Fannie Lou Hamer, Rosa Parks, and Coretta Scott King Voting Rights Act Reauthorization and Amendments Act of 2006

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague and dear friend, the gentleman from California, Mr. Honda, who is managing this Special Order, but more especially also as an outstanding leader in our Asian Pacific American community and currently serving as chairman of our Asian Pacific Congressional Caucus.

I want to also commend our Democratic leader, Ms. Nancy Pelosi, for her outstanding remarks. The fact that she also is a Member who has one of the largest constituencies in not only the State of California of our Asian Pacific American community, but, as Ms. Pelosi was making her statement, I recalled also her predecessor, someone whom I have had the highest admiration and respect for, a giant of a man not only in his ways but as an example, with a real great sensitivity and compassion for the needs of the Asian Pacific American community people, none other than the late Congressman Phil Burton.

I would also like to commend my colleagues, Congresswoman Juanita Millender-McDonald and Congressman Al Green, for their outstanding remarks this evening in this Special Order.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in celebration of the Asian Pacific American Heritage Month to acknowledge the contributions of our Asian Pacific American individuals and communities to the success of our great Nation. I commend my colleagues who founded this celebration in 1977 by introducing a resolution calling upon the President to proclaim the first 10 days in May Asian Pacific Heritage Week, former Representatives Norm Mineta and Frank Horton, and Senators Daniel K. Inouye and Senator Spark Matsunaga.

I think we need to also understand, Mr. Speaker, the dynamics. Those of us who are Americans, and we are very, very proud of being Americans, but whose roots are from the Asian Pacific region, and the dynamics of why the Asian Pacific region is so important, it is in our national interests, not only our national security, the economics, just about every phase of what is really critically important in our Nation in dealing with this region of the world which, by the way, two-thirds of the world's population is the Asian Pacific region. Six of the 10 largest armies in the world are in the Asian Pacific region. Our trade with the Asian Pacific region is four times greater than any other region in the world, including especially that of Europe.

I am reminded a couple of years ago what Senator Inouye said, for every one 747 that flies between the Atlantic and the United States, four 747s fly between the Asian Pacific region and our country.

Mr. Speaker, the Asian Pacific American community is vibrant and growing

with an estimated 14 million Asian American residents and another 975,000 Pacific Americans. I am proud to be a member of this Asian Pacific American community, a community that has produced so many inspiring individuals. In government, in the military, in the sciences, sports, entertainment, business, you name it, we have it.

In government, for example, especially from the great State of Hawaii, among the first, I guess you might say, U.S. Senator Hiram Fong, Senator Daniel Inouye, Senator Daniel Akaka, the first elected Asian American Governor of any State, Governor George Ariyoshi, our first native Hawaiian Governor, Governor John Waihee, our first Filipino American Governor, Governor Ben Cayetano.

We also have Mayor Neal Blaisdell, and the newly elected mayor of the city and county of Honolulu, Mufi Hannemann. We also have Lieutenant Governors Jimmy Kealoha and Duke Ainoa. Norm Mineta, a good friend of mine who is not only partly responsible for initiating this Heritage Month, but was always the first Asian Pacific American mayor of a major U.S. city like San Jose, he was also the first Asian Pacific American to be a member of a Presidential Cabinet when he was appointed as Secretary of Commerce in the year 2000 by former President Clinton and now is U.S. Secretary of Transportation appointed by President Bush.

Elaine Chao, another first. Secretary Chao is the first female Asian American Cabinet member, appointed Secretary of Labor by President Bush.

Gary Locke, first Asian American Governor on the mainland United States, elected Governor of the State of Washington in 1996. And I could never forget and my deepest respect to the late Congresswoman Patsy Mink, first Asian American female elected to the U.S. Congress since 1964. Then our late colleague and friend, my dear friend, the late Congressman Bob Matsui, who inspired me and mentored me throughout our time here together as a senior member of the House Committee on Ways and Means.

As a Vietnam veteran, Mr. Speaker, it would be ludicrous for me not to say something to honor the hundreds of thousands of Asian Pacific Americans who have and continue to serve in all the branches of the armed services of our Nation.

I would like to share with you the contributions of tens of thousands of Japanese American soldiers who volunteered to fight our Nation's enemies in Europe during World War II.

Mr. Speaker, we are all aware of the fact that after the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, by the Imperial Army of Japan, there was such an outrage and cry for an all-out war against Japan. In days afterwards, our President and the Congress formally declared war. But caught in this crossfire were hundreds of thousands of Americans, mind you Americans, who happened to be of Japanese ancestry.

Our national government immediately implemented a policy whereby over 100,000 Americans of Japanese ancestry were forced to live in what were called, supposedly, ``relocation camps''; I call them ``concentration camps.'' Their lands, their homes, and their properties were confiscated without due process of law.

It was also a time in our Nation's history that there was so much hatred and bigotry and racism against our Japanese American community. And yet despite all of this, leaving their wives, their parents, their brothers and sisters behind barbed-wire fences in these prison camps, the White House accepted the requests from tens of thousands of Japanese Americans who volunteered to join the Army, and as a result, two combat units were organized.

One was called the 100th Battalion, and the other was known as the 442nd Infantry Combat Group. Both were sent to Europe to fight. And I might say that I am very, very proud to have been associated and been a former member of the 100th Battalion, 442nd Infantry Combat Group out of the State of Hawaii.

Mr. Speaker, in my humble opinion, history speaks for itself in documenting that none have shed their blood more valiantly for our Nation than the Japanese American solders who served in those two combat units while fighting enemy forces in Europe during World War II.

The military records of the 100th Battalion and the 442nd Infantry are without equal. Those Japanese American units suffered an unprecedented casualty rate of 314 percent, and received over 18,000 individual decorations, many awarded posthumously for bravery and courage in the field of battle.

For your information, Mr. Speaker, 52 Distinguished Service Crosses, 560 Silver Stars, and 9,480 Purple Hearts were awarded to the Japanese American soldiers of the 100th Battalion and 442nd Infantry Group. I find it unusual, however, that only one Medal of Honor was given. Nonetheless, the 442nd Combat Group emerged as the most decorated combat unit of its size in the history of the United States Army.

President Truman was so moved by their bravery in the field of battle, as well as the tremendous sacrifices of the African American soldiers in World War II, that he issued an executive order to finally desegregate all of the branches of the armed services.

Senator Inouye lost his arm while engaged in battle against two German machine gun posts, and he was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross. After a congressional mandate to review again the military records of these two combat units some 5 years ago, I was privileged to attend a White House ceremony where President Clinton presented 19, 19 Congressional Medals of Honor to the Japanese American soldiers who were members of the 100th Battalion and 442nd Combat Infantry. Senator Inouye was one of those recipients of the Congressional Medal of Honor.

I submit, Mr. Speaker, these Japanese Americans paid their dues in blood to protect our Nation from its enemies. It is a shameful mark on the history of our country that when the patriotic survivors of the 100th Battalion and the 442nd Infantry returned to the United States to be reunited with their families, who were locked up behind barbed wire fences, living in prison camps, and could not even get a haircut in downtown San Francisco, simply because they looked Japanese, they were Japanese, and for that reason alone, even with their uniforms on, they were not given the privilege of getting a haircut.

My former colleague and now U.S. Secretary of Transportation, Norm Mineta, and the late Congressman Bob Matsui from Sacramento both spent some of the early years of their lives in these prison camps. Secretary Mineta told me one of the interesting features of these prison camps was posting of machine gun nests all around the camp, and everyone was told that these machine guns were posted to protect them against rioters. But then Secretary Mineta observed, if these machine guns were posted to guard us, why is it that they are all directed inside the prison camp rather than outside it?

