Jan Schakowsky

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, today is Equal Pay Day, a day that symbolizes the financial struggles that women must endure because of the ever-present wage gap. In the workforce, women are at a clear disadvantage. They are paid less than their male counterparts for doing the same job. Women are paid on average 74 cents for every dollar men received of $148 less each week. Women of color are faced with an even worse prospect. African American women earn 64 cents for every dollar men earn or $210 less each week. Hispanic women fare the worst. They earn only 54 cents for every dollar men earn. This pay inequity is hurting families in every part of our country. A working woman's family loses on average $4,000 each year due to this inequity. And in Illinois, the numbers are even worse. Women in my home state lose on average $4,913 a year. The inequity compounds over the years. A 25-year-old working woman will lose $523,000 during her lifetime as a result of this wage gap. And when she retires, she'll collect a smaller pension and less Social Security. There is no denying that a pay gap exists today. When comparing the wages of women and men who have the same job, qualifications, education and background, men win. As we begin the 21st Century, we must eliminate inequities in the workplace. We must do this for the sake of our next generation of women leaders. When my granddaughters Isabel and Eve are ready to enter the workforce, I want to make sure that they earn the same as their male counterparts. It is only fair.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chairman, I gratefully rise today on behalf of my constituents in the 9th Congressional District of Illinois in strong support of H.R. 701. Anyone who has spent even one day in Chicago when the weather is decent, and it is often, cannot help but notice how much we enjoy every square inch of parkland, beaches, and green space. CARA will enable the Chicago Park District to do even more to improve the quality of life in Chicago. For example, the Chicago Park District possesses over 200 field houses. Many of these buildings are large structures of great historic significance. CARA funds would help preserve many of these structures and make them more accessible. Chicago's park system also provides employment opportunities, youth recreation-as-prevention initiatives and after-school programs for the city's children. Under CARA, Illinois will receive over $55 million in total funding annually, which, when matched and leveraged, equates to increased funding many times over. Mr. Chairman, the time is now to advance this bill and reinvest in our quality of life for generations to come. I commend the sponsors of this legislation and urge my colleagues to support it.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for introducing this wonderful piece of legislation. I am sure, Mr. Speaker, there are many Americans who think that the buying and selling of people ended in the 19th century when slavery was abolished, and most people here are sure at least that if it happens, it certainly does not happen here. Wrong. It is estimated that over 50,000 women and children are brought to the United States under false pretenses and forced to work as prostitutes, abused laborers or servants. And worldwide, it is even worse. Each year 1 to 2 million women and children are trafficked around the world. This is by far one of the worst human rights violations of our time. Women and children are easy targets for exploitation and are often the most marginalized members of society, the last to be educated, and the last to have economic independence. Mr. Speaker, when I had the privilege of traveling with the President to South Asia, I saw a young girl named Nurjahan in Bangladesh. She was about 15 years old. All she knows for sure is that she thinks she is about 15 years old, but she knows for sure that at 8, she was bought by a brothel in Pakistan probably for between $200 and $1,500. She finally escaped from a life as a sex slave. I met her and eight other girls at the headquarters of an organization called Action Against Trafficking and Sexual Exploitation of Children in Dhaka, Bangladesh. They all looked like the children they were, except for the acid scars borne by a few of them. The invisible scars one can hardly bear to imagine. Many of these girls could not go home because even if their families would accept them, their communities would not. Adding to their unspeakable tragedy, some are infected with HIV and all require counseling, a relatively new practice in South Asia. I am committed to advancing the economic, legal and political status of women and children here in the United States and worldwide, and urge my colleagues to support H.R. 3244, the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 1999. Nurjahan and so many others are waiting for us to take seriously the horrendous practices involved in the trafficking of human beings.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, last September, I toured Daniel Boone School in Chicago to see firsthand its overcrowded conditions. Boone School has an enrollment of 1,100 students, 300 more than the school can reasonably accommodate. Classes were being held in hallways, and students were learning in makeshift classrooms like the teachers' lounge and cafeteria. Three different classes were being taught in the same room at the same time. Last week, I returned to Boone School; and I am sad to report that nothing has changed. Classes are still being held in hallways and teachers' lounges. But what moved me most was the seventh grade girl who stood up and looked me in the eye and said, ``You came last September, how come nothing is changed; and when will we see improvements in our school.'' That is a legitimate and tough question. Boone School, however, is not alone. Eighty-nine percent of Illinois schools are in need of repair, rebuilding, or upgrade. How can we expect to deliver the best quality education to our students when they are learning about gravity from falling ceiling tiles. It is just unacceptable to send our children to 19th century schools when we go into the 21st century. Yesterday, a study released by the NEA shows that it costs $322 billion to repair and modernize American schools. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 4094, America's Better Classroom Act of 2000.