Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 90, on S. 686, I did not attend in protest of the politicization of a profound medical and family tragedy. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.''

Mr. Speaker, Verna Lee St. Clair King, born and reared in Berwick, Louisiana, is the daughter of John Westley St. Clair and Florence Ellen Calvin St. Clair. Educated in Louisiana and Texas, she earned her A.B. degree from Wiley College in Marshall, Texas and later an M.A. from San Diego State University.

Verna grew up determined to make life better for others. She eventually became a teacher, making politics and helping others through community service her lifelong hobbies. Her intelligence and insight led her to the political arena and the fight for equal education.

A professional educator in San Diego for thirty years, Verna has a long history of involvement with the San Diego Teachers' Association (SDTA). Through the SDTA, she represented the National Education Association and served as a member of the National Women's Caucus and Black Caucus.

Verna's unselfish nature led her to become increasingly involved in a wide array of civic activities: she was vice-chair of the 79th Assembly District Committee, served on the 44th Congressional Advisory Committee, and was a charter member of the San Diego Council of Democratic Women. In addition, she is a charter member and past president of Women Inc. She is also involved with Alpha Kappa Alpha, CTA, the YWCA, her church, and the Democratic Party. In addition, she has recently served on the Community Service Association Board as well as the San Diego Historical Site Board.

Verna's involvement in the community and politics has allowed her to interact and work with individuals such as Coretta Scott King, Andrew Young, Jimmy and Rosalyn Carter, Alan Cranston and Tom Bradley.

Verna is listed in prominent annuals and has received many awards in recognition of her professional and community service. In the past, she has been the recipient of the Democratic Committee's Golden Key Award and received a Key to the City of San Diego for her outstanding work in the field of human relations. For bridging the gap between parents and teachers, Verna was honored with an Honorary Service award by the Ninth District P.T.A. Her current honors reflect the esteem in which she is held by her fellow professionals and by those who have had the pleasure of working with her in political and community activities.

Verna's husband, Alonzo King, now deceased, shared her interests both politically and professionally. In addition, Verna and Alonzo were blessed with a close family that included five children: Joyce L. King Thomas, Verna Lee E. Bickerstaff, St. Clair King, Alonzo King, and Reginald King, the latter two of whom are deceased.

Verna has always been gracious in all of her endeavors, and her knowledge and experiences have been invaluable to professionals, friends, fellow committee members and the community.

She truly has been an inspiration to all San Diego.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

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

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

Mr. Chairman, I call this the ``Let U.S. Veterans Rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan'' amendment. Once again, I rise in support of the veterans of our Nation. We have a major, major, major operation in Iraq and Afghanistan. The bill on the floor today appropriates a sum of $81 billion, and we will be spending over $200 billion. It seems to me that we ought to guarantee jobs to veterans with companies that are awarded government contracts from this fund. Our active duty are fighting, but those who volunteer to go and help in other ways should have the preference that their veterans' service offers.

We have all rallied to support our troops, but often after they come home, our veterans are not treated with the respect they deserve. I outlined yesterday the lack of respect that they will have and continue to have because of lack of adequate funding in the health care system. PTSD, post-traumatic stress disorder, for example, will not have the funding that is needed to treat what is expected to arise out of the current war. As I said yesterday, research funds are being cut, nurses' positions are being cut.

I tried yesterday to put an amendment on the floor that would supplement this supplemental with an additional $3 billion that the veterans groups think and have testified and have outlined is necessary. That $3 billion was not added in yesterday's supplemental. So today I ask that we ensure that there are jobs for our Nation's veterans, whether they are new or old. Let us give them the preference that they have in law at home with the preference for the contracts that are being awarded with such abandon in the Middle East today.

We know, if we do not serve our veterans with jobs or health care, what occurs. We know that up to half of the homeless on the streets today are veterans, mainly from Vietnam, because we did not give them the honor, the respect, the health care, the jobs, the housing that they needed. And so they are on the street after having fought for this country. One way to make sure that this does not happen to anyone else is to include veterans in the rebuilding of Iraq and Afghanistan. Many of them fought for freedom for those nations. Let us get them involved in the effort to build the future.

Mr. Chairman, I hope that the rules are not invoked here once again to stop a commonsense approach to helping our veterans in this Nation.

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

Of course.

La Jolla.

No, it is not.

Mr. Chairman, in last year's appropriation bill, that hospital was awarded close to $100 million for seismic refitting, retrofitting for earthquake safety.

Yes, sir.

Mr. Chairman, yes, in last year's appropriation bill, La Jolla Medical Center was one of a variety of hospitals, I think about two dozen.

Many times.

Yes, sir.

Mr. Chairman, whatever the gentleman from California (Chairman Lewis) suggests, I would consider.

Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would continue to yield, look, everybody wants efficiencies in this system; but I will say, for a paralyzed veteran with a spinal cord injury, there is no better place than the VA to get care.