I submit, ladies and gentlemen, my good friends, my colleagues, the wholesale and arbitrary abolishment of the constitutional rights of these loyal Japanese Americans should forever serve as a reminder and testament that this must never be allowed to occur again.

When this miscarriage of justice unfolded during World War II, Americans of German and Italian ancestry were not similarly jailed en masse. Some declared the incident as an outright example of racism and bigotry in its ugliest form.

After viewing the Holocaust Museum in Washington, I understand better why the genocide of some 6 million Jews has prompted the cry ``Never again, never again.'' Likewise, I sincerely hope that mass internments on the basis of race alone will never again darken the pages of the history of this great Nation.

Now, to those who say, Well, that happened decades ago, we must say that we have to continue to be on our guard for this kind of thing to happen again. I remember years ago the case of Bruce Yamashita, the Japanese American born and raised in the State of Hawaii, who was discharged from the Marine Corps after a training program as an officer candidate and an ugly display of racial discrimination.

The Marine Corps superiors taunted Yamashita with ethnic slurs and told him, We do not want your kind around here, go back to your own country. The

situation was made worse when a leading officer of the Marine Corps made a statement on the 60 Minutes program who said, Marine officers who are minorities do not shoot, swim or use compasses as well as white officers.

The Commandant later apologized for his remarks, but it was a little too late. And I am really happy to know that after all of the investigations that the Secretary of the Navy finally awarded Mr. Yamashita his commission as an officer and a captain in the United States Marine Corps.

The tradition continues today of the thousands of Asian Pacific Americans who served in the armed services. Retired General Eric Shinseki was the first Asian Pacific American four-star general who served as U.S. Army Chief of Staff.

Our Asian American Pacific Island soldiers are fighting for freedom in Iraq even as I speak. Just this past weekend I was privileged to witness in Germany the swearing in of a Samoan soldier by the name of Command Sergeant Major Iuniasolua Savusa as the Command Sergeant Major for U.S. Army Europe and the 7th Army.

I am very proud of Command Sergeant Major Savusa for his accomplishments. He is an inspiration and a great role model for our youth and other Asian Pacific Americans who currently serve in the military.

Mr. Speaker, I think at this point I want to defer to my good friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda) the manager of this special order this evening. And I am sure that he may want to continue portions of his statement as well.

Mr. Speaker, how much time do we have remaining?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to offer my closing remarks. I say, Mr. Speaker, when I envision America I do not see a melting pot designed to reduce or removal racial differences. The America I see is a brilliant rainbow, a rainbow of ethnicities and cultures with each people proudly contributing in their own distinctive and unique way a better America for generations to come.

Asian Pacific Americans wish to find a just and equitable place in our society that will allow, like all Americans, to grow, to succeed, to achieve and to contribute to the advancements of this great Nation.

I would like to close my remarks by asking all of us here this evening, What is America all about?

I cannot think of it said better than on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in the summer of 1963 when an African American minister by the name of Martin Luther King, Jr., poured out his heart and soul to every American who could hear his voice when he uttered these famous words, ``I have a dream. My dream is that one day my children will be judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.''

That is what I believe America is all about, Mr. Speaker. Again, I thank my colleague and my good friend, the gentleman from California, for his management of this Special Order honoring all of the Asian Pacific American community in our country and the contributions that they have made to make our country to form a more perfect union.

I rise today in celebration of Asian Pacific American Heritage Month, to acknowledge the contributions of our Asian Pacific American individuals and communities to the success of our great Nation.

I commend my colleagues who founded this celebration in 1977 by introducing a resolution calling upon the President to proclaim the first ten days in May Asian/Pacific Heritage week--Representatives Norm Mineta and Frank Horton, and Senators Daniel K. Inouye and Spark Matsunaga.

The Asian Pacific American community is vibrant and growing, with an estimated 14 million Asian American residents and another 975,000 Pacific Americans.

I am proud to be a member of this Asian Pacific American community, a community that has produced so many inspiring individuals in government, the military, the sciences, sports, entertainment, and business. In government, for example: from Hawaii

Senators Hyrum Fong, Daniel Inouye, Daniel Akaka.

Governors George Ariyoshi, John Waihee, Ben Cayetano.

Mayors Neal Blaisdell and Mufi Hannemann, Lt. Governors Jimmy Kealoha and Duke Aiona.

Norm Mineta--my good friend was not only partly responsible for initiating APA Heritage Month, but was also the first Asian Pacific American mayor of a major U.S. city (San Jose). He was also the first Asian Pacific American to be a member of the Presidential Cabinet, when he was appointed as Secretary of Commerce in 2000 by former President Clinton and five years ago Mr. Mineta was appointed by President Bush as U.S. Secretary of Transportation.

Elaine Chao--another first, Secretary Chao is the first female Asian- American cabinet member, appointed Secretary of Labor in 2001, also appointed by President Bush.

Gary Locke--the first Asian-American governor on the mainland U.S., elected governor of Washington, 1996.

Patsy Mink--the first Asian-American female elected to Congress, in 1964 from Hawaii.

Bob Matsui--my dear friend and colleague who inspired me and mentored me throughout our time together here as a senior member of the House Committee on Ways and Means.

As a Vietnam Veteran, it would be ludicrous for me not to say something to honor the hundreds of thousands of Asian-Pacific Americans who have and continue to serve in all the branches of armed services of our Nation. I would like to share with you the contributions of the tens of thousands of Japanese-American soldiers who volunteered to fight our Nation's enemies in Europe during World War II.

Mr. Speaker, we are well aware of the fact that after the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, by the Imperial Army of Japan--there was such an outrage and cry for all-out war against Japan, and days afterward, our President and the Congress formally declared war--but caught in this cross-fire were hundreds of thousands of Americans--Americans mind you who happened to be of Japanese ancestry.

Our national government immediately implemented a policy whereby over one-hundred thousand Americans of Japanese ancestry, were forced to live in what were called relocations camps--but were actually more like prison or concentration camps. Their lands, homes and properties were confiscated without due process of law.

It was also a time in our Nation's history that there was so much hatred, bigotry and racism against our Japanese-American community--and yet despite all this--leaving their wives, their parents, their brothers and sisters behind barbed wire fences in these prison camps-- the White House accepted the request from tens of thousands of the Japanese-Americans who volunteered to join the Army. And as a result two combat units were organized--one was the 100th Battalion and the other known as the 442nd Infantry Combat Group--both were sent to fight in Europe.

In my humble opinion, history speaks for itself in documenting that none have shed their blood more valiantly for our Nation than the Japanese-Americans soldiers who served in these two combat units while fighting enemy forces in Europe during World War II.

The military records of the 100th Battalion and 442nd Infantry are without equal. These Japanese-American units suffered an unprecedented casualty rate of 314 percent and received over 18,000 individual decorations, many awarded posthumously, for bravery and courage in the field of battle.

For your information Mr, Speaker, 52 Distinguished Service Crosses, 560 Silver Stars, and 9,480 Purple Hearts, were awarded to the Japanese-American soldiers of the 100th Battalion and 442nd Infantry Group. I find it unusual; however, that only one Medal of Honor was ever given. Nonetheless, the 442nd Combat Group emerged as the most decorated combat unit of its size in the history of the United States Army.

