[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 18]
[House]
[Pages 25283-25291]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                  CBC DISCUSSES SCHIP AND THE JENA SIX

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 18, 2007, the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Jones) is recognized 
for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.


                             General Leave

  Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and include extraneous materials on the subjects of the Congressional 
Black Caucus Special Order message hour today that will focus on SCHIP 
as well as the Jena Six.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Ohio?
  There was no objection.
  Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, today 50 million Americans have no 
health insurance, including more than 8 million children. Eight out of 
10 uninsured Americans either work or are in working families. Sadly, 
many of those uninsured and underinsured are African American.
  Being uninsured means going without needed care. It means minor 
illnesses become major ones because care is delayed. Tragically, it 
means that one significant medical expense can wipe out a family's life 
savings. There are millions of working uninsured Americans who go to 
bed every night worrying about what will happen to them and their 
families if a major illness or injury strikes.
  In my home State of Ohio, there are currently 1,362,000 uninsured, an 
increase of 18,000 people since 2003. We have also seen the strain on 
many of

[[Page 25284]]

the local hospitals in my district when people are forced to use 
emergency rooms as their source of primary care.
  The problem is getting worse. As the price of health care continues 
to rise, fewer individuals and families can afford to pay for coverage. 
Fewer small businesses are able to provide coverage for their 
employees, and those that do are struggling to hold on to the coverage 
they offer. It is a problem that affects all of us, and we cannot sit 
idly by while the people of this country continue to go without health 
insurance.
  Tomorrow, we will have an opportunity to expand one of the most 
effective government programs implemented in the last decade, the State 
Children's Health Insurance Program, or SCHIP. SCHIP is a joint State-
Federal program created in order to provide health insurance to 
children in low-income households whose income, although meager, was 
still above Medicaid eligibility.

                              {time}  1945

  Currently, the program allows for States to provide health insurance 
to families whose household income is up to 200 percent of the poverty 
level. In 2006, SCHIP provided coverage to over 6.7 million children, 
and although it has been successful since its inception, there are 
still 9 million children without any health insurance, many of whom are 
minorities. Currently, more than 80 percent of the uninsured African 
American children and 70 percent of the Hispanic children are eligible 
for SCHIP but not enrolled.
  It gives me great pleasure to lead this special hour this evening on 
behalf of the Congressional Black Caucus, and I'm pleased at this time 
to yield time to my colleague and good friend Barbara Lee from 
California.
  Ms. LEE. First, Mr. Speaker, let me just thank my colleagues from the 
Congressional Black Caucus for their leadership, especially our Chair, 
Congresswoman Carolyn Kilpatrick, who has done such a wonderful job 
keeping us focused on ``Changing Course, Confronting Crises and 
Continuing the Legacy.''
  I also want to thank the Chair of our Ethics Committee, Congresswoman 
Stephanie Tubbs Jones for her leadership on so many issues and also for 
her service on the House Ways and Means Committee. She has truly made 
history as the first African American woman serving on that committee, 
and as we heard tonight, her commitment to children's health care is 
remarkable, and she has done so much on behalf of our children, and so 
I thank Mrs. Jones for her leadership and for this Special Order.
  Let me first rise in solidarity with the tens of thousands of people 
around our Nation who took to the streets last week to protest the 
miscarriage of justice that has taken place in Jena, Louisiana.
  Students in my district are as outraged as students throughout the 
country. The case of the Jena Six is yet another example of the 
institutional racism in our criminal justice system, and it is 
unacceptable.
  We have come so far from the days of Jim Crow, but incidents like 
this one should serve as a solemn reminder of just how much further we 
must go in seeking liberty and justice for all.
  Just with Katrina, the Jena Six demonstrates in a glaring and tragic 
manner the unfinished business of America. Unfortunately, these are 
issues in many instances of black and white.
  If we are ever to overcome the tragic legacy of racism in this 
Nation, we have a duty to our young people to see to it that the 
principle of equal justice is upheld. If we truly believe in our 
Nation's principle of equality under the law, then we must make sure 
that everyone, regardless of race, is held equal under the law.
  There are Jenas everywhere in America, and it's not just where nooses 
are hung from trees. Just look at the injustice and the ramifications 
of mandatory minimum sentences and three strikes laws. Young black men 
have received sentences under these laws totally disproportionate to 
the crime committed. It's time for America to wake up and begin to 
complete this unfinished business.
  Now, let me just briefly talk about children's health care and say in 
no uncertain terms that it's really incredibly irresponsible and 
downright shameful that the President really does not support 
children's health care.
  SCHIP is one of the most successful programs in our Nation, 
facilitating coverage for 6 million children. When I was in the State 
legislature, along with Congresswoman Hilda Solis and now-Mayor Antonio 
Villaraigosa, we wrote the Healthy Families program, which was the 
California SCHIP initiative. We were then and continue to be committed 
to extending the reach of the program as much as possible with the 
available resources, and now Healthy Families in California provides 
low-cost access to health care for over 800,000 children, more than any 
other State.
  The flexibility built into SCHIP has allowed California to provide 
access to health, dental and vision coverage for the children that it 
serves, and we must continue to support that vital mission.
  Providing health care coverage for our children is one of the most 
cost-effective investments that America can make. Children are the 
least costly to provide coverage for, and giving children access to 
adequate primary health care will create a generation of healthier, 
better educated and, in the end, more productive adults.
  Under the Bush administration, the number of uninsured Americans has 
continued to grow. Employers continue to cut coverage and shift more of 
the burden to employees as costs continue to rise, but the SCHIP 
program has slowed the growth for our Nation's children.
  Additionally, comprehensive health coverage for children is an 
important step towards eliminating the growing, continuing, huge health 
disparities that plague minority populations, including 800,000 Asian 
Pacific Americans, 1.4 million African Americans, and 3.4 million 
Latinos.
  Minority children make up more than 5 million of the 9 million 
uninsured children. These children are more than twice as likely as 
white children to die before their first birthday, and these mortality 
rates are a direct result of these children being uninsured.
  So, quite frankly, I think it's two months of the funding for this 
occupation of Iraq, this funding would cover every child in America for 
a year. It is a tragedy that children's health care has not been funded 
at the level that we're funding the occupation of Iraq.
  Now, unfortunately, I have to say it seems like the President is 
waging war against our children, and I hope that the American people 
hold him accountable.
  I thank you for organizing this Special Order tonight.
  Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend from the 
great State of California, Congresswoman Barbara Lee.
  It gives me great pleasure at this time to yield time to my good 
friend from the great State of New Jersey. He is a leader in 
international relations and is now the Chair of a new subcommittee 
called Global Health as part of the International Relations Committee. 
I give you my good friend and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Donald 
Payne).
  Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, let me begin by also expressing my accolades 
to the gentlewoman who is chairing this Special Order tonight from the 
great city of Cleveland in Ohio.
  As you know, she has served with distinction in the past in the 
judicial system as a judge. She is a former prosecutor, of course, and 
esteemed attorney, and she now heads the very difficult Ethics 
Committee, which really says that of all of the people in this body, it 
was deemed that she was the most qualified and suitable, in addition to 
qualifications you need to be suited for a position, and so I commend 
you for that.
  Also, as I previously mentioned, we're very pleased with the 
Congressional Black Caucus as it continues to be the conscience of the 
Congress. Our chairperson from the great city of Detroit, 
Representative Kilpatrick, is doing an outstanding job.

