that country. He will be discussing issues ranging from the war on terrorism to improving trade relations between our two nations. I view this trip as an important and positive part of the ongoing U.S.-China dialogue. However, I believe it is imperative that we do not ignore the suffering of the working class in China. I recently read an article in the Washington Post about the Shuangfeng Textile Factory located in Dafeng, China. According to the Washington Post, corruption has engulfed the firm, leaving thousands of workers with little pay and little hope. Top executives of the firm have forced workers to buy over priced company stock and to accept pay cuts of up to 50%, which amounts to $25 to $40 a month. Reportedly, resistance to those demands has resulted in some employees losing their jobs. The workers attempted to acquire the attention of local and federal officials by signing petitions and staging strikes. They sat in the factory for days and nights, not even returning home to see their loved ones. During those nights, police stormed into the factory and used force to drag them outside. The police also made dozens of arrests to try and put an end to the employee uprising. In spite of all this, the government apparently took no action to investigate the case. Eventually, the workers were defeated and had to accept the terms of management and return to their jobs with broken spirits. I hope all of my colleagues take the time to read the portion of the Washington Post article that I have submitted for the Record. Instances, such as the one at the Shuangfeng Textile Factory, are cause for great concern. People in China are crying out for justice and they must not be ignored. I urge President Bush to raise this issue with the leadership of China and work with them to help improve the situation. More over, the President should press China to improve its labor, environment, and human rights record in general. It is important for us to take advantage of our dialogue with China to help put an end to the suffering of so many people. [From the Washington Post, Jan. 21, 2002] ``High Tide'' of Labor Unrest in China Striking Workers Risk Arrest to Protest Pay Cuts, Corruption (By Philip P. Pan) Dafeng, China.--On the fourth night of the strike, management cut off the heat. The 2,000 workers occupying the Shuangfeng Textile Factory responded by huddling together and wrapping themselves in thick blankets and surplus military coats. Even as the temperature neared freezing, they refused to leave. Not long ago, banners on the factory walls reminded workers they were ``masters'' of the Communist state. Now, the same workers were camped on a cold floor between rows of rusty spinning machines, nursing their grievances over boiled water and biscuits. Mostly middle-aged women, they spoke quietly of pay cuts and worthless stock shares, of corrupt officials and missing pension funds, of being cheated in China's rough-and-tumble transition from socialism to capitalism. They spoke, too, of the risks they were taking by fighting back. Three times, police had tried to expel them from the factory, dragging women out by the hair, jabbing others with electric batons. Three times, the workers had managed to hold on. Now, there were rumors a military police unit had been summoned to this small city 150 miles north of Shanghai. ``We know this is dangerous,'' said one young woman sitting in a corner of the vast factory floor near large spools of white cotton yarn. ``But it's too late to be scared now.'' Then, glancing out a window, she added nervously: ``The police should be here soon.'' The battle in Dafeng, which began Dec. 16 and ended less than two weeks later in defeat for the workers, is part of a larger story playing out across China's fast-changing industrial landscape. Two decades after the ruling Communist Party adopted capitalist economic reforms while continuing to restrict political freedom, growing numbers of Chinese workers are risking arrest to stage strikes, sit-downs and other demonstrations. In many ways, these protests are acts of desperation by people struggling to survive without the help of effective labor unions, courts or other institutions that provide checks and balances in a market economy. As thousands of state factories are closed or sold, workers who once were promised lifetime job security and benefits now face mass layoffs and, sometimes, the loss of their savings to corrupt managers. Their willingness to fight back presents a thorny political problem for a party that has always staked its legitimacy on providing a better life for the working class. It is difficult to estimate how often these protests occur, in part because local officials often try to conceal them from their superiors. But one recent government report acknowledges the country is in the midst of a ``high tide'' of labor unrest, with the number of workers participating in strikes more than doubling in the first half of the 1990s alone. Another report in an internal party publication said there were 30,000 protests of significant size in 2000, or more than 80 incidents per day. The authorities often respond to these protests by trying to appease the workers; at other times they react with force, sending in