A bill for the relief of Jorge Rojas Gutierrez, Oliva Gonzalez Gonzalez, and Jorge Rojas Gonzalez.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Fugitive Information Networked Database Act of 2008, or the FIND Act. This bill provides resources to law enforcement to ensure the entry of felony warrants into the national FBI database and to assist in tracking down and extraditing fugitives. It helps ensure that fugitives who flee their States will be located, apprehended, and brought to justice. It protects our communities by taking dangerous criminals off the streets.

According to a recent series of articles in the St. Louis Post- Dispatch, anywhere from 1.9 million to 2.7 million felony fugitives are on the run from law enforcement. When State and local law enforcement issue a warrant for a fugitive's arrest, they are expected to enter it into the FBI's National Crime Information Center database as well as into their own State and local databases. The national database is accessible to all State and local law enforcement agencies, which use the national database to track fugitives around the country.

The national database is only as good as the information that States enter into it, however. Too often, State and local law enforcement agencies enter warrants into the State and local databases, but not into the national database. It is estimated that more than a third of all felony warrants have not been entered into the national database. That means anywhere from 800,000 to 1.6 million wanted felons can escape justice and remain at large in our communities simply by crossing State lines.

Unless a warrant is entered into the national database, a sheriff or police officer who stops a fugitive has no way of knowing that he is wanted in another jurisdiction--sometimes for a violent crime. Many fugitives go on to commit additional crimes in other States. Some know that if they can flee across State lines, there's a good chance they can--in some cases--get away with murder. This is inexcusable.

I have heard a range of reasons why State and local law enforcement have not been entering felony warrants into the national database. Some reasons are valid. For instance, if law enforcement is using a person suspected of a felony as an informant, it's understandable that they would not want to enter the informant's name into the database.

Many jurisdictions don't enter warrants into the national database, however, simply because they don't have the time and resources to update and validate warrant entries, which is a resource- and time- intensive process.

Fortunately, the burden of warrant entry and validation can be alleviated. By developing new databases, or by upgrading existing ones, to ensure compatibility and interoperability with the national database, State and local law enforcement can facilitate information sharing and seamless warrant entry into databases at all levels of government. With additional resources to hire personnel for the validation process, State and local law enforcement can enter felony warrants into the national database without worrying about not having the resources to validate them.

The FIND Act addresses the problem of warrant backlogs by providing State and local law enforcement with the resources necessary to develop and upgrade their systems, and hire additional personnel to perform the validation process. Specifically, it authorizes $25 million for fiscal years 2009 and 2010 for grants to States to develop new systems or upgrade existing systems so that they are interoperable with the NCIC database.

Another reason law enforcement doesn't enter felony warrants into the national database is concern that the State will not have the resources to extradite the fugitive if he is found outside the State's borders. Helping State and local agencies enter their felony warrants into the national database is therefore only half the battle. We also need to ensure that when a dangerous fugitive is caught, the jurisdiction in which he is wanted can work with the U.S. Marshals Service to extradite him to face justice.

While I was drafting this bill, I spoke to one sheriff who apprehended an individual wanted for rape in another State. The sheriff notified that State that he had their criminal in custody, but when the State said they didn't have the resources to extradite him, the sheriff had no choice but to free the rapist into his community.

When we in Congress do not provide law enforcement with the basic resources they need to extradite dangerous criminals like this, we fail in our most basic duty to those we represent--the duty to protect them from violent crime.

The U.S. Marshals Service is on the front lines of fugitive apprehension and extradition. We authorized funds several years ago for the development of Regional Fugitive Task Forces that combine the resources and expertise of State and local law enforcement and the U.S. Marshals Service. These task forces have been very successful and could do much more to track down and extradite fugitives if they had the proper resources.

My bill authorizes an additional $20 million in fiscal year 2009 to fund existing and develop new regional task forces, and it provides $10 million for fiscal years 2010 through 2014. It also authorizes $3 million for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2014 to assist in the extradition of fugitives through the Justice Prisoner and Alien Transport System.

The FIND Act provides essential resources to locate, capture, and bring to justice dangerous fugitives. It takes commonsense steps to protect our communities from rapists, murderers, and other violent criminals who have fled across State lines. I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, today I am introducing a private relief bill on behalf of Jorge Rojas Gutierrez, his wife, Oliva Gonzalez Gonzalez and their son, Jorge Rojas Gonzalez. The Rojas family are Mexican nationals living in the San Jose area of California.