President Truman was so moved by their bravery in the field of battle, as well as that of African-American soldiers during World War II, that he issued an executive order to finally desegregate all branches of the Armed Services.

Senator Inouye lost his arm while engaged in battle against two German machine gun posts and he was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross. After a Congressional mandate to review again the military records of these two combat units 5 years ago--I was privileged to attend the White House ceremony where President Clinton presented nineteen Congressional Medals of Honor to the Japanese-American soldiers who were members of 100th Battalion and 442nd Combat Infantry group--Senator Inouye was one of those recipients of the Medal of Honor.

I submit, Mr. Speaker, these Japanese-Americans paid their dues in blood to protect our Nation from its enemies. It is a shameful mark on the history of our country that when the patriotic survivors of the 100th Battalion and the 442nd Infantry returned to the United States to be reunited with their families who were locked-up behind barbed wire fences, living in prison camps--and could not even get a haircut in downtown San Francisco because they all looked Japanese--despite the fact that they too were Americans.

My former colleague and now U.S. Secretary of Transportation, Norman Mineta, and the late Congressman Bob Matsui from Sacramento both spent some of the early years of their lives in these prison camps.

Secretary Mineta told of one of the interesting features of these prison camps were postings of machine gun nests all around the camp and everyone was told that these machine guns were posted to protect them against rioters.

But then Secretary Mineta observed--if these machine guns are posted to guard us, why is it that they are all directed inside the prison camp compound and not outside?

I submit, ladies and gentlemen, the wholesale and arbitrary abolishment of the constitutional rights of these loyal Japanese- Americans should forever serve as a reminder and testament that this must never be allowed to occur again. When this miscarriage of justice unfolded during World War II, Americans of German and Italian ancestry were not similarly jailed en masse. Some declare the incident as an example of outright racism and bigotry in its ugliest form. After viewing the Holocaust Museum in Washington, I understand better why the genocide of some 6 million Jews has prompted the cry, ``Never Again, Never Again!'' Likewise, I sincerely hope that mass internments of the basis of race alone will never again darken the history of our great nation.

To those that say, well, that occurred decades ago, I say we must continue to be vigilant in guarding against such evil today.

Not long ago, we had the case of Bruce Yamashita, a Japanese-American from Hawaii who was discharged from the Marine Corps officer training program in an ugly display of racial discrimination. Marine Corps superiors taunted Yamashita with ethnic slurs and told him, ``We don't want your kind around here. Go back to your own country.'' The situation was made worse by the Commandant of the Marine Corps, a four star general, who appeared on television's ``Sixty Minutes'' and stated: ``Marine officers who are minorities do not shoot, swim, or use compasses as well as white officers.'' The Commandant later apologized for his remarks, but it was a little too late.

After years of perseverance and appeals, Mr. Yamashita was vindicated after proving he was the target of vicious racial harassment during his officer training program. The Secretary of the Navy's investigation into whether minorities were deliberately being discouraged from becoming officers resulted in Bruce Yamashita receiving is commission as a captain in the Marine Corps.

The tradition continues today of the thousands of Asian-Pacific Americans who serve in the armed services. Retired General Eric Shinseki was the first Asian-American four-star general who served as U.S. Army Chief of Staff. Our Asian-American and Pacific Island soldiers are fighting for freedom in Iraq even as I speak.

Just this past weekend, I was privileged to witness the swearing in of the Samoan soldier CSM Iuniasolua Savusa as the Command Sergeant Major for U.S. Army Europe and the 7th Army. I am very proud of Command Sergeant Major Iuni Savusa for his accomplishments. He is an inspiration and a great role model for our youth and other Asian- Pacific Americans who currently serving in the military.

Other outstanding Asian-Pacific Americans who have made significant contributions to our nation:

Dr. David Ho--pioneered treatment for HIV/AIDS and named by Time Magazine as its ``Man of the Year'' in 1996.

Dr. Hideyo Noguchi--isolated the syphilis germ in 1911, leading to a cure for the deadly disease.

Dr. Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar--Nobel Prize winner, evolution of stars, led to modern astrophysics.

Ellison Onizuka--the first Asian-American astronaut, 1985, Died aboard the Space shuttle Challenger in 1986.

Kalpana Chawla--Astronaut, first Indian American woman in space.

News, Sports, and Entertainment--

Ellen Nakashima--chief reporter for the Washington Post in Southeast Asia.

Connie Chung--in 1993, became the first Asian American to be a nightly news anchor for a major network.

Keanu Reeves--internationally renown actor.

Apolo Ohno--Olympic Gold & Silver Medalist, speed skating.

Jet Li--movie actor.

Kristi Yamaguchi--Olympic Gold Medalist, figure skating.

Dwayne Johnson--also known as the ``Rock,'' professional wrestler and movie star--Scorpine King, Walking Tell, Doomed.

Dr. Sammy Lee, Olympic gold medalist high diver.

Greg Louganis--Olympic gold.

Michelle Kwan: Olympic Silver and Bronze medalist, Figure skating.

Duke Kahanamokee, gold medalist swimmer.

Angela Perez Baraquio: First Asian American Miss America 2001 (Miss Hawaii).

Sarah Chang: world famous violinist.

Lucy Liu: Actress.

Bruce Lee: Martial Artist and Actor.

Tiger Woods: Golf Professional.

Michelle Wie: Professional Golfer.

Akebono (Chad Rowan): Sumo Wrestler (retired), yokozuna.

Konishiki Salevaia Afigaroe: Sumo wrestler, oyeki.

Musashimaru Peitari, Sumo wrestler, retired, yokozuna.

24 Samoan NFL football players in 2005/2006 season.

9 Native Hawaiian NFL football players.

5 Tongan Americans--NFL football players.

Mr. Speaker, when I envision America, I don't see a melting pot designed to reduce and remove racial differences. The America I see is a brilliant rainbow--a rainbow of ethnicities and cultures, with each people proudly contributing in their own distinctive and unique way--a better America for a generation of Americans yet unborn.

Asian-Pacific Americans wish to find a just and equitable place in our society that will allow them--like all Americans--to grow, to succeed, to achieve and to contribute to the advancement of this great nation.

Mr. Speaker, first as an American, whose roots are from the Asian Pacific Region, I would like to close my remarks by asking all of us here tonight, what is America about? I think it could not have been said better than on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in the summer of 1963 when an African-American minister named Martin Luther King Jr. poured out his heart and soul to every American who could hear his voice, when he uttered these words: ``I have a dream. My dream is that one day my children will be judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.''

That is what I believe America is all about.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize the gentleman from Texas, Congressman Al Green.

I want to thank the gentleman from Texas for his wonderful words, and we shall be there.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring up now the gentlewoman from California, Congresswoman Juanita Millender-McDonald.

I thank my gracious colleague from California for your wonderful words.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to rise today to recognize the Asian and Pacific Islander community and to commemorate Asian Pacific American Heritage Month.

As Chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus we call CAPAC, I feel privileged to be here tonight to speak of the Asian and Pacific Islander history and accomplishments. Additionally, I will be highlighting those issues affecting our communities and the priorities for CAPAC.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a moment to acknowledge and remember extraordinary community leaders, long-time friends of the APIA community that we have lost this year, Judge Delbert Wong and journalist Sam Chu Lin.

Sam Chu Lin, who began reporting in the 1960s, worked as a correspondent for CBS and Fox. Sam Chu Lin was also a respected print journalist, writing columns and articles on Asian Pacific affairs for Asian Week, Rafu Shimpo and the San Francisco Examiner.