To keep that quality of care for those veterans requires investment in our system. We are all looking for efficiencies but I will tell you there is no independent person, including the VA.

Mr. Chairman, the gentleman asked me a question.

Including the VA that says that we have enough money.

The VA says we do not have enough money. . . .

Mr. Chairman, I wish to be heard on the point of order.

Once again we are using the rules to block a commonsense amendment. It seems to me that the chairman has deeper issues than a blocking of the thing on a procedural ground and feels that the VA is not doing its job. That is obviously a deep issue that we ought to discuss, but that should not lead him to block this amendment.

In addition, the only way I could judge the sincerity of the majority party in these issues is to see what they had done to the chairman of the committee I have sat on for the last 12 years; that is, the VA Committee. The chairman was removed from that job, purged from that job because he stood up for veterans.

I hope, Mr. Chairman, that the gentleman will join me on a mission as I join him on a mission for accountability and efficiency to convince the leadership of his party to put back on that committee members of the committee who actually fight for veterans.

Once again, I think the veterans of this Nation ought to understand that the rules of this House can be waived for anything that the majority party wants, but when it comes to the veterans of this Nation, they refuse to waive the rules.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment. The Clerk read as follows:

Amendment offered by Mr. Filner:

At the end of title V (page 69, after line 17), insert the

following new section:

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment which I am labeling an emergency amendment. It is an emergency amendment because the money is needed for the veterans of this Nation, especially those who are returning from the war in Iraq and Afghanistan who may not be able to get the services they need for a variety of wounds, both physical and mental.

Let me first say where I got the number of $3.1 billion. It is not just a figure grabbed from the air. Every year the veterans service organizations of this Nation put together a budget called the Independent Budget for the Department of Veterans Affairs. This is the one for 2006. What it says is that just to keep meeting the needs for our current veterans and those who we expect to see in the coming year, we will need an additional $3.1 billion than was allocated by the President in his budget. We do not know what this House will adopt yet, so this figure is drawn from the inadequacies of the President's budget as he gave it to Congress recently.

This is a supplemental budget for those fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. At least that is the title. Let me make sure all the people of the House understand the relevance of the veterans budget for the war that we are fighting abroad. Here is what our first President, George Washington, said and it has never been done more eloquently: ``The willingness with which our young people are likely to serve in any war, no matter how justified, shall be directly proportional as to how they perceive the veterans of earlier wars were treated and appreciated by their country.''

Mr. Chairman, the morale of our troops overseas depends on how we are going to treat their comrades when they return and how we treat their comrades who served in earlier battles. We are not treating them to the level that is worthy of their sacrifice. Whether you look at the amount of nurses, whether you look at research funds, whether you look at the resources for post-traumatic stress disorder for which virtually every returning soldier, Marine who is in Iraq and Afghanistan may have, wherever you look, there is a deficiency in this veterans budget.

I call that an emergency. I call that important to the struggle that is being waged overseas. If you are voting for that struggle, you have to vote to make sure the veterans who come back from that struggle are well treated.

Right now we have a proposal from the President which advocates a mere one-half of 1 percent increase in the veterans health care budget over the previous year. That is a real cut, because of health inflation and the advancing age and the needs of the population, to about a 14 or 15 percent cut by the administration's own figures. So we are cutting in real terms 15 percent from the veterans health care budget.

How does the administration want to fund that cut? Doubling the copayments for prescription drugs, adding an enrollment fee of up to $250 for those in the so-called lower categories of veterans preference. That is outrageous. That is unconscionable to charge the veterans of this Nation for their own health care and to balance the budget on the backs of these veterans.

The chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs was not satisfied with having a $250 enrollment fee. He proposed doubling it to almost $500 for some of these veterans. These veterans are supposedly in lower categories, either because of the nature of their illness or their income. But, Madam Chairman, this Nation, this Congress has the funds to help all of these veterans to get the care that they need.

Let me remind my colleagues, this is a $2.5 trillion budget that we are operating within our Nation. We have about a $400 billion deficit, a $7.5 trillion debt. We are spending several billion dollars a week in Iraq. Yet someone is going to say that we do not have the $3 billion that is necessary for our veterans? I reject that argument because this is a Nation that is worthy of its veterans. This a Nation that could put the money where it is needed. And this is a Nation that can do what is required for our veterans.

We simply cannot charge these copayments. We simply cannot charge this enrollment fee. We simply cannot continue to have a VA that is gagged from informing veterans of their rights under law. That is what is happening in the VA today. My amendment to provide $3 billion extra will correct that injustice.

Point of Order

Madam Chairman, I know how reluctant the chairman is. This is a supplemental budget. By definition it goes beyond whatever we did in the previous year. That is why it is called a supplemental. And by some technical mumbo jumbo, he has managed to say that this supplemental is not subject to the rule that he just read. Through technicalities, through arcane kinds of things, he is saying that the veterans of this Nation are not

entitled to this care because he is using a rule which is not being used for the $81 billion that we have on the floor but is used for this $3 billion that we are trying to use for our Nation's veterans.

