[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 75 (Wednesday, June 2, 2004)]
[House]
[Pages H3711-H3717]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    ARE YOU BETTER OFF TODAY THAN YOU WERE THREE OR FOUR YEARS AGO?

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 7, 2003, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings) is 
recognized for 60 minutes.

                              {time}  2230

  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, it is certainly a pleasure to be here 
tonight along with my colleagues from the Congressional Black Caucus as 
we begin to look at a very critical issue, and it can be simply titled: 
Are you better off today than you were 3 or 4 years ago?


                             General Leave

  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
have 7 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on the 
subject of this Special Order.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Feeney). Is there objection to the 
request of the gentleman from Maryland?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I cannot help but comment on the comments 
that were just made by my Republican colleagues. As I listened to them 
very carefully, I was struck by, and I know it is their good intent to 
make America better, but one of my colleagues talked about how he had 
lost jobs in his district and how he now is trying to figure out ways 
to make sure that people who may have lost their jobs will be in a 
position to get jobs in the future. I think that is a very noble 
objective.
  But the one thing we must keep in mind is that there are millions of 
people who have lost their jobs since January of 2001, and it is 
nothing like being in a position where you have lost your job. No 
longer are you able to buy tennis shoes for your children, no longer 
are you able, in many instances, to put food on the table. And if you 
were in Baltimore, no longer were you able to afford to take a vacation 
to Disney World, let alone a faroff distant land.
  So when I listened to my colleagues, I could not help but ask myself 
the question, What have we done and what have they done to make sure 
that this country does not hemorrhage jobs? And then I heard the 
astounding argument that I did not think I would be hearing again since 
our President made it not long ago, in that there is something right 
about outsourcing jobs; that is there is something right about, 
according to my colleagues on the other side, about being able to make 
a call in Maryland for a Maryland service and possibly ending up with 
an operator

[[Page H3712]]

