[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 82 (Thursday, June 10, 1999)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1217]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                           HON. MAXINE WATERS

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, June 9, 1999

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 1401) to 
     authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2000 and 2001 for 
     military activities of the Department of Defense, to 
     prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal years 2000 
     and 2001, and for other purposes:

  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I rise to oppose this unjust and unfair 
rule. The Majority Leadership is still refusing to allow several 
Democratic amendments to be considered by this House. I am especially 
opposed to this rule because my amendments to extend Section 2323 of 
Title X of the U.S. Code were not ruled in order.
  Section 2323 established a five percent contract goal for small 
disadvantaged businesses and certain institutions of higher education, 
including Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Hispanic-
serving institutions. Achieving this modest goal is the objective of 
the Department of Defense, the Coast Guard and NASA. This important law 
is scheduled to expire in the year 2000.
  I proposed two amendments to extend Section 2323 beyond the year 2000 
and improve the implementation of this important provision of law. My 
colleague, Ms. Velazquez, also proposed two amendments to extend and 
modify Section 2323. So there were four different proposals regarding 
contracting for small disadvantaged businesses and minority 
institutions and none of them were ruled in order by the Republican 
leadership.
  Recent trends have provided compelling evidence for the continuing 
need for affirmative action goals in Federal contracting. Following the 
Adarand v. Pena decision by the Supreme Court, the Federal Government 
undertook a review of affirmative action programs, and subsequently, 17 
of these programs were altered or eliminated.
  These changes have led to a significant drop in the number of Federal 
contracts awarded to minorities and women. For example, in 1995, the 
Department of Energy, which contracts out 80 percent of its purchases 
of goods and services, awarded $215.8 million in contracts to women and 
minority-owned businesses. In 1997, the amount dropped to $66.1 
million. It would be extremely unfortunate if a similar decrease in 
Federal contracting with minority-owned businesses were to occur at the 
Department of Defense, the Coast Guard and NASA.
  Section 2323 is a modest goal to encourage contracts with minority-
owned businesses and other small businesses. As a result of this 
provision, many businesses owned by socially and economically 
disadvantaged individuals have been able to compete for, have been 
awarded and have executed Defense, NASA and Coast Guard contracts. 
Section 2323 has allowed small disadvantaged businesses and minority 
institutions of higher education to make a positive contribution to the 
national security of the United States.
  I urge my colleagues to oppose this unjust rule and support a fair 
rule that will allow the Members of this House to consider the 
extension of Section 2323.

                          ____________________