[[Page 25285]]

  Today, I rise to speak briefly on two subjects. First of all, I rise 
to speak about my support for the reauthorization of the State 
Children's Health Insurance Program, SCHIP, which expands and increases 
health insurance coverage for low-income children and improves the 
quality of health care that our children receive. But we need to pass a 
bill that fully funds and covers all eligible children. How could the 
richest Nation in the world do less than to provide for its young? It 
is critical and important because they are our future.
  Today, our Nation is facing a health care crisis. Existing private 
insurance options are becoming increasingly less affordable for 
families, and 45 million individuals remain uninsured in our country, 9 
million of whom are children. The State Children's Health Insurance 
Program and Medicaid have been successful in providing 6 million 
children with health care coverage.
  In considering the reauthorization of SCHIP, we must build on past 
bipartisan success and work together to ensure coverage for the 9 
million children who remain uninsured.
  I am proud to say that New Jersey has made significant progress in 
providing health insurance for its children. However, the progress 
cannot be maintained unless we reauthorize legislation which meets the 
real needs of children and for children's health coverage, including 
addressing the unique needs of children with disabilities.
  According to a study released by Families USA, the number of 
uninsured children in my home State of New Jersey could be reduced by 
100,000 Statewide if SCHIP is fully reauthorized.
  Without this legislation, New Jersey has more to lose than most 
States, unfortunately. Why? Because New Jersey did the right thing by 
increasing SCHIP eligibility to 3.5 times the Federal poverty level 
because of the cost of living, which is higher in New Jersey, 
especially housing costs. Similarly, New Jersey enrolled low-income 
parents in part because research has shown that this results in more 
low-income children being enrolled in the program.
  However, instead of being rewarded for these actions, under the Bush 
administration's proposal, over 28,000 children and 80,000 parents 
Statewide could lose their health care coverage. In addition, thousands 
more children who are eligible now but not participating would never be 
able to enroll in the program.
  Mr. Speaker, the Federal Government must be a responsible partner in 
terms of State health coverage initiatives. Forty years ago, Medicare 
eliminated the problem of the uninsured among the elderly. I believe we 
have an opportunity to take steps to do the same now with our children 
by fully reauthorizing this vital health care program.
  Mr. Speaker, my commitment to children's health care is solid, and I 
urge that we support a bill that fully reauthorizes, not half, not a 
quarter, not three-quarters, but fully authorizes, and I hope that the 
bill that comes before us will do just that.
  Now, if I may speak for a few minutes on the Jena Six.
  Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Absolutely, please proceed.
  Mr. PAYNE. Thank you very much. Because we stand here on the 50th 
anniversary of school desegregation in the South and 43 years ago after 
the signing of the civil rights bill of 1964.
  However, recent events, particularly in the last 2 years, give 
credence to the saying that all that glitters is not gold. Although we 
thought we were making tremendous progress, still many problems remain.
  Two years ago, New Orleans washed away, exposing undertones of class 
and race that did not go away with the signing of those two momentous 
decrees, Brown v. the Board of Ed and the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
  In Jena, Louisiana, the issue of race, which had been simmering below 
the surface, had reached the boiling point late last year. Can you 
imagine that an act of sitting under the unspoken white only tree will 
garner the reaction of nooses? Not only nooses, but nooses decorated in 
the school colors being hung from that same tree? There's no mistake 
the symbolism that nooses hanging from a tree means in the not-so-
distant history of America.
  As a matter of fact, the NAACP was founded in 1909 not for full 
employment, not for equal accommodation. The simple, original goal was 
simply to try to stop lynchings, just try to stop lynchings, and here 
we have nooses put under a tree that is the tree for whites only, to 
send a message that if you sit here, you don't know what might happen 
to you in the future.
  While I find what those students did to be egregious, hanging the 
nooses on the tree, I am just as disgusted and dumbfounded by the 
reaction of the school administrators. Chalking up those actions to be 
a youthful stunt shows a dereliction of duty by the Jena school 
administrators. Have you no sense of history? Have you have no sense of 
common decency? Three days of in-school suspension for the culprits of 
this prank equates to a slap on the wrist. That punishment says shame 
on you but really means no harm, no foul.

                              {time}  2000

  Yet, after almost 4 months of underwhelming reactions from the school 
administration who are supposed to protect and advocate for the 
students under their care, the school imploded.
  While I do not condone violence as a solution, couldn't something 
have happened before we even arrived at this point? Yes, one student 
was injured, and thankfully he has recovered. But attempted second 
degree murder, second degree aggravated battery and conspiracy?
  The Jena school administration and the local legal system cannot run 
hot and cold while doling out punishments. They have the responsibility 
to be objective and fair, and not play with the people's lives like 
they are pawns in a chess game. The punishment must fit the crime. We 
are dealing with lives here, especially the lives of young people who 
still have a lot ahead of them. Threatening to take their lives away at 
the stroke of a pen does not ring of the necessary objectivity and 
fairness befitting a district attorney who looked at the black students 
and said, by the stroke of this pen I can have your future of your 
life.
  And so as I conclude, Martin Luther King said, injustice anywhere is 
a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network 
of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one 
directly, affects all indirectly.
  As Members of Congress elected by the people to represent them and to 
promulgate laws on their behalf, we have to speak out against these 
types of injustices that threaten the very foundation upon which this 
Nation stands, equal treatment under the law. If we fail to speak up 
for these young men, we will be abdicating our roles for which we were 
elected. What is to say that my grandchildren or your child will not be 
the next? Let us not sheepishly accept this type of behavior, not in 
the 21st century.
  Mrs. JONES of Ohio. I would like to thank the gentleman from New 
Jersey for his comments.
  Today, as I said previously, under the leadership of our Chair of the 
Congressional Black Caucus, Congresswoman Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, 
this is the CBC's special message hour. Today our message is on the 
SCHIP program and the Jena Six.
  It gives me great pleasure to yield time to my colleague and good 
friend from the Virgin Islands. She is a medical doctor. Prior to 
coming to Congress, she practiced medicine right here in Washington, 
DC. She is the leader of the Congressional Black Caucus health brain 
trust. It gives me great pleasure to yield such time as she may consume 
to the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands, Donna Christensen.
  Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Thank you for yielding, Congresswoman, and for 
leading this Special Order so we can speak of these issues of 
importance to our constituents. And let me join my other colleagues in 
applauding our chairwoman, Congresswoman Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, for 
setting aside this hour, and let you know again how

