[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 38 (Thursday, March 8, 2012)]
[House]
[Pages H1300-H1302]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Hayworth). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of January 5, 2011, the Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from 
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) for 30 minutes.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I yield to the distinguished 
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton).


                      Congratulating Joe Quattrone

  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I thank my colleague from Texas, and I would 
like to say that she is a pleasure to travel with. She is a real 
gentlelady.
  The reason I take the floor for just a couple of minutes is one of 
our dearest friends in the Capitol is a fellow named Joe Quattrone. He 
is a barber down in the House barber shop, and on March 1 he celebrated 
42 years cutting hair in the Capitol of the United States. He came to 
the United States when he was 18 years old from Italy. He said he has 
lived the American Dream, and he's one of the nicest people that I 
think you'll ever meet.
  Everybody who has ever worked with him or had their hair cut by Joe 
understands that he is a very caring person and one that they respect. 
He has cut the hair of every Speaker of the House except two--Nancy 
Pelosi, and I don't think she goes to the men's barber shop; and John 
Boehner, the current Speaker. And I'm going to talk to Speaker Boehner 
as soon as we get back from break and get him down there so Joe can say 
he's cut every Speaker's hair since he has been a barber at the House 
barber shop.
  He has cut the hair of Vice Presidents, Presidents, the President of 
Italy, the Secretary of Transportation, ambassadors, Governors, 
admirals, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; but his favorite 
person, besides me, is Tip O'Neill, the Speaker of the House when Tip 
was the Speaker sometime back.
  He worked before he came here at Andrews Air Force Base and the 
Pentagon.
  I would just like to say to Joe the Barber, because I'm going to give 
him a copy of this floor statement, Madam Speaker, that he has been a 
credit to the institution of Congress. He is liked by everybody who has 
ever been in his chair, and I just want to congratulate him on 42 years 
of working here in the Capitol. And I don't think anybody has ever 
complained about him. He's really a nice guy. He started March 1, 1970, 
and he's here now 42 years later.
  I just say Joe, congratulations. I'll be down to see you in 2 weeks.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I was very happy to yield to the gentleman, 
and I indicated to you in the spirit of bipartisanship, although I've 
not had the privilege of having Joe cut my hair, let me congratulate 
Joe the Barber because he is the epitome of a public servant. He has 
worked for this august institution for 42 years, and I'm very proud to 
say that he can claim that he has cut the hair of all of our Speakers. 
And I don't think our Speaker, who has outstanding Italian heritage, 
our former Speaker, Speaker Pelosi, would in any way shy away from 
congratulating this distinguished gentleman who came to this country 
and literally is a walking, if you will, American Dream.
  So I want to congratulate you, Joe the Barber, on behalf of a 
bipartisan Congress and join my colleague, Mr. Burton, in 
congratulating you for your service. You are truly a public servant, an 
inspiration to all of your family members, and we wish you a long life.
  Again, congratulations for 42 years to Joe the Barber.
  With that, I will continue my remarks and thank the Speaker.