police and jailing the most outspoken demonstrators. ``We have no idea what's going to happen next,'' the young woman in the factory here said that night as the strike wore on. Like many interviewed for this report, she asked not to be identified out of fear she would be arrested. ``The government doesn't want to back down, and neither do we.'' A Secret Bankruptcy The Shuangfeng Textile Factory lies on the outskirts of Dafeng, a quick drive from the city's glittering downtown into a dreary neighborhood of run-down buildings and dirt alleyways. Off the main roadway, past a row of ramshackle shops, a large crowd of workers gathers in front of the factory's creaky metal gate. There is no picket line, just a group of men and women in heavy coats milling about restlessly in the middle of the road, stamping their feet to keep warm under a pale yellow street lamp. Their faces are lined from years of squinting while operating spinning machines and, more recently, from lack of sleep. Some of the workers are smoking; others have been drinking. Every time a car drives by, the crowd gets jittery. Past the gate is the factory itself, a deteriorating complex built in 1931, before the Communist revolution. It is the city's oldest and largest textile mill, one of several in this cotton-growing region that produces yarn and cloth for the nation's garment factories. In the mid-1990s, Beijing began pushing local officials to either get rid of small, money-losing state firms like the mill or make them profitable. What followed was a disorderly process in which the government often sold stock in factories to the workers, but retained control as the majority shareholder. China's Communist rulers had not yet embraced full privatization. ``Some people invested willingly. Others didn't think it was a good idea. But in the end, we all handed over the money,'' said one worker in the spinning division. ``If we didn't give them the money, we would lose our jobs.'' Last November, the company suddenly and secretly filed for bankruptcy. The factory boss and several other managers emerged as the firm's new owners. The workers discovered what had happened only weeks later, when a local newspaper published a short item about the transaction. They immediately suspected they had been victim of a ``fake bankruptcy,'' a common phenomenon in China in which corrupt managers hide a factory's assets, declare bankruptcy and then purchase the firm themselves at a reduced price, often with money they have embezzled. The man who gained the most in the bankruptcy was Shi Yongsheng, the mill's manager and now its largest shareholder, according to workers and local officials. Shi was appointed to run the mill only three years ago after a career managing several smaller state factories in Dafeng, including a tannery and a fur plant. Residents describe him as a close friend of one of the city's deputy party secretaries. Workers said he bragged to other managers about his plan to slash salaries. Shi did not return telephone calls, and a government spokesman said Shi was too busy to speak to reporters. But a company document obtained by workers showed that the factory owed them $14 million, including $2 million for the shares they had purchased and $3 million they had paid toward their pensions. In addition, the document said, the government had provided the factory with nearly $8 million to help it cover its debts to workers and provide those laid off with welfare payments. A government official in Dafeng confirmed the figures were accurate. Where all that money went, though, remains a mystery. ``What happened to our money? How did we go bankrupt?'' asked one longtime employee, who asked that he be identified only by his surname, Zhang. ``We had a lot of questions. No one gave us any answers.'' Strike Without Slogans Instead of an explanation, the workers got a pay cut. On Dec 13, managers began calling in employees and demanding they sign new contracts slashing their salaries by half, to between $25 and $40 a month. The workers revolted. In a meeting, an employee tore up the contract in front of her supervisors, workers said. In another, a worker denounced factory managers, saying, ``Officials live off the labor of the workers!'' With resistance rising, the company tried to make an example of two outspoken employees in the spinning division, young mothers named Chen Feng and Liu Landing. On the morning of Dec. 16, the factory hung a large poster on the front gate declaring that ``the two comrades have separated from their posts and from the factory.'' ``I had worked in the mill for seven or eight years, and I have an 11-year-old child to support,'' said Chen, 29, by telephone several weeks later. ``So, of course, I was depressed.'' Chen declined to discuss why she was fired, but she confirmed what happened next: ``The workers went on strike, and they asked the company to let me go back to work.'' A strike is a sensitive undertaking in China. The Communist Party has always portrayed itself as a workers' party, and it still teaches schoolchildren how Mao Zedong launched his career by organizing strikes among miners and railway workers. But the government has also absorbed the lesson of how strikes helped bring down Communist