[[Page 25286]]

proud we are, how proud you make all Americans as the first black woman 
on the Ways and Means Committee and also as Chair of the Ethics 
Committee.
  Tonight, this hour is devoted to two topics, the Jena Six case and 
the Children's Health Insurance Program. As I tried to decide which one 
of these compelling and imminent issues to speak on, it occurred to me 
that there is a connection between the 2. Both deal with the well-being 
of our children and this Nation's responsibility to provide equal 
opportunity for them for a life of quality and of achievement.
  With the case of Michael Bell, who remains locked up with no bail, as 
well as the other five Jena High School students, this country is 
witnessing firsthand the kind of injustice perpetrated on far too many 
African American children which results in the destroying their dreams, 
their hopes, and their lives. It is time for the good people of this 
country to rise up and say, no more. So I want to thank the leadership 
of the CBC and all of our members for answering the call of these young 
people. I thank the Reverend Jesse Jackson, the Reverend Al Sharpton, 
the others of the faith leadership, the NAACP, and the thousands who 
marched in protest, for standing up and standing with the Jena Six and 
for justice.
  These young people and Genarlo Wilson of Georgia are just seven of 
the countless others who have faced and continue to face the same fate, 
and we must never stop the work of protecting our children.
  That applies also to the issue of the Children's Health Insurance 
Program. Regardless of what one hears on TV and radio, there are about 
6 million children now in the program, 800,000 of whom would lose their 
insurance if we reauthorize it at the level the President says he will 
accept. There are now almost 9 million children who are uninsured, 6 
million of whom are eligible for SCHIP, the children's insurance. The 
bill the Senate Republicans are holding us at will only add about 2 
million. I believe that every eligible child must be covered, even if 
that means a shortened reauthorization to stay within the funding 
limits set in the Senate.
  And the White House and Republican talking heads need to stop 
misinforming and distorting the truth about what we are proposing in 
the House bill and even proposing in the watered down version that the 
Senate has reached agreement on. There are no upper middle class, even 
middle class children who would be covered under either the House 
original version or the current proposal. Coverage is provided for only 
up to 200 percent of poverty, which is where it has always been. The 
House SCHIP I still support would just finally provide adequate funding 
to get those already eligible, but not signed up, covered.
  Our children need access to health care that includes dental care, 
mental health care; and it needs to begin at the very beginning by 
including prenatal care for their mothers. The Territories need to have 
State-like treatment, and we must also include immigrant children who 
are legally here.
  The American people want us to provide health care to everyone. If we 
cannot begin with poor children, what kind of country are we? Do we not 
understand that, in keeping our children healthy, we save money by 
preventing more serious chronic illness later and that we build a 
stronger country by enabling them as healthier adults to contribute to 
everyone's well-being and our Nation's strength?
  We in the House have built consensus around the better bill, and that 
was not easy. We need our colleagues on the other side of the Capitol 
to join us on the side of right. Come on, colleagues, let's give our 
children what they need. Let's do the right thing. Let's send the 
President a bill that is truly observing of the wonderful human beings 
full of potential that are America's children. If he vetoes it, let it 
be on him, not on us.
  Mrs. JONES of Ohio. I thank the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands.
  It gives me great pleasure at this time to yield for comment to my 
good friend from the great State of California, former ambassador to 
Micronesia, a now Member of Congress, such time as she may consumer. We 
are glad to have her here. She is in her third term, the gentlewoman 
from California, Congresswoman Diane Watson.
  Ms. WATSON. Mr. Speaker, I want to give a special thanks to 
Representative Stephanie Tubbs Jones for coordinating this. She 
certainly has shown her leadership ability in everything that becomes 
her responsibility. And I thank you for the time.
  I want to very quickly add my remarks to those of my colleagues 
referencing the Jena Six. I was horrified to see us take a step 
backwards into a period of time when there was fear and hatred 
displayed on people's faces and in their actions. And certainly we know 
that with every crime committed there is a punishment.
  But the symbol of justice in this country of ours, the United States 
of America, is a symbol that has a scale and a blindfold, because 
justice should be blind. And in a country that uses the rule of law as 
its guide post, how is it that we become so unjust when we are dealing 
with our young people?
  Certainly, things happen and anger builds up and children do things 
that are illegal and sometimes foolish. But rather than looking at them 
as adults, let's apply the law to them as young people and apply it 
equally so they can learn their lesson.
  With a stroke of the pen and destroying the lives of six young men, I 
think that sends the wrong message to the world. We are asking other 
countries to model their forms of government after ours here in 
America. And I would give a caution. We have made too many mistakes, 
and I would say don't take our mistakes as part of our Western-style 
democracy. They are truly mistakes of man, not mistakes of law. And so 
I would hope that, after the demonstrations, after the fury, justice 
will take place and people will be treated fairly.
  Mr. Speaker, our American health care system is failing. According to 
the Census Bureau, the number of American children who lack health 
insurance has reached a new high, 8.7 million. Worst of all, that 
number has actually increased by 1 million just over the previous 2 
years. Meanwhile, our gross domestic product during that same period 
increased by $1.5 trillion. So at the same time our economy was growing 
by that amount, 1 million more children were losing their health 
insurance.
  Mr. Speaker, it is absolutely shameful that, in a Nation as wealthy 
as ours, we leave so many children sick and vulnerable. It is shameful 
that the richest Nation in the world has an infant mortality rate that 
ranks 35th, higher than any other rich nation. It is shameful that 
while we vote for tax giveaways for the richest Americans, the poorest, 
most vulnerable Americans are left in the lurch.
  I believe we were sent here to do more than just apply Band-Aids to 
this situation. I think we have the responsibility to make sure that 
every American, and certainly every child, can see a doctor when they 
are injured or fall ill. Politics is often about compromise, but which 
children should we decide not to allow the deserving health coverage? 
Which of us would be willing to choose between our own children, saying 
one can be healthy but another must be ill? I think this is a false, 
immoral choice; and I do not believe we should accept anything less 
than full coverage for every American child.
  In my district, the economics range from the dangerously poor to the 
superrich. And I say ``dangerously poor'' to describe the impact of 
poverty on children's health. Poor children are at risk from disease, 
from crime, from poor education, and many other negative influences 
that stem from a poverty environment. This list goes on.
  When we talk about homeland security, we really mean the people on 
the land. So providing a health delivery system for all our children is 
the only way to guarantee a strong Nation of future Americans. So let's 
invest in our children rather than in war that can take their lives too 
early, so regardless of income levels, our children have a birth right 
to grow up healthy and strong to face the challenges of a rapidly 
changing world.