Judge Delbert Wong was the first Chinese American judge in the continental United States. Delbert Wong was a fourth generation American of Chinese heritage. After earning his undergraduate degree in business at U.C. Berkeley, Wong served in World War II as a B-17 navigator and was awarded numerous medals.

After the war, Judge Wong faced a choice between joining his family's grocery business or entering law school. This was not met with much support from his parents, who would say, Who would hire you, a Chinese, they would constantly say. Undeterred, Wong completed his law degree in 1948, becoming the first Chinese American graduate of Stanford Law School.

After graduation, he was appointed deputy legislative counsel, serving the California State legislature in Sacramento and later appointed deputy attorney general, becoming the first Asian American to hold those positions.

In 1992, Congress passed a law that officially designated May of each year as

Asian Pacific American Heritage Month.

I want to thank the following people who have worked to designate May as Asian Pacific Heritage Month: the late Congressman Frank Horton from New York; my good friend, Secretary of Transportation, Norman Mineta; Senators Daniel Inouye and the late Senator Spark, or Sparky, Matsunaga.

Some important dates include the first 10 days of May, which coincide with two important anniversaries, the arrival of Japanese American immigrants on May 7, 1843 to California, settling in El Dorado County; and the completion of the transcontinental railroad on May 10, 1869, by the Chinese laborers.

The first APIA settlement in this country dates to 1763 when Filipinos escaped imprisonment aboard Spanish galleons and established a community near New Orleans.

Today, the APIA community is one of the fastest-growing populations in the country, with over 13 million APIAs living in the U.S. and representing 4.5 percent of the total U.S. population.

My home State of California has both the largest APIA population, approximately 4.6 million, and the largest numerical increase of APIAs since April of 2000.

Mr. Speaker, this year's theme for Asian Pacific American Heritage Month, Dreams and Challenges for Asian Pacific Americans, reflects hardships overcome by the APIA community while highlighting the hope we maintain as we contribute to the prosperity of this great Nation.

This year, I would like to particularly honor the centennial celebration of Filipinos in Hawaii and the 50th year since Dalip Singh Saund became the first Asian American Sikh to be elected to the U.S. Congress.

On December 20, 1906, a group of Filipino plantation workers arrived in Hawaii aboard the Doric, leading the first wave of Filipinos to migrate to Hawaii. The first group of Filipinos was followed by subsequent waves of Filipino immigrants who came to settle in Hawaii and, also, other parts of the United States, contributing to a migration pattern that continues up to this day.

Today, Filipinos with their rich culture and heritage have become a positive influence on mainstream life in Hawaii, with many of them succeeding prominently in their respected professions, in business, politics, government, the academe and the arts.

2006 also marks the 50th year since Dalip Singh Saund became the first Asian American to be elected to the U.S. Congress. While in office, Dalip Singh Saund forged a measure that allowed South Asians to become U.S. citizens.

As our community expands, we must also continue to educate our fellow citizens about the uniqueness of our experiences.

The APIA community is often misperceived as monolithic. Our community is extremely diverse in our languages, ethnicities and culture. Aggregating such a large and diverse group makes it difficult to understand the unique problems faced by the individual and subgroups, such as the Southeast Asian Americans, who are refugees that fled their home countries in the late 1970s and the early 1980s.

As a country, we need to better address the needs of the APIA community when we discuss disaster preparedness, comprehensive immigration reform, voting rights, education, health issues and veterans.

National disasters such as the September 11th terrorist attacks, Hurricane Rita and Hurricane Katrina, exposed serious gaps in the delivery of public services to limited-English-proficient communities, or LEP communities. In fact, the lack of linguistic and culturally competent services within FEMA and related Federal agencies prevented many LEP individuals from accessing critical disaster-relief services such as cash assistance, health care, mental health care, housing and small business loans.

As a result, at least 15,000 families from the gulf coast suffered unnecessary hardships. Many of the Asian Americans in the gulf coast region, hit by Katrina, were shrimpers and fishermen and were significant contributors to the local economy and fishing industry for years.

Plaquemines Parish in southern Louisiana is one of the locations of the main fishing and shrimp sites. Plaquemines Parish commercial landings average $441,181,891 in retail annually. Plaquemines Parish has an average annual landing of 28.8 million pounds of shrimp, valued at $238.3 million in retail value.

Extensive reports from FEMA community relations and local fishermen determined that all but 20 percent of the fishing boats were destroyed in the hurricanes. In order for these families to go back to their old way of life, approximately 430 boats must be repaired and in the water before shrimp season begins May 15.

Many of the fishermen, due to cultural and linguistic barriers, were not accustomed to the American way of accessing public assistance, navigating the intricacies and bureaucracies of public agencies and commercial transactions. The fishermen have been denied Small Business Administration loans, which would help them rebuild their boats, due to the fact that they need to buy insurance prior to getting a loan. But one cannot buy insurance for a boat until it is in a working order.

Fishermen must also prove that they can pay back the loan. But without income, SBA is reluctant to give loans. Due to the complications of the system and of the linguistic and cultural barriers that are posed to them, the Asian Pacific community faces an even bigger struggle.

This month, I will introduce legislation to improve disaster relief and preparedness services for individuals with limited English proficiency by requiring the Federal Emergency Management Agency to bolster Federal resources and outreach to community organizations that serve the limited-English population.

Mr. Speaker, our Nation was founded by immigrants who valued freedom and liberty, who sought to be free from persecution, from a tyrant government. Families fled their home countries to seek refuge in this great Nation, because they too believed in liberty, justice and freedom for all.

APIA families who seek to be reunited with their family members overseas have not seen their dreams come true because of our broken immigration system. Over 1.5 million Asians are caught in the family immigration backlog, and immediate family members from overseas wait as long as 10 years to reunite with their families in the U.S.

Mothers and fathers wait to reunite with their children. But due to the long years of waiting, their children may have already reached the age of 18, and their families will have to start the process all over again.

As we honor the 41st anniversary of the Immigration Nationality Act of 1965 and the 31st anniversary of the Refugee Act of 1975, we need to remember that our country was founded and created to protect our freedom and civil liberties.

I believe we need comprehensive immigration reform to fix our broken immigration system.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a break in my presentation to offer the microphone and the floor to our Democratic leader, a great leader from the State of California, from the great City of San Francisco, someplace where you always leave your heart, our leader, Nancy Pelosi.

Thank you, madam leader.

Mr. Speaker, if I may just suspend my remarks and invite my colleague from American Samoa to share his comments with us, the great Congressman who has been here for quite a few years, Congressman Eni Faleomavaega.

(Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from American Samoa for adding so much information to this presentation, because I think that when people listen and hear what it is that we are sharing with this country, there may be many, many people out there that say, I did not know that.

Although we talk about many firsts, accomplishments from members of our communities, I am sure also, that those who are first expect never to be last, that they would continue, that we would continue to contribute to this country. And in order to contribute to our country, we have to also defend the Constitution.

Defending the Constitution and defending the rights of our people also entails the voting rights. This past week, H.R. 9, the Voting Rights Act reauthorization was introduced.

The right to vote is keenly felt by the Asian and Pacific Islander American community. Chinese Americans could not vote until the Chinese Exclusion Acts of 1882 and 1892 were repealed in 1943. First-generation Japanese Americans could not vote until 1952 because of the racial restrictions contained in the 1790 naturalization law.

With the markup in Judiciary Committee tomorrow, we need to ensure that important provisions such as section 203, which has been very vital to the API community's ability to participate in the electoral process, gets reauthorized in this Congress.