regimes in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my deep disappointment in the bill before us today. Today, we had the opportunity to follow the lead of the Senate by passing a 13-week extension for Americans who have been unable to find work but whose unemployment benefits have run out. I have received many, many letters from constituents who are concerned about losing their homes, paying for their health bills, and buying food for their children. Today, we had the opportunity to help them by passing the Senate provision and sending it to the President's desk. Instead, the Republican leadership chose to play politics with the lives of unemployed persons and their families, once again putting forth a bill that they know cannot be enacted into law. In the last quarter of 2001, nearly 860,000 unemployed men and women exhausted their unemployment benefits. In December alone unemployment benefits ran out for 300,000 workers. In my State of Illinois, 42,299 workers exhausted their benefits in the last 3 months of last year--an increase of 88 percent from the previous year. Faced with serious fiscal pressures, no state has stepped forward to extend assistance as they have in the past. Hundreds of thousands of Americans are now struggling to pay their bills as they look for work in the middle of a recession. I believe that we need a real economic stimulus plan and that we can do a great deal more than we're doing to create jobs and prevent additional layoffs. We should be providing assistance to States, funding the construction and repair of housing and schools, expanding transportation options, and investing in clean water projects. We should be assisting laid-off workers and their families and obtaining affordable health coverage through COBRA and Medicaid. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle don't agree with those job stimulus proposals. They would rather give money to the wealthy and mega-corporations than invest in targeted and proven job creation initiatives. They would rather provide unemployed men and women with an insufficient tax voucher than guarantee health coverage through Medicaid. We disagree on those questions and it will take time to resolve them. In the meantime, we should take a simple action today. We should pass a 13-week benefits extension that will provide immediate relief to over 1 million workers. We could take that step. Sadly for this institution and tragically for those workers, the House leadership has decided it would rather make a political point than make a difference in people's lives.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) for yielding me the time. I rise in strong opposition to this measure. This resolution is nothing more than an effort to divert attention from the Enron-like scandal in the Republican economic plan. The Republicans are robbing Social Security and Medicare in order to guarantee additional future tax breaks to the richest Americans. In order to mask this irresponsible, risky and cynical behavior, they fall back on their old discredited mantra, that putting future tax cuts for the rich on hold equals a tax increase. They will say it over and over, but it will never be true. Everyone in this House is for middle- and lower-income tax cuts, which, by the way, benefit the wealthy as well as the economy, but now that this administration has presided over the disappearance of a $5 trillion surplus, they want to go after Social Security. Ask the American people the real question. Should we sacrifice Social Security and Medicare in order to give tax cuts to make the rich even richer? Actually the Los Angeles Times did ask the question, and 80 percent said stop the tax cut. We should vote no on this shameless resolution.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 577, a bill to Require Disclosure of the funding sources for Presidential Libraries. I want to congratulate and thank the author of this measure, the Chairman of the Government Reform Committee, the Chairman of the Government Efficiency Subcommittee, and our ranking member, the gentleman from California for his efforts to improve this legislation. The improvements that were made to this bill prior to floor consideration are due in large part to his efforts and he should be commended. While I rise in support of this measure today, I do not believe this bill goes far enough. I am disappointed that one of the amendments I offered in the Government Reform Committee and which was included in the Committee-passed bill, is not a part of the measure we are debating today. The provision would have made congressional foundations disclose funding sources as well. I offered that provision because I believe that members of Congress should be at least as accountable to the public as we expect the President to be. Congressional foundations and the members that run them should make public the sources of major funding they receive to prevent any accusations of undue influence on the legislative process. H.R. 577 requires the disclosure of the sources and amounts of donations made to foundations raising money to build and maintain presidential libraries. I am pleased that the measure we are debating includes an amendment of mine that passed in