Congressional Record: Proceedings and Debates of the 107th Congress, First Session, Volume 147, Part 8 Page: 10,324
This book is part of the collection entitled: Congressional Record and was provided to UNT Digital Library by the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE
June 12, 2001
On June 17, a wreath laying cere-
mony will take place at the memorial
to commemorate the 85th anniversary
of its dedication. Tomorrow I will be
introducing a resolution in honor of
the 68 Americans who were memorial-
ized or buried on the site and to honor
all our fallen aviators of World War I.
In addition, the resolution will express
support for the funding needed to re-
store this hallowed site.
In a poster right here, this
storyboard depicts the history of the
Lafayette-Escadrille and their "Herit-
age of Valor and Sacrifice." Seven
Americans formed the original Amer-
ican squadron. When the Escadrille,
which means squadron, transferred to
United States command in 1918, 265
American volunteers had served in the
French Air Service with 180 of those
having flown combat missions. In all,
the Escadrille flew 3,000 combat sor-
ties, amassing nearly 200 victories. In
fact, the Escadrille became the birth of
the United States Air Force.
A joint French-American committee
was organized at the end of World War
I to locate a final resting place for
these American aviators. With the land
donated by the French Government,
the Lafayette-Escadrille Memorial was
dint mddle is the front of the miteo
rial. It encompasses an arch of triumph
with a series of columns placed on ei-
ther side. Indeed, it is a sight to be-
hold.
The memorial also contains a sanc-
tuary and a burial crypt. Sunlight fills
the tomb by way of 13 stained glass
windows. Each of these works of art de-
picts the Escadrille flying its many
missions over the battlefields of Eu-
rope. One of the most striking stained
glass works depicts the U.S. aviators,
escorted by an eagle, on a symbolic
flight across the Atlantic to come to
the aid of France.
Sadly, the memorial is in desperate
need of repair. The structure sits in a
meadow with a high water table. Heavy
rains flood the tomb, exacerbated by
the poor functioning drains and water
leaking through the terrace behind the
memorial. Structural repairs are need-
ed for the crypt and the overall founda-
tion, and double glass is needed to pro-
tect the remarkable, remarkable
stained glass windows.
If we look again at the center, we
will see that the front of the memorial
is cracked and stained with pollution.
Let me show my colleagues the next
poster. This graphic here shows the de-
terioration inside the crypt. The crum-
bling masonry and stucco and overall
structural damage is evident.
Here we can see additional damage
on the ceiling. Furthermore, the
stained glass windows, like the one we
see here, are not protected. These beau-
tiful works of art could be lost forever
if the structural deterioration is al-
lowed to continue.In 1930, U.S. Attorney Nelson Crom-
well founded the Lafayette-Escadrille
Memorial Foundation. He endowed the
foundation with a $1.5 million trust
fund for maintenance, which has all
been exhausted. Today, the foundation
has a mirror organization in France
and a pledge of monetary support to re-
store this memorial.
Although studies to estimate the
cost of restoring the memorial are on-
going, it is obvious that the resources
required will exceed the meager means
of this foundation. The French Govern-
ment has already indicated its willing-
ness to assist, and it is time for the
United States Government to do the
same.
Combining the efforts of private in-
dustry and the United States Congress,
it is my hope to join the French in re-
storing the memorial to its original
beauty. It is the right thing to do to
honor our fallen aviators of World War
I and to demonstrate our respect for
the sacrifices of all Americans in serv-
ice to our Nation and our allies.
Mr. Speaker, I hope my colleagues
will join with me in supporting funding
for the restoration of this great memo-
rial.
MORE COMPARABLE EDUCATION
SYSTEM
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under
the Speaker's announced policy of Jan-
uary 3, 2001, the gentleman from Penn-
sylvania (Mr. FATTAH) is recognized
during morning hour debates for 5 min-
utes.
Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I take
the floor today to, on one hand, com-
pliment the other body which for over
2 days now has debated the legislation
that I offered here in the House to cre-
ate a more comparable education sys-
tem within our various States.
I want to thank in particular the
Senator from the great State of Con-
necticut, Senator DODD, and Senator
BIDEN from Delaware, Senator REED
from Rhode Island. I would like to also
thank Senator BOXER and a host of
other members, Senator CORZINE, and
then the colleague who I served on the
Web-based Education Commission
with, Senator ENZI, who is a Repub-
lican Member of the Senate from the
State of Wyoming.
I would expect that when the matter
is brought for a vote after some more
debate this week, there will be a lot of
the other Members from the other body
that I would want to thank.
But I also have some concern that
this legislation, unfortunately, did not
get a full hearing here in this House.
The Committee on Rules decided that,
when we debated the education bill,
that for some reason we were in a rush
and that we could not offer amend-
ments to title I as part of the reauthor-
ization of the Elementary and Sec-
ondary Education Act.So even though the House Committee
on Education and the Workforce under
the leadership of the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. BOEHNER), my great friend,
the majority chairman, gave me the
opportunity to testify before the com-
mittee and to raise this concern, it was
not afforded the opportunity rightfully
to be debated and voted on here on the
floor of the House.
But let me move to the substance of
this matter because I think that we
perpetrate a fraud on the Nation to
talk about education reform and some
discussion about the inequities that
exist within our States between poor,
rural and urban school districts and
their wealthier suburban counterparts,
for in almost every State in the Union,
there has been and continues to be liti-
gation brought by small, rural and im-
poverished school districts and large
urban districts seeking from their
State a fuller share of educational
funding, an adequate share.
When we talk about education re-
form, we talk about testing every child
every year in every school as if every
child every year and in every school is
afforded the same education oppor-
tunity. Well, we know that is not the
case.
D 1245
We know that, for instance, in poorer
school districts most of the children
are being taught by teachers who are
not certified in the subject that they
are teaching; that, in fact, in math, in
science, in the critical disciplines, that
the teachers who are teaching the ma-
jority of the students in urban and
rural school districts did not major nor
minor in the subjects that they are
teaching. So we have physical edu-
cation teachers teaching science, and
then we want to come along and test
kids and compare them to others.
Now, I see my colleague, the newest
of Members from the great State of
California, where there has been plenty
of litigation on this issue. Look at the
example of Beverly Hills High, in which
young people have the opportunity to
have 23 advanced placement courses of-
fered to them, but at Compton High
not one advanced placement course is
available to them. How can we create a
situation where we are going to look at
young people and say they are not per-
forming as well as their counterparts
when they are not given the same op-
portunity?
In Maryland, right next door, we
have wide disparities on what is being
spent in one district versus another.
We have in the city of Baltimore 123
young people who had the opportunity
to take AP courses; but in Montgomery
County, the wealthiest suburb, 5,000
students had the opportunity to take
AP courses.
In Philadelphia, my home, in the
great Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
the 45 contiguous school districts to10324
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Matching Search Results
View 117 pages within this book that match your search.Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
United States. Congress. Congressional Record: Proceedings and Debates of the 107th Congress, First Session, Volume 147, Part 8, book, 2001; Washington D.C.. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc31063/m1/3/?q=virtual+music+rare+book: accessed May 31, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.