Maxine Waters

Ms. WATERS

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank both the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Blunt) for helping to rescue this legislation. There have been several unsuccessful attempts over the past 4 years to recognize and compensate the families of those who lost their loved ones. Mr. Speaker, I rise as an original cosponsor in support of H.R. 3375, because this bill provides much-needed, but long-delayed, compensation for the victims of U.S. embassy bombings several years ago. In 1998, two U.S. embassies were bombed in Africa, one in Kenya and one in Tanzania. Agents of Osama bin Laden orchestrated these bombings, costing the lives of over 220 persons, including 12 American citizens. These attacks represent attacks against America and need our attention. As we all know, embassy personnel are often targeted because they represent the United States in a foreign country. The families of those victims have never been compensated. While foreign service officers assume a reasonable level of risk in accepting a foreign assignment, they should not have to bear the burden of murder at the hands of terrorists without compensation for their surviving families. The fact that those families have, to date, received no compensation is even more alarming in light of the fact that the families of those killed in the accidental bombing of the Chinese embassy in Serbia in 1999 received $1.5 million each. I agree with the United States decision to provide compensation for these families, but we must not neglect the families of Americans lost in Kenya and Tanzania. Regrettably, in East Africa the State Department failed to comply with its own regulations to warn embassy personnel that intelligence information confirmed the existence of active terrorist activity in that area. The State Department also disregarded the repeated requests of the Kenya ambassador for greater security to protect the embassy and its personnel. It is a travesty that these disregards of policy may have contributed to a loss of American life. It is a shame that we have not acted sooner to compensate these families. This bill will provide that the embassy bombing victims will receive compensation on the same basis as compensation is provided to victims of the September 11 terrorist attacks. They would go through the process administered by the Special Master that is used by all victims of the September 11 terrorist attacks. Any person filing a claim under H.R. 3375 would waive all rights to civil suit in Federal or State court, except as to suits to collect collateral source obligations such as life insurance, pension funds, and death benefits. Any award received under the fund will be reduced by any other amount of compensation of the claim it has received or is entitled to receive as a result of the bombings. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill. It provides a logical approach to this long-awaited compensation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott).

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Boyd), a gentleman who has worked very hard and has several constituents that were lost in that bombing.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Wynn), another gentleman who has worked very hard.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, how much time is remaining?

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) who has worked hard on this issue.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Owens). (Mr. OWENS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I have no other speakers and I would just like to say in closing that this is one of our finer moments. We have a lot of problems in our society and there are many of us who are oftentimes criticizing this body and even some of our colleagues; but it is moments like this that help you to understand that no matter how long it takes, no matter how difficult it is, that if we are persistent we can indeed do the right thing. I would like to thank one young lady who is not a Member of this House, who happens to be the daughter of and the sister of two of the victims, Miss Edith Bartley. She worked so very hard. She never gave up. She went from Member to Member to Member, telling the story over and over again. And whenever we had a failed attempt in some committee, she never despaired. She came back and she would start all over again. So I am delighted, Mr. Speaker, that on this day on the floor of this House we have the opportunity to pass this legislation that will take care of those bombings that took place in Africa 4 years ago. That was the tip of the iceberg for the work of Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda. And I guess if we had been wise enough, if we had been visionary enough to be able to follow what was happening and to connect the dots, perhaps things would have been a little bit different here in the United States. But let me just say today we kind of make up for the long wait for the families of those victims. And in saying that, again, I would like to thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) for his leadership. He did not have to take this bill up. He did. And he provided assistance to all of us. I would like to thank my colleague, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Blunt) and all of the other Members who are original co-sponsors and who have worked so hard to make sure there is some justice for these families. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. WATERS

Ms. WATERS. Yes. Let me just say that 301 as originally authored did not have the proviso in it that said unless there is an agreement to seize all poppy cultivation or drug trafficking activities, which modifies the original 301 which did not have that in there. This would simply say that they could get assistance if they simply agree that they will not continue the activities as we know it. Is that what the gentleman is referring to?

Ms. WATERS. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Ms. WATERS. So, Madam Chairman, we want to discourage that. And, finally, the amendment would require the President to submit an annual report toward the eradication of poppy cultivation and the elimination of drug trafficking activities in Afghanistan. Let me just say that with all of the information that we have about what went on down in Nicaragua, too many people were involved. There was a Memorandum of Understanding between the CIA and the Justice Department that they did not have to support drug trafficking. We think we have done away with that, but we want to assure that we do not make the same kinds of mistakes as we move in to help this devastated country. They need us and we need to do the right thing. I think that we can change this country. We can change the direction. We can help very, very poor people in a devastated country. We can improve education. We can improve the infrastructure. But let us do it without drugs and drug trafficking being a part of it. We do not need the assistance of drugs in doing all of this. I would ask for an ``aye'' vote on my amendment.