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, today I declare solidarity with Jews across this nation and around the world to mourn and to pay tribute to those who perished at the hands of the Nazis during the Holocaust. On Tuesday, in Israel and around the world, ceremonies were conducted, as they are annually. Today in the nation's capitol, we hold our traditional Days of Remembrance ceremony. This year, I am keenly aware of the need to not only remember and honor the lives that were lost, but to continue to educate others about the Holocaust and the dangers of hate. For the Jewish community, Yom Ha-shoah holds a symbolic value. Through prayer and education the community remembers those who were lost, and who continue to be lost because, unfortunately, hate acts continue to occur. The last year has been a trying one for the Jewish community and people of color in my district. Over the Fourth of July holiday last summer, Ricky Birdsong, an African American man beloved by his family and community, was shot by a white supremacist criminal on a cowardly shooting rampage. Jewish constituents of mine were shot on their way to synagogue, targeted because of their religious beliefs. Not only did these tragic occurrences scar my community emotionally, they served as a bitter reminder that hate is a dangerous reality that still persists. Around the world this year, we have been reminded of the need to continue the battle against hate. In Iran, 13 Jews stand trial today on arbitrary and falacious charges of espionage. In China, thousands of Falun Gong are persecuted because of their spiritual beliefs. In Austria, a political leader who praised Hitler was elected to the dismay of the international community. In Africa, violence and ethnic conflict are raging. Nazi war criminals remain at large throughout the world. In Russia and elsewhere, anti-Semitic rhetoric is echoed by elected officials. People of color in this country are often unfairly targeted by law enforcement officials. Immigration policies of our country continue to neglect the human rights and needs of those with the misfortune of being born in oppressive or poor nations. The media in several nations is pervaded by anti-Semitic sentiments. Those unfortunate facts and many others, remind us of the need to adhere to our vow that never again will we tolerate the kind of abuse we witnessed. I am proud that this nation has made a practice of refusing to look the other way when hate rears its ugly face. 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. Men, women, children, babies, and families were ravaged by the hateful acts of the Nazi regime. There is no way for me to put into words the unspeakable horrors experienced. We can only listen to the recollections of those few remaining survivors of the Holocaust. 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. Millions of insurance policies were liquidated by the Nazis 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. I hope that before this time next year we will at least be able to say that we have made real progress on this front. That will require 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 that survivors deserve. The theme of hope is strong among Jews this year. Negotiations continue in efforts toward peace between Israel and her neighbors. This year, we may see some real results and a chance for life without fear for our allies in the Middle East. I was reminded of the power of hope and the importance of celebrating life along with honoring the dead this week. Thousands participated in the ``march of the living'' at Auschwitz, where over a million Jews met their fate. I am proud to carry on the traditions of Judaism in my every day life and I am proud of the Jewish community and all of its success, despite all of the suffering. 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 their fate will not be suffered by others.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski) for the opportunity today to speak on this very important subject and raise my concerns about the Federal Railroad Administration's proposed rule on the use of locomotive horns. All of us, the Federal Railroad Administration and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski) and I, are very concerned about safety at railroad crossings. No one wants to see any more accidents involving trains and school buses full of children. However, the rule as written will cause undue harm in Northeastern Illinois and may even undermine safety. I had the opportunity to raise these concerns when the Federal Railroad Administration came to the Chicago land area to conduct four hearings, and I would like to reiterate some of the concerns that I raised and to point out that I think that there are other far less disruptive means to improve safety here. We have a long history of dealing with rail crossing safety issues. Over the past 12 years, injuries and fatalities in Northeast Illinois have declined by over 60 percent. At the same time, the train traffic has increased by nearly 50 percent. As a result of cooperation between advocates and transportation officials, safety at rail crossings has dramatically increased. While more must be done, we are clearly headed in the right direction. The FRA's proposed rule would require mandatory whistleblowing at all grade-crossings unless significant upgrades are made. I believe there are several reasons why the FRA's proposed rule is not the appropriate approach for Northeast Illinois. First, there is the question of safety. Because of technological and cost impediments to the specific upgrades, the FRA's proposed rule would require mandatory whistleblowing in many areas. While it is clear that this would have a profound negative impact on quality of life in our area, there also remains serious questions as to whether whistleblowing actually reduces collisions. Many experts have pointed to what is called the ``Chicago anomaly'' where the data shows that there are actually fewer collisions at gated crossings where whistles are banned than where whistles are blown. The Chicago anomaly strongly suggests that at least there are alternatives that can better increase safety. Mandatory whistleblowing may actually undermine our efforts. Illinois is focusing its efforts and resources on addressing the most dangerous rail crossings based on safety records. The FRA approach would require expensive and time-consuming technological enhancement at all at-grade rail crossings even if safety records demonstrate no problems at those crossings. This would divert resources from making safety improvements at extremely dangerous crossings. I think we ought to take a very hard look at such a dramatic switch in strategies, particularly since the rules for upgrades may be unaffordable and unworkable. While all are committed to rail safety, there are wide discrepancies in the cost estimates of complying with the proposed rule. These concerns are legitimate. The FRA estimates that the cost of implementing this program nationwide would be $116 million. But the Chicago Area Transportation Study estimates that the true cost will be more than that in Illinois alone, a total in our State of $170 million to $234 million. We need to increase spending on rail safety. I want to commend my colleague the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski) for his leadership on rail safety and his commitment to finding additional Federal resources to achieve that goal. I am proud to be a cosponsor of his legislation, H.R. 2060, the Railway Safety and Funding Equity Act of 1999, which would double Federal spending for State grade crossing programs. We will work hard to get the necessary funding, but we need to make sure that the resources are there. Even if we succeed in providing the needed resources, there are serious technological barriers to compliance with the FRA proposal. The first is time. The proposed rule gives communities now operating with whistle bans 2 to 3 years to adopt supplemental or alternative safety measures in order to avoid mandatory whistleblowing. We have nearly 1,000 at-grade rail crossings in Illinois that