somewhere in India or in some far distant land because jobs have been 
outsourced.
  I would simply come to this floor, Mr. Speaker, and say that it is 
time for us to change the leadership in this country, because the jobs 
they talk about having been lost are jobs that did not have to be lost. 
Over and over again members of the Congressional Black Caucus have come 
to this floor and talked about so many issues with regard to jobs, with 
regard to education; and then I hear my colleagues talking about 
lifelong learning. And I shall comment in a moment on what this 
administration proposes to do, and that basically is to cut back on the 
very training that they say that their constituents need after they 
lose the jobs; but, Mr. Speaker, I would simply say that something is 
awfully wrong with the picture that they paint.
  Unfortunately, America has suffered and America's people have 
suffered tremendously over the course of the last 3\1/2\ years. So we 
ask the question tonight as a Nation, Are we better off today than we 
were 4 years ago? This question may sound familiar to you. If you will 
recall, it is the same question that former President Ronald Reagan 
posed to the Nation during his 1980 run for the Presidency. Now, I must 
admit that although I probably would not agree with President Reagan on 
many things, I definitely agree that Americans must assess whether or 
not their government is working for them; and if not, they must figure 
out what to do about that.
  I would submit that if government is not working, we should have 
commonsense solutions. In an employee-employer relationship, if the 
employee is not doing the job, he or she is fired. And I would submit 
this evening that we need to look at that course for this 
administration, and it is our plan to lay out our case tonight.
  Mr. Speaker, we should never forget that this is still the people's 
government. We are public servants of the American people. It is no 
accident that the first line of the Constitution reads ``We the 
people.'' And it is no accident that the people's money funds the 
operation of our government. Yet, Mr. Speaker, this Congress, led by 
Republicans in both bodies, has failed to fully provide for the people 
in every single way that matters.
  As stewards of the government's purse, my colleagues on the other 
side of the aisle have run up deficits and debt to the highest levels 
ever. At the same time, on issues from education to health care to the 
cost of basic goods and services, the average American is worse off 
under this administration than they were 4 years ago. And now, Mr. 
Speaker, the administration is already making plans for further cuts in 
services to the American people for the next fiscal year.
  We have often said on this floor that we understand and are 
definitely committed to our troops, but we also are committed to having 
a balanced approach to the problems of this country and the problems of 
the world. There is absolutely no doubt that anyone using common sense 
would make sure that you protect yourself from outside forces. I would 
agree with that, and I think most of my colleagues, if not all in the 
Congressional Black Caucus, would, as would probably all 435 Members of 
this Congress. But at the same time, Mr. Speaker, we have to balance 
that and make sure that the people in this country are taken care of 
too.
  In other words, what good does it do to go outside of this country 
and defend this country and go to Iraq and go to Afghanistan seeking 
out the terrorists while at the same time the very people that we are 
supposed to be making sure that they have benefited are falling by the 
wayside. In other words, our children. I have often said our children 
are the living messages we send to a future we will never see.
  But as I listened to my colleagues on the other side a few moments 
ago, it is interesting they never talked about the fact that children 
are indeed being left behind every day and every moment of the day. 
While they talk quite a bit about how great the No Child Left Behind 
legislation is, and I would agree with them to a degree that it is good 
legislation, and if I recall correctly most Members of this Congress 
voted for that legislation. It was pretty much a bipartisan effort. But 
the thing they did not mention is that it has been substantially 
underfunded.
  If you go to any school district throughout this country, you will 
talk to teachers and you talk to people who are on the front line, and 
they will tell you that this underfunding has caused great grief and 
has put them and State and local governments in a very bad position.
  I saw a recent Washington Post article revealed a secret White House 
budget memorandum which detailed severe cuts in a range of Federal 
programs that are essential to the lives of millions of Americans. 
Everything from Head Start, again talking about children, and 
homeownership programs, to Department of Veterans Affairs, yes, I said 
the Department of Veterans Affairs. And if I might just put a footnote 
here, here we are with the President just dedicating America's World 
War II memorial the other day, yet still the Department of Veterans 
Affairs is on the chopping block if this administration is reelected in 
November.
  It is not about what is said; it is about what is being done. I would 
ask the American people to keep their eye on what is being done, not 
what is being said. And after celebrating Memorial Day and honoring our 
veterans, I cannot imagine how some people in this town could even 
propose to cut veterans benefits.
  On Memorial Day, when I had an opportunity to talk to so many of the 
veterans in my district, one of their number one complaints was that 
they are not able to get the kind of medical care now that they need. 
They cannot even get the medical care for their spouses. And these are 
men and women who have given so much to their country believing that 
there would come a time that they would be able to get the type of 
benefits that they needed.
  But this administration, while making wonderful, wonderful speeches 
at the new World War II memorial, at the same time is cutting benefits. 
It is unconscionable to think that the men and women who served this 
country would have to endure their elected officials turning their 
backs on them when they return home and need services.
  And so it is, Mr. Speaker, that we have a situation where this 
administration has decreased Federal revenues, raised deficits through 
poor policy decisions, and is now telling the American people that they 
must sacrifice their children's educations or veterans benefits to pay 
for it all. Something is glaringly wrong with this picture when we ask 
our elderly veterans to take a cut, when we ask our children, now that 
it is their chance to get an education through Head Start and other 
programs that will support them and allow them to be all that God meant 
for them to be, it is simply not right that we would cut those things 
that would help our children get to where they have to go and cut the 
things that would help our veterans not only survive but thrive and 
live meaningful lives.
  Mr. Speaker, I think the American people must put all of this in 
context of the budget conference that recently passed this House of 
Representatives. In order to pay for the President's prized tax cuts 
and to get the most political gain, this House agreed to a budget 
resolution that only extended out for 1 year. Traditionally, Congress 
considers budgets that take into account 10 years' worth of Federal 
spending. But knowing that a 10-year estimate would reveal their fiscal 
mismanagement, this administration and the Republicans in Congress 
chose to pass a 1-year budget that would mask the true cost of the tax 
cuts, a poorly crafted Medicare bill, and the war in Iraq.
  Over and over again, members of the Congressional Black Caucus have 
come to the floor and not asked the American people but begged them to 
look at what was happening in this Congress and look at what this White 
House is doing and use a very simple commonsense measuring tool, and 
that measuring tool would simply be how, if you had a similar 
circumstance in your home, how would you handle that.
  In other words, if you had an increase in problems in your home, if 
you had emergencies in your home, would you then go to your employer 
and say cut my pay? Well, basically, that is what has happened here. 
Here we have a war in Afghanistan, here we have a war in Iraq, here we 
have also a situation where we now have to have something

[[Page H3713]]

called homeland security; and so our costs are increasing to the tune 
of $25 billion, the most recent request from the President. But at the 
same time, the President makes a decision, and my Republican colleagues 
agree, to cut taxes on the richest of the rich. Something is simply 
wrong with that picture.