Language-minority citizens were often denied needed assistance at the polls. In the 1975 amendments to the Voting Rights Act, such assistance became required in certain situations, and we need to ensure that these provisions continue to remain in current law.

Mr. Speaker, as Americans, we need to ensure that our children receive a quality education, but also provide adequate teacher training, funds for after-school and extracurricular activities and ensuring that college is affordable for every student that deserves to receive a higher education.

According to the U.S. Census, 50 percent of Asians age 25 and over have a Bachelor's degree or higher level of education. However, I would like to emphasize that when we disaggregate the data, when we tease apart the information for the API subgroups, we find that the model minority stereotype is in fact a myth.

Only 9.1 percent of Cambodian Americans, 7.4 percent Hmong Americans, 7.6 Lao Americans, 19.5 percent Vietnamese Americans and 16 percent of native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders who are 25 years and older have a Bachelor's degree.

These numbers show that we must do a better job of disaggregating data and information about our communities to assess the needs of those hard-working Americans who still falter behind. To address the disparities between subgroups of the larger APIA community, we need Congress to pass the Asian American and Pacific Islander Serving Institutions bill, which my colleague from Oregon, Congressman David Wu, will be introducing later this month.

This legislation will provide Federal grants to colleges and universities that have an enrollment of undergraduate students that is at least 10 percent APIA and at least 50 percent of its degree-seeking students receive financial assistance.

As a caucus, we will work to increase the availability of loan assistance, scholarships and programs to allow APIA students to attend a higher education institution; to ensure full funding for teachers and bilingual education programs under the No Child Left Behind law; to support English language learners; and to support full funding of minority outreach programs for access to higher education, such as the TRIO programs to expand services to serve APIA students.

Mr. Speaker, a common misperception of APIAs is that, as a group, we face fewer health problems than other racial and ethnic groups. In fact, APIAs as a group and specific populations within this group do experience disparities in health and health care.

For example, APIAs have the highest hepatitis B rates of any racial group in the United States. APIAs are also five times more likely to develop cervical and liver cancer than any other ethnic and racial group.

According to the Census Bureau, 18 percent of APIAs went without insurance for the entire year in 2000. This means that the uninsured are not only more likely to go without care for serious medical conditions, they are also more likely to go without routine care, less likely to have a regular source of care, less likely to use preventive services and have fewer visits per year.

At the same time, without appropriate language translation services or properly translated materials, limited-English-proficient immigrants cannot receive adequate care, as well as State and Federal benefits for which they may be eligible.

In the APIA community, 76 percent of Hmong Americans, 61 percent of Vietnamese Americans, 52 percent of Korean Americans and 39 percent of Tongans speak limited English. Therefore, eliminating health care disparities in the APIA community must include data collection, linguistically appropriate and culturally competent services, and access to health insurance.

CAPAC has been working with both the Congressional Hispanic and Black Caucuses on the Health Care Equality and Accountability Act to eliminate ethnic and racial health disparities for all of our communities.

I have introduced the Health Care Equality and Accountability Act, which will address expanding the health care safety net by diversifying the health care workforce, combating diseases that disproportionately affect racial and ethnic minorities, emphasizing prevention and behavioral health and promoting the collection and dissemination of data and enhanced medical research.

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to extend my gratitude to the patriotic men and women serving our country in the military, including the 60,813 APIAs serving on active duty in the U.S. armed services, as well as the 28,066 in the Reserves and the National Guard.

I also commend and thank the 351,000 APIA veterans who fought for this country. I would like to highlight and honor the Filipino veterans as my colleague had done who have not been compensated and recognized for their service, which I believe is a national disservice to these brave veterans.

As a country, it is our duty to ensure that these veterans have equal access to all the benefits and treatment that other veterans receive. We believe that our troops should be taken care of when we send them into battle and that they should be given the respect when they return home. Therefore, I stand with my colleagues, Congressman Issa and Congressman Filner, to support their bipartisan legislation, H.R. 4574, to restore full benefits to

these veterans who fought for our Nation during World War II. With Congressman Issa taking the lead and Congressman Filner in a leadership position in the Veterans' Affairs Committee, we have a great chance to get this bill to the floor in honor of the centennial celebration of Filipinos in Hawaii and to keep the word of Congress that we gave to these brave veterans of World War II.

I am proud of our community's accomplishment, Mr. Speaker, and I would like to recognize many of the APIA firsts in areas of art, film, sports, sciences, academia, and politics. In each effort, these folks, who were first, expect that they are not the last:

In 1847, Yung Wing, the first Chinese American graduated from Yale University and the first APIA to graduate from a U.S. college;

In 1863, William Ah Hang, who was Chinese American, became the first APIA to enlist in the U.S. Navy during the Civil War;

In 1944, An Wang, a Chinese American who invented the magnetic core memory revolutionized computing and served as a standard method for memory retrieval and storage;

In 1946, Wing F. Ong, a Chinese American from Arizona, became the first APIA to be elected to State office;

In 1948, Victoria Manalo Draves, a Filipino American diver, became the first woman to win Olympic gold medals in both the 10 meter platform and the 3 meter spring board events;

In 1956, Dalip Singh Saud, the first Indian American to be elected to Congress;

In 1965, Patsy Takemoto Mink, the first Japanese woman and woman of color elected to Congress who championed title IX;

In 1985, Haing Ngor, a Cambodian American, became the first APIA to win an Academy Award for his role in the movie ``Killing Fields'';

In 1985, Ellison Onizuka, a Japanese American, became the first APIA astronaut whose life was lost in a launching tragedy.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, the Asian American Pacific Islander American community continues to fight for our civil liberties and our civil rights as Americans.

Even after the internment of the Japanese Americans during World War II, we as a community did not grow embittered or cowed by discrimination; instead, we progressed and moved forward. I am proud to be a member of the APIA community because we continue to serve as positive contributors to our many communities by investing in education, business, and cultural opportunities for all Americans.

In closing, this Asian Pacific American Heritage Month we take pride in our history, accomplishments, and the promise of our future as we continue to pave the way for a better tomorrow in the name of dreams and challenges of Asian Pacific Americans.

Mr. Speaker, the 6 years I have served here I learned that Asian Americans have a unique contribution to make to this body and to this country, and that we because of our history in this country uniquely understand and recognize that our Constitution is never tested in times of tranquility. Our Constitution is always tested in times of trauma, terror, tension and tragedy. And to the point where we can internalize the principles of our Bill of Rights and our Constitution, and to the point where we understand that defending this Constitution and its people will we be able to face as Members of this body, face overwhelming public approval which could be wrong and stand up to them, say it is wrong because it does not follow the Constitution.

These are the kinds of heritage and contributions Asian Americans have made, will make and continue to make in this country so that we may fulfill the phrase in the preamble of our Constitution that says ``to form a more perfect union.''

In the words of Congressman Al Green, ``There will be a tomorrow.''

Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Chairman, I think the focus of the debate has gone awry. You are right. It is not an immigration issue. It is a citizen issue.

But I do want to tell my colleagues that many people have fled persecution, sought asylum, and then become citizens. They come as adults, they come as elderly persons, but they are now citizens. They have been fleeing the persecution of oppression, and they come here for hope, and they come for a dream of opportunity.

When they become citizens, this will simply allow them to partake of that dream, and that is to vote. This is a bad amendment because it does not respect the idea that this is a country of freedom. I ask my colleagues to oppose the Stearn Amendment and support the full implementation of the Voter Rights Act Reauthorization.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the Stearns amendment to H.R. 5672, which would prohibit the Department of Justice from enforcing section 203 of the Voting Rights Act. The amendment is divisive, punitive, and will take America in exactly the wrong direction.