Ms. WATERS. Madam Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. WATERS. Madam Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be modified in the form at the desk.

Ms. WATERS. Yes, I do.

Ms. WATERS

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3717. Deposit insurance has served America well for over 65 years. It has maintained public confidence in our banking system throughout times of prosperity and times that were not so good. The bill we reported out of the Committee on Financial Services is designed to maintain and strengthen today's system for tomorrow's consumers so that we can ensure that we have a deposit insurance system that will serve us well throughout the new millennium. I am particularly concerned about our small independent community banks and I believe they will benefit from this legislation. Not everyone agrees with this increase in FDIC. However, the Senate will continue to reconcile some of the differences that have been articulated, but I believe we should vote to pass this bill off the floor. This legislation merges the bank insurance funds and the savings association insurance funds into one deposit insurance fund. It also grants the FDIC increased flexibility to manage the funds, particularly in replacing the hard trigger designated reserve ratio with a range which will permit the FDIC to respond to economic conditions in setting the designated reserve ratio. I am particularly pleased that the legislation includes an amendment that I offered during subcommittee consideration. This amendment represents a small but important change that will implement a law that has been on the books since 1991. During the consideration of the FDIC Improvement Act, then-Congressman Tom Ridge and Floyd Flake sponsored legislation to provide for a discount in deposit insurance assessment for deposits attributable to lifeline for basic banking accounts. Basic banking is just what it sounds like. At least one quarter of low income families are currently unbanked, that is, they exist outside of the traditional banking system, often relying on check-cashing services or notorious payday lenders to facilitate basic transactions, generally paying exorbitant fees in the process. We all take for granted the ease and convenience of having a checking account, but many families lack that luxury because they are unable to maintain large minimum balances in these accounts. These lifeline accounts, by their very nature, do not hold large deposits. Furthermore, the FDIC concedes that any effect on the fund would be negligible. However, implementation of the Flake/Ridge provision was wholly dependent on appropriated funds which never materialized. My amendment simply removes the requirement for appropriated funds so that this provision, after more than a decade on the books, can finally be implemented. My amendment was adopted by voice vote at subcommittee and upheld at full committee by a bipartisan vote. It attracted the support of both industry and consumer groups, including AARP, the Independent Community Bankers of America, the New Jersey League of Community Bankers, the Consumer Federation of America, U.S. Public Interest Research Group, Consumers Union and the National Consumer Law Center. I would like to thank all of my colleagues on the Committee on Financial Services who supported the amendment, especially the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus). He has worked tirelessly in support of this provision because he truly understands that providing a small incentive for banks to offer these accounts can make all the difference in the world for millions of American families. I thank him once again.

Ms. WATERS

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, here we go again. Welfare reform is a serious issue, and we should not play politics with it. This is a bad bill, and Members on the other side of the aisle know that. This President has put forth a bill that will penalize those who are trying so desperately to change their lives. What do they mean by making a welfare mother with children under 6 work for 40 hours while they are trying to get into training programs and change their lives? We need to assess each individual and decide what they need. If they need to be in school for 2 years because they dropped out early, if they need counseling, if they need to have an opportunity to have a substance abuse program to change their lives, we should be doing that. Instead, what we are doing is taking away vocational education, doing nothing to make sure that the health care needs are taken care. No, there is not enough money in this budget for child care. Parents cannot go to work and be trained without child care. Yet there is a lot of money in the bill, $300 million, to talk about promoting marriage. Give me a break. Let us give welfare recipients a chance to become independent.

Ms. WATERS

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce The Stolen Asset Recovery Act of 2002. This bill would facilitate the identification of assets that have been stolen by dictators and other corrupt officials in developing countries and laundered in American financial institutions. Many developing countries have been ruled by dictators and corrupt officials who have stolen millions of dollars from their people, laundering these stolen assets in banks and financial institutions in the developed world. Numerous dictators, such as Sani Abacha of Nigeria, Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines, Mobutu Sese Seko of Zaire, Jean-Claude ``Baby Doc'' Duvalier of Haiti, Slobodan Milosevic of Yugoslavia, Suharto of Indonesia and the Taliban of Afghanistan, have plundered their countries' resources and left their people deeply impoverished and oppressed. When these corrupt officials leave their countries, the new governments typically lack the resources to thoroughly investigate the theft and identify the laundered assets. The Stolen Asset Recovery Act of 2002 would require the Secretary of the Treasury to submit annual reports to the Congress on the laundering of stolen assets in American financial institutions. The reports would include an explanation of U.S. Government efforts to identify stolen assets, mechanisms available to the U.S. Government to identify stolen assets and legislation that could be enacted to facilitate the return of stolen assets to the people of the countries from which the assets were stolen. The legislation would also require the Secretary of the Treasury to urge international financial institutions, including the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, to provide to the United States copies of all audits regarding the use of funds loaned to governments where corruption has been a serious problem. The United States should support efforts to identify assets stolen by corrupt foreign officials and facilitate their return to the people who rightfully own them. I urge my colleagues to support The Stolen Asset Recovery Act of 2002.