                              {time}  2245

  There are many people that sit and they say to themselves, it is good 
that I get my money back, and I can understand that, but one of the 
things that we have to realize is that most of the middle class get 
very few funds back on this tax cut. The fact is that we have a 
situation where in Maryland, for example, those middle-class folks who 
got a tax cut of maybe $600, $700, they saw the tuition of their 
students at State colleges go up some 30 percent in some instances. In 
Baltimore, sewer taxes have gone up, and there are proposed taxes with 
regard to property. So taxes are going up. They are also seeing that 
their services are lessened because there is not as much money coming 
through the State coffers.
  So the question is: Is this a shell game or what? Is it a shell game 
that on the Federal level you tell me I am getting a tax cut and at the 
same time tax cuts are taking place for the richest of the rich? The 
fact still remains that services are reduced.
  Mr. Speaker, the American people should truly take a look at their 
household finances and their general well-being and ask themselves, is 
my family better off now than we were 4 years ago? I would submit that 
they would have to answer no. Further, will the Nation be better off 4 
years from now if we continue on our current course? I would guess that 
the average American would answer no to both of these questions.
  In 2 days the Department of Labor will release its monthly 
unemployment situation report. For the good of the country, I hope the 
numbers reflect a positive change in the unemployment situation. But, 
regardless, we cannot allow ourselves to forget about the unemployed 
people that those numbers represent. I have often said that so often 
what we do is we look at statistics, and we get so caught up in numbers 
that we forget that there are faces and there are families behind those 
statistics.
  Although the President and others in this administration are 
traveling the country touting job growth, we cannot allow ourselves to 
forget that the economy has yet to create a single net job under this 
administration, not one, no, not one.
  So I ask, Mr. Speaker, what should all of the millions of people who 
have lost jobs, the 150,000 workers who are joining the workforce every 
month and the college graduates, like the ones I spoke to recently at 
Shaw University and Carnegie Mellon University, do to find work in an 
economy that has not created a single job since January, 2001? Real 
people, Mr. Speaker, are struggling to supply the most basic needs to 
their families and continue to pound the pavement every day in 
desperate search of a job.
  If I were to ask the more than 120,000 unemployed people in my home 
State of Maryland if they are better off than they were 4 years ago, I 
believe the overwhelming majority would probably say no. Not only are 
they without work, but this administration continues to cut the social 
services that are supporting their very survival.
  Mr. Speaker, if you look closely, you will find that among the 2006 
cuts that the administration is secretly planning to make are job 
training and small business programs. As I listened to my colleagues a 
few minutes ago on the other side talk about retraining people for jobs 
when they lose a job, I wonder if they are communicating with this 
White House which is, at the same time as they are talking about trying 
to train people for jobs, here we have a White House that is submitting 
a budget to literally cut the training from underneath those people who 
are unfortunate to lose their jobs. It is counterproductive and, 
frankly, disingenuous to talk about job creation publicly yet cut every 
program that will create jobs when no one is looking.
  So, Mr. Speaker, as I conclude, I must say tonight that something is 
wrong with this picture. Our President continually talks about being a 
compassionate conservative, but, as many people have said, the only 
people he seems to show compassion to are conservatives. Everyone else 
just simply seems to be out of luck and out in the cold.
  Mr. Speaker, the American people cannot afford 4 more years of this 
President. For one, our country will be bankrupt and the domestic 
programs that are the life-line for tens of millions of Americans, not 
just African Americans but all Americans, will be decimated. This is a 
risk we simply cannot take. This is a risk we simply cannot afford.
  That is why, just as we saw yesterday in South Dakota and all across 
this country, Americans are exercising their civic duty to vote. We saw 
record numbers of people coming out during the Democratic primaries. 
Why? Because they are frustrated, and they want a change. They are the 
ones, as they march to the voting booth, who have already answered the 
question, am I better off today than I was 3.5 years ago, and they are 
saying, no. They are saying, yes, I will vote.
  They ask themselves another question as they walk into the voting 
booth, and that is, will we be better off if we ask this question 4 
years from now than we are today? And I think clearly their answer is 
no. I believe that after January 20, 2005, there will be new leadership 
in the House of Representatives, the United States Senate and 1600 
Pennsylvania Avenue. This new leadership will take charge to put 
America back on track, will take charge to put America back to work. It 
will take charge to make sure that our children, whose gifts are 
already wrapped up in them, have an opportunity to display their gifts 
and be all that God meant for them to be. They will take charge to make 
sure that college students have an opportunity to get an education and 
that the Pell Grants that now have level funded, basically, are 
expanded so that young people can have their opportunity.
  In closing, I am always reminded that we just celebrated the 50th 
anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education. I will never forget a young 
lady named Kayla from the John P. Sousa School when she came before one 
of our programs celebrating Brown. She came with some very simple 
words, but they were very profound. Here was this little girl standing 
on her tiptoes, very frail but very healthy.
  She stood up, and she said my name is Kayla. She said I am a student 
at the John P. Sousa School here in Washington, D.C. She said 50 years 
ago my school was segregated, and she said today my school is 
segregated. She said 50 years ago my school was all white, and then she 
said, 50 years later, my school is 98 percent African American and 2 
percent Hispanic. She said I have seen the pictures of my school, the 
John P. Sousa Middle School, from 50 years ago. She said it was a 
beautiful place, one of the most beautiful places I have ever seen. She 
said now it is much different.
  Her words were so piercing and left almost everybody in the room in 
tears when she said this. She said, today, when I go to school, I have 
no library because the adults tell us we cannot afford a librarian, so 
we have no library. She said I have had an opportunity to look at a few 
books in the place they call a library, and I noticed that many of them 
are the same books which existed on the shelves back in 1951.
  She went on to say that so often she comes to school and it is damp 
because rain is coming through the roof. She talked about the bathrooms 
and how she refused to go so often and waited until she got home to 
relieve herself because the bathrooms were in such bad shape.
  But then she asked the question which I think we must all confront. 
She said, as adults, I just ask you to do this. It is now my chance to 
get an education. It is my chance to have a decent childhood. It is 
your responsibility to provide me with that so that I can grow up to be 
who I want to be.
  So it is not just the Kaylas of the world who suffer. It is our 
veterans. It is our students. It is all of those people who simply want 
an opportunity to get across a bridge that will allow them to turn back 
and help others across the bridge of this great society. Mr. Speaker, 
we cannot continue to cut the services to them and at the same time cut 
the taxes for the richest of the rich.