have whistle bans and would have to be physically ungraded within that very short time period in order to avoid lifting the bans. The Chicago Area Transportation Study, again, estimates that it would actually take about 10 years to accomplish this massive job. Unfortunately, the proposed rule does not provide adequate time to begin with, let alone allow flexibility for logistical delays. There is also a real suspicion that the required upgrades required in the proposed rule are impossible. For example, barriers along the side of roads that lead up to gated rail crossings would prevent cars from driving around the gates to cross the tracks, but they would also prevent snow blowing, a significant problem in an area like Chicago. Another example is the requirement of photo enforcement, which just happens to be illegal under Illinois State law. Quad gating is also illegal in the State because of the concern that otherwise law-abiding motorists may get trapped on the tracks by closing gates if we close all access to and from the tracks with quad gates. Last, but by no means least, I want to discuss what happens if we do not adopt alternatives to mandatory whistleblowing because of safety, technological, or cost issues. As I mentioned, 2.5 million people live within one quarter mile of rail crossings in Chicago, 75,000 in my own district. Children attend school near rail crossings. They would be subjected to repeated train whistleblowing at levels between 84 and 144 decibels at all hours of the day and night. Eighty-four decibels is well above the Illinois Department of Transportation's trigger for noise abatement procedures, and 144 decibels is above the pain threshold. Their lives would literally be disrupted. Given the ``Chicago anomaly'' and given the strong argument that Illinois can pursue alternative means to accomplish the same or even higher safety goals and given the fact that millions of people would be harmed, I believe that we have to find alternatives to the current rule as it is proposed. I think we need to revisit the rule, think of better solutions. And my sense from the Federal Railroad Administration is that there was some willingness to consider these alternatives. Such action, in conjunction with the passage of H.R. 2060, is what is needed to truly provide for improved safety and quality of life in my district throughout the State and throughout the Nation. Again, I thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski) for his help on this important initiative.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I would like to join my colleagues in thanking the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) for being such an outstanding leader and outspoken person on the issue of the global AIDS crisis. It is a little bit hard to follow my colleague from Illinois and his eloquence and his beautiful voice, but I appreciate the opportunity to weigh in on this important issue. I want to also express my continuing support for H.R. 3519, the World Bank AIDS Marshall Plan Trust Fund Act, which is sponsored by the gentlewoman from California and also the chairman of the Committee on Banking and Financial Services from Iowa, and I am very proud to be a cosponsor of that bill. If enacted, H.R. 3519 would create a worldwide trust fund that is administered by the World Bank and funded by governments, the private sector, and international organizations. Nations would be able to receive grants from the trust fund to address the HIV/AIDS crisis. The bill would direct the United States to contribute $200 million a year, and I hope it stays at no less than $200 million, to the fund for 5 years, the hope being that U.S. contributions would help leverage contributions from others in the private sector and the international community. Although the passage of this bill would be a significant victory in the battle against HIV/AIDS, it is a small drop in a very big bucket. It is estimated that about $10 billion would be needed to fight AIDS in Africa over the next 5 years, just to fight AIDS in Africa. We must do much more if we want to seriously address the HIV/AIDS epidemic that is killing millions of people worldwide, and the United States has to lead the way. It is in our own best interests to do so, because HIV/AIDS knows no borders and it threatens the stability of the world, even more than conventional warfare. I have been extremely concerned in the past by the actions of our government on this issue. While a number of important initiatives have been created and championed by the administration, and I do not want to diminish those, I yet was dismayed when I realized efforts by other nations were being blocked because of objections raised by the pharmaceutical industry and in turn by our government. These were efforts that would lower the cost of AIDS drugs by manufacturing generics or importing them at a lower cost. We saw our own government step in on the side of the pharmaceutical companies to prevent that. I have been encouraged by recent comments by the administration that appear to reflect a policy change on this issue. I hope that I will not hear any more reports of our administration weighing in to prevent others from addressing their own national emergencies. I would hope that the United States would take advantage of every opportunity to help other nations address this crisis, including relinquishing to the World Trade Organization patents on AIDS drugs that are owned by the United States and were developed using our own taxpayer funds. I commend the administration and National Security Council for the step taken this week in designating HIV/AIDS as a threat to our national security. Indeed, HIV/AIDS stands to threaten this Nation and others. I must say that I am truly surprised that there are individuals in our Congress who would disagree and contend that the AIDS pandemic is not a national security threat. I can only assume such individuals have not been paying attention or just do not want to face the facts. We have been hearing a number of those facts. Let me add to those a few additional ones, and I think some bear reiterating. AIDS is claiming more lives than all armed conflicts in the last century combined. Twelve million men, women, and children in Africa have already died of AIDS. Today in Africa, 5,500 people are buried daily because of AIDS, and that number is expected to more than double. AIDS is the leading cause of death in Africa, but also, and this is very important, among young adult African-American men in the United States as well. It is our problem. Every day 11,000 people in Africa become infected, one every 8 seconds. According to the Director of the Office of National AIDS Policy, it is estimated that by 2005 there will be more than 100 million, 100 million, HIV/AIDS cases worldwide. Today in sub-Saharan Africa, one-fifth to one-third of all children have already been orphaned by AIDS. We talked about the 40 million that within the next decade may become orphans. HIV/AIDS runs high among the world's militaries. The rapid loss of senior officers can mean destabilization for those nations where the military plays a central role. It should be noted that the most effective means of halting the spread of AIDS in the developed or developing world is