[[Page 25287]]

  Thank you, Stephanie Tubbs Jones and Mr. Speaker, for the time 
allowed.
  Mrs. JONES of Ohio. I am about to yield some time to a really good 
friend of mine who in fact was the Chair of the Equal Employment 
Opportunity Commission when I was a trial lawyer at the EEOC with my 
earlier career. But before I do that, I want to make a statement with 
regard to Jena Six.
  I have been blessed in my lifetime to have a lot of opportunities in 
the law. I was an assistant county prosecutor, criminal division for 
2\1/2\ years; I was a municipal court judge for 2 years; I was a 
general jurisdiction judge for 8 years; and I also was the Cuyahoga 
County prosecutor for 8 years before I came to Congress. And I give 
that statement, my background, so you understand the breadth and the 
experience that I have.
  The prosecutor in Jena, as I have come to understand, as with every 
other prosecutor in this country, has an ethical obligation, and it is 
very difficult when the light is shone on you. Here we have a young man 
who has been in jail more than a year, a juvenile. Now a court has said 
to them that his trial should be overturned. That prosecutor, the 
prosecutor in Jena, should be saying to himself, duh, should I be 
rethinking the position I have taken? Should I not encourage the judge 
to do justice? Should I not say to that judge, grant this young man 
bail until we work this out?

                              {time}  2015

  I'm confident it's tough on him because he's got all these other 
people saying, hold your ground; do what you've been doing. It's a lot 
easier to hold your ground than to do what's right. And I'm calling 
upon that prosecutor, the prosecutor in Jena to rethink, go back in a 
corner in his office all by himself without all the pressure, and 
contemplate why he was put in office.
  Prosecutors are some of the most powerful people in this country, and 
I'm going to encourage young people who are listening to me to become 
an assistant county prosecutor. When you are the prosecutor, you are 
vested with so much discretion that you would have the opportunity to 
reconsider what's happened with this Jena Six.
  But as I move forward, I want to say to this prosecutor, all of us 
talk about justice and what's happened in our judicial process, in the 
judicial system. Young people need to see in judicial officers and 
prosecutors justice so that they will have faith in the system.
  Again I'm calling upon this prosecutor to rethink what he did. You 
know, it's very easy to overcharge. When you overcharge, then you can 
say to the people, well, I charged him with this, but I was able to get 
a plea bargain. Justice requires, ethics require that the prosecutor 
apply the law to the facts and then make a decision with regard to what 
the charge should be.
  In this instance, again, I call upon this prosecutor to take a look 
at the circumstances. High school kids. And we've seen fights among 
high school kids where the fights get rough and damage occurs and 
injury occurs. And I'm not saying by any stretch of the imagination 
that there should not be some question or responsibility for the 
conduct that was engaged in.
  But I call upon the prosecutor again, you do justice. Don't wait for 
the judge to do justice. Don't wait for God to do justice. It's in your 
hand to do justice, to use the power that you have, that you've been 
vested with, that the people of America expect you to do your job; and 
your job will be to rethink the decisions you've made in this case and 
make sure that justice applies. And it's in your power to do so.
  It gives me great pleasure, at this time, to call upon my good 
friend, one of the great lawyers in the Congressional Black Caucus 
who's shown leadership in every area that I can think of, my good 
friend, the Delegate from the District of Columbia, Eleanor Holmes 
Norton, for such time as she may consume.
  Ms. NORTON. I thank the gentlelady for her very gracious remarks and 
kind words. To the gentlelady who remarked that I first knew her when I 
was Chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, I must say to 
her that it gave me special personal pride to see her elected to the 
Congress, much more to see her become the first African American woman 
on the Ways and Means Committee, and she just did us proud again.
  The gentlelady from Ohio has applied her distinguished career in the 
law to reminding the prosecutor what his first obligation is, and that 
is to do justice. That's why the prosecutor is given such discretion. 
He often doesn't prosecute, or he thinks of other things that should be 
done. The onus is on him.
  And I found your remarks especially important in light of the fact 
that after what we've seen in Jena has left us to just get to one side 
or the other, and that's not solving the problem either.
  I want to thank the gentlelady from Michigan, who is the Chair of our 
caucus, for delegating to you this responsibility and for her great 
leadership, especially in this week of the Congressional Black Caucus 
events where we will be discussing public policy and trying, as a group 
of African Americans, to contribute not only to the Congress, but to 
our Nation.
  If the lady will, I would like to comment on both issues. I decided 
that the issue, the consciousness on the issue, had been raised and no 
words that I could say could further raise them.
  But my consciousness was raised when 50,000 people went to Jena, led 
by young people. Now understand, yes, there were civil rights leaders 
here, but not since I was a kid in the Student Nonviolent Coordinating 
Committee did I see a demonstration that was generally led by young 
people. The organized Civil Rights Movement played its part. But nobody 
who looked at those television pictures can have any doubt about who 
organized this extraordinary demonstration. And look what it was. It 
was a peaceful protest in the tradition of the peaceful nonviolent 
protests of the 1960s and '70s.
  These kids, mostly college and high school youngsters, who identified 
clearly with the Jena Six of their age, came to Louisiana essentially 
to say that adults had lost control of their town and of their society. 
I went and looked for what has happened, and I want to say a few words 
about what has happened that makes me say that adults lost control.
  This event that we all know about under the tree began almost a year 
ago. Well, in August. Well, August 2006, as a matter of fact. Now we're 
already in, so that's more than a year ago. Where, interestingly, these 
students went and asked permission to sit under a tree. Everything 
thereafter, it seems to me, falls squarely on the shoulders of the 
adults. Here the children are asking for permission. What do kids 
usually do when they see a shady spot? And that's what it was, 
apparently, one of the few shady spots close to the school has been 
preempted by people of a certain color. Well, you know, the way in 
which children go to school and college today, tragically, in separate 
groups, instead of going over and simply starting a fight or simply 
sitting under the tree, they asked permission.
  Mr. Speaker, the noose, one can argue about whether the 3 nooses 
should have resulted in expulsion or not. For myself, particularly if 
there's only 1 high school, I'm not for expelling anybody. I'm for 
using the good offices of the adults to try to keep from doing that. 
And I doubt if there was more than 1 high school in Jena.
  But the fact is that, whether or not the kids knew what the 3 nooses 
meant, once that word reached adults, white and black, they knew for 
sure. And without recounting all of the events, it appears that many 
opportunities to try to solve this issue were lost because those in 
charge of the town refused to listen.
  How could a prosecutor, the prosecutor of which the gentlelady spoke, 
have essentially used the threatening language about the stroke of a 
pen and making your lives disappear after a school assembly? The school 
assembly was the right thing to do.
  But I say to the Chair of tonight's event, where is the civil rights 
unit of the Justice Department?
  After more than a year with this thing heating up, they still have, 
so far