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to address their 
remarks to the Chair.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I look forward to addressing 
these very important issues to you, and certainly we want to make sure 
that we address questions.
  In the coming weeks, we will be discussing the attributes of the 
Affordable Care Act, and I will look forward to coming to the floor of 
the House and again acknowledging how much money the Affordable Care 
Act, the health care act, has in fact saved this Nation: how it has 
preserved Medicare, how we focus on medical education, medical school 
education, medical providers' education, how we have talked about 
issues dealing with health care disparities, and in particular how we 
have expanded the community health clinics that have saved lives, how 
we have worked on issues dealing with children's health care, how we 
have provided access to health care for many, many people.
  That allows me, or calls upon me, to again follow up to again 
distinguish the Georgetown law student who spoke before Members of 
Congress who got in the crosshairs of a commentary that was not very 
flattering. I just want to distinguish the commentary that came against 
the Georgetown law student from comments that will be made by 
entertainers and others across the Nation in the course of their 
comedic work.
  The question about the Georgetown law student, Madam Speaker, was 
that she was called before Members of Congress to speak. She was not 
speaking on a television program or an interview. She was actually 
called by Members of Congress to testify to the question of access of 
health care to women.
  And I will tell you that right now documentation shows that women who 
are 24 years old and above, their health plans today cost 84 percent 
more than a male similarly situated. So we know without health 
insurance how devastating it would be for women not to have health 
insurance.
  Many of the Planned Parenthood family clinics and others are focused 
on health care. We want to have a firewall, as Planned Parenthood has, 
and that is that the firewall is that access to health care is a 
distinguishable factor of their service, and that's what this young 
woman was speaking about, the importance of access to health care.
  It was in the course of that testimony that made her a victim of 
public ridicule. That's why I believe President Obama appropriately 
acknowledged the right of a citizen to petition his or her government 
and that if they do so, they should not be subject to public ridicule. 
There lies the basis of the President of the United States calling this 
Georgetown law school student. And I applaud that because no matter how 
high you are, the highest office in

[[Page H1301]]

the land, the Commander in Chief, isn't it appropriate, isn't it 
befitting of an individual who represents all of the people of the 
United States to have the humanity to be able to call people, citizens, 
families, when they are at their lowest ebb, when they have been in the 
course of public service or they have been in a position of presenting 
their public case to the United States Congress or even to the 
President of the United States of America.

