Adam Schiff

Mr. SCHIFF

Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker: Sarkis Papazian, Elizabeth Khatchadourian, David Khatchadourian, Haroutiun Barseghian, Annik Mugurdichian, Mari Zadoian, Ghazar Ghazarian, Zkon Chouldjian, Takvor Kazandjian, Hagop Kazandjian, Avedis Aghjayan, Garabed Garabedian, Tavriz Garabedian, Shoushanig Garabedian. These are a few, a precious few, of the more than 1.5 million men, women, and children who lost their lives in the first genocide of the 20th century. Ardeni Gureghian, Nazeni Kalustian, Antoine Kalfayan, Antranig Antoian, Rouben Gureghian, Anoushig Antoian, Mardiros Alemian, Haigaz Alemian, Hampartz Alemian, Caloust Alemian, Shmavon Tetezian, Sirpouhi Nahabedian Tetezian: 1.5 million people whose lives were as precious to them as our lives are to us, who loved their children and were loved; who aspired for a better life just as we aspire for a better life for ourselves and our families. Nahabed Nahabedian, Hampartzoum Tetezian, Sarkis Tetezian, Kourken Tetezian, Marnos Meneshian, Hovnan and Knar Neneshian, Aghavni Meneshian, Elmast Meneshian, Voski Meneshian, Mgerdich Meneshian. Pray for us, they would say, as Ambassador Morganthau recalls in his memoirs; pray for us, they said as they left their homes, homes in which they had lived and their ancestors had lived for 2,500 years. We will not see you again in this life, they said, but we shall meet again. Pray for us. Kevork Meneshian, Hampar Meneshian, Eknadios Meneshian, Hripsime Meneshian, Senekereem Meneshian, Edmund Kalfayan, Boghos Arzougaldjian, Flor Megerdichian, Ohanes Nigoghosian, Karekin Sherestanian. This administration, our administration, the U.S. administration, prides itself for being plain spoken, for not engaging in the diplomatic nuances that often make a moral judgment, a moral position of a nation ambiguous. Then let us be plain spoken. Let us call genocide, genocide. Let us not minimize the deliberate murder of 1.5 million people by the Ottoman Empire. In this Congress, in this administration, let us be frank. By acknowledging the first genocide of the 20th century, we will give the families of the victims the justice and the peace that all the principles of humanity require. Krikor Zohrab, Vartkes Serengoulian, Siamanto, Daniel Varoujan.

Mr. SCHIFF

Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained in my district on Tuesday, April 24, 2001, and I would like the record to indicate how I would have voted had I been present. For rollcall vote No. 85, the motion to instruct on budget conferees, I would have voted ``aye.'' For rollcall vote No. 86, to pass a suspension bill, I would have voted ``aye''.

Mr. SCHIFF

Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I am not going to attempt to speak on the unique tragedy and trauma suffered with the loss of a child. I think other Members have already spoken to that, and could speak to it with a passion of familiarity that neither I nor any other male Member of this Chamber could. Instead, I would like to speak as a former prosecutor, someone who for 6 years went into court and prosecuted a variety of Federal crimes, and has experience not only with the job of prosecuting those cases but also handling the inevitable motions, the appellate process, the habeas corpus petitions and all of the delays attendant to litigating complex issues. This is a criminal justice bill. This is a public safety measure. Its ostensible purpose is to use the vehicle of the criminal justice system to deter attacks on pregnant women, to incapacitate those who would conduct them by lengthening the sentences, to bring about retribution on those who would commit such a heinous act. All of the purposes of the criminal justice system are served by both bill and substitute; but if one has to choose as a prosecutor going into court under one law or going into court on another, they would certainly choose to go into court under a law that is less subject to constitutional challenge and attack. The bill, as it is drafted, using definitions like a member of the species Homo sapiens at any stage of development who is carried in the womb, invites, demands in fact, constitutional litigation. As a prosecutor, one can be assured in both motion and appeal to the highest courts of the land they will be required to litigate when life begins under the bill. That is not required under the substitute. If it is our goal to give prosecutors that extra tool, as the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Graham) mentioned, if it is our goal to allow prosecutors to take more vigorous action to have greater penalties at their beck and call to deter, to incapacitate, to bring about retribution for these crimes, let us choose a substitute which makes that possible without this unprecedented constitutional litigation.