The story of the Rojas family is compelling and I believe they merit Congress' special consideration for such an extraordinary form of relief as a private bill.

Mr. Rojas and his wife Ms. Gonzalez originally came to the United States in 1990 when their son Jorge Rojas, Jr. was just 2 years old. In 1995, they left the country to attend a funeral, and then re-entered on visitor's visas. The family has since expanded to include a son, Alexis Rojas now age 15 and a daughter Tania Rojas now age 14.

Since arriving in the United States, this family has dedicated themselves to community involvement, a strong work ethic and volunteerism. They have been paying taxes since their arrival in 1990. The family has been described by their friends and colleagues as a ``model American family.'' I would like to tell you some more about each member of the Rojas family.

Mr. Rojas is a hard-working individual who has been employed by Valley Crest Landscape Maintenance in San Jose, California, for the past 14 years. Currently, Mr. Rojas works on commercial landscaping projects. He is well-respected by his supervisor and his peers.

In addition to supporting his family, Jorge has volunteered his time and talents to provide modern green landscaping and a recreational jungle gym to Sherman Oaks Community Charter School, where his two youngest children attend school.

Ms. Gonzalez, in addition to raising her three children, has been very active in the local community. She has worked to help other immigrants assimilate to American life by working as a translator and a tutor for immigrant children at Sherman Oaks Community Charter School and the Y.M.C.A. Kids after-school program.

She has also coached soccer teams, and has recently directed a Second Harvest food drive for the school. Ms. Gonzalez also devotes many hours of her time to the organization People Acting in Community Together PACT, where she works to prevent crime, gangs and drug dealing in San Jose neighborhoods and schools.

Perhaps one of the most compelling reasons for permitting the family to remain in the United States is the impact their deportation would have on their three children. Two of the children, Alexis Rojas age 15 and Tania Rojas age 14, are U.S. citizens. Jorge Rojas, Jr. has lived in the United States since he was a toddler. For these children, this country is the only country they really know.

Jorge Rojas, Jr. is currently working at Jamba Juice. He graduated from Del Mar High School in 2007 and has been accepted to San Jose City College. However, his dreams and aspirations have been placed on hold because he remains subject to deportation.

Alexis and Tania Rojas are students at Sherman Oaks Community Charter School. They are described by their teachers as ``fantastic, wonderful and gifted'' students. In fact, the principal at Sherman Oaks has described all three of the children as ``honest, hard-working academic honor students'' and has commended all of them for their on-campus leadership.

It seems so clear to me that this family has embraced the American dream and their continued presence in our country would do so much to enhance the values we hold dear. I have received 30 letters from the community in support of this family. Enactment of the legislation I have introduced today will enable the Rojas family to continue to make significant contributions to their community as well as the United States.

I ask my colleagues to support this private bill.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and letters of support be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, today I am introducing a private relief bill on behalf of Jorge Rojas Gutierrez, his wife, Oliva Gonzalez Gonzalez and their son, Jorge Rojas Gonzalez. The Rojas family are Mexican nationals living in the San Jose area of California.

The story of the Rojas family is compelling and I believe they merit Congress' special consideration for such an extraordinary form of relief as a private bill.

Mr. Rojas and his wife Ms. Gonzalez originally came to the United States in 1990 when their son Jorge Rojas, Jr. was just 2 years old. In 1995, they left the country to attend a funeral, and then re-entered on visitor's visas. The family has since expanded to include a son, Alexis Rojas now age 15 and a daughter Tania Rojas now age 14.

Since arriving in the United States, this family has dedicated themselves to community involvement, a strong work ethic and volunteerism. They have been paying taxes since their arrival in 1990. The family has been described by their friends and colleagues as a ``model American family.'' I would like to tell you some more about each member of the Rojas family.

Mr. Rojas is a hard-working individual who has been employed by Valley Crest Landscape Maintenance in San Jose, California, for the past 14 years. Currently, Mr. Rojas works on commercial landscaping projects. He is well-respected by his supervisor and his peers.

In addition to supporting his family, Jorge has volunteered his time and talents to provide modern green landscaping and a recreational jungle gym to Sherman Oaks Community Charter School, where his two youngest children attend school.