the use of effective prevention measures, including needle exchange programs and condom distribution, the kinds of efforts that, unfortunately, have been repeatedly opposed by the majority in this body. I had the privilege of going with the President and other Members of Congress to India and met in New Delhi in a very poor neighborhood Naseem the barber, who was one of 10 barbers trained in New Delhi to not only deliver a shave and a haircut and the neighborhood gossip, but also information about AIDS prevention and a condom. This is a program that is funded in part by USAID, by American taxpayer dollars, and a good and important expenditure of funds. Since the beginning of the epidemic, 410,800 people in the United States have died from AIDS. Today it is estimated that as many as 700,000 people in the United States have AIDS. We cannot be lulled or allow our children to become lulled into believing that the new drug cocktails, the protease inhibitors, have conquered the disease. Our policies cannot be driven by those who would say that the threat to our national security that AIDS poses does not exist or by those who would claim that it is simply a homosexual disease. It is not, it is a heterosexual disease as well. That is very important. I was proud to join the Vice President and our Ambassador to the United Nations at a meeting of the United Nations Security Council in January. During that session the Security Council addressed the issue of HIV/AIDS in Africa. This marked the first time that the Security Council looked at a health issue in the context of a threat to global security. The Vice President made the point that it is time for us to move beyond our classical definition of security. We have all talked about the staggering statistics, but I want to just end by saying while I was honored to have the opportunity to attend that historic meeting, I left feeling even more unsettled than I expected. The fact that a United Nations panel considered the issue of AIDS in the form of a security meeting and our National Security Council has followed suit should be taken as both a move in the right direction for the international community as well as a serious wake-up call. We, the international community, are losing the fight currently against AIDS. This beast knows no borders, it does not discriminate by class, race, gender, or nationality. AIDS is not just a detriment to the health of humanity; it is a global security threat and should be addressed as such. Again, I want to commend my colleague for her tireless effort on this issue and look forward to the passage of H.R. 3519 when it is considered by the entire House.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall vote No. 56 on H. Con. Res. 288 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye''. During rollcall vote No. 57 on H. Res. 182 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye''. During rollcall vote No. 58 on Journal I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye''. During rollcall vote No. 59 on Ordering Previous Question H. Res. 444 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay''. During rollcall vote No. 60 on Agreeing to Res. H. Res. 444 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay''. During rollcall vote No. 61 on Will House Consider S. 1287 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay''. During rollcall vote No. 62 on Commit w/Instructions S. 1287 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye''. During rollcall vote No. 63 on S. 1287 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' During rollcall vote No. 64 on H. Res. 445 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' During rollcall vote No. 65 on H.R. 3822 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.'' During rollcall vote No. 66 on Journal I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.'' During rollcall vote No. 67 on Ordering Previous Question H. Res. 446 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' During rollcall vote No. 68 on Agreeing to H. Res. 446 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' During rollcall vote No. 69 on H. Con. Res. 290 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' During rollcall vote No. 70 on Owens Amdt to H. Con. Res. 290 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.'' During rollcall vote No. 71 on DeFazio Amdt to H. Con. Res. 290 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.'' During rollcall vote No. 72 on Stenholm Amdt to H. Con. Res. 290 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' During rollcall vote No. 73 on Sununu Amdt to H. Con. Res. 290 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' During rollcall vote No. 74 on Spratt Amdt to H. Con. Res. 290 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.'' During rollcall vote No. 75 on H. Con. Res. 290 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.''

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentlewoman from New York for her tremendous leadership on assuring a complete count of all Americans. I wish I could be as optimistic. Unfortunately, in the city of Chicago, we are 10th out of the 10 largest cities in the response to the census so far. My hope is that all responsible elected leaders will be encouraging people from our States, from our cities and communities to fill out that census form. I have heard a lot of political pandering, we all have in our days, but rarely have I heard anything quite as irresponsible as the trashing that is going on of the census long form. One would think that some of those elected officials who are doing it, Members of this body on the Republican side of the aisle who are doing that, one would think that they had never seen that form before. As the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney) pointed out, every single Member was able to scrutinize every single question. As a consequence, we came up with a form, a long form that is, in fact, shorter than it was in 1990 and adds only one question. All of us are interested in knowing how many grandparents now are taking care of children. We hear that all the time from our constituents. They had total control over what was going to be in there. There were no complaints in 1990 from them. How long does it take to get to work? People say, oh, why do you have to know that? Well, why does one think that we want to know that, so that we can understand where we need transportation dollars. Do we need a new road? Do we need more transit to shorten that time? Do we need more affordable housing so that people can live near the jobs? Employment questions. What is this new economy about? Let us use the census to understand that better. Is our prosperity really being shared? Are there more people who are working for themselves, and are they making a decent living when they are working at home? In Illinois, in the Chicago area, in Cook County, we undercounted enough children in 1990 to fill 78 schools. That is why we need an accurate count, so that we can make sure that we get the educational opportunities to our kids. Now, one listens to John Stossel on 20/20 last Friday night, and one would think that the census is simply a tool of big government, in fact, he said a government that is selling dependency, that