[[Page H3714]]

  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek), who 
has worked so hard on these issues and has been constantly at the 
forefront of trying to make sure that we do have balance in our 
country, trying to make sure that we deal with our economy, that we 
deal with our welfare with regard to this country in a balanced 
approach, but at the same time one who sits on the Committee on Armed 
Services and makes sure that our soldiers are supplied with the kinds 
of equipment that they need, that they are given the kinds of uniforms 
and the kind of support that they need.
  I applaud the gentleman for his many, many efforts. Not only has he 
been at the forefront of our domestic issues and certainly those with 
regard to war, but he has also been one who has stood up over and over 
again with regard to peace and that is trying to bring peace to a 
foreign land called Haiti. The gentleman has spent countless hours in 
that country meeting with people, trying to make sure that humanitarian 
assistance is brought to those 8 million people who suffer.
  Recently, the gentleman has spent a phenomenal amount of time trying 
to make sure that those flood victims in Haiti get the kinds of 
supplies that they need. A true leader and a true friend, I yield to 
the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek).
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for those 
very kind words. It is always an honor to address not only the U.S. 
House of Representatives but the American people.
  I think it is very important when the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. 
Cummings) was talking about many of the issues happening to Americans 
versus for Americans, and I think it is important that we speak from 
the position of fact, not fiction.
  What we are talking about here is actually fact. This is the 
President's budget that he has put forth. This House on the majority 
side has passed a budget that in some instances undercut the 
President's budget. I thought tonight I would share with the American 
people some of the things that have taken place in this budget that is 
really jeopardizing our national security.
  I think it is very, very important for this time after Attorney 
General Ashcroft had his famous press conference last week unveiling 
potential terrorist attacks on our country, possibly these terrorists 
could be in the continental United States, information that even the 
Department of Justice admits that they have known for the last 30 days, 
30 days prior to that but failed to share with the American people.
  Also at that press conference, I thought it was very interesting, we 
have the largest Federal agency in the history of the Republic and the 
history of the world called the Department of Homeland Security. I 
thought it was something fundamentally wrong. I am looking at this 
great announcement taking place, and there was no Secretary Tom Ridge 
at the Department of Homeland Security because he did not know that 
this press conference was taking place.
  I will share with Members that Homeland Security is a very, very 
important agency in communicating with local government, giving them 
the kinds of direction and intelligence that they need to be able to 
fight the fight on the front end. We call it Homeland Security. I would 
say front-line security when it comes down to cities and counties and 
even all of the way down to the school boards of things that they have 
to do to protect the citizenry in their area.
  But I can tell Members that the budget as we look at it and look at 
the COPS program that the President has cut, words are inadequate to 
even describe it.

                              {time}  2300

  The cut in the COPS Program, which is the community policing program 
that so many Americans appreciate, so many young lives have been 
diverted from a life of crime, so many crimes have been prevented in 
local communities and States, all to have enough money to be able to 
allow individuals that are making an enormous amount of money to get a 
larger tax cut, I think that is unfair. I think it is unfair to our men 
and women that are wearing blue; I think it is unfair to firefighters 
that are out there where the fire program was cut. We are opening fire 
stations in Iraq, but we are closing fire stations in New York City. I 
think it is important as we say that we honor our first responders, 
that we do not dishonor them by cutting the very funding that they are 
looking for.
  The Firefighter Grant program was cut by $246 million. That is a lot 
of money, Mr. Speaker. It was cut for the sake of making sure that 
individuals that are well, well, well off have an opportunity to 
receive their tax cut. Then, on top of that, they try to make it 
permanent.
  Also when you look at local law enforcement, for State and local law 
enforcement, also $959 million was slashed from the budget by the 
President. As we look at interoperability, when I used to be a State 
trooper in Florida, sometimes you would show up on an emergency scene 
and you will have a city or county law enforcement officer there. Many 
times, because in my particular area we had what we call 
interoperability, we were able to talk to one another to be able to 
save lives. Now this has been cut out of the budget.
  In so many places in America, they do not have that opportunity to be 
able to talk to one another. In this time of terrorist threat and 
living under this new threat that we have right now of individuals 
possibly being on U.S. soil, individuals that wake up and go to bed 
every night with the thought in their mind and their heart that they 
want to carry out some level of harm to an American, no matter who you 
are, if you are a woman or you are a man or you are a minority or you 
are not a minority, if you are Native American, as long as you are an 
American, there are people that wake up in this world and in the 
continental United States saying, how can I carry out terror on these 
individuals? How can I disrupt their lives?
  So these cuts that are being made, we are not just talking about 
school lunch programs. That is important. We are not just talking about 
hopefully trying to get a health care plan that the 43 million people 
without health care can have health care one day, affordable health 
care. That is important. Medicare, being able to make sure that we have 
an affordable prescription drug program that works for the individuals 
that need it versus for the individuals that are making the drugs. That 
is important.
  But I will tell you what is very important is to make sure that we do 
not see a disruption in the way that we live our lives day in and day 
out. And the way this White House, and then the Congress, turned 
around, the majority turned around and even made it worse in cutting 
the very programs and the very funding that local governments need.
  Now, Mr. Speaker, I want to make sure that we are clear on this, 
because I want to make sure the American people understand what I am 
saying. If a terrorist was to carry out or attempt to carry out an act 
in your local town, community or city or State, Members of Congress are 
not going to run down there and try to take care of things. It is going 
to be that first responder. It is going to be that police officer, it 
is going to be that firefighter, it is going to be that paramedic, it 
is going to be the individuals working in the hospitals, it is going to 
be the nurse that you look at every day, the doctors that you look at 
every day that will respond to that act.
  Guess what? If they do not have the equipment to respond 
appropriately, if they do not even have the radio equipment to be able 
to communicate with a number of agencies that they must communicate 
with, to be able to hopefully contain the situation or prevent it, the 
penny will outweigh the pound in that instance.
  So one wonders why the law enforcement community has found themselves 
running to Senator John Kerry for support or help. They are running 
there because they do not see it in the budget. They do not see what we 
are saying in the budget reflecting our real purpose here and making 
sure that they have what they need.
  This hits right here, because I was a State trooper for 5 years; and 
I will tell you, equipment is important, to be able to not only make 
sure I was able to go home to my family, but to make sure that many 
others, from the State I am