Mr. SCHIFF

Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of Dr. Edward C. Stone, retiring Director of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California. After ten years of distinguished service at JPL, Dr. Stone will be returning to full-time teaching and research at the California Institute of Technology, where he has taught since 1967. Dr. Stone, the David Morrisroe Professor of Physics, has been widely regarded as an energetic and thoughtful leader at JPL. Since his first cosmic-ray experiments on Discoverer satellites in 1961, Dr. Stone has been a principal investigator on nine NASA spacecraft missions and a co-investigator on five other NASA missions for which he developed high resolution instruments for measuring the isotopic and elemental composition of energetic cosmic-ray nuclei. Using these instruments, Dr. Stone and his colleagues undertook some of the first studies of the isotopic composition of three distinct samples of matter. During his tenure at JPL, Dr. Stone's many accomplishments include Galileo's five-year orbital mission to Jupiter, the launch of Assini to Saturn, as well as a new generation of Earth sciences satellites such as TOPEX/Poseidon and SeaWinds, and the spectacularly successful Mars Pathfinder landing in 1997. He has transformed the direction of JPL from administering a few large projects to managing many new, smaller exploration missions. Dr. Stone's vision has revolutionized the way JPL does business, thus expanding its impact on the field of astrophysics and planetary science. He is a remarkable scientist, whose brilliance is coupled with his ability to lead. Dr. Stone exemplifies integrity, energy, and leadership, and his deep commitment to JPL and its goals has been the touchstone of the Laboratory's success. I would like to commend Dr. Stone for his extraordinary dedication and thank him for his decade of service.

Mr. SCHIFF

Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, March is Women's History Month and I would like to take this opportunity to honor Stacey Murphy, an elected City Council-member of the City of Burbank, California, as 2001 Woman of the Year for California's 27th Congressional District. Ms. Murphy, who served a term as Mayor from 1999-2000 and Vice Mayor from 1998-1999, has an exemplary record of service to her community and has consistently strived to improve the quality of life in her city. First elected to the Burbank City Council in 1997, Ms. Murphy has contributed to the success of numerous municipal initiatives, including maintaining the city's electric utility, ensuring dependable power at reasonable rates for Burbank's consumers; completing Burbank's first lighted field dedicated to the sport of soccer; completing the community theater complex operated by the renowned Colony Theater; implementing the ``Got Wheels'' youth transportation program; approving the construction of a new Buena Vista library; and seeking to protect Burbank's residents form the adverse impacts caused by the Burbank Airport. As a representative of the citizens of Burbank, Ms. Murphy has been a force for finding common ground on the issues and challenges confronting the city. Prior to her election to the City Council, Ms. Murphy served as a member of the Magnolia Park Citizens Advisory Committee, the City of Burbank Park and Recreation Board, her local School Site Council, the Roosevelt Elementary PTA and the Gate Advisory Committee. She has also brought leadership to the regional level, serving as a board member of the San Fernando Valley Transit Zone and as a representative to the Southern California Association of Governments. Born on May 12, 1958 in Los Angeles, California, Ms. Murphy graduated from Hollywood High School in 1976 and attended California State University, Northridge. A Burbank resident for the past 17 years, Ms. Murphy is the proud mother of Sean, age 16, Robert, age 14, and Connor, age 8. As Burbank Mayor Bill Wiggins has said, ``Stacey Murphy does a great job of bringing opposing sides together and coming up with creative solutions that ensure everyone has been treated fairly.'' I am proud to name Stacey Murphy as 2001 Woman of the Year for California's 27th Congressional District.