is his word, that is what the census is about in his conspiratorial tone. But who really is using this census data? I would posit that ABC, the very station he was on, that 20/20 probably uses the census data to figure out who the audience is, where to sell advertising. The private sector surely as much as the public sector uses the census data to figure out where investments should be made, where are we going to put our money in communities, who is living out there. This is not a conspiracy of government. This is a partnership with the people of the United States so that we can distribute public dollars and private dollars. We need to be doing the census form for ourselves. This is not a favor to anybody. This is going to bring results to every single community. There is not a district in this country that will not be better served if there is a complete count. So for any politician to get up and pander and say, oh, you do not have to fill this out, it is really intrusive, is counterproductive for their own constituents. Leadership is about explaining to constituents why this is important, why it is in their interest to fill it out. When people complain, we encourage them to understand what the real meaning of this complete count is. I am so proud to join with the gentlewoman from New York in her work and so many of us who are trying every single day to make sure that the people in this country get what they deserve. Anyone who has ever said, ``I send my tax dollars to Washington, what do I get back, am I getting my fair share?'', if they have not filled out the census form, then that is not an appropriate question, because if they do not fill out this form, then they will not be counted. So I join my colleagues in urging all Americans to get this census form in. They have got a few more days to do it. I encourage my colleagues, Mr. Speaker, to inform their constituents about the importance.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 1776. I am very proud to be a cosponsor of this bipartisan bill, which authorizes nearly $7 billion for affordable homeownership and job creation. We ought to do this. We are in the midst of the longest economic expansion in the history of the United States. Despite this wealth, we are leaving too many families behind. Just recently, HUD reported that 5.4 million households do not have decent and affordable housing, and this bill gives us some power to deal with these problems. The reauthorized Community Development Block Grant will provide State and local governments, like Chicago, funding for economic development so we can encourage employers to create jobs in our district. The HOME program will provide the city, as well as Chicago-based community organizations, such as National People's Action and ACORN, with necessary funds to increase homeownership. With this money they can rehabilitate dilapidated homes and provide mortgage counseling. In short, this bill empowers our neighbors and mayors with the means to stabilize and improve our communities. I am grateful that the full Committee on Banking and Financial Services approved my amendment to assist families that desperately cry out for housing and to help assist persons with disabilities who are facing foreclosure. I urge support for this legislation.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, as a woman, a mother and grandmother of girls, I am deeply and personally offended by this legislation. It implies that American women just have to be stopped from frivolously deciding to terminate a pregnancy just days or weeks before delivery. It has been stated on this floor that these pregnant women have not explored all of the medical and surgical options to save their babies or protect their own lives, and it takes politicians to stop them. Mr. Speaker, the truth is, the women who have late abortions are forced to end wanted pregnancies, either because the baby will surely die, like Kim and Barry Koster's baby that had no brain, or the women will seriously jeopardize their own life and health. Women are portrayed as irresponsible baby killers when in fact it is the sponsors of this bill who show utter disregard for the life and health of women. President Clinton, in vetoing one of the former versions of this bill said quote, for these women, this was not about choice, not about deciding against having a child, these babies were certain to perish during or shortly after birth, and the only question was how much grave damage was going to be done to the women. This bill implies that the current law allows women to have abortions up to the last minute before delivery, but that is not true. Despite all of the rhetoric to the contrary, Roe v. Wade strictly limits abortions after viability, and the Hoyer-Greenwood alternative would have made that even clearer. This is not about one procedure or even late-term abortions. This bill is so broad and so vague that it would ban most abortion procedures including some first, and all second and third trimester abortions, and that is the goal. To reverse Roe v. Wade and take away from women what the Supreme Court calls ``The most intimate and personal choice a person may make in a lifetime, choice essential to personal dignity and autonomy and central to the liberty protected by the 14th amendment.''

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chairman, during committee hearings on the Colombia aid package, I raised serious questions about what has been posed as mostly a counter-narcotics effort. Unfortunately, those questions have not been answered. That is why I am going to raise them again here today. Why are we taking action to invest in a militaristic drug war that has the potential for escalating regional conflict in the name of fighting drugs instead of doing what we need to do, putting more money here at home, and attack the problem here with at least as much vigor? Considering the demonstrated failure of militarized eradication efforts to date, why should we believe that investing more money in this type of plan will achieve a different result? According to the General Accounting Office, despite U.S. expenditures of $625 million in counter-narcotics efforts in Colombia between 1990 and 1998, Colombia surpassed Peru and Bolivia to become the world's largest coca producer. Colombia is already the third largest recipient of our foreign aid in the whole world, and there has been no net reduction in coca production in Colombia or cocaine availability in the United States. All of the heroin the United States consumes can be grown on just 50 square miles. An entire year's supply can fit into one cargo plane. Yet, the rebels in Colombia and the paramilitaries already control an area the size of my home State of Illinois. What makes us think that this amount of money, this effort, is going to do anything to seriously reduce the supply? According to the United Nations, profits from illicit drugs are so high that three-fourths of all drug shipments would have to be intercepted to seriously reduce the profitability of the business. Why are we focusing exclusively on the rebels when we know that the paramilitaries in Colombia are involved in the drug traffic, and that they are the ones who are responsible for 70 percent of the human rights abuses