[[Page 25288]]

as I know, this unit that does not engage in law enforcement but does 
help troubled communities. This is a small town. They perhaps don't 
have the resources or the expertise to know what to do. But this school 
has gone through four lockdowns over this event; the local newspaper 
suggesting that the parents who tried to raise the issue at a school 
board meeting soon thereafter and were denied were the cause of the 
unrest. And there has been unrest.
  The expulsion hearing for hanging the nooses becomes an issue not 
simply because that was not considered enough of a punishment. That's 
arguable. I don't want to stand here and say what was the proper 
punishment. It's because people look at the fact that that was 
mitigated to a few days and compare it to the almost instant expulsion 
of the black kids following a fight.
  I don't regard these 2 things as the same. But I say to you that the 
reason that this appearance of unequal justice heated up is because 
after the expulsion was overturned to a few days' suspension, the 
adults did not, in fact, react to the mounting tension in the school, 
and it has mounted for over a year.
  When the parents of the black students weren't allowed to speak at 
the school board meeting, they apparently went a second time and were 
allowed to speak, but, quote, not about the noose issue. There's nobody 
in Jena, and I can forgive them that, they're small-town folks, who 
understood that this was mounting, and if you don't get to talk it out, 
if you don't have small groups, if you don't have somebody helping you, 
it's just going to continue to mount.
  Disciplinary issues continue all around this separate incident. We 
have incidents of young blacks being attacked by whites in the town, 
all around this incident without anybody, months later, heating up, 
incident after incident, all going back to the nooses; gun pulled on 
some black kids, not because they were involved with the whites who 
pulled the gun, but in retaliation for a prior incident. So here you 
have retaliation going and people going after whoever is not of their 
color.
  And the teachers begging for somebody to do something over and over 
again. The recounting of what happened for a full year says the 
teachers are saying, for goodness sakes, help us out. We see mounting 
tension in this school. We had, a few months ago, a dozen teachers 
threatening a ``sick out'' if discipline was not restored in the 
school. And that's when the prosecutor comes forward and ups the 
charges of the 6 boys to attempted second-degree murder. That was his 
response to mounting racial tension in a school.
  The prosecutor, I want to suggest to the gentlelady from Ohio, I 
believe, is in violation of Louisiana rules of professional conduct, 
just as the prosecutor was in violation of the North Carolina rules in 
the infamous case involving the woman who accused the Duke players of 
rape. This prosecutor has done the very same thing. He has gone before 
the press and spoken in such a way that I believe he should be 
investigated by his own under Louisiana rules of professional conduct. 
And I believe and call upon the Louisiana Bar Association to do so.
  But above all, I'm calling this evening on the Justice Department to 
lend its mediation resources to this poor little town where both the 
blacks and the whites are greatly in need of outside assistance. This 
kind of racial tension has built up over time, not only in this 
community, but I think young people around the country see Jena as 
emblematic of the abuses, overcharging in the criminal justice system.
  Just as this young man who's being held in jail without bail may have 
been, and indeed did, if, in fact, he is found guilty now, and I do not 
know if he has yet been found guilty as a juvenile. The matter was 
thrown out when they wanted to prosecute him as adult.
  If he has engaged in that violence, you will not find anybody in the 
Congressional Black Caucus or in this Congress saying violence was the 
appropriate response, given the fact that you have not been 
appropriately responded to on the 3 nooses. That, you won't find us 
saying.
  What you'll find us saying is that every adult knew what maybe kids 
do not know, what 3 nooses have to have meant to these kids' parents 
and to these kids. And, Mr. Speaker, the adults in Jena allowed this to 
build up; beyond the adults, the Justice Department, who would have 
been in touch with these incidents.

                              {time}  2030

  They are charged to be in touch with these incidents over the last 
year. They did not move in and I call upon them to do so now.
  Mrs. JONES of Ohio. If I could reclaim my time for a moment, in my 
notes with regard to Jena Six, after the new situation where the white 
students or whoever hung the nooses from the tree, the African American 
students decided to protest. So here, then, the district attorney, 
accompanied by the police, comes to the high school and says to them, I 
can be your best friend or your worst enemy. I can take away your lives 
with the stroke of a pen.
  My position would have been, again, and I say this very clearly, that 
this prosecutor knows that he has power and people know that he has 
power. But there is this piece of poetry that says that when you are 
talking to young people, in essence, what they say to you is, I would 
rather see a sermon than hear one every day. And this district attorney 
should be setting the example by engaging in conduct and setting 
justice as his point of entree with these students versus sitting down 
and saying to them, along with the police, cut down what you are doing 
because I can be your worst enemy or your best friend. And he truly 
can, but being someone's worst enemy or best friend is not the gauge by 
which we would hope that prosecutors in this Nation engage in their 
conduct and official responsibilities.
  I yield to the gentlewoman.
  Ms. NORTON. Just to respond to that and just say a few words about 
SCHIP, what you say is so important. Also, the power of the prosecutor, 
we have seen him send Members of Congress to jail. You don't need to 
tell him much. But above all, what the prosecutor needs to know is this 
is not decades ago when a prosecutor approaching black people got them 
to fear and trembling. These are kids. This is 2007. That was seen as a 
threat, and it didn't do the job. In fact, it upped the ante, and it 
was irresponsible conduct because he should have been aware of how his 
words would have been perceived. And if anything, he needed to cool it 
down, perhaps to say the law is here to do his job if you don't do 
yours, but certainly that kind of threat had the opposite effect on 
teens.
  Maybe on you and me, we might have said, well, wait a minute, we had 
better stop here. But these are kids who had spent a full year fighting 
each other anyway. And, again, where is it going to come to an end? The 
youngster who remains in jail remains there. We don't know what is 
going to happen to him. It seems to me the only way to bring it to an 
end is to bring in outside forces to try to mediate this situation.
  I want to say a word about SCHIP in light of the allegation that many 
of us simply want to give high earners access to this bill to provide 
health benefits for children above the normal poverty line. And the 
figure has been cited in some jurisdictions you can make $60,000 or 
$80,000 a year. This needs to be explained to the American people. Yes, 
there may be some of us who see it as a way to get universal health 
care, but I will tell you most of us don't see it that way. The reason 
we have gone to children is because we have failed utterly and know we 
will continue to fail in the foreseeable future to get universal child 
care. And so the whole point of the State health bill was to say at 
least let's do it for children. And the notion of doing it for people 
with high income needs to be explained.
  Poverty benefits are not adjusted for the cost of living in 
particular places. That has enormous hardship. But its hardship when it 
comes to health costs cannot be overemphasized because of