Section 203 removes barriers to voting faced by tax paying American citizens: Citizens who do not speak English well enough to participate in the election process. Tax-paying citizens should not be penalized for needing assistance to exercise their fundamental right to vote. Language minority citizens are required to pay taxes and serve in the military without regard to their level of English proficiency. If they can shoulder those burdens of citizenship, they should be able to share in the benefits of voting with appropriate assistance to exercise the vote.

Section 203 protects citizens, not illegal immigrants: Section 203 mandates language assistance based on a trigger formula for language minorities from four language groups: Native Americans, Native Alaskans, Asian Americans, and persons of Spanish heritage. The immigrant debate should not influence the debate on ensuring that the fundamental right to vote is exercised equally by English and non- English proficient citizens. According to the 2000 census, three- quarters of those protected by Section 203 are native-born citizens. For example, 100 percent of Native Americans and Native Alaskans were born in the United States; 98.6 percent of Puerto Ricans protected by Section 4( e) were born in the United States; and 84.2 percent of Latinos were born in the United States.

Section 203 was enacted to remedy the history of educational disparities, which have led to high illiteracy rates and low voter turn out: These disparities continue to exist. As of 2000, three fourths of the 3 to 3.5 million students who are native-born were considered to be English Language Learners (ELLs), meaning the students don't speak English well enough to understand the basic English curriculum. ELL students lag significantly behind native-English speakers and are twice as likely to fail graduation tests. California has over 1,500,000 ELLs; Texas has 570,000 ELLs; Florida has 250,000 ELLs; and New York has over 230,000.

Since 1975, there have been more than 24 education discrimination cases filed on behalf of ELLs in 15 states: Fourteen of the States in which education discrimination lawsuits have been brought are covered by language assistance provisions. Since 1992, 10 cases have been filed. Litigation and consent decrees are currently pending in Texas, Alaska, Arizona, and Florida. Discrimination cases that have been brought address issues such as inadequate funding for ELLs, inadequate curriculum to assist ELLs become proficient in English, and lack of teachers and classrooms. These disparities increase the likelihood that ELLs will achieve lower test scores and drop out of school, ultimately, leading to lower voter registration and turnout.

Adults who want to learn English must endure long waiting periods to enroll in English Second Language (ESL) literacy centers: The lack of funding to expand the number of ESL centers around the country leaves minority citizens unable to enroll in classes for several years. For example, in large cities such as Boston citizens must wait for several years to enroll. In New Mexico, citizens must wait up to a year. In the State of New York, the wait lists were so long, the State eliminated them and instituted a lottery system. Once enrolled, learning English takes citizens several years to even obtain a fundamental understanding of the English language--not enough to understand complex ballots. Citizens should not be barred from exercising their right to vote while trying to become English proficient.

Most jurisdictions covered by section 203 support its continued existence: According to a 2005 survey, an overwhelming majority of jurisdictions covered by Section 203 think that federal language assistance provisions should remain in effect for public elections. In fact, in a poll of registered voters, 57 percent believe it is difficult to navigate ballots and instructions and that assistance should be provided.

I urge defeat of the Stearns Amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the Steams Amendment to H.R. 5672, which would prohibit funds from being used for the design, renovation, construction, or rental of any headquarters for the United Nations in any location in the United States.

I believe the amendment is unwise, short-sighted, and harmful attack on one of the most important international institutions in the world. Withholding funds that are lawfully owed to and desperately needed by the United Nations to perform its essential functions is harmful to the U.N. and against the interests of the United States.

In this era of new global challenges, the global war on terror to the problematic war in Iraq to the threats to world peace posed by ambitions of North Korea and Iran to acquire nuclear weapons, we need the U.N. more than ever. And for the most part, the U.N. does a good job meeting these challenges. The organization conducted the first-ever national election from scratch in Afghanistan and trained 150,000 Iraqis as election staff for the elections in that country. The U.N. also was instrumental in coordinating the massive tsunami relief and reconstruction effort, involving multiple governments and hundreds of NGOs, that brought relief and healing to hundreds of thousands of people suffering in Indonesia. The U.N. helped to end violence and instability in Haiti, Sierra Leone, and Liberia.

With 191 diverse members, the U.N. is not perfect. It is unrealistic to expect perfection from an imperfect international system. The U.N. surely has many of the virtues and faults of its member countries, including our own country. But with all its faults, it is still an indispensable forum for the peaceful resolution of conflict.

Despite both managerial and systemic limitations, the U.N. has shown resourcefulness in confronting the new challenges posed by failed states, infectious diseases that transcend borders, global climate change, famine, weapons trade and terrorism.

The U.N.'s current Secretary General, Kofi Annan, is a leader determined to implement serious reforms. He recognizes that the United Nations is at a critical crossroads and that it must be modernized and rationalized if it is to survive. For over a year now, informed by the work of the high-level panel he appointed, the Secretary General has been working on a plan to overhaul the U.N. completely so that it is more professional and more capable of confronting global threats, challenges and change.

I caution my colleagues to resist the temptation to withhold the payment of our U.N. dues. As we all know, the United States just recently completed a multi-year process of paying off a massive debt to the U.N. that had accumulated over many years. During that process, we successfully reduced the percentage of the U.N. budget that U.S. taxpayers are responsible for funding.

So as we map out our nation's strategy for the next decade at the glass edifice on the East River, we must remember that operating the United Nations costs a lot of money. But not nearly as much money as international strife and chaos. The United Nations is deserving of the continuing support of the world, and of the United States of America.

I urge defeat of the Stearns amendment.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, Mr. Weiner knows that I have voted with him consistently on the COPS program and, of course, am chagrinned to stand here to argue against a program that is so vital, but Mr. Mollohan is correct.

These are tough decisions that have to be made, and the decision that has to be made is whether we want to remain competitive in science and technology, and we have to cut the science programs. It is a bad budget that we have to operate under, but frankly, in the shadow of a pending launch and the commitment to remain at the cutting edge of science that generates out of exploration and technology and science that comes under this particular funding, we are losing ground.

I would hope that we go back to the drawing board and get the money that we need for the COPS program. It is a good program, but this is not the kind of decision that draws anyone to a degree of happiness. This is splitting the baby, and we have nothing when we get through with it.

This is an important program to support, and that is the space exploration, the science programs. The minimum moneys we have and the fact that we have to take moneys for the COPS program, we need to fund it from the President's budget. He needs to fund the COPS program. This is not the way to do it.

I would ask my colleagues to oppose the Weiner amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I reluctantly rise in opposition to my colleague's amendment, not because of the merit of the intent, but because of the harm it does in taking money away from an already under-funded NASA. This amendment would cut $476.5 million from science, aeronautics and space exploration systems. I wish the President's budget had allowed for full funding of the COPS program. The quarral is with the White House not with NASA.

I wholeheartedly support the work of NASA, and I am committed to the future of scientific and space exploration. I am deeply concerned that the amount appropriated in the FY07 budget does not meet all the needs for future space exploration as we move forward in this new century. A lack of necessary budget authority makes scientific innovation and space exploration very difficult. As I have stated before, this Administration has made many bad budgetary choices, including zeroing out the COPS program. However, it is not in the nation's best interest to compound that mistake with this one.