[[Page H3715]]

from, Floridians, were able to go home to see their families. If I did 
not have what I needed to protect them and prevent crime or accidents 
or what have you, then it is for naught.
  Now, let us look at this. When we cut the budget here, Mr. Speaker, 
it is a trickle-down effect. It is something we call here in Washington 
``devolution of taxation.'' We say, well, we will cut your taxes here. 
We will send you a $32 check in the mail, and maybe you can go out and 
get a Number 2 or Number 3 at Burger King or McDonald's for you and the 
kids. But in reality we are passing that down to the State government.
  I have shared this on the floor before in the past, but I want to 
make sure the American people understand what is happening right now in 
real time. It goes down to the State, your local State. The State does 
not have the prerogative that we have.
  We have the opportunity to take out a credit card, swipe it and just 
put it on the Federal debt, which I must say right now, Mr. Speaker, is 
the largest debt in the history of the Republic, in the history of this 
country.
  I am not proud of that debt, and we did not get there by providing 
the dollars that we provided, minimum dollars we provided to local and 
State law enforcement to say we are putting it out there and we have 
given some money here and there and had a couple of check presentations 
on your local television station.
  But this debt came from the tax cuts for the very wealthy individuals 
in this country. This debt came from going into war unplanned, which I 
must say you pull out Time magazine and the individuals that are 
writing about this and have been following what has been going on in 
Iraq, and read about mistake after mistake after mistake that have cost 
American lives, that have cost the taxpayers money. We called ourselves 
going with the willing. We went with individuals that we helped fund to 
make it to Iraq.
  For those individuals that have served, rotated in and out of Iraq, 
those individuals that are watching us right now missing a limb, have 
facial scars from shrapnel, those individuals' families that are 
watching that never made it back, we honor and appreciate them every 
time we get an opportunity.
  But there are some individuals that are in suits and ties that are 
making decisions that are not only sending this country into further 
debt as it relates to the effort in Iraq, but also because we did it 
the way we did it, did not provide the troops with the very things that 
they needed, going back to equipment and going back to following up on 
our responsibility of making sure that they have the equipment that 
they need, the armor that they need, of making sure these Humvees have 
armor around the doors, making sure we are able to head off these bombs 
that are detonated by cellular phones, we are just catching up.
  It was a DOD report that said almost 25-plus percent of the injuries 
that took place could have been avoided if they had what they needed.
  So when you hear individuals, and I heard the chairman speak when we 
started talking about devolution of taxation, and I just wanted to go 
there with the troops for a moment so that individuals know this is not 
just local government, this is throughout the Federal Government, that 
when it goes down to the State, they have to balance the budget.
  And how do they balance it? Well, they cut the resources they would 
ordinarily give to taxpayers and your local city or town. So when that 
happens, that means that the local government, they have to turn to the 
family. That is where the buck really stops.
  Think about it in your community. How many bond referendums have 
taken place recently to be able to raise money to run your schools or 
build your schools?