[[Page 25289]]

differences in the cost of living and inflationary rise of health care 
in particular. Health care inflation is far greater than any other kind 
of inflation in the society. So you are faced in large cities, for 
example, with people who can't possibly afford even health care 
provided by their employer because the cost of living in the high-cost 
place where they live is such that they can barely afford to live 
there. So what is $61,000 in one place is not nearly what it is in a 
small town someplace else.
  I want to point that out because these high-cost-of-living regions 
are faced with a terrible dilemma, that those children who will be 
without health care are in a large number and the salaries as seen 
nationwide do not explain why.
  I looked at what were these places. These places in order of highest, 
the top three, to lowest are Hawaii, number one; California, number 
two; and the District of Columbia region, the national capital region, 
number three.
  Is anybody surprised? People can't even afford to live in the 
District of Columbia anymore because of the cost of living.
  New York must be here coming up. I am just looking down the list.
  But essentially when you consider, yes, there is some enhanced 
benefit from the Federal Government, but what these jurisdictions have 
said is that the situation has become so bad after our investigations 
for certain people who are, yes, above the Federal limit that we 
believe that hundreds of thousands of children will, in fact, be 
without health care unless we move. And I am astounded by the number of 
States that believe this, and I am chagrinned that we see a preemptive 
strike by the Bush administration to, in fact, despite what we have 
passed, keep States from bringing in, up to a certain limit, certain 
families who have been priced out of health care in their communities.
  So I call upon Americans, as they read about what we are trying to do 
here, to understand what we are really trying to do here, to make sure 
that when we say we are covering all children who need health care and 
could not otherwise get it, we mean that and no more.
  I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, thank you very much, Congresswoman 
Eleanor Holmes Norton of the District of Columbia. And I want you to 
know, and the people of the District of Columbia to know, we are for 
your having representation and a vote in the Congress, and we are going 
to be vigilant and keep working on that very issue.
  Ms. NORTON. Thank you.
  Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I am currently serving on the Ways 
and Means Committee. As many people have said this evening, I am 
blessed to be the first African American woman in the history of this 
country to serve on this committee. I am pleased this year to work my 
way to the Health Subcommittee. And on that committee, as a part of 
that committee, I have had the opportunity to work on the recent 
legislation passed by the House on August 1 that took a vital step 
towards ensuring the future health of America by approving the 
Children's Health and Medicare Protection Act. It was called the CHAMP 
Act of 2007.
  On the Health Subcommittee, I have had the opportunity to talk with 
my colleagues and listen to testimony from doctors and those in health 
care and those who provide kidney dialysis, et cetera, to help me begin 
to formulate my position on many issues.
  One of the things that has been clear to me, however, is if we don't 
provide health care to our children, we are writing our future. I 
recently had the opportunity to go to university hospitals in my 
congressional district to participate with some young people in what's 
called the Healthy Children program and their focus on obesity, one of 
the biggest problems that faces children in our country and 
particularly minority children whose diet tends to be not as healthy, 
low-income folks, as folks who are able to choose fresh vegetables, 
fruit, et cetera. And as I was playing with these children, and we were 
doing exercises and we were rolling around the floor with these 
exercise balls and these various types of strings to help us lift and 
move our arms, I noticed that these young people were motivated, 
motivated, to change their eating habits as well as their life-style.
  Obesity has claimed so many of our children. Back in the day when I 
was in school, I remember there was this President's requirement that 
you had to do so many sit-ups, you had to run so many laps, and you had 
to be involved in activity. And somehow we have to get our children 
back to that activity.
  We have children with high blood pressure. We have children with 
diabetes. We have children who are working their way to kidney failure 
as a result of the lack of health care and the lack of preventative 
health care.
  So there should be no surprise on the face of any person in the 
United States of America that we need to have health care coverage for 
all of our children.
  Now, the controversy becomes how do you pay for it. And right now we 
are in this Congress where we are saying we want to be concerned about 
pay-fors. We want to be fiscally sound. So we either have to come up 
with a way to tax and change it, or we have to be able to reduce 
expenditures in other areas. I am one of those who believes that it is 
time to expend the money that we need to expend for health care, health 
care for all Americans, because I know we are spending much more than 
that as we fight this war in Iraq and we provide health care to the 
people of Iraq and still question whether we provide adequate health 
care to the veterans of our country who have been injured and maimed 
over there.
  But today on behalf of the Congressional Black Caucus, it has been my 
pleasure to host this message hour. We have had an opportunity to bring 
to the attention of the American public our concerns about the State 
Children's Health Insurance Program, which will be debated on the floor 
of this House tomorrow.
  I encourage America to tune in, listen in, and call in and raise your 
complaints, raise your concerns, and let Members of Congress and 
Members of the Senate understand how important you know that health 
care for children is.
  And, lastly, I will focus back one more time on the Jena Six. It was 
great to have an opportunity with my colleagues to address that 
particular issue. And on behalf of our great Chair, Congresswoman 
Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick of the State of Michigan, I thank the Speaker 
for granting us this Special Order for today.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, in the 21st century, there are some things 
that I had hoped we would have put behind us as a society. As we move 
to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the ``Little Rock Nine,'' there 
are things that I had hoped today's children would not need to suffer. 
But as the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, I know that we are 
still in search of equal justice across this Nation. There are still 
places where the progress of the civil rights era have not fully taken 
hold.
  The tragedy of the Jena 6, which is unfolding right now before the 
eyes of the Nation, shows us that we still have some distance to travel 
before putting the demons of the past behind us. The controversy dates 
back to August 2006 when black students at Jena High School attempted 
to sit under a tree where white students socialized exclusively. The 
following day, three white students, who would later be punished only 
with suspensions, hung nooses from the tree. A series of racially 
charged episodes involving off-campus violence soon followed the noose 
incident. In one instance, black student Robert Bailey would be 
attacked in a white part of town at gun-point. The white student who 
attacked Bailey would face only simple battery and probation. The white 
man who pulled the gun on Bailey, however, would face no consequence. 
Ultimately, Bailey would be charged with theft of a firearm for 
wrestling the gun away.
  Later, racial taunting directed at black students in the high school 
cafeteria would lead to a fight in which a white student would be 
injured and sent to the hospital. These injuries, however, would not 
prevent the student from attending a high school event that same 
evening. The five of the Black teens involved in the fight--Mychal 
Bell, Robert Bailey,