Committee to reduce the disclosure requirement for donations to $200 or more. That is the same level of the requirement that currently exists for congressional campaigns and it is a valuable component of the legislation we are debating today. The bill provides that once the National Archives and Records Administration assumes the responsibility for the presidential library in question, the threshold for such disclosure would be raised to $5,000. Again, Mr. Speaker, I support the goals of H.R. 577 but believe the Congress needs to go further. I hope that this year, my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will support stand-alone legislation I plan to introduce that will impose funding disclosure requirements on congressional foundations. I urge all members to vote in support of H.R. 577 and look forward to working with my colleagues on related issues in the time to come.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I feel privileged and honored to join my colleagues on the House floor to mark an historic day for this body, for Democrats, for women and for America. Tomorrow, the distinguished gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi) will be sworn in as the Democratic whip. This occasion is cause for celebration and is a sign of great progress. The gentlewoman from California's election to whip is an historic landmark in the evolution of our great democracy. She will now emerge more fully as a leading voice on the national stage for the Democratic Party and for the Congress, and she will motivate women of all ages, because of her eloquence, her competence, her confidence and her passion, to strive for new heights and to participate more fully and completely in politics and policy. We are witnessing a shift in the national political landscape. It is a movement. Women do not want to just be at the table, we want to be at the head of the table. Because of the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), we are energized and empowered. Our new Democratic whip was not elected because she was a woman. That she is one is a real benefit, and she will send a strong message as an inspiration for aspiring women throughout the country. Her election is a demonstration of the reality that the Democratic Party is a party of diversity, inclusion and opportunity. She has made great efforts to reach out to members from all parts of the Democratic Party and is committed to the needs and values of this caucus and our diverse constituencies. But to me she is not just the whip; she is an inspiration, a mentor, a dear friend and a true leader in every sense of the word. I look forward to following her to advance an agenda we can all be proud of. I join my colleagues in congratulating her and wishing her well.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3054, a bill to award the Congressional Gold Medal to the heroes of September 11. I hope that this small token of appreciation will symbolize America's appreciation for the endless bravery that was shown on that day. There are some, for whom there is no sacrifice too great when the call to duty sounds. There are some, in a world wrapped in a shroud of self-promotion, who see beyond the ``me'', the ``my'', the ``mine'' and the ``I''. There are some that so regard their brothers and sisters that they disregard their own safety, their own well being, and even their own lives, to lend a hand. there are some, which in a split second make a decision to forget themselves and do what it takes to save others; they are heroes. For heroes, there is no room to think or to rationalize. It is never practical to endanger ones existence in the hope of promoting the survival of others, but they do. It goes beyond what is logical. The hero possesses an innate and instinctive ability to respond to extreme situations with others in mind. By nature, the hero defies the basic human impulse for self-preservation. The hero is selfless. On September 11, many Americans heeded the call to action. On a beautiful morning, ordinary people awakened to start the day, to go about their normal routines with smiles, frowns, traffic, and cups of coffee. The Pentagon was still an impenetrable fortress and the skyline of New York was still intact; the morning proceeded as usual. In the moments to follow, shocked and horrified, firefighters, police officers, servicemen and women, and everyday people sprang into situations that were simply incomprehensible; they fought to save lives. They saved lives and returned to save more, and in an instant, the courageous fire that burned in their hearts was extinguished. Above the mayhem, Flight 93 swam the skies to reach the West Coast. Aboard this flight the passengers eagerly awaited landing, waiting to meet their loved ones miles away. Nonetheless, with angry shouts the silence was broken and the passengers realized that terror's arm had reached yet another flight. The terrorists made their move and fought to carry out this horrible act. They were headed to Washington, DC to destroy the very symbols that shine as beacons for freedom throughout the world. The terrorists were trained and prepared to destroy lives and break the spirit of America. However, they were never trained to defeat the spirit of