                              {time}  1450

  I hope that we, no matter what our position and station in life, 
particularly those of us who hold roles in the most powerful lawmaking 
body of the world, the United States Congress--the highest office is 
considered the Commander in Chief, also the leader of the free world--
that we would have the capacity to offer an apology to someone who has 
felt offended.
  I want to move into an apology that I want to offer, and that is to 
the families in my district whose loved ones have been buried in our 
veterans' cemetery in Houston, off of Veterans' Memorial, who have now 
faced this tragic circumstance of having headstones misplaced or moved. 
I don't think there should be any tolerance for that. I believe that 
when an individual takes an oath to serve in the United States 
military, for those who, through God's grace, are able to return from 
battlefields, who are able to retire out of the military as veterans, 
that we owe them a great deal of respect for their benefits. And then 
to those families who experience a fallen loved one, either in battle 
or that they ultimately die as a veteran of the United States military, 
they should expect that the sacredness of their burial be respected.
  I will be visiting our cemetery in Houston, Texas, and asking, Can we 
not get it right? Can we not fix the problem that moves headstones, 
that has misplaced headstones and mislabeled headstones? I frankly 
believe that our men and women in the United States military deserve 
better, and I'm going to ask for better and insist on that.
  I have been working over the last couple of weeks meeting with a very 
prominent Syrian American in my district, having met with him and 
others in months past on this whole question of Syria. Just last week, 
I presented a letter to the representative of the Syrian Embassy 
demanding that President Assad resign and step down from office, 
demanding that the Red Cross be allowed, at that time, to come in and 
provide humanitarian relief, demanding that women and children be 
protected and taken to safe places so they could receive health care 
and food, and, at that time, asking for the respectful removal of the 
deceased, the bodies of the two fallen Western reporters and the others 
that have been wounded.
  Some progress has been made. In the immediate hours of that visit, we 
saw that the Red Cross and the Red Crescent were able to come in, or 
the International Red Cross. Then shortly thereafter we saw that Syrian 
forces were bombing the humanitarian relief efforts. And we heard an 
interview from one of the Western reporters that clearly indicated that 
the two reporters that died were actually murdered, because the Syrian 
forces actually targeted the location where they were, where 
journalists were. Everyone knows that there is an effort to maintain a 
firewall or respect for journalists no matter where they are, on a 
battlefield or in the area. It's known where they are allegedly trying 
to be in a safe place, and then you directly bomb that area, then you 
know that there's certainly basis for someone, an interview that took 
place on CNN that indicated that they thought it was direct murder. 
However we define it, we know that there is enormous loss of life.
  I want to just say that having had the privilege of serving on the 
Foreign Affairs Committee, now a ranking member on the Subcommittee on 
Homeland Security, having served on that committee for a number of 
years since 9/11, the tragedy of 9/11, having gone to a number of war 
zones, from Bosnia to Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, having gone to Mumbai 
right after the horrific terrorist bombing, and knowing what conflicts 
around the world mean in terms of either sending our military 
personnel, or even after we engage. If you look at the NATO engagement, 
which included the United States and Libya, there are many who will say 
right now, look at the confusion. But I think it's important to 
understand that the intent of the NATO allies was to stop the 
brutality.
  The aftermath we would want to be better. We would want there to not 
be the conflict that is going on, the tribal conflict, the instability 
of the Libyan Government as we speak. To be very truthful with you, of 
course we don't want that to be happening. But no one took to the NATO 
alliance or took to the air to bomb Libya in agreement in a coalition 
to create confusion afterward. The call and the response was to stop 
what was the apparent slaughter and the killing of Libyan citizens en 
masse.
  We know it is not perfect now. Iraq is not perfect, frankly, and we 
made it worse by going into Iraq because at that time there was not 
that kind of immediate conflict. But that was the basis for Libya.
  Now we have a situation where the argument is that Syria is too 
complicated, in the region that it's in, the impact of a direct hit is 
too complicated. Today, I am calling upon the very body that was 
established at the very end of the 1940s after we ended World War II, 
another horrific and heinous world conflict which we did not expect, 
based upon historical perspectives when many argued that World War I 
was the ``War to End All Wars,'' and, of course, that did not happen, 
and we've had conflicts and wars since.
  But right now, the brutality of violence against the Syrian people, 
the desperation of killing children in the streets, of slaughtering 
babies and of not allowing the wounded to get health care, calls upon 
the world to respond. And I think it is very clear that it is complex 
enough that a direct attack by the United States, as the administration 
has acknowledged, would not be appropriate. A direct attack, a direct 
hit by the United States may not get the results that we would like. 
But there is no doubt that we cannot leave in good conscience this 
Congress without someone calling for an immediate response and relief 
from the United Nations, which was organized to draw together world 
support.
  Whether it is appropriate for U.N. peacekeepers, whether it is 
appropriate for the U.N., working with some of the Arab States out of 
the Arab League, it is absolutely ludicrous, tragic, disastrous, and 
heinous for us to watch night after night the violence that is going on 
against the Syrian people.
  One may argue that there is violence everywhere. But it is a call 
upon our humanitarian position in the world to be able to call out for 
assistance. So, today, I am calling for actions by the United Nations 
in establishing or reaching out for a coalition that would provide 
military response. What does that mean? Providing weapons, if you will, 
so that those individuals who are defending themselves against 
slaughter--let's be very clear. These individuals are trying to defend 
themselves against slaughter, one city after another is under direct 
attack by the Syrian national forces, ordered by President Assad, who 
refuses to leave, and no one has been able to make him leave. The 
violence and the bloodshed continues on and on and on and on.
  So I don't think that we can stand and do nothing. I have already 
indicated I fully understand that a direct hit by the United States 
would not be the appropriate direction to take. But that does not leave 
us helpless, and it does not leave the United Nations helpless. And as 
a Member of Congress who has supported the United Nations over and over 
again for the value of its presence in terms of a world force, to 
insist upon some coming together of nations to the Secretary-General--
don't shame yourself with inaction. Don't shame the United Nations with 
inaction by not calling upon those who have resources in the region to 
be able to prevent those rebels, or those who are defending themselves, 
or those men and young boys who are defending themselves, who are 
picking up sticks and whatever they are using, from being slaughtered 
in the streets, from having amputated legs, from having no ability to 
be able to attend to the wounded.

