[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 39 (Thursday, March 2, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H2573-H2574]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        DON'T HURT THE CHILDREN

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Fields] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. FIELDS of Louisiana. Mr. Speaker, today I had a very, very 
important visit from my district. I had a visit from a very, very young 
kid, whose name is Jonathan Edwards. He is a kindergarten student. He 
is 6-years of age. He walked into my office and he had some little red 
buttons, and he pinned a little red sticker on each member of my staff. 
He walked into my office and he indeed stuck one on me. And it 
indicated ``Don't hurt the children.'' Don't hurt the kids.
  I gave him a big hug and we talked about some of the things that were 
taking place in Baton Rouge, and we also talked about what is taking 
place here in Washington. He walked out of the office, Mr. Speaker, and 
I could not help but think about what is taking place right here in 
Washington, DC as this little kid tried to make some sense of what is 
taking place here in the midst of this debate.
  I thought about Healthy Start, and I thought about the cut of $10 
million in a program that is so important to our young people. I 
thought about the WIC Program, $25 million will be cut; 50 to 100 
thousand expected mothers will be taken away from this program. I 
[[Page H2574]] thought about the fact there are so many babies that 
die, Mr. Speaker, after they are born, because their parents do not 
have proper prenatal care. And I was looking at little Jonathan, and it 
made me think what shameful condition in this country when we take 
money away from mothers who want to have productive children, who want 
to bring birth to kids who can live and who can survive.
  Then I thought about educational cuts, $1.7 billion in educational 
programs, and I could not help but think about the $500 million that we 
cut in the program called Drug Free Schools and Communities. And how 
can we, Mr. Speaker, cut $500 million, totally eliminate drug free 
schools in communities, when drugs in our schools and communities are 
going up and not coming down?
  What are we saying to our children? Just say no to drugs? Or just say 
no to drugs is the moron's answer to the drug problems? And it was that 
simple, we would not even need schools. We would simply tell kids, just 
say yes to math, just say yes to science.
 But that is not the answer to the drug problem. We must teach kids 
drug education.

  Then I could not help but think about the fact we are cutting $100 
million from elementary and secondary infrastructure, school 
infrastructure. We have jails and prisons in this country, Mr. Speaker, 
that are in better condition than our schools. You take a school in my 
own Parish, Red River Parish, where the ceilings are leaking everyday. 
Every time it rains, students cannot stay in the classroom because the 
ceilings are leaking, not to mention the fact that the air conditioner 
does not work during the summertime and the heat does not work during 
the wintertime.
  This same Congress, just when we took away $100 million of money for 
infrastructure for schools, we just appropriated $10.5 billion for 
jails. So if you are a prisoner in this country you have great air 
condition, the ceilings do not leak, and you have an opportunity to be 
in a building that is built well and well maintained.
  Then I thought about the $28 million from the Dropout Program that 
was cut. Realizing that 86 percent of the people in this country who 
are in jail are high school dropouts, there is a serious correlation 
between education and incarceration. But yet we find the need in this 
Congress to cut $28 million from the Dropout Program.
  Then I thought about the summer jobs program. I guess that irked me 
almost the most, because I thought the Contract With America was to 
take people off of the welfare roles, but not to take kids off of the 
payrolls; to take innocent kids in the summertime who finished school, 
and all they have to do and look forward to is a summer job, to totally 
eliminate that program. Now we are going to have kids on the streets, 
more crime indeed. Kids who go and work during the summer will not be 
able to do it this summer if this rescission package stays as it is 
today. These kids take that money and buy their school clothes. Many of 
them help their parents.
  Then I thought about, lastly, but certainly not least, the school 
lunch program. And I take a moment of personal privilege on the school 
lunch program because I am indeed a person who went through school and 
who benefitted from the school lunch program. And to think that this 
Congress would have the audacity and unmitigated gall to take school 
lunches away from innocent children, when in jails, when prisoners in 
jail today get three square meals a day. It is popular to feed a 
prisoner in this country, but it is not popular and is not correct to 
feed a child.
  Then what really irks me, Mr. Speaker, at the time we take food out 
of the innocent kids' mouths, we give $1.2 billion in food aid to 
foreign countries. At the time we take away summer jobs, we give $2.3 
billion to economically support other countries.
  So I hope that my colleagues defend these children and defend what is 
right and take this opportunity to defeat this rescission package when 
it comes to the floor.
                         parliamentary inquiry

  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it.
  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, since the other side has obviously a 
coordinated effort here to really have not just a series of 5-minute 
special orders, but a number of them, could we please be tight on the 
time? Because there are folks on this side of the aisle who want to 
keep in the spirit of the 1 hour here and 1 hour there. I would ask 
perhaps without a ruling form the Chair that, and I suppose Mrs. 
Clayton is in charge, that you could be a little tighter on your time 
so we could have the chance to talk, unless you want to yield some time 
to us?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In response to the gentleman's parliamentary 
inquiry, the Chair would state for Members who have spoken this evening 
on both sides of the aisle, the Chair has attempted to remind them of 
that 5-minute limit, and will continue to do so.

                          ____________________