Mr. SCHIFF

Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, we had in the past decade the fiscal discipline to continue paying down the national debt of this country. Although there is much debate about what credit the previous administration ought to have for the incredible economic successes of the last decade, I think it is plain that one of the most significant things that that administration did was get our fiscal house in order; was continue paying down our national debt; was maintaining the discipline that kept interest rates low; that made homeownership possible for hundreds and thousands of families across this country that had never enjoyed the benefits of homeownership, by allowing them to have mortgage payments that they could make by keeping their families together under one roof. Our successes I think over this last decade are owing in some strong measure to that discipline. Now that discipline is never easy to maintain. It is not easy to maintain when times are difficult when we would rather spend the money on programs that will help people that are hurting in this country. It is not easy to maintain that discipline in the good times. One of the things that I admire about the Blue Dogs and the reason that I joined, as a new Member of this Congress, the Blue Dogs is that they have consistently fought in good times and hard times not to lose sight of the need to pay down this debt in this country. The surplus that we are enjoying is our surplus, the American people's surplus. The debt that hangs over our heads is the American people's debt. More accurately, much of the surplus that we enjoy is owing to the people that went before us, to our parents' generation who made the sacrifices, who built the universities, the roadways, the waterways, the infrastructure in this country that made this period of prosperity possible. It is their money as much as our generation's. It is their Social Security and their Medicare that are underfunded. We talk about a surplus in Social Security. Well, I suppose if we look at today, we can call it that. But if we look at the 75-year life of Social Security, what at the moment looks like a surplus over 30 years or over 75 years looks like a $30 trillion deficit. Maybe we should be talking about the Social Security deficit. What are we going to do about that? The only plan we have for dealing with Social Security solvency is the abstract idea that we will come together on some reform in the future. We do not know what that reform is going to look like. We do not know what the reform of Medicare is going to look like. We do not know, as we stand here today, what the budget looks like. Yet, here we are making plans for tax expenditures over the next decade and beyond based on projections of the surplus that may or may not materialize, that even the people who gave us those projections say are at best informed guesses about the future; and we are ready to bet the farm on those guesses when we have no plan for Social Security and Medicare. So I became a member of the Blue Dogs because they are committed to making sure we maintain the discipline in good times and in bad times to pay down that debt, that we consider that we are, not only talking about our parents' generation, the people who made this prosperity possible, but we are talking about our children as well and their future. Because, while it is the American people's surplus and the American people's debt, it is our children's future that we are talking about. If that debt goes on, if that debt grows, it is not you and I who will pay it. It is our children and their children. So here today we have to talk about those that will come after and think about those who come after while we stand so ready to take credit for surpluses that will not materialize for 5 or 10 years. Now, we have a tax plan; and we will have a major tax cut this year, and we should. And we should. The question is how large should that tax cut be? How large prudently can it be? What I think we ought to be debating just as vigorously, though, that I hear so little about in this Congress and this administration is what is our economic plan. Tax policy is simply one part of an economic plan and the economists say not even the most significant part. There are limitations to what we can do with fiscal policy in terms of our economy. Now we lost massive, multitrillion dollar equity in the stock market this week. There are a lot of Americans very concerned about the downturn in this economy and what it means to their families. Many thousands of Americans have already lost their jobs. What is the economic plan of the administration and the Congress? How does this tax proposal fit into that plan? The reality is there is no plan. There is no plan. It is far more important that we focus here and now on what we can do to turn around these recent downturn signs, that we can put ourselves back on the road of incredible prosperity which we have traveled down for the last 8 years. We have to start focusing on the economy and what is our economic plan. So I urge the Congress and all Americans, let us turn our attention together in a bipartisan way, in a bipartisan tradition that the Blue Dogs represent to finding a tax cut that works for all of the American people that is the size that we can afford that does not squander the investment that our parents made, and their Social Security and Medicare and does not squander the investment that we owe our children in good schools and in their future and in low mortgages and giving them the American dream of homeownership. Let us work together across party lines and do what is right for this country over the long term.

Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for yielding me a little time at the end of the afternoon. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to condemn a deplorable act that has taken place halfway around the world with repercussions on our ability to protect the world's heritage and to preserve world history for future generations. On February 26 of this year, the Taliban ordered the destruction of pre-Islamic statues in Afghanistan, among them a pair of massive Buddhas carved out of a mountainside and towering over 100 feet. Two days ago, on March 12, UNESCO's special envoy to Afghanistan confirmed what the international community feared most, the complete destruction of the 1,600-year-old statues in the Bamiyan province. In the words of UNESCO chief Koichiro Matsuura, ``It is abominable to witness the cold and calculated destruction of cultural properties which were the heritage of the Afghan people and, indeed, of the whole of humanity.'' I have introduced a resolution condemning the Taliban's destruction of pre-Islamic statues in Afghanistan and calling for the immediate access for UNESCO representatives to survey the damage. House Concurrent Resolution 52 sends a strong message that religious intolerance of any kind is unacceptable and must immediately be stopped. One of the most cosmopolitan regions in the world at one time and host to merchants, travelers, and artists from China, Central Asia and the Roman Empire, today Afghanistan is one of the most repressive and intolerant countries in the world as a result of the actions of its ruling Taliban faction. The destruction was ordered and carried out for fear that those ancient statues may be used for idol worship. Destroying those unique creations which had withstood the test of time and the elements of nature on the basis of an irrational fear motivated by intolerance of other cultures and religions is simply unacceptable. The destruction of the pre-Islamic statues also contradicts the basic tenet of Islam that requires tolerance of other religions. People of all faiths and nationalities, including Muslim communities around the world, condemn the destruction of these statues which were part of the common heritage of mankind. It is imperative we join the people and governments around the world in condemning the senseless act of destruction of our joint cultural heritage and call on the Taliban regime to immediately cease and desist any further destruction of other pre-Islamic relics.

Mr. SCHIFF

Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, this year we will have a large tax cut. We will have a large tax cut that provides tax relief to every taxpayer, that addresses estate and marriage penalties as well. That we know for a certainty. The question, of course, of how large and who will be the primary beneficiaries is as yet undetermined, but we know that we will have the largest tax cut that we can afford. Will we have a solvent Social Security system? Will we have Medicare with a prescription drug benefit? Will we have an adequate educational system? Will we pay down the national debt? These questions we do not have an answer for. Now, why is that? Why is that that we can say with absolute certainty right now we can have a massive tax cut but we cannot say whether Social Security will continue? We cannot say whether Medicare will be solvent? What does this say about our priorities as a nation? It says we do not put Social Security first. We do not put Medicare first. We do not put the needs of our children first. Now, why is this? Why are we going forward with no budget? Why are we going forward with a bill that could have a major impact in this country for 25 years with no budget? Why is it so important that we act on this right now? Well, the argument that is made is that we need to spur the economy right now. Well, let us set aside the fact that even Alan Greenspan says that the use of fiscal policy in the form of tax cuts does little to affect the immediate condition of the economy. Let us say that we agreed with that philosophy. Why does that mean that we take action on a bill right now that will affect us in 5 to 10 years? If we are concerned about spurring the economy now, let us do something to spur the economy now. Let us not make a decision about expenditures 5 to 10 years from now that will have no effect on today's economy. No, we are taking action right now on a bill that will have an effect on the next generation. We are doing it without a budget in place. We are doing it on the basis of projections we know are incredibly speculative. We are doing it at a time where the interest on the debt we pay every day is a billion dollars; a billion dollars a day we pay in interest on the national debt. No, we are going to ignore the promises both parties made during the last campaign of paying off the debt by 2012 or 2013. That is out the window. We are going to ignore the promises made by both parties during the campaign of providing prescription drug benefits to seniors. We are going to ignore our promises to set aside Social Security and Medicare. No, we are going to pass this bill right now and then we are going to worry later to see if we can afford it. Now I am just a freshman in this institution, but even a freshman can see this is no way to budget for a nation or a family. In families across America, people have very basic principles: Pay your bills; live within your means; provide for your family's future; provide for your country's future. This process does not meet that very basic standard. Let us have a budget first. Let us have a budget that we can be proud of, not only today, tomorrow and this year. Let us have a budget that we can be proud of 10 or 20 years from now, because what we are doing this week, make no mistake, will affect this country for the next quarter of a century. I do not want to look back on my period in Congress and say that one of the first acts that we did when I entered the Congress was something that set this country back on the path of deficit spending, increased national debt, that we did the fiscally irresponsible thing. Let us have a budget first.