                              {time}  2310

  How many opportunities where someone has said, well, you know, we no 
longer have the feeding program for your grandmother or your aunt or 
even yourself who is watching right now; we had to cut that because the 
funding ran out.
  Let me tell my colleagues, there was a lot of money to work with 
before the President took office. We were around here, Congress was 
around here talking about how are we going to spend, how are we going 
to manage and spend appropriately the surplus, of making sure that we 
are able to make sure that Social Security was not bankrupt, make sure 
that we are able to get a health care plan, where we do not have 
individuals that are punching in and punching out every day at work, 
working the midnight shift, some working two jobs and still do not have 
affordable health care. How do we help small businesses provide that 
health care to individuals? How do we help our young people prepare 
themselves to be able to be our leaders and Members of Congress and 
business owners in the future? How do we do that?
  How do we make sure that we raise the education commitment from the 
Federal Government to the State government and local governments to 
make sure that we have a quality early childhood education program? How 
do we make sure that every troop who goes into a theater of war to put 
his and her life on the line, every Reservist that goes on active duty, 
how do we make sure that they have the equipment that they need to be 
able to defend this country; the very freedom that veterans have 
provided us right now, the democracy that we live under, the flag that 
we stand under? How do we make sure that those individuals are not sent 
in? And we are saying we are right behind you and we continue to drop 
more and more back as we look at show me the money. Show me the 
commitment. Show me that you are going to stand with me.
  We have individuals right now, and this is not the Kendrick Meek 
report, you can read about it, you can ask a Reservist, you can ask 
someone who has gone into theater. Yes, they used to write letters and 
asked to be sent cake or sent candy or sent a picture. Now they are 
writing letters back home saying, send me a bullet-proof vest. Send me 
something for my radio. Send me some duct tape because I am having to 
make sure for my uniform. Send me an extra pair of pants. Send me a 
cap. Go down to the Army Navy store and buy this canteen for me.
  Mr. Speaker, individuals are sleeping right now with sand in their 
teeth. The last thing that they should have to do and the last thing 
that their loved ones should have to do is to have to worry about 
equipment. But, better yet, when the question is asked, who is paying 
on some level or experiencing some sacrifice with what these men and 
women are doing in Iraq and Afghanistan fighting the war against 
terrorism, trying to set forth a democracy in Iraq?
  So I think it is important, I say to my colleagues, that we remember 
that it is not all about press conferences and talking about how we 
support the troops. On this floor, every time something flares up in 
Iraq, someone wants to put forth a resolution supporting the troops. We 
support the troops. The troops know we support them. We do not have to 
every time something flares up, well, let us divert, let us see who is 
going to vote to support the troops and who does not support the 
troops. Supporting the troops is making sure the troops have what they 
need. And as we look at it right now, I say to my colleagues, they do 
not, and we are still talking about how we can get more of them there.
  So, Mr. Speaker, as I wrap up, I just want to say that what this 
administration has done has not been a proper response to a post-9/11 
experience. Harvard University had former Senator Sam Nunn, who is an 
outstanding patriot and a member of the Committee on Armed Services for 
many years in the other body, well-respected from Georgia, and they had 
an opportunity to look at nuclear weapons and what is the picture right 
now? What has happened in the last 4 years? We secured more nuclear 
stockpiles 2 years prior to 9/11 than we did 2 years after 9/11. And 
what we are hearing publicly from the CIA, they are more concerned 
about a nuclear weapon coming on a freighter or a container that can 
shut down the economy in New York or Miami or any of these major port 
cities, Los Angeles or one of the 361 ports we have here in this 
country, but, better yet, they are more accessible.
  So it is important. This is serious business when we start talking 
about national security. It is serious business when we start talking 
about men and women in a forward area, and it is very serious when it 
comes down to the fact

[[Page H3716]]

that we are making tax cuts permanent for individuals that are out 
buying Hummers and things of that nature, out with major disposable 
income saying that we are hurting and we need another tax cut; better 
yet, we need to make it permanent in the light of cutting the Federal 
commitment to State government, cutting the Federal commitment to local 
government, cutting the Federal commitment to local schools, cutting 
the Federal commitment to our troops when it comes down to what they 
need.
  So someone can get on the floor and they can go and talk for 2 or 3 
hours talking about how much they love the troops, but it is not 
reflected in the budget, and it is not reflected as it relates to the 
equipment that they need on the ground there.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I think that it is very appropriate that we share 
with the American people every week that this is not a Democrat, a 
Republican, or an independent issue. This is an American issue. This is 
an issue that Americans are fed up with, this continued lack of 
responsibility when it comes down to the Federal commitment to their 
local, State and local government.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his excellent 
statement. I am going to sum up and just reemphasize some of the things 
that he has said.
  I think a Thursday, May 27, article by Jonathan Wiseman of the 
Washington Post, I just want to quote part of it, and the gentleman may 
have a comment on it. But the gentleman started off by talking about 
how real, we have to deal with real facts. And the gentleman said that 
the fact is that the President does submit a budget, and so we speak 
from that budget tonight and its devastating effect on so many 
Americans.
  I had spoken earlier about the fact that this budget affects so many 
of our young people. I just want to quote from Mr. Wiseman's article. 
He says, ``The Women, Infants and Children nutrition program was funded 
at $4.7 billion for the fiscal year beginning in October, enough to 
serve the 7.9 million people expected to be eligible.'' But he goes on 
to say, ``In 2006, the program would be cut by $122 million.'' He says, 
``Head Start, the early childhood education program for the poor, will 
lose $177 million, or 2.5 percent of its budget, in fiscal year 2006. 
The $78 million funding increase that Bush has touted for homeownership 
programs in 2005 would be nearly reversed in 2006 with a $53 million 
cut. The National Institutes of Health spending would be cut 2.1 
percent in 2006 to $28 billion after a $764 million increase for 
2005.'' That brought the NIH budget to $28.6 billion.
  ``Finally, a subject that is near and dear to all of us: homeland 
security. A centerpiece of the Bush reelection campaign,'' says Mr. 
Wiseman, ``would be affected. Funding would slip in 2006 by $1 billion 
to $29.6 billion, although that would still be considerably higher than 
the $26.6 billion devoted to that field in 2004, according to an 
analysis of the computer printout put out by the House Committee on the 
Budget Democrats.''
  So we have this situation where we are simply talking about balance, 
and we have often said, members of the Congressional Black Caucus, let 
us deal with the Nation's problems like we would deal with our most 
serious family problems.
  Basically, what we have called for was common sense, understanding 
that whenever we have a family problem, we pause, we analyze the 
situation, we are flexible, we come up with solutions that are 
appropriate for the problem.