[[Page 25290]]

Carwin Jones, Bryant Purvis, and Theo Shaw were charged as adults with 
attempted second-degree murder and conspiracy to commit murder, 
sentences that carry up to 80 years in prison. The sixth teen will be 
tried as a juvenile and faces undisclosed charges.
  One would have hoped that the elders of Jena would have intervened in 
a way that led to healing in the community. Sadly, this was not the 
case. Allegations of prosecutorial misconduct have been directed at 
LaSalle Parish District Attorney Reed Walters, who told black students 
at a school assembly in response to the noose incident that ``I can be 
your best friend or your worst enemy. With a stroke of my pen, I can 
make your lives disappear.'' This statement was proven true when Mychal 
Bell was convicted in June of aggravated second-degree battery and 
conspiracy by an all-white jury. The court-appointed attorney who 
represented Bell called no witnesses and presented no evidence in his 
defense.
  The families of Jena have not, however, faced this struggle alone. 
Just as happened in the 1960's, students, activists, and other 
concerned citizens from across the Nation have organized, rallied, and 
raised money on behalf of the Jena 6. Most recently, on September 9, 
2007, Reverend Jesse Jackson met with families of the Jena 6 and called 
upon Jena officials to reconsider the charges. Major rallies were held 
in Jena and around the country on September 20, the day Bell's 
sentencing was scheduled to occur. Tens of thousands traveled to Jena 
from across the country to show their support.
  This show of activism has had some effect. This month, charges 
against Jones, Shaw and Bailey were reduced to aggravated second-degree 
battery and conspiracy, although Purvis still faces charges of 
attempted murder and conspiracy. A judge also granted a motion to 
overturn Bell's conspiracy conviction, stating that the case should 
have been tried in juvenile court. In addition, the 3rd Circuit Court 
of Appeals overturned Bell's remaining aggravated second-degree battery 
conviction, also on the grounds that it should have been tried in 
juvenile court.
  At the Federal, we cannot remain silent. Indeed, the Community 
Relations Service of the Department of Justice has been in Jena for 
months to assist with conciliation efforts. Investigation units of the 
Department have also apparently reviewed the situation. It is important 
for members of Congress to maintain careful oversight of Federal 
actions to ensure that all the resources of the Justice Department are 
employed to protect the rights of the local community.
  To that end, I will convene a panel at the Congressional Black Caucus 
Annual Legislative Conference to address the plight of the Jena 6. The 
forum will be held on Friday, September 28, at 3 p.m. in Room 209c of 
the Washington Convention Center. The panel will feature: Prof Charles 
Ogletree, Harvard University Law School; Tory Pegram, Louisiana 
Affiliate, ACLU; Family Members of Robert Bailey--Jena 6; Rep. Elijah 
Cummings (MD-7th); Michael Baisden, Radio Personality; Louis Granderson 
Scott, Attorney of Michael Bell (Jena 6); and Rev. Al Sharpton, Civil 
Rights Activist.
  Ultimately, I believe that a Judiciary Committee oversight hearing 
may be warranted, as the Department of Justice has intervened with 
little success. The Department investigated the noose incident, but 
concluded that a hate crime had not been committed. However, we should 
explore whether the apparently hostile racial climate at the local high 
school opens federal jurisdiction under other civil rights statutes. 
Similarly, the activities of CRS should be reviewed to determine their 
effectiveness at dispute resolution.
  We have reached a point in history where this kind of situation is no 
longer tolerable. I commend everyone across the country for 
participating in rallies, sending your support and letting these 
students and the rest of the country know that we, as a Nation, will 
not stand for this kind of injustice.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the bipartisan, bicameral 
plan to reauthorize the State Children's Health Insurance Program, 
SCHIP, which the House will consider later this week. This crucial 
legislation will ensure that millions of our children receive the vital 
health services they need.
  Even though I support this legislation, I rise today with a heavy 
heart. It is nothing short of a disgrace that here, in the wealthiest 
country on earth, eight million children lack health insurance 
coverage. We ought to be ashamed that we are having this debate at all.
  I am absolutely stunned that some Congressional Republicans and the 
President continue to oppose this legislation, particularly in light of 
the fact that the President used SCHIP as part of his campaign platform 
in 2004. Talk about shock and awe! I am shocked beyond belief that they 
can stand before the American people with straight faces and refuse 
health care for our children. I am in awe of the gall required to base 
the denial of these vital, life-saving services on an ideological 
talking point. Madam Speaker, the ideology of my colleagues on the 
other side of the aisle has not provided health care for these children 
yet. It is impossible for any serious person to believe that if this 
legislation is defeated the Republican ideology will suddenly start 
working its magic and provide health care for these children whose 
parents can't afford to buy it in the open market.
  In my years fighting for universal health care, we have often said, 
``Covering children is easy. How could anyone refuse to support 
coverage for children?'' It was coverage for adults that was always 
perceived as the real challenge.
  But today, the Republicans have stooped lower than even I thought was 
possible. Not only are they saying ``We can't afford to give our 
children health care.'' This is the same party, by the way, that finds 
money for tax cuts for the rich, that finds money to fund a disaster of 
a war. Many times more money than what is needed to cover these 
children, in fact.
  Not only are the Republicans admitting that they prioritize tax cuts 
for the wealthy and feeding the military industrial complex over 
insuring our children. They are now standing before the American people 
and saying ``It is not our job to guarantee health insurance coverage 
for America's children.'' They are refusing to make that promise.
  Instead, they propose that our children's health should be subject to 
the ups and downs of the stock market, that it should depend on their 
parents' employment status, or how much they have in a bank account. It 
is utterly beyond conception how the Republicans can possibly think 
these concepts will be accepted by the American people. But I will 
leave my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to face the 
repercussions of this folly next November.
  Let me move on to a more positive subject: the compromise SCHIP bill, 
which we will pass over these shameful objections. While I would have 
preferred the original House-passed bill to the more modest bicameral 
compromise, the House-Senate agreement is a major improvement over the 
President's proposal, which would result in 840,000 children currently 
enrolled in SCHIP losing their coverage.
  The House-Senate agreement invests $35 billion in new funding for 
SCHIP over five years to strengthen the program's financing, increase 
health insurance coverage for low-income children, and improve the 
quality of health care children receive. It will provide health 
coverage to millions of low-income children who are currently uninsured 
and ensures that the 6.6 million children who currently participate in 
CHIP continue to receive health coverage. Pending final Congressional 
Budget Office estimates, the reduction in the number of uninsured 
children will approach 4 million children.
  Under the agreement, quality dental coverage will be provided to all 
children enrolled in CHIP. The agreement also ensures states will offer 
mental health services on par with medical and surgical benefits 
covered under CHIP. The agreement provides states with incentives to 
lower the rate of uninsured low income children. It replaces the flawed 
CMS August 17th letter to states with a more thoughtful and appropriate 
approach. In place of the CMS letter, the agreement gives states time 
and assistance in developing and implementing their own best practices 
to address crowd-out.
  The compromise proposal improves outreach tools to simplify and 
streamline enrollment of eligible children, providing $100 million in 
grants for new outreach activities to states, local governments, 
schools, community-based organizations, safety-net providers and 
others. It also establishes a new quality child health initiative to 
develop and implement quality measures and improve state reporting of 
quality data. These measures are critical to ensuring that all our 
nation's children get the health care they need.
  Mr. Speaker, let's tell the White House and the Congressional 
Republicans still standing with it that it's time to stop playing 
political games. Let's tell them it's time to work together to ensure 
more children across the country have the high-quality medical care 
they deserve. The President might not be able to understand that it's 
the right thing to do, but the American people certainly will.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, let me thank my dear friend, 
Ms. Tubbs Jones of Ohio, for organizing this special order on the very 
importance subject of SCHIP, the State Children's Health Insurance 
Program. I am particularly pleased that we are having this discussion 
tonight because I have very serious