and civilian murders in that country? Why are we ignoring the proven drug control strategies that focus on prevention, treatment, and education? I know that my colleagues have pointed out that we are spending money on that, but we also know that that is the effective way to address the problem. We should be doing more. If we are so serious about reducing drug use, then why is 63 percent of the need for drug treatment unmet in the United States, according to the substance abuse and mental health services administration? I think we need to question if this really is a counter-narcotics operation, or is it a counterinsurgency operation? Could it be more about purchasing helicopters than protecting our children? What exactly is our mission? What will it take to achieve total victory in Colombia? Are we prepared to make that type of investment in dollars and in lives? How many lives? If not, what is the purpose of this aid? It seems to me if we really want to address the drug problem, we should be here today discussing the original Pelosi amendment, which was not able to be considered, which was an aggressive, ambitious approach to increased domestic spending on drug prevention, treatment, and education, not a massive, militaristic care package for a military with the worst record of human rights abuses in this hemisphere. I believe that this aid package for Colombia is a misguided, dangerous, and irresponsible approach. I urge my colleagues to vote in support of the Pelosi amendment, and I would also urge support for the Ramstad and Campbell amendment and against this bill.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. (Ms. SCHAKOWSKY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise on behalf of senior citizens who cannot afford to pay for their prescriptions. I rise for the children who go to overcrowded and broken down schools. I rise for the people who work full time and still cannot afford health insurance or quality child care. I rise for people who cannot afford to send their children to college. I rise for the 80 percent of the homeless who go to work every day and play by the rules and cannot afford a roof over their heads. I rise to oppose Republican budget priorities that will make the very rich even more rich. We have the means to protect our seniors, to support our families, and to educate our children and to bring everyone along. This is the moment in history when we can and should do that.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I know I am not alone in asking how long we have to wait and what is it going to take? It is hard to believe that it is almost 1 year since the Columbine tragedy, and yet it appears that we have not learned a thing. Since Columbine, we have endured tragedies in Conyers, Georgia; my community of Rogers Park in Chicago, Illinois; Bloomington, Indiana; Atlanta, Georgia; Pelham, Alabama; Granada Hills, California; Ft. Worth, Texas; Honolulu, Hawaii; Seattle, Washington; Wilkinsburg, Pennsylvania; Memphis, Tennessee; Kayla Rollard in Mt. Morris Township in Michigan. Thirteen children, a Columbine's worth of children, every day are killed in the United States. Communities are waiting. Parents are waiting. But most importantly, our children are waiting. Why can we not at least sit down and have this conference committee? I rise to support this motion to instruct, and I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to get to business. The American people are watching and they are waiting.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 431, a resolution expressing support for humanitarian assistance to the Republic of Mozambique. I am proud to join my colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks) and other Members in expressing concern for the people of Mozambique and commending those who are providing assistance to Mozambique during this difficult time. I also want to thank my African and Caribbean Task Force in the 9th Congressional District of Illinois for underscoring for me the importance of this aid and the United States' support for other international development and debt relief initiatives. On February 9 of this year, several Southern African nations including Mozambique, Botswana, South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe began to experience serious flooding as a result of heavy rainfall. Mozambique experienced the most severe consequences. On February 22, Tropical Cyclone Eline blew into Mozambique. The cyclone worsened an already critical situation. Mozambique is now facing a severe humanitarian and economic crisis. Water supplies are in jeopardy, thousands of Mozambicans are homeless, crops and livestock have been destroyed and the threat of disease has been increased. It is important that the United States and the international community take an active and committed role in Mozambique's recovery efforts and those of other Southern African nations. Mozambique is one of the world's most heavily indebted poor countries according to the World Bank and therefore does not possess adequate means by which to address this crisis. I join my colleagues in commending South Africa and the United Kingdom for acting quickly to assist Mozambique. The Administration should also be commended for its increasing efforts to provide disaster assistance to Mozambique. I hope the message of this resolution will encourage the continuing efforts of the Administration and increasing involvement of the international community in providing emergency relief to Mozambique. This tragic disaster serves as a reminder of the importance of debt relief and development assistance efforts that focus on sub-Saharian Africa. We need to help those nations to bolster their capacity to respond to natural disasters and the needs of their people in general. My thoughts and prayers are with the people of Southern Africa. I am determined to help maintain a long-term commitment to the welfare of those nations. I urge all Members to vote in support of H. Res. 431.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, at a time of unprecedented economic prosperity and growth, many American families are left behind. Those families work hard and play by the rules. They deserve a raise. But many of my colleagues on the other side are standing in the way of giving 10 million workers a raise in the minimum wage. Instead, they insist on sending to the President a bill to raise the minimum wage that is tied to a tax giveaway to the rich. As a result, we will see the economic gap expand even more. I applaud the President for making it clear that he will veto this dreadful bill. This is not a minimum wage increase bill; it is a maximum giveaway to the wealthy. Under their $120 billion tax cut, the wealthiest 1% of all taxpayers, or those earning more than $319,000 a year, would get 73% of the total tax cut. This is not a surprise. The leaders of the other party have demonstrated many times during the past year that they would rather pass bills that benefit special interests and the rich instead of hardworking families. A minimum wage worker earns $10,700 a year. That means a single mother on minimum wage with two kids earns $2,600 below the poverty line. Many of my colleagues on the other side would prefer to give her 33 cents a year over 3 years. Their tax plan gives millionaires $6,128 a year. Is this what Republicans meant by compassionate conservatism? Sixty percent of minimum wage earners are women; nearly 75% are adults; \3/5\ are the sole breadwinners in their families; and more than 50% work full-time. Those who have to take care of our children at daycare centers and our parents at nursing homes deserve better. They deserve more than $5.15 an hour. A raise in the minimum wage is about economic fairness and social justice. It is a small step in ensuring that all Americans share in our nation's economic prosperity and growth. I urge my Republican colleagues to stop playing politics with the economic welfare of 10 million hard working people.