heroism. The passengers of Flight 93, after talking to their courageous and heroic family members and learning of the attacks, decided that there would be no more death and destruction. They decided that America had suffered enough for one morning. They decided that they would trade their lives to save hundreds, maybe thousands more, quite possibly my own. For them, heroism was not the goal. They did not seek a grand prize or recognition. They sought only to prevent the destruction that was sure to come absent their intervention. For heroes, there is no reward other than the satisfaction of knowing that their sacrifice may allow the life of others to continue. Since September 11, America has received so many lessons in heroism. We have been schooled in selflessness and courage. We have learned what it means to sacrifice. We can only honor and thank them for these lessons and for the lives that they saved, and the lives they gave. The Congressional Gold Meal is the nation's highest civilian award. The medal recognizes outstanding achievements and unusual acts of valor and courage. Be it over a lifetime or in one instance, it recognizes that its recipients have--in their own way--changed the world for the better. The heroes of 9-11 have shown a courage that is rare to modern times. They fought the hatred and the malice of that terrible day with love, compassion, courage and selflessness. And they changed the world. It is difficult to find good in such a tragic event. However, we can look to the many men and women who worked tirelessly and who died courageously to save life, and know that even in the face of death and terror, the good in humanity prevails. The Congressional Gold Medal is but a small token, but I hope it will symbolize the immeasurable thanks that we pay to these heroes. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall vote No. 495 on December 12, 2001 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ''yea``.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall vote No. 494 on December 12, 2001 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, some of my colleagues have had the privilege of getting to know Dr. Quentin Young, a revered Chicago institution known for his unremitting commitment to health care, economic and social justice. Some of us know him because of his dedication to universal health care, under the banner he coined of ``Everybody in, nobody out.'' Some of us know him because of his leadership in protecting public health. Some of us know him because of his dedication to ending discrimination and bigotry. I also known him because he is a trusted friend and my personal physician. Dr. Young brought his years of activism, dedication, and enthusiasm to the House last spring, when he testified at the inaugural meeting of the House Universal Health Care Task Force. I share his lifelong goal of universal health care for all and agree that he is the ``conscience of the country'' on this issue. Dr. Young's remarkable spirit and career are described in a December 9, 2001 article in the Chicago Tribune. It is entitled ``The Patient Doctor,'' and chronicles the story of a remarkable individual who fights every day to improve people's lives and our nation, and I urge my colleagues to read the entire article, but I want to provide a brief sampling of Dr. Young's extraordinary. Young was barely launched on his medical center in the early 1950s when he became a leading advocate--and one of the few whites--in the fight to end the discriminatory attitudes and practices at Chicago-area hospitals that led to minority physicians' being denied practice privileges at all but Cook County Hospital. In 1964, he co-founded the Medical Committee for Human Rights, a group of progressive physicians who provided medical care at civil rights marches and sit-ins and riots. That role earned Young a prestigious position in the civil rights movement: He was Martin Luther King Jr.'s doctor when King lived in Chicago in 1966. His committee affiliation also got Young subpoenaed to appear before the House Un-American Activities Committee in October 1968 to answer questions about his and the medical committee's role during the riots at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago that year-- an experience friends say was a high point of Young's career because he believed he got the best of verbal sparring with committee members. Young and the late Dr. Jorge Prieto, former head of the Chicago Board of Health, were the primary forces behind the movement to establish neighborhood medical clinics in the late '60s. Their work led to the current network of 32 medical clinics throughout Cook County that will support the new $500 million Cook County Hospital. Even now, nearing his 80th year, Young cannot keep still. ``I am impulsively an advocate,'' he says. In addition to running an internal medicine practice in his native Hyde Park--as he has done since 1952--the indefatigable doctor is medical commentator for National Public Radio on WBEZ-FM and helps direct two organizations he founded to advocate for national health care (often referred to by critics as socialized medicine): Physicians for a National Health Program and the Health and Medicine Policy Research