                              {time}  1500

  Today, March 8, it is imperative that you begin to assess the violent 
situation and you stop this slaughter now.
  As we leave to work in the districts, I will be pushing back on this 
issue,

[[Page H1302]]

continuing to push back to the United Nations, asking the Arab League 
for their help through different states to provide this care.
  How do I put a backdrop on this? This happens to be the week in which 
we commemorate what we call, in this Nation, Bloody Sunday. For many 
who don't understand that date, it was yesterday. It was the day that 
those individuals who were pleading for the right to vote in this 
country--similar to the concept of democracy and freedom, in a 
different way, in a different era, the Syrians are saying that they are 
oppressed by this regime. But in the day that we were in the midst of 
civil rights, there were regions and places and people that could not 
vote in this country; and so citizens from all backgrounds took to 
Selma, Alabama, and proceeded nonviolently after being violently pushed 
back and, in essence, bloodied, came back and walked peaceably over 
that bridge in Selma, Alabama, which was commemorated last Sunday, but 
the actual date was this Wednesday. I will be commemorating it Houston, 
Texas, on this Sunday, March 11.
  But the concept simply was, when people felt that they were 
oppressed, in this Nation they found a way to find relief through a 
nonviolent approach. Ultimately, as those who are historians will know, 
we passed, in a bipartisan way, with the signature of President Lyndon 
Baines Johnson, both the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting 
Rights Act, which I maintain today is a protector of every citizen's 
right to vote no matter what your racial background, where you live. 
The Voting Rights Act simply says: One person, one vote. We protect 
you. We protect America. We believe in voting.
  We have since tried to expand that to ensure that there are election 
laws that don't stop people or oppress people from voting, and any 
number of things, like voter IDs, when there is no fraud. Where people 
have a registration card and have lived in the community, we should be 
allowing citizens to vote.
  But I put that in the context, because now this is 2012, and I think 
Americans feel with some, if you will--how shall I call it?--some 
mishaps and laws that probably don't work, that we can vote. Well, just 
think of a society that feels that they can't speak, that they cannot 
act upon a free government. Just think of that kind of society. And 
then you want to petition your government, and what happens? What 
happens, you're slaughtered. You're slaughtered.
  There is no peaceable marching, because if you studied Syria, you 
will know that they started peaceably marching. What happened? The 
Syrian forces came and attacked them with weaponry and with violence. 
They killed them, plain and simple, when they were marching for 
freedom.
  So I would ask that we, again, not allow this to happen. I will 
proceed with my petitioning to the United Nations. I will be prayerful 
as well, because as we stand here today, I will assure you that there 
are those in Syria that are dying as I am on this floor today, that 
there are those that are losing their lives, that they are being 
attacked by the Syrian national forces who are killing people in the 
street. I don't think that we can allow that to occur anymore in this 
month when we celebrate Women's History Month and the fact that we've 
celebrated some of the women peacemakers. Right now, today, women are 
being wounded, women are being hurt, their children are being hurt in 
Syria.
  I want to thank the Speaker for yielding this time and allowing me to 
call upon the good graces of the international family to be able to 
lift up the souls and the spirits and the lives of the Syrian people.
  As you reflect on this, let me just say, when you thought there was 
no hope--and you can look at the Arab Spring, although governments are 
not perfect and we are struggling for these governments, such as Egypt 
and others, to establish themselves, who would have ever thought that 
individuals could have brought about a change in Egypt and Tunisia and 
Libya? Who would have ever thought that democracy would be raising its 
head? As difficult as it is, don't give up on the Syrian people. Don't 
give up on those children, those babies, those young men, those men and 
those families. Don't give up on Syria, and don't stand by idly while 
bloodshed continues and Syrians are slaughtered in the street.
  I look forward to a final relief and a lifting of our humanitarian 
spirit as we, as a Nation, celebrate the democracy and the freedom in 
which we are able to live.
  I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________