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, Shame, shame, shame. The NRA's leadership has once again shamed our nation, the American people, and its own members. Wayne LaPierre, the NRA's Executive Vice President, on national television, suggested that the President of the United States promotes violence for his political gain. LaPierre said, ``I've come to believe that he needs a certain level of violence in this country. He's willing to accept a certain level of killing to further his political agenda and his vice president too.'' To all the parents who lost a son or daughter to gun violence, LaPierre is telling them to blame the President and not the guns. I would not be surprised to hear the NRA's leadership blaming school grief counselors of inciting more school shootings so they can have more business. How can the NRA leadership ignore the fact that thirteen children die each day from gun violence? How can they ignore the fact that a majority of Americans want Congress to pass sensible gun safety measures? How can they lay blame on a President who supports background checks at gun shows, a ban on the import of large-capacity ammunition clips, and the sale of child safety locks with every handgun? It's time for the NRA leadership to wake up and smell the gunpower in our communities and classrooms, and step out of the way of meaningful gun safety legislation. I submit the following New York Times editorial entitled ``Desperate Rhetoric from the NRA,'' for the Record. [From the New York Times, Mar. 14, 2000] Desperate Rhetoric From the N.R.A. Americans have become used to hearing nutty talk from leaders of the National Rifle Association. But Sunday's outrageous assertion by the group's executive vice president, Wayne LaPierre, that President Clinton is ``willing to accept a certain level of killing to further his political agenda'' deserves special condemnation. Mr. LaPierre made his sick suggestion that the president relishes having gun tragedies to exploit in an interview on ABC's ``This Week.'' He was there to push the N.R.A.'s demonstrably false line that the nation already has enough gun laws on the books if only the administration would enforce them. Thanks largely to the N.R.A.'s lobbying, those laws do not adequately address issues of supply, distribution, design or child access. In a new advertising campaign the N.R.A.'s president, Charlton Heston, accuses Mr. Clinton of engaging in lying and scare tactics to win support for gun control measures bottled up in Congress. But for dishonesty, it is hard to beat the N.R.A.'s own whopper in trying to portray the group as a friend of the reasonable gun safety measures it has been fighting to defeat or water down. The sparring came just days after Mr. Clinton's meeting with key Congressional leaders at the White House failed to produce progress in freeing a modest gun control package from the House-Senate conference committee where it has been stalled for months. The sticking point remains the strong gun-show provision that cleared the Senate last May over the N.R.A.'s vehement opposition. This provision would extend to gun-show sales the same background check requirement that now applies to guns purchased from licensed dealers. Two Democratic senators, Charles Schumer of New York and Richard Durbin of Illinois, are planning to step up the pressure by attaching gun control amendments to other legislation coming to the floor. This will force recorded votes on matters with broad public support, like mandatory trigger locks and background checks of buyers at gun shows, flea markets and Internet sales. Only two weeks ago a 6-year-old killed a classmate with a handgun, one of many reasons gun regulation promises to be an issue in the long political campaign ahead. The chief obstacle to saner gun control remains the obstructionism of the N.R.A., whose extremist views and rhetoric should offend Americans fed up with all the gunfire.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1883, the Iran Nonproliferation Act. Any transfer of technology to Iran that would allow that country to develop weapons of mass destruction would represent a threat to Israel and other allies in the region. Passage of this measure sends a strong message to the international community. The United States will not be silent or inactive if any nation decides to aid Iran in production of weapons of mass destruction. By making it clear that we will impose sanctions on any authority that fuels Iran's dangerous motives, I hope we will be more successful in our efforts to prevent Iran's development of nuclear weapons. While the recent strong showing for reformers in Iran's parliamentary elections is encouraging, we still need to be extremely cautious and firm in our dealings with Iran. We must never allow any nation to develop weapons of mass destruction if we believe they may be targeted on our allies or on Americans. It is important to remember that Iran has been the world's largest exporter of terror for some time now and is an ardent opponent of the Middle East peace process. I am pleased to join my colleagues in supporting H.R. 1883 and sending the right message on behalf of all Americans, that we will not allow back-door maneuvers that aid Iran's dangerous plans for terror and destruction.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, racial and religious intolerance have no place in twenty-first Century America. Hate for a fellow human being because of religion or skin color has no place among us. Institutions that teach our next generation of leaders prejudice are breeding grounds for bigots. And political leaders who fail to speak out against such hurtful and divisive mantras have failed their duties and the people they represent. We cannot afford to remain silent in the face of anti-religious, anti-Catholic, and anti-minorities preaching from leaders of Bob Jones University. That is why I rise today to commend the gentleman from New York for his forthright Resolution. I am a proud cosponsor of his resolution that rejects discrimination and intolerance based on religion, race, and ethnicity. This resolution would put Congress on record as opposing policies preached and practiced only at Bob Jones University in South Carolina. Policies that are repulsive and unimaginable by a majority of Americans today. Some of these policies include the barring of free association of interracial couples on campus. Just as repulsive is the anti-Catholic venom emanating from the halls of this university. This is not what is supposed to be taught in the classrooms. We cannot stand idly by while bigots are free to spout their shortsighted and hurtful words. We must speak out against intolerance and injustice. Congress must act now and pass this Resolution.