My greatest concern at this point is that we may not allocate enough money or resources to ensure the safety of all NASA astronauts and crew. After the Columbia disaster, safety must be our highest priority and it is worrisome that there is not a noticeable increase in funding to address all safety concerns.

Additionally, I am concerned that pressure to retire the Shuttle by a fixed date to free up resources for other activities, coupled with the need to fly up to 28 Shuttle flights to assemble the Space Station, could--if not handled properly--lead to the types of schedule and budgetary pressures that were cited by the Columbia Accident Investigation Board, CAIB, as contributing to the Columbia accident. I know that this concern is paramount at NASA as we move forward in the future.

NASA has the ability to inspire the generations toward untold discoveries. As always I look forward to working with the good men and women of NASA as we push the boundaries of our world once again.

Thus, because this amendment cuts funding so desperately needed by the researchers, engineers, and innovators at NASA, I cannot support it, and I urge my colleagues to follow my lead.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher).

Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Linda T. Sanchez).

Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King).

Mr. Chairman, I accept the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in very, very, very, very strong opposition to the gentleman's amendment.

The COPS Program is already $468 million over the request, $57 million over last year. The amendment proposes reductions to NASA that are devastating. If you are opposed to the space program or you do not like the space program or you do not want America to be number one, you ought to support this amendment.

But if you want America to have a strong space program, you ought to strongly defeat this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Feeney).

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, if I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida, then if I strike the requisite number of words, I can get 5 minutes, correct?

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon).

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word, and I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert).

I yield to the gentleman from Alabama.

Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff).

Mr. Chairman, let me say that I strongly urge defeat of the amendment. China is using their space program for military reasons. They now have laser beams. For the members of the committee that came to the subcommittee briefing, the closed briefing, you saw where they are. It is frightening. China has 200,000 engineers working on the space program, and we have 75,000.

If the Weiner amendment passed, the nmber of U.S. engineers would drop. America, under the Weiner amendment, would no longer be number one. That would be dangerous to our country and absolutely wrong. So I strongly, strongly urge the defeat of this amendment, which I think would almost guarantee, if it passed and stayed in the law, the loss of American leadership in space.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment; and I would first like to yield 2\1/2\ minutes of my time to the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan).

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment, and let me read a letter from our Secretary of State, Secretary Rice.

She says, ``I write in strong support of our contribution to the U.N. Capital Master Plan.'' That is what we are talking about, CMP.

``The U.N. facilities pose a number of serious safety and security concerns for the American and foreign staffs, diplomats, and visitors.'' Many of these are American citizens. ``In particular, the U.N. facilities do not,'' do not, ``meet fire and life-safety building codes or modern security requirements. We support the renovation of the facilities to address these deficiencies.

``The Department remains strongly committed to ensuring transparency and effective oversight of the project. We have worked closely with U.N. Under Secretary General Chris Burnham,'' who is an American, ``to take steps to strengthen internal controls of the CMP. In particular, Under Secretary General Burnham, with our support, has set up a U.N. CMP Project Office as an independent office reporting to him. The U.N. CMP Project Office has allowed access to project documents and review of ongoing work. And, the CMP Project Office has used a value engineering process and third-party contractor reviews of design documents to improve cost and quality control.

``We realize this will be an ongoing effort and are committed to close U.S. Government monitoring of the project's implementation throughout its life span. I urge full funding for this important renovation project.''

What if there were a fire at the U.N.? What if something happened and we were to deny this money?

I have been as critical of the U.N. as anybody for their failure to deal with the issue of Darfur and things like this. They stood by and allowed Srebeniza to take place. They stood by and allowed Rwanda. But I am not going to stand by and allow the building to crumble and not have safety conditions in the building.

So I ask you, before you vote on this, take a minute to look at the letter of the Secretary of State. The administration is not for the Stearns amendment. It is a safety issue not only for American citizens but also the foreigners at work in the building. But also American visitors. If you go to the U.N., there are many tourists that go through the building.

So I strongly urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment; and again I urge you, if you have any doubts, come over and read the letter from Secretary Rice. It is a safety issue.

I urge defeat of the Stearns amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

I thank the gentleman. I completely agree with what he said. I appreciate his efforts to combat violent crime, and I am happy to do everything I can to work with the gentleman and the ATF to address the crime in New Jersey. Quite frankly, there ought to be an office in New Jersey.

I thank the gentleman, and will try to help.

Amendment Offered by Mrs. Jones of Ohio

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentlewoman's amendment.

In 2003, the National Academy of Public Administration, NAPA, completed a study recommending the creation of the EEOC National Contact Center. So NAPA, a nonpartisan, bipartisan group, has recommended that the call centers, which the gentlewoman wants to shut down, be established.

Following a 6-month startup period, the National Contact Center handled 402,383 inquiries in a 12-month period in addition to the 118,322 hits on frequently asked questions. The National Contact Center staff handled 302,622 of these inquiries, resolving 70 percent without further involvement of EEOC field staff.

Also, it has been said, if you shut these call centers down, the technology that EEOC would have to have would cost anywhere from $10 to $12 million. Currently, the volume of inquiries coming into the National Contact Center is increasing as field offices have begun to route their calls through the contact center.

By handling these inquiries, the National Contact Center has not caused any further staff reductions but rather has freed up EEOC employees to devote more time to the critical functions of mediating, investigating and litigating charges.

I do agree it has to be monitored, but to that, I believe the staff and Mr. Mollohan's staff have worked together to provide oversight in this regard. The report accompanying the bill includes language to require the commission to implement the recommendations of the Inspector General. We are working to ensure a better EEOC National Contact Center, but prohibiting the funds for the center would increase the workload on the EEOC front line, detract from the people that are helping. So I urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Do I get to close?

I urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment. But what I would like to do, this is a pilot program, and the pilot, if my memory serves me, ends in September of this year, September of 2006, so the pilot has not finished.

So to destroy the pilot before the pilot is finished, what I would like to do is, when we finish the pilot in September or maybe even we could try to expedite it a little bit to see, is to invite the gentlewoman up and ask NAPA to come up with us and sit down and have NAPA take a look at that, maybe at an appropriate time.

But I think the pilot has to go. NAPA is a very good organization. We have used the NAPA people with regard to the reorganization of the FBI and many other agencies.

What I would ask is we have a ``no'' vote. At the end of the pilot, in September, I am going to remind the staff; we will call NAPA up, also call the EEOC. I would invite the gentlewoman to come to the meeting and kind of see where we are. Fortunately, we will still have time to kind of deal with the issue, because I don't believe that we will be in conference by then.

But we are in the middle of the pilot; you don't kill it while the pilot is still operating. This is the National Academy of Public Administration, which so many individuals have used so many times.

Yes, I would yield.

I can't answer that. The staff said they are going to vote. But what I would like to do tomorrow is write the commission or ask the commission that they not vote in July to make it permanent until the pilot is finished.

Does that mean you withdraw the amendment?

Yes. I would do that. I would also ask if we can ask the National Academy of Public Administration also be part of that process.

Sure.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the Clerk read the amendment so we can understand what amendment this is.

Mr. Chairman, we accept the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentlelady from California (Ms. Loretta Sanchez of California).

Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentlelady. I want to be on record I am absolutely, opposed to granting PNTR to Vietnam.

If you read the Human Rights Report of the State Department of Vietnam, which probably not many people read, it is a disaster. It is a disaster. I cannot understand why a bill would even come to the floor.

On the issue of intellectual property, if you look to see how they are treating the Catholic Church and the Buddhists, do you think they are going to be any better on intellectual property? No way.