Ms. Gonzalez, in addition to raising her three children, has been very active in the local community. She has worked to help other immigrants assimilate to American life by working as a translator and a tutor for immigrant children at Sherman Oaks Community Charter School and the Y.M.C.A. Kids after-school program.

She has also coached soccer teams, and has recently directed a Second Harvest food drive for the school. Ms. Gonzalez also devotes many hours of her time to the organization People Acting in Community Together PACT, where she works to prevent crime, gangs and drug dealing in San Jose neighborhoods and schools.

Perhaps one of the most compelling reasons for permitting the family to remain in the United States is the impact their deportation would have on their three children. Two of the children, Alexis Rojas age 15 and Tania Rojas age 14, are U.S. citizens. Jorge Rojas, Jr. has lived in the United States since he was a toddler. For these children, this country is the only country they really know.

Jorge Rojas, Jr. is currently working at Jamba Juice. He graduated from Del Mar High School in 2007 and has been accepted to San Jose City College. However, his dreams and aspirations have been placed on hold because he remains subject to deportation.

Alexis and Tania Rojas are students at Sherman Oaks Community Charter School. They are described by their teachers as ``fantastic, wonderful and gifted'' students. In fact, the principal at Sherman Oaks has described all three of the children as ``honest, hard-working academic honor students'' and has commended all of them for their on-campus leadership.

It seems so clear to me that this family has embraced the American dream and their continued presence in our country would do so much to enhance the values we hold dear. I have received 30 letters from the community in support of this family. Enactment of the legislation I have introduced today will enable the Rojas family to continue to make significant contributions to their community as well as the United States.

I ask my colleagues to support this private bill.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and letters of support be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, today I rise to introduce the bipartisan Federal Employees Paid Parental Leave Act of 2008. I introduce this bill with Senators Warner, Clinton, Kerry, Schumer, Mikulski, Sanders, and Durbin.

This bill has a simple and yet important requirement: that Federal employees be granted 4 weeks of paid paternity and maternity leave.

The Federal Government is the country's largest employer, with more than 2.7 million employees. My state of Virginia is home to more than 100,000 Federal employees. As the Nation's largest employer, the Federal Government should be the leader in workplace policy. The Federal Government should provide benefits that are equal to what we call best practices in the private sector.

Furthermore, according to the Office of Personnel Management, more than half of the Federal Government's employees will become eligible for retirement within the next 10 years. The Federal workforce is aging faster than the private workforce. The benefits desired by younger workers are offered by private sector employers, but not by the Federal Government. Although the Federal Government cannot compete with private sector salaries, we should be offering comparable benefits.

The current parental leave law for Federal employees is in need of an update. The Federal Employees Paid Parental Leave Act provides that, of the 12 weeks of unpaid leave guaranteed by the Family and Medical Leave Act, federal employees will be allowed to substitute 4 weeks of paid leave, as well as any accrued annual or sick leave for the birth or adoption of a child.

This requirement mirrors a recent provision put forward by the Senate Armed Services Committee in the National Defense Authorization Act, which would allow 21 days of paid paternity leave for our military personnel.

The legislation we are introducing today is also an issue of fairness for the working family. The U.S. Census Bureau reports that more than 70 percent of women with children over the age of 1 are in the workforce and that both parents work in most families.

Additionally, according to the National Partnership for Women and Families, in today's highly competitive jobs environment, there is little workforce flexibility to help working

women and men care for their families and still succeed at their jobs. This is particularly true for those Americans whose economic security is most at risk.

It is important to note the parental leave practices of non-Federal employers. Research by the Joint Economic Committee has found that Fortune 100 firms offer paid leave typically lasting 6 to 8 weeks. Additionally, most of America's economic rivals provide paid parental leave, as do many other nations. The European Union requires that member countries offer 14 weeks of paid leave and most offer more than the required amount.

By contrast, our Nation's current laws force healthy, long-term federal employees to save up their sick days and vacation time so they can use this paid time off to care for their newborn or newly adopted child. Asking employees to cobble together accrued leave makes it difficult for relatively new employees or those who experience health problems to save up enough time for parental leave. We owe our civil servants a more thoughtful, worker-friendly policy.

I note that the House of Representatives recently reported a similar bill out of the appropriate House committee by a strong bipartisan vote. I hope the Senate begins similar action on this bill.

I urge my colleagues to support this pro-family, pro-Federal worker legislation.