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, today, the district office of the people of Illinois' 9th Congressional District was vandalized with an anti- Semitic obscenity. While I am pleased to say that we, as a community, are prepared to stand tall in the path of any and all acts of hate and words of bigotry, today's action is a sad reminder that there are those among us that fear diversity and refuse to view it as the sign of strength and tradition that it is. Acts of hate directed against Jews, Catholics, Protestants, Muslims or any other group or person in this country are unacceptable and will not be tolerated. I am proud to represent one of the most ethnically diverse districts in America. The diversity and tolerance in our district is symbolic of what our nation should be. We will not be silent whenever hatred shows its ugly face. I wish to commend the brave officers of the Niles Police Department, Chief Sheehan, and FBI officials for their prompt response and effort on behalf of the people of the 9th Congressional District. This crime of hate is a cowardly act that will not go unpunished. There are those who view the 9th Congressional District, because of its diversity, as a prime location to spread their hateful venom. I am confident that the rich tradition and values of the people of the 9th Congressional District will always prevail.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, now is the time for a real Patients' Bill of Rights; and today is the day that we should instruct the conferees to move quickly to pass a strong bill. I have a letter from constituents. Dear Representative Schakowsky: We beg you to please do everything you possibly can to support a Patients' Bill of Rights for those of us who find ourselves in the merry-go- round of dealing with HMOs and reluctant insurance company benefit providers. It has gotten to the point of being ridiculous when patients are subjected to mental torture by these big companies. This certainly cannot be what our Founding Fathers had in mind. Ultimately, we have only one means of relief, the United States Congress. I understand the big providers have lobbyists, with deep pockets, fighting any legislation that would force them to be more fair and of understanding their responsibilities to their customers, but this cannot be allowed to interfere with what we all know to be basically right and wrong. This is what the average American cannot understand. Why cannot Congress just do what is right for the people whose well-being has been entrusted to them? It has been entrusted to us. This is the day that we can act to say move quickly, move now.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the gentleman's motion to instruct conferees, to act quickly, and to pass the bipartisan House bill. This morning I read a letter on the floor that I received from David and Suzanne Miller, two of my constituents from Niles, Illinois. They asked, and I quote, ``Why can't Congress just do what is right for the people whose well-being has been entrusted to them?'' Why indeed. Last November we passed a bill that held out great promise for millions of patients in managed care plans. That bill, that particular bill, would make it easier for patients to enroll in clinical trials; give direct access to women for obstetrician-gynecological services; ensure that children could get to see their pediatricians and pediatric specialists; make sure patients undergoing treatment for serious illnesses can stay with their own doctors rather than being forced to switch; let health care professionals, not insurance company bean counters, make medical decisions; and, finally, hold health care plans accountable and let patients sue if they are injured by HMO decisions. But, Mr. Speaker, it will do nothing if it is not enacted into law. Let us not let David and Suzanne Miller down or the millions of patients who count on us.

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, as a member of the Committee on Banking and Financial Services, I rise in strong opposition to S. 900. Winners-Losers. In this bill it is painfully clear. Banks, insurance companies and securities firms. Big winners. Losers? Working class communities and consumers. This bill helps create corporations that can afford to ignore families and small businesses down the street due to a weakened Community Reinvestment Act. CRA has brought literally a trillion dollars' worth of loans into starving communities since its passage in 1977. But S. 900 lowers the requirements for CRA compliance and maliciously burdens community-based groups that are fighting for investment in their neighborhoods. Huge financial conglomerates get access to their customers' most private information, which they can use without permission. When a widow receives the funds from her husband's insurance policy, the insurance company can share that information with its brokerage firm which can then barrage the grieving woman with stock offerings. The bank that gives us a loan for our child's education can sell her address to a credit card company, which then entices her with a card at school. If we have a bad day on the stock market, make a claim against our health insurance, we can kiss that mortgage goodby. Write checks to a psychiatrist or an oncologist and then just try to get a new health insurance policy. Why should we be for this? We should not be for this. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, it is with great admiration that I rise today to pay tribute to a great institution in my hometown of Evanston, Ebenezer African Methodist Episcopal Church. Ebenezer AME Church is celebrating its 117 years of worship and service in our community. I want to congratulate Pastor and Mrs. James C. Wade, the congregation, and all those who have helped make Ebenezer a shining light in our community. I also send my best wishes to all those enjoying this year's celebration, ``Catch the Vision,'' especially the young men and women from all across Chicago. Under Pastor Wade's leadership, the church has reached out to the Evanston community and beyond. Their activities have had a profound impact on the lives of countless individuals. Their commitment to civic service knows no bounds. The church continues to lead by example, helping those in need, including senior citizens who need affordable housing, and positively influencing the lives of our youth. Having worked closely with Pastor Wade, it is clear to me and to all in our community that the Pastor is an ambassador of good will. He reaches out to all those that he meets and forms lasting bonds that help to strengthen the spiritual bridge between human beings. The success of Ebenezer and the AME community is a testament to all those who have contributed and continue to give their energy to this worthy cause. I consider myself blessed to have attended many services at Ebenezer, and I am honored to call Pastor Wade and the Ebenezer community my friends. We have formed close ties over the years and our partnership will only flourish in the next millennium.