                              {time}  2320

  I seriously question whether or not we are dealing with solutions 
appropriate to the problem, because everything seems to be out of 
balance. And so it is tonight, the Congressional Black Caucus comes and 
simply says that we are looking for balance. Yes, we must address the 
issue of terrorism. Every single one of us never wants to see planes 
flying into any building. None of us want to see chemical weapons 
released out into places where they could do harm. We do not want that. 
We want to fight terrorism, but at the same time we fully understand 
that we have got to make sure that we take care of the people here in 
the United States.
  And if I have to say it a million times, I will say it over and over 
again, so often when people hear members of the Congressional Black 
Caucus or even hear the words ``Congressional Black Caucus'' they 
assume that we are only talking about and for African American people. 
And, ladies and gentlemen, I am here to tell you that the people that 
we speak for are Americans, no matter what their color may be. We want 
to make sure that every American has the opportunity to be all that God 
meant for them to be.
  One of the things that I often say, as I yield to my friend, is that 
when I get up in the morning, after I pray for myself and my family, I 
ask God to give us as a Congress, give us the opportunities and the 
wisdom and the discernment to increase our constituents' opportunities 
to be blessed so that they can live the best lives that they can.
  And so that is what this is all about. Not only our constituents, but 
as we well know, what we do in this body not only affects the 
constituents in our district, the constituents in our country, but, I 
would submit, our constituents of the world. It is not just limited to 
this country.
  Mr. Speaker, I would now yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I just want to say that the 
gentleman is 110 percent right. I am so glad you shared the article 
with the American people and the Congress.
  Today I wore the World War II pin they gave us when we were there at 
the dedication. I went with my uncle, King Pitman, and my mother, 
Congresswoman Carrie Meek. It was a very proud moment in their 
lifetime, the experience of the time of World War II. My uncle is a 
Korean veteran and he is a part of the VA. He is injured. He is 
disabled. He is in a wheelchair. I could not help but look at the other 
patriots that were out there. They asked for all the veterans to stand 
up and those that could stand, they stood. Some just put their hand up 
because they could not stand. These are the individuals that fought 
such a wonderful, wonderful war on behalf of our freedom. There was a 
lot going on during that war. There was a lot going on in Congress 
during that war.
  But I will tell my colleague this, that I could not help but think on 
that day we did honor them. And, yes, they were without a place in our 
Mall for their service. And now they have a memorial that is 
outstanding. And I commend those that put forth the private sector 
dollars and also the Members that put forth the legislation to make 
that happen.
  But I could not help but think the reality on Tuesday morning that if 
they went to the VA the line and the wait would have been almost as 
long when it comes down to health care as it took for them to be 
recognized by this country.
  I will tell you this: we say that we love them, we say that we 
appreciate them, but when it comes down to being able to provide just 
the simple health care that they were promised, they have to wait weeks 
and months. VA hospitals are being closed throughout this country. And 
we are adding more and more veterans as we fight this effort in the 
gulf, as we fight this effort in Iraq and Afghanistan and the Horn of 
Africa. More and more veterans are being added to the rolls. I will 
tell you if veterans are having it hard now, I will tell you, if this 
Congress, if the American people do not do what they need to do in 
November to make sure that we have leadership in this House, that we 
have leadership in the White House, and that we have leadership in the 
other body that is going to set that as a priority, that we need to 
make sure that these veterans get what they deserve. And that is 
respect, number one, and to make sure that they get the health care 
that they were promised when they signed up. They did not sign up to 
wait in line, especially every day.

  My son, we have an American flag outside of our house in Miami. It 
flies. We keep the light on it. We make sure no matter what is going on 
in the world that we appreciate and we honor their patriotism and we 
honor this country. But it is just a sad commentary that we can go and 
say, fine, you are a wealthy individual, and I am not upset with 
individuals being wealthy, maybe one day I can maybe in another life. 
But when we have veterans that are waiting in the lines and