Mr. SCHIFF

Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, the Pasadena branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People is celebrating its 18th Annual Ruby McKnight Williams Awards Banquet on March 8, 2001 and I would like to join in honoring the memory of a famed Pasadena native son, Matthew ``Mack'' Robinson. Mack Robinson was a world-class athlete. Competing in the 1936 Summer Olympics in Berlin, Germany, he won a silver medal in the 200-meter run, crossing the finish line just a step behind that great Olympian, Jesse Owens. Mack's roots in Pasadena ran deep. He was a track star at Pasadena City College in 1938, the same year his younger brother, future Dodgers' great Jackie Robinson, lettered there in four sports. Mack set national junior college records in the 100- and 200-meter runs and in the long jump. When the Olympic games were held in Los Angeles in 1984, Mack helped carry the Olympic flag into Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum. He cared deeply for his community and, later in life, was renowned for leading the fight against street crime in Pasadena. One of Mack's great causes was ensuring a monument was built in his hometown to honor his brother, the man who in 1947 broke major league baseball's color barrier. The Pasadena Robinson Memorial, honoring both brothers, was dedicated in 1997. Pasadena City College last year renamed its stadium to honor the pioneering brothers and Congress last year approved naming the post office at 600 Lincoln Avenue in Pasadena, California, as the ``Matthew `Mack' Robinson Post Office Building.'' Sadly, Mack died at the age of 88 in Pasadena on March 12, 2000. Mr. Speaker, I join the Pasadena NAACP in saluting Mack Robinson for the shining example he presented in sports and in life. Mack Robinson was truly a champion in all he did.

Mr. SCHIFF

Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this rule. During committee consideration, I offered several amendments to correct oversights in the bill. These amendments were of a relatively minor character. The first would provide that when someone, for example, is legally separated from their spouse and files individually for bankruptcy, that we would not consider the separated spouse's income in determining whether the person filing for bankruptcy met the means test. As a practical matter, if someone is legally separated and has no access to the assets of the other spouse and yet that other spouse's assets are considered in the means test, they will not qualify for chapter 7. That is not appropriate. I am really astounded that this provision was taken out of the manager's amendment. During the committee hearing, the sponsor of the bill indicated that he thought that there was likely merit to this amendment. The second that I offered would provide for a GAO study to determine the impact on child support, whether this will make it more difficult for people to collect child support. That was also rejected, a mere study of the issue. I do not know what we are afraid of. If we have a study of the issue and it finds, as the proponents of the bill say, that this has no net adverse impact on women trying to collect child support, then great, we know that. But if a year goes by and the study is conducted and it finds there are problems, we can then address them. What are we afraid of? Why are we afraid to find out the answer to those questions? I am hoping this bill comes back from conference with the Senate in a different form. Many of us would like to support this bill. This bill has many important bankruptcy reforms in it. Many of us believe bankruptcy reform is vital. There are some positive things on child support in this bill, like relief from the automatic stay. But if even these minor issues that could ultimately be very important are rejected out of hand as they are in this rule, then the House is essentially delegating to the Senate to do the meaningful work on the bill. We are delegating to the Senate to decide what amendments should be taken and what not, what the form of the bill ought to be. I hope that this pattern would not persist with other legislation as well or we will really be delegating our responsibility to the other House. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I would urge opposition to this rule and in the future would hope that where there are amendments that are acknowledged in committee as probably having merit, where suggestions such as a study are made, that they would be considered in order. I thank the Members for their consideration.