Ms. WATERS

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, in the past several weeks we have heard a lot of talk about TANF reauthorization. The Bush Administration wants to increase the number of hours that welfare recipients work to 40. Twenty-four hours would have to be in work-related activities, activities that do not include education or vocational training. But even in the remaining 16 hours, the limits on education and job training are severe in the Republican proposals. Recipients can receive vocational training, education, or rehabilitation and substance abuse treatment for a total of three months in a 24 month period. We know that education is one of the main avenues for a person to move out of poverty. A year 2000 survey of people who left the welfare rolls after 1996 found that only those workers who had at least a two- year post secondary or vocational degree were able to rise above the poverty line. Single female heads of households with a high school diploma are 60 percent more likely to have jobs. That number increases to 95 percent when they have an associate's degree. We need to focus less on putting people in jobs, and focus more on training people for careers with room for advancement. TANF Reauthorization should be about reducing poverty, not reducing caseloads.

Ms. WATERS

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Mr. Chairman, I rise to support the Sanders amendment to the Export- Import Bank Reauthorization Act. The Sanders amendment would prevent companies from receiving assistance from the Export-Import Bank if they lay off a greater percentage of workers in the United States than they lay off in other countries. The purpose of the Export-Import Bank is to create American jobs for American workers. Unfortunately, the bank has a history of providing assistance to companies that have been exporting American jobs and hiring cheap foreign labor. For example, the Export-Import Bank insured a $3 million loan to help General Electric build a factory where Mexican workers will make parts for appliances that will be exported back to the United States. As a result, 1,500 American workers will lose their jobs to Mexican workers, who will be paid only $2 per hour. The Sanders amendment would ensure that the Export-Import Bank does not subsidize companies that are exporting American jobs instead of American-made products. I urge my colleagues to support the Sanders amendment. Mr. Chairman, many of us worked very hard on plant closure legislation just a few years ago because we found that after we gave great tax cuts right here in the United States under the Reagan administration that our companies were exporting jobs to third-world countries for cheap labor. That is after we had given big tax breaks. They took the money and put it in their pockets and exported the labor. We can stop that with this simple amendment. This will help out. I would ask my colleagues to support this amendment.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, first I would like to say to my colleague, the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), that I am appreciative for his willingness to try and work out support for amendments that may not have a lot of support, but the gentleman understands the importance of a particular amendment and has worked with the author to try and get it done. So let me thank the gentleman. In addition, I would like to thank the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky) for being there always on these kinds of issues. This is so important. I came up to support the amendment because I was concerned about a project that was approved by the Export-Import Bank for $92 million for diamond mine processing equipment and services to Alrosa, a Russian diamond company, that operates in countries such as Angola where conflict diamonds are sold by paramilitary groups that propagate internal conflicts and engage in gross violations of human rights. So it is so important that we know what they are doing, or at least we have an assessment. Most Americans do not understand that we put $1 billion into this Export-Import Bank. Many would see this as simply corporate welfare. And while we have increasing problems with our own budget, while we are trying to fund education, while we are trying to secure Social Security, it is very important that we look at projects such as this one and begin to raise the questions about who is really benefiting from the Export-Import Bank. While this will do an assessment on human rights, which we need to do, I think we are going to have to go deeper. While I thank my colleague for supporting this amendment, we are going to have to go deeper to look at the Export-Import Bank and see if this is something we want to continue to do.