[[Page H3717]]

not receiving the kind of health care that they deserve and not being 
appreciated in the way they should be appreciated, I think we can do 
better things with that money to be able to make sure that we honor 
them.
  I thank my colleague for allowing me to be here tonight. I look 
forward to the Congressional Black Caucus continuing to come to the 
floor to share with the American people about what is going on under 
the dome here in Washington D.C.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman again for his 
leadership. The gentleman has been here for less than 2 years now, but 
has made a tremendous impact on so many of us. We are very proud of his 
leadership.
  As we close, Mr. Speaker, I assume we have about a minute, let me 
just say this, that the gentleman did make a point that I want to 
reemphasize. We want to make sure we have a strong military. But young 
people, if they are listening to what we are saying and they are 
informed, a lot of times young people will go into the military, they 
are looking forward, they have a vision of their future, and they want 
to serve this country, they want to give it their best; but they also 
look beyond their service. They are saying what benefits will come to 
me? What benefits will come to my family? So I think probably one of 
the best recruiting tools for a strong military is for us to keep our 
commitment.
  When they see their grandfathers doing what the gentleman just said, 
waiting in long lines for their relatives and friends, that does not 
say very much for us.
  So I think as we are in this war and as we stand up for our soldiers, 
we must also stand up for our veterans.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. The gentleman is 110 percent right. Veterans 
should not get the voice mail when they call the VA. They should get 
the person that is going to treat them the way that they should be 
treated and make sure they are scheduled for whatever appointment they 
need in a reasonable time and not wait 3 or 4 months just to see an 
optometrist.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. I think it is very appropriate that we end on that 
note, Mr. Speaker, a note about the people we just spent a day saluting 
and letting them know how much we love them; but now it is not only 
time to salute them and tell them that we love them but it is also time 
to make sure that we do for them as they have been promised.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise as Member and First 
Vice Chair of the Congressional Black Caucus to warn our great nation. 
The current Administration--one that has made promises, one that has 
amassed tremendous debt, and one that has gotten us into a war and 
subsequent occupation that can be characterized as a financial abyss 
has put government agencies on notice this month that if reelected, the 
2006 budget may include cuts for virtually all agencies in charge of 
domestic programs, including education and homeland security.
  In the Administration's ``accidental'' memorandum proposing potential 
budget cuts fails to realize that when cuts are made across the board, 
vulnerabilities are created in each area, and we then have a homeland 
security problem.
  A Washington Post article (May 27, 2004, Page A01) entitled ``2006 
Cuts in Domestic Spending on Table,'' a budget analyst at the 
conservative Heritage Foundation tried to rationalize the 
Administration's proposed 2006 cuts in stating, ``I think the public is 
ready for spending cuts . . . not only does the public understand [sic] 
there's a whole lot of waste in the federal budget. However, the public 
is ready to make sacrifices during the war on terror.'' There is 
something troubling about that statement, something that is endemic to 
the entire Administration. The public's supposed willingness to 
sacrifice is obviously in respect of the need to conserve and enhance 
our domestic homeland security policy. Why on earth would the public 
not want to spend more money on improved homeland security? National 
Institutes of Health (NIH) spending would be cut 2.1% in 2006, to $28 
billion, after a $764 million increase for 2005 that brought the NIH 
budget to $28.6 billion. We won't be worrying about improving our 
biodefense programs, apparently.
  This is good news, bad news situation. The good news is that 
President Bush has hurt his chances of being elected again by letting 
people know that, if he is reelected, his budget for 2006 will include 
spending cuts for virtually all agencies in charge of domestic 
programs, including education, homeland security and others that the 
President backed in his campaign year. That will hurt his chances of 
being reelected. The bad news is that if he is reelected, his budget 
for 2006 will include spending cuts for virtually all agencies in 
charge of domestic programs, including education, homeland security and 
others that the President backed in his campaign year.
  J.T. Young, a spokesman for the White House Office of Management and 
Budget, said in a memo that, ``Agencies have asked for this sort of 
direction.'' Maybe that is true, but the rest of us didn't ask for such 
a negative policy. We need domestic programs, including education, 
homeland security, and others that the President backed in his campaign 
year.
  The funding levels referred to in the memo would be a tiny slice out 
of the federal budget--$2.3 billion, or 0.56 percent, out of the $412.7 
billion requested for fiscal 2005 for domestic programs and homeland 
security that is subject to Congress's annual discretion. It will not 
offset the enormous expense of the war in Iraq, an expense that we 
cannot even begin to estimate. But it will hurt the American people. We 
depend on these programs.
  I am amazed by some of the items on his chopping block: The Education 
Department; a nutrition program for women, infants and children; Head 
Start; and homeownership, job-training, medical research and science 
programs all face cuts in 2006. This is very difficult to understand.
  It also bothers me that the administration may have to make cuts in 
key government services to pay for the tax cuts that have gone to the 
wealthy members of our society. But with the budget deficit exceeding 
$400 billion this year, tough and painful cuts are unavoidable, said 
Brian M. Riedl, a budget analyst at the conservative Heritage 
Foundation, and this may be true. As I have said in the area of 
immigration law, we need to work together to solve our problems. If we 
have to cut expenses, the decision on what should be cut needs to be 
made on a bipartisan basis.
  Another approach to offsetting our deficit would make more sense to 
me. We presently have between 8 and 14 million undocumented aliens 
living in the shadows of our society. If we brought them out of the 
shadows and made it possible for them to obtain good employment, they 
could contribute to our ability to pay off the deficit with the income 
taxes that they would pay.
  Mr. Speaker, thank you for giving us time to discuss these important 
issues.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________