Mr. SCHIFF

Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, as we celebrate Black History Month, I would like to recognize several African American leaders from my district in California: Loretta Glickman Hillson, Ruby McKnight Williams and Ralph Riddle. Loretta Glickman Hillson began her political career in the 1960s as President of the Human Relations Committee at Pasadena City College. As President of this organization, she led the fight to ensure equal access for all in the Rose Queen tryouts sponsored by the Tournament of Roses Association. Subsequently in 1978, Hillson became the first African American woman to become a member of the Tournament of Roses Association. In 1977, Hillson became the first African American woman to be elected to the Pasadena City Council. After serving three years on the City Council, Hillson then became Pasadena's first African American vice-mayor. In 1982, Hillson won a momentous victory in the Pasadena mayoral election, once again breaking the color barrier by becoming the first African American woman to become Mayor of Pasadena. Hillson's selection as Mayor also marked the first time in the history of the United States, that a black woman became Mayor of a city with a population over 100,000. During her political career in Pasadena, Hillson was successful in making local government more accessible to residents in black neighborhoods, resulting in increased political activism and heightened interest in civil affairs among the black community. Prior to beginning her political career, Hillson sang professionally with the New Christy Minstrels. She also spent several years as a choir director, English teacher and investment counselor. She is currently living in Lubbock, Texas with her husband Reverend William B. Hillson, whom she married in 1991. Hillson's career paved the road for a more equal and representative government in Pasadena. Her strength and character will continue to be admired by generations to come. Although Loretta Hillson certainly faced opposition and adversity during her tenure in city politics, many civil rights leaders of the past are responsible for the opportunities which African Americans like Hillson have enjoyed. Rudy McKnight Williams is one of those leaders whose undaunting courage helped shape the society we live in today. Williams was born in 1894 in Topeka, Kansas, and as a young adult moved to California just as the Depression swept the nation. As a single woman in 1930, Williams had moved to California with the hope of becoming a kindergarten teacher as she had been in Topeka. Yet, the Pasadena school district denied employment to Williams because of her race. Although she faced an extremely segregated community with discriminatory laws, Williams refused to let her dreams be destroyed by racism and prejudice. Leaving her teaching career behind, Williams became a founding member of the Pasadena branch of the NAACP. She became a leader of the Civil Rights Movement in Southern California, petitioning for municipal and school employment, home ownership and access to public swimming pools for African Americans. In addition to her work with the NAACP, Williams also volunteered with the League of Women Voters, and served as Commission Chairman of the Pasadena Recreation Commission. She was also President of the Tuesday Morning Club, The Women's Democratic Club, and the Interracial Women's Club. Yet, her greatest service was to the NAACP where she served for over 65 years, including two terms as President in 1959 and from 1969-1982. In addition, Williams served for six years as an advisor to the NAACP National Youth Work Committee. During Williams' leadership in the NAACP, the Pasadena branch backed two precedent- setting school integration cases in which Williams visited the U.S. Supreme Court to witness the decisions. Mrs. Williams was also involved in other organizations, including Co-Op Village, Citizens Urban Renewal Advisory Committee, Pasadena Head Start, and the Pasadena Commission on Human Needs and Opportunities. Williams remained active with the NAACP as President Emeritus of the NAACP Executive Board until her death in 1999. Williams contributed much to the spirit of Pasadena. Her community activism and work with our youth will be sorely missed. Yet, Williams' legacy lives on as Pasadena pays her tribute in an annual awards banquet in her name honoring those who exhibit excellence in community service. In addition to Loretta Glickman Hillson and Ruby McKnight Williams, I would like to honor Ralph Riddle, another Pasadena community leader who assisted in changing the Pasadena Police Department. Ralph Riddle was born on June 9, 1916 in Pasadena, California. He attended Pasadena High School and then completed his university education in Arizona. In 1942, Ralph joined the military and spent four years as an Army Sergeant stationed throughout the world. After returning to Pasadena, Riddle joined the Pasadena Police Department on November 12, 1946, becoming the first African American police officer in the history of the Pasadena Police Department. Although Riddle was assigned to various units within the Pasadena Police Department, his first love was community relations. Prior to the late 1960s, the Pasadena Police Department was without a community relations department. Under the leadership of Police Chief Bob McGowan, Riddle helped establish a community relations department and was subsequently chosen to lead the unit. In this position, Riddle acted as a liaison between the Pasadena Police Department and the African American community. He remained in this position until 1974, when he retired from the Pasadena Police Department and became the Pasadena City College security chief until the early 1980s. In addition to Riddle's community service efforts, he volunteered extensively with the Pasadena NAACP. Although Mr. Riddle passed away in January of 1990, his life continues to touch the Pasadena community through his shining example and through the career of his daughter-in-law, Lt. Phlunte Riddle, the first African American Sergeant and First African American Lieutenant in the history of the Pasadena Police Department. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to participate in Black History Month as well as to pay tribute to Loretta Glickman Hillson, Ruby McKnight Williams and Ralph Riddle. I am extremely proud of the rich history in my district and of the leadership, humanity, and compassion exhibited by Mrs. Hillson, Mrs. Williams and Mr. Riddle. In closing, I would like to wish Loretta and Reverend Hillson the very best. To the family of Ruby McKnight Williams and Ralph Riddle, a grateful community gives thanks that both Ruby's and Ralph's lives touched so many. And to Lt. Phlunte Riddle, I wish you the very best in all your endeavors.