[[Page 25291]]

concerns about the SCHIP legislation that comes before the House 
tomorrow. My major concern is that the version of the legislation that 
will come before the House tomorrow is less expansive than the version 
the House voted on previously.
  This is extremely important because reauthorization of SCHIP is 
crucial to closing the racial and ethnic health disparities in this 
country. Narrowing health care coverage of our children, as this newly 
agreed upon version does, clearly falls far short of the goal that we 
had hoped for in our efforts to decrease health disparities. It is 
crucial that this Congress continue to bring awareness to the many 
health concerns facing minority communities and to acknowledge that we 
need to find solutions to address these concerns. My colleagues in the 
Congressional Black Caucus and I understand the very difficult 
challenges facing us in the form of huge health disparities among our 
community and other minority communities. We will continue to seek 
solutions to those challenges.
  Reauthorization of the SCHIP is crucial to realizing those solutions. 
However, we must not compromise away the health of millions of children 
who will under this new SCHIP version go without health care coverage. 
It is imperative for us to improve the prospects for living long and 
healthy lives and fostering an ethic of wellness in African-American 
and other minority communities.
  I thank all of my CBC colleagues who have been toiling in the 
vineyards for years developing effective public policies and securing 
the resources needed to eradicate racial and gender disparities in 
health and wellness.
  We know that the lack of healthcare contributes greatly to the racial 
and ethnic health disparities in this country, so we must provide our 
children with the health insurance coverage to remain healthy. SCHIP, 
established in 1997 to serve as the healthcare safety net for low-
income uninsured children, has decreased the number of uninsured low-
income children in the United States by more than one-third. The 
reduction in the number of uninsured children is even more striking for 
minority children.
  In 2006, SCHIP provided insurance to 6.7 million children. Of these, 
6.2 million were in families whose income was less than $33,200 a year 
for a family of three. SCHIP works in conjunction with the Medicaid 
safety net that serves the lowest income children and ones with 
disabilities. Together, these programs provide necessary preventative, 
primary and acute healthcare services to more than 30 million children. 
Eighty-six percent of these children are in working families that are 
unable to obtain or afford private health insurance for their 
Meanwhile, health care through SCHIP is cost effective: it costs a mere 
$3.34 a day or $100 a month to cover a child under SCHIP, according to 
the Congressional Budget Office. There are significant benefits of the 
State Children's Health Insurance Program when looking at specific 
populations served by this program.


                           Minority Children

  SCHIP has had a dramatic effect in reducing the number of uninsured 
minority children and providing them access to care:
  Between 1996 and 2005, the percentage of low-income African American 
and Hispanic children without insurance decreased substantially.
  In 1998, roughly 30 percent of Latino children, 20 percent of African 
American children, and 18 percent of Asian American and Pacific 
Islander children were uninsured. After enactment, those numbers had 
dropped by 2004 to about 12 percent, and 8 percent, respectively.
  Half of all African American and Hispanic children are already 
covered by SCHIP or Medicaid.
  More than 80 percent of uninsured African American children and 70 
percent of uninsured Hispanic children are eligible but not enrolled in 
Medicaid and SCHIP, so reauthorizing and increasing support for SCHIP 
will be crucial to insuring this population.
  Prior to enrolling in SCHIP, African American and Hispanic children 
were much less likely than non-Hispanic White children to have a usual 
source of care. After they enrolled in SCHIP, these racial and ethnic 
disparities largely disappeared. In addition, SCHIP eliminated racial 
and ethnic disparities in unmet medical needs for African American and 
Hispanic children, putting them on par with White children. SCHIP is 
also important to children living in urban areas of the country. In 
urban areas: One in four children has healthcare coverage through 
SCRIP. More than half of all children whose family income is $32,180 
received healthcare coverage through SCHIP.


                        Children in Urban Areas

  SCHIP is also important to children living in urban areas of the 
country. In urban areas: One in four children has healthcare coverage 
through SCHIP. More than half of all children whose family income is 
$32,180 received healthcare coverage through SCHIP.


                     Children in Rural Communities

  SCHIP is significantly important to children living in our country's 
rural areas. In rural areas: One in three children has healthcare 
coverage through SCHIP or more than half of all children whose family 
income is under $32,180 received healthcare coverage through Medicaid 
or SCHIP. Seventeen percent of children continue to be of the 50 
counties with the highest rates of uninsured children, 44 are rural 
counties, with many located in the most remote and isolated parts of 
the country. Because the goal is to reduce the number of uninsured 
children, reauthorizing and increasing support for SCHIP will be 
crucial to helping the uninsured in these counties and reducing the 17 
percent of uninsured.
  Mr. Speaker, I would much rather we extend the deadline for 
reauthorization of SCHIP, while we diligently and reasonably consider 
the unsettled issues in this debate so that millions of the most 
vulnerable population, including many African American and other 
minority children can receive the health care coverage they need to 
remain healthy and develop into productive citizens of this great 
country. It is not as important to reauthorize an inferior bill under 
pressure of fast-approaching deadlines as it is to ensure that we 
provide health care to those children who remain vulnerable to health 
disparities. I urge my colleagues to join me in ensuring health care 
coverage for millions of children and reducing health disparities among 
the most vulnerable populations.

                          ____________________