Group. Last summer, he and other health-care activists marched for 15 days across 137 miles of northern Illinois to drum up political support for the Bernardin Amendment to the state constitution. Named for the late Cardinal Joseph Bernardin, who supported universal health care, the proposed amendment would guarantee health insurance for every Illinois resident. Despite the long odds against any national health-care reform in a closely divided Congress, Young is optimistic about national health insurance being enacted, even after the war on terrorism put many domestic issues on the back burner. ``I think very emphatically that the complications of Sept. 11 create a much more urgent need for national health insurance,'' he says. ``Our current system is imploding. Even with our straitened circumstances economically, because of the incredible administrative waste in the present system, there's still enough money there to take care of everybody.'' Of course, being at the forefront of divisive social and political issues can be risky, as Young learned in 1954 when as a young doctor he took a stand on an issue that cost him his job. On Jan. 17, 1954, 15-month-old Laura Lingo was severely scalded when a vaporizer full of melted menthol oil overturned on top of her in her South Side home. The toddler's mother, Irene, rushed her to nearby Woodlawn Hospital, which no longer exists. Irene Lingo had little money and no hospital insurance. After initial emergency treatment, officials at Woodlawn decided not to admit the baby because of the mother's inability to pay and sent them to Cook County Hospital. The baby died there the next day. A coroner's inquest found Woodlawn Hospital negligent in the baby's death. Young, an attending physician at Woodlawn, was among several Chicago doctors who signed a letter published in one of the daily papers condemning the practice of hospitals' sending poor patients to Cook County. Not long after the letter was printed, Woodlawn revoked Young's privileges, putting the young physician and father out of work. Neither that nor any other setback has slowed Young down. He has been doing his advocacy work, seeing patients in his Hyde Park office and getting his various messages out through press conferences, newspaper op-ed pieces and, until recently, his weekly radio show ``Public Affairs'' on WBEZ. The war on terrorism has given him new spins on his causes, such as the recent anthrax-by-mail cases, which he says underscored the need to correct serious shortcomings in the public-health system. ``We can end huge threats to human existence,'' says Young, a former president of the American Public Health Association, noting that public-health campaigns were able to defeat smallpox, polio and flu. ``And we can help with our current problem if we make our public health infrastructure really muscular, by training more epidemiologists and computerizing our 3,000 county, city and state public health organizations.'' Right or not, he will always be doing something, friends say. Dr. Ida Hellander, executive director of Physicians for a National Health Program who has worked with Young for 10 years, took a sabbatical last summer to rest and study photography in Montana. Just before leaving, she turned to her boss and mentor and asked him, partly out of frustration: ``Quentin, don't you ever think about what it'd be like to live like regular people--not be so aware of all the social injustice, all the suffering, all the great struggles?'' Young didn't miss a beat: ``Yes, Ida,'' he responded. ``I call it death.''

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to condemn terrorism in all forms. We continue to be shocked and saddened by the September 11 attacks, and the gruesome attacks that have been taking place in Israel this month. Wednesday night, at least 10 Israelis were killed and more than 30 were injured during a roadside bombing and shooting attack against a bus. It was among the bloodiest incidents in nearly 15 months of violence in the Middle East. If there is going to be hope for peace in the region, these acts of hate and terror must stop. Israel cannot be expected to negotiate with those that allow for such atrocities to occur. I was also angered and saddened yesterday to learn that two leaders of the Jewish Defense League were assembling bombs to use in planned attacks against one of L.A.'s largest mosques and the local offices of a House member (Mr. Issa). The two men, Irving David Rubin and Earl Leslie Krugel, have been charged with conspiracy to manufacture and detonate bombs targeting Arab and Muslim buildings in the Los Angeles area, as well as the San Clemente offices the gentleman from California (Mr. Issa). As a Jewish Member of Congress, I was particularly outraged by the news of those vicious plans. I want all of my colleagues and the entire American public to know that those individuals are seen by Jews as any other terrorist would be seen. They have no right to attempt to carry out murder in the name of religion and they do not represent the values or the beliefs of the Jewish community. Now, more than any time, it is important for this nation to embrace its diversity and for all of us to denounce discrimination, terror, and hate in any form.