Mr. SCHIFF

Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Social Security and Medicare Safe Deposit Lockbox Act. Passage of this legislation will make certain that the Social Security and Medicare surpluses are protected in a ``lock-box'' and are not affected by spending increases and tax cuts. However, the Medicare surplus is not taken off-budget by this bill and therefore is not ensured the same protection as the Social Security surplus under current budget rules. This is a critical flaw in this bill and I do not believe that H.R. 2 alone will solve the long-term challenges facing Medicare. Nevertheless, I support passage of the Social Security and Medicare Safe Deposit Lockbox Act of 2001 and will remain committed to protecting these surpluses. I believe it is absolutely essential that we maintain our fiscal discipline and continue paying down our debt. We must provide resources to deal with long term problems facing Social Security and Medicare, while making room for targeted tax cuts and investments in priority programs. I am also proud to have joined my colleagues, Mike Ross and Dennis Moore, in introducing H.R. 560, a bill that would take Medicare off- budget, giving it the same protected status as Social Security, and would lock away Medicare surpluses unless they are to be used for current Medicare programs. While I support the bill before us, our bill has a much stronger enforcement mechanism and would be even more difficult, if not impossible, to violate.

Mr. SCHIFF

Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, as a brand new member of the House International Relations Committee, it is my pleasure to rise today to extend my congratulations to Prime Minister-elect Ariel Sharon on his victory in last week's elections, as well as to the people of Israel for their commitment to democratic principles of government. I join my colleagues in assuring Prime Minister-elect Sharon of our country's unwavering support and commitment to the State of Israel. We remain steadfast in our commitment to Israel's security and look forward to working with him in pursuing regional peace and stability, as well as working to further strengthen U.S.-Israel relations. It is imperative that we continue the dialogue for peace in the Middle East, and to this end, I call upon Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat to demonstrate a commitment to the peace process by calling for an immediate end to the violence. I also want to acknowledge the work of the House International Relations Committee Chairman, Mr. Henry Hyde, and the lead sponsors of this resolution, Mr. Lantos, Mr. Gilman, Mr. Ackerman, and Mr. Cantor, for their work on this resolution. I look forward to working with them in the House International Relations Committee on this and other issues of importance to our national interests and foreign policy.