Ms. WATERS

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I first would like to thank my colleague from Vermont for allocating the time, but I would further like to thank both the chairman, the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), and our ranking member, the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), for the bipartisan leadership that they offer to all of us on this very important committee and the Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy and Trade. They have worked very well together, and I appreciate what they have been able to produce. I rise to express my support for H.R. 2604, the Multinational Development Banks Authorization Act. H.R. 2604 would reauthorize U.S. participation in the International Fund for Agricultural Development, IFAD, and the Asian Development Bank and set forth additional policies concerning several international financial institutions. This bill includes provisions to promote transparency in the operations of international financial institutions, oppose the imposition of user fees on primary education and health care in impoverished countries, and support efforts to stop the spread of HIV/ AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, and other infectious diseases. I am particularly interested in the United States participation in IFAD. Unlike other international financial institutions which have a broad range of objectives, IFAD has a very specific mandate, to eliminate hunger and world poverty in developing countries. IFAD's target groups are the poorest of the world's poor. They include small farmers, the rural landless, nomadic people, indigenous people, and rural poor women. IFAD provides funding and resources to promote economic development for these impoverished rural people. I am especially pleased that this bill includes a provision I offered as an amendment during the subcommittee markup on the participation of IFAD in the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries initiative. This provision requires the Secretary of the Treasury to submit a report to this committee on the participation of IFAD in the HIPC initiative. I appreciate the support of my colleagues in the Committee on Financial Services for this provision, and I would urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Ms. WATERS

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support H. Con. Res. 388, which would support the establishment of a National Minority Health and Health Disparities Month. The United States is a nation with a health system marked by its disparities. Too often, low-income Americans, racial minorities and individuals who lack health insurance find that quality health care is unavailable to them. At the request of Congress, the Institute of Medicine released a report this year confirming the existence of serious racial disparities in American health care. Racial disparities in access to cancer screening contribute to higher cancer death rates for minorities. Black and Hispanic women are less likely to receive breast cancer screening with mammograms than white women, and black and Hispanic men are more likely to be diagnosed with more advanced forms of prostate cancer than white men. Last year, I introduced H.R. 3336, The Cancer Testing, Education, Screening and Treatment (Cancer TEST) Act, to provide cancer screening and treatment services for minorities and low-income populations. This bill now has 49 cosponsors. Racial minorities have been disproportionately impacted by the HIV- AIDS epidemic. They now represent a majority of new AIDS cases and a majority of Americans living with AIDS. I am circulating a letter to the Chairman and Ranking Member of the House Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services and Education Appropriations to request an appropriation of $540 million for the Minority AIDS Initiative in fiscal year 2003. Ninety Members of Congress have agreed to sign my letter. Unfortunately, the problems in our nation's health system are only getting worse. A survey of California employers by the Kaiser Family Foundation shows that health insurance premiums increased by 9.9 percent in 2001. That is more than double California's 4.3 percent inflation rate. Furthermore, Calpers, the State of California's employee benefits system, plans to raise rates for its HMO premiums by 25 percent next year. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H. Con. Res. 388 and support legislation that will guarantee every man, woman and child in America quality health care services, regardless of race, level of income or place or employment. Quality health care should be for everyone.

Ms. WATERS

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, right now, this Congress is working on reauthorization of Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, or TANF (``tan if''). There are some good bills out there that really address critical problems with welfare, such as Patsy Mink's bill, H.R. 3113. Unfortunately, the bills that are actually moving toward the Floor have some very substantive problems. Those bills are H.R. 4090, introduced by Wally Herger, and H.R. 4092, introduced by Buck McKeon. Both bills follow closely along the lines of the Administration's proposal, and neither will make positive steps toward reducing poverty in this country. The main theme for all of the Republican proposals is workfare. I'd like to talk for just a minute about what workfare is and what it is not. Workfare is a program where people are herded like cattle into unskilled labor, where they are paid low wages and not given protections that non-welfare recipients have, such as minimum wage, OSHA protections, and civil rights regulations. In New York's largest workfare-type program, 30,000 municipal jobs have been displaced by workfare jobs. The welfare workers who were doing the same jobs as the municipal workers have not been given minimum wage and work protections. Workfare has been called ineffective by some states, and expensive by many others. The expense is so great that, to institute it on the level called for by Herger or McKeon's bill would divert resources from other initiatives. Doing so would cut off recipients from services they desperately need, such as training and child care. In a nutshell, it would be counterproductive. At a time when the Administration's budget flat funds TANF, decreasing the value of the block grant by 22 percent, we cannot embark on new experiences that will waste the precious dollars we have. What we do need is a new focus on education and training. Single female heads of households with a high school diploma are 60 percent more likely to have jobs. That number increases to 95 percent when they have an associate's degree. In addition, jobs requiring the least education experience the lowest professional growth, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The studies that have been done, and the stories from recipients tell us in no uncertain terms what we need to do to get people off of welfare and out of poverty. It is crucial that we pay attention to their suggestions, rather than going off in new directions with no proven track record.