President Bush is going to visit this fall. We are hoping that the President will meet with dissidents here and also dissidents over there and speak out on human rights, religious freedom and on the intellectual property issue. So anything that we could do in this bill that would be helpful with regard to beefing up intellectual property and doing as much is helpful.

But, also, as I told another Member from your side earlier today, it isn't just putting a couple dollars in. I want somebody who really believes, and, as of now, I think this whole issue of trade trumps everything.

I wish we could harken back to the days of Ronald Reagan, whereby Ronald Reagan just spoke out so boldly on the issue of human rights and religious freedom in Eastern Europe, called the Soviet Union the evil empire, was laughed at by the liberal media, and lived to see the fall of the Soviet Union.

That type of approach that Ronald Reagan took would be the right approach to take with regard to Vietnam, whereby we could see additional trade and human rights and religious freedom and, lastly, the respect for intellectual property, so they are not just stealing everything that we have.

Mr. Chairman, I understand the Ways and Means Committee has concerns with this amendment. Although, looking around, I see no one from the Ways and Means Committee.

We also are aware that the Office of the United States Trade Representative has committed to ensuring public health experts are included on this advisory committee. We have been led to believe this issue will be resolved in the near future, but with that understanding, I have no objection to the amendment personally. So I would accept the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be read.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Since 1975, the Bilingual Election Assistance Provisions of the Voting Rights Act have forced States and political subdivisions to accommodate multiple languages at the polls. The provisions prohibit States from providing voting material only in the English language.

While all of us enjoy hearing a wide variety of languages spoken here in the United States, I think that official government functions of the government ought to be conducted in English. Let me repeat that. I think the official government functions of this government ought to be conducted in English.

Let me state that my amendment is not about immigration, intimidation or discrimination. It is about assimilation. This is also an amendment about States' rights. States or political subdivisions can provide voting assistance in other languages if they want to, but I do not believe this is good for the United States to mandate.

The United States of America is a Nation of immigrants. We are the original melting pot. Importantly, though, the first motto of the United States of America was E pluribus unum: ``Out of many, one.'' This motto symbolizes the integration of the 13 independent colonies into one united country. The motto assumed even further meaning as Americans welcomed ever more immigrants from many lands to our shores. And one of the most unifying elements of one Nation is a common language.

Since our Nation's founding, there have been people who would literally suffer life and limb to be an American citizen. And I think that if you have the good fortune to be able to vote in the United States, then it is not too much to ask that this be accomplished in English. You can bring your own assistance to the polls if you need it, but I do not think the United States Government should be forced to pay for such assistance.

So, in my opinion, section 203 of the Voting Rights Act would exacerbate isolation and segregation. If individuals are not nudged, not pushed by the circumstances of daily living, including voting, to get out and master the basics of the English language, then they are denied all the rich opportunities that life in this great Nation offers. Further, depending upon how you got here, it is generally expected that you have a command of the English language. If you are born here and you obtain voting age and are limited for some reason in English proficiency, then I consider this quite a failing of the schools. And for most naturalized proceedings, you must pass a limited English proficiency requirement. Of course, democracy does not end at the polling place, so if one faces a language barrier to voting, then I suspect that he or she is secluded from enjoying all the full rights and privileges of democracy in the United States.

And, finally, Mr. Chairman, this amendment is about applying our scarce resources wisely in this country. The Bilingual Election Assistance Provisions come at no small cost to our States, our counties and our small towns.

For example, does a language with several dialects, such as Chinese, trigger the assistance requirement? Then the statute says that the jurisdiction's obligation is to ascertain the dialects that are commonly used by members of the applicable language minority group in the jurisdiction and to provide oral assistance in such dialects. Does a language that is unwritten trigger the requirement? Then oral assistance and publicity are required. We simply cannot, Mr. Chairman, afford to translate government documents and transactions into every possible conceivable language.

Now, if my amendment passes and becomes the law of the land, what would happen? Here is what: Voters not confident of their command of the English language would do what all of us would do, bring in their friends and neighbors and ask for help and assistance. Until 1975, there was no government duty to provide ballot translation, but a voter could certainly bring an interpreter of his choice to the voting booth.

I think that all eligible voters should knowledgeably, vigorously seeking knowledge, exercise their franchise. But let us just be a Nation that votes united, not divisively.

And I would say in conclusion, Mr. Chairman, States should not have to print ballots in all these various languages. Let us just have the ballots printed in English.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King).

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

My amendment would prohibit funds from the United States being used for the design, renovation, construction or rental of any headquarters for the United Nations in any location in the United States.

I offered this type of amendment 1 year ago, and then I agreed to withdraw it. My honorable colleague, Chairman Wolf joined me in requesting a GAO investigation of the United Nations headquarters renovation. That ongoing investigation has done little to advance our understanding of what the U.N. is doing besides how good the U.N. is at spending our taxpayers' money.

One of the lead experts in the GAO's ongoing investigation, Thomas Malito, testified in the Senate just last week. ``The U.N. is vulnerable to fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement due to a range of weaknesses in existing oversight practices.'' That is why I have returned to ask that we withhold funding until the United Nations makes public and transparent its contracting and disbursement information relative to the renovations.

The United Nations estimates that the planned renovation of its headquarters building in New York City would cost $1.7 billion, billion, for a work site that is over 2\1/2\ million square feet.

The most expensive building sold in Manhattan, the General Motors building, recently sold for $1.4 billion. The entire U.N. building could be built again for under $2 billion. Still, repair and refurbishing are activities that involve greater financial opportunities, one would suppose.

Now, even if the U.N. cost estimates remain constant, a big if, the U.S. share of renovation would be about $480 million. That would be in addition to our regular annual dues of $423 million, plus all other contributions of nearly $2.4 billion.

The General Assembly has yet to approve a plan amongst the four being considered, but the U.N. has already spent almost $40 million on preferred renovation plans, $20 million in the last month alone, according to the GAO.

The GAO also found that the $1.7 billion cost estimate only scratches the surface of the expected costs. The estimate does not include any of the following: new furniture, at least $100 million per year for an unknown number of years; new security costs, as well as temporary security costs during construction; new phones and information technology systems; and new office equipment.

Moreover, according to the GAO, ``While the U.N. has yet to finalize a specific procurement strategy for the renovation project, to the extent that it relies on current U.N. processes, implementation of the planned renovation is vulnerable to the procurement weaknesses we have identified previously.'' And the GAO continues: ``For example, it has not,'' the U.N. now, ``has not established an independent process to consider vendor protests that could alert senior U.N. officials of failure by procurement staff.'' And the U.N. has yet to establish an independent bid process, something that the U.S. Government has in place and we all take for granted.

In addition, although the U.N.'s Office of Internal Oversight Service, OIOS, has a mandate establishing it as an independent oversight entity and to conduct oversight of the renovation, it lacks the budgetary independence it requires to carry out its responsibilities. The OIOS is dependent on the whims of the very department and program heads it is auditing. The problems with this setup were made plain in the Oil-for-Food program when OIOS was prevented from examining high-risk areas where billions of dollars were subsequently found to have been misused.

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the patience of my good friend from Virginia, Chairman Wolf, on this amendment, and his approach to the very difficult work of crafting and passing the appropriation bill for this subcommittee. In this case, dealing with the United Nations, we have 61 years of patience, and this patience has to be very frustrating for all of us. But, Mr. Chairman, do we simply continue to grant the United Nations the possibility of continued corruption and possibly graft with this project? I don't think so.