Mr. SCHIFF

Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in celebration of the life of the late Senator Alan Cranston. Growing up in California, I developed a strong admiration for the life and work of this great leader. As a young man living in Northern California and attending Stanford University, I came to view Senator Cranston as a model for our time and an inspiration to young people everywhere. He served a legendary four terms in the United States Senate and made history by being the only U.S. Senator ever to have been elected his Party's Whip seven times. His vibrant intellect, persuasive skill, and even-handed approach were recognized by leaders here and abroad, and Senator Cranston came to be seen as guiding hand in shaping many of the important legislative measures that came up for consideration during his 24 years on Capitol Hill. His devotion to the causes he cared about and his expertise on both domestic policy and international relations made him one of the most talented and well-respected public servants of this century. The people of California will be forever grateful for the many accomplishments of Senator Alan Cranston. He was a tireless advocate for his constituents, while always being mindful of the needs of the entire nation. His efforts to provide affordable housing, protect our environment, secure a woman's right to choose, and advocate for the disabled paved the way for groundbreaking legislation that transformed domestic policy in the United States. But what Senator Cranston is best known for is his lifelong commitment to world peace and his conscientious objection to nuclear weapons. He played a pivotal role in developing arms reduction and nuclear arms control treaties and traveled the world, building relationships with foreign leaders and promoting peace. Senator Cranston will always be remembered for his many contributions to the global community, and I am proud to rise today in celebration of his life of service to the state of California, this nation, and our world.

Mr. SCHIFF

Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join my colleagues in urging support for the Public Education Reinvestment, Reinvention, and Responsibility Act. This bill invests more in education, $35 billion over 5 years, for title I, for poor and disadvantaged communities where many young people, through no fault of their own, are getting a poor education, and are failing to meet their full potential because of our failures. It provides more for charter schools, for magnet schools and innovative public school choice programs, and also to help children unlock the door of opportunity that is the English language. How do we make this investment? Are we simply throwing good money after bad? Are we spending more without doing more? The answer is no. This bill targets children who are most in need. Seven percent of the public school budget is provided via Federal funding. Our solution is, therefore, a 7 percent solution; and it will only be effective if it is targeted and targeted to those who are most in need. This bill does that. The bill also provides local schools with greater flexibility to use local innovation to meet local needs. It does this by consolidating a myriad of Federal programs into five national goals. I introduced legislation not unlike this in the State legislature in California. It was very instructive as we proceeded with that bill, consolidating 30 categorical education programs into one. Each of the special interests that had grown up around that particular categorical program came to oppose it. It became very apparent to me, as I think it has to many in this country, that some of the educational programs, albeit started for good reason and with the best of intentions, have come to exist and persist for themselves, not for the benefit of the children they were intended to teach, but to perpetuate the suppliers, the vendors, of those materials of that approach, and this has to end if we are going to change public education for the better. This proposal consolidates those programs, develops a system based on accountability, not accountability simply that the money is spent for its intended purpose, but rather accountability that says, we will give you flexibility, you give us good results. Under the current law, there is no accountability. That has to change if we are going to improve the quality of a public school system. We have to demand more of our teachers, of our parents, of ourselves, and this bill goes a long way to doing exactly that. Why all the focus on education in the last few years? We have a proud heritage in this country of public education. It has always been the great equalizer providing opportunity to the poorest among us, tapping the human potential of every child, and giving them a chance to succeed, a chance to enjoy the American dream. We are losing that heritage to schools that underperform, with children who fail or drop out or perhaps, saddest of all, who graduate and cannot read, who get a diploma and cannot write. Jefferson once said that ``A nation that expects to live both ignorant and free expects what never was and never will be.'' Today's bill does honor to the father of public education, and restores our commitment to public education and civic education. Mr. Speaker, I commend the work of the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith), the gentleman from California (Mr. Dooley), the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roemer), and others; and I urge the support of my colleagues.