Madam Chairman, I understand these rules, and I understand these technical points of order. They are designed to protect certain amendments and not have others. Fine. But when one uses that rule to shut out the veterans of this Nation, to shut out the troops that are coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan, from the care that they deserve and will need, we are going to shut down PTSD programs, Madam Chairman, all across this Nation, and yet every soldier and Marine is going to come back with potentially that disorder.

So one can use all the rules, but what we are doing here is immoral, it is unconscionable, it is outrageous that we would be treating the veterans in this way.

Madam Chairman, I understand what the chairman is saying. I have been around here long enough. I do not have confidence in that regular order. I know what is going to happen then. Then we will be accused of legislating on appropriations or some other rule will be brought up. So I do not accept the ruling. I intend to challenge the ruling, and I think we owe this to our veterans.

Madam Chairman, I move to appeal the ruling of the Chair.

Madam Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I want to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes) for bringing us these two amendments. Again, these are for national security emergency issues, border patrol agents at our border.

I represent all the California-Mexico border. I know that we need these agents. The President asked for them, and yet he did not put the money in to pay for them.

In addition, every veterans group and the VA itself say to complete the year, giving the services they need, they need another $1.3 billion. This is truly an emergency.

The rules that will be used once again to say that our national defense at the border, our veterans to get their adequate health care, somehow we violate the rules, but let us not violate common sense. Common sense says we need these funds. We need this protection. We need these services for our veterans.

Let us dispense with the technical objections and fund what we need for our veterans and for our border defense.

Point Of Order

Mr. Speaker, let me reiterate what I said about nitpicking and arcane rules. This whole bill is a violation of the rules of the House except for the fact that it says in the bill it does not violate the rules. So telling us that we should have respect for the rules, my colleagues ought to show some respect for the good sense of the American people, for common sense. This whole bill is a violation of the rules without a waiver. Is that not true, Mr. Chairman? Would this bill be a violation of the rules if there was not a waiver involved in the rules?

As I said, the rules are being used to damage common sense and to damage our Nation's security and damage our health care to our veterans. I think it is a disgrace to use those rules for these purposes.

Madam Speaker, I want to explain to my colleagues and to Americans across the country what happened here today on the floor of the House, especially what happened to the veterans of these United States, veterans of past wars, veterans of the current war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Iran may be next.

We had a supplemental budget, they call it, on the floor today, a budget for $81 billion to fund our war in Iraq and Afghanistan; and they called it a supplemental so they could do it over and above the regular budget so they do not have to pay for it in ways that you and I have to pay for things or our businesses have to pay for things. They just create a bigger deficit without accountability.

So they are on their way to passing an $81 billion supplemental bill for our active duty troops; and yet when I brought on to the floor an amendment to that $81 billion that said let us put $3 billion into care for our veterans, those coming back from the wars today and those who have been in wars previous to this, I asked for a figure of $3 billion because that is what the veterans service organizations in this Nation said is what we need more than what the President requested in his recent budget proposal. So I brought on to the floor a $3 billion amendment to an $81 billion supplemental.

Keep in mind that we have a $2.5 trillion budget. We have this year at least a $400 billion deficit. We have an existing debt of $7.5 trillion. We are spending $1 billion every 2 or 3 days in the Middle East, and yet they say we do not have the $3 billion for our veterans.

That is what happened on the floor of the House today, my fellow Americans. They voted down the ability to deal with our veterans.

Those who are coming back today from Afghanistan and Iraq, the vast majority have the potential of having post-traumatic stress disorder, PTSD; and yet when they will need the services in the coming year, we will have reduced those PTSD services because of the cut in the budget that the President has proposed and this Republican Congress will approve.

We will cut nursing care. We will cut research. We will cut prosthetic devices. But we will add more waiting time for those who want a mental health examination or a dental examination. We will add months and months and months to the waiting time for those who want their claims established. Yet when I asked today for $3 billion, the majority of this House said no.

We can afford the $81 billion. It was for our active duty. We can afford a $7.5 trillion debt. We can go into deficits for $400 billion this year, but no, no, let us not pay that $3 billion for our veterans.

I thought that was disgraceful. I thought that was unconscionable. I hope that when the Republican Members of this House go home, all the veterans across this country will say, how come you voted against that amendment to give $3 billion more for our health care? How come you did not respect our active duty, when they come home will not find the services? How come they negatively influenced the morale of our troops, because they know that they are not getting proper treatment back home?

I hope people ask that to those Republican Congressmen who voted down my motion on a technicality, when we have veterans from World War II and since and coming back today who are suffering.

Madam Speaker, I think that is disgraceful. I think the American people had better question this Congress about why they do not support the veterans of this United States.

Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 7 o'clock and 31 minutes p.m.), the House adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, March 16, 2005, at 10 a.m.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time, and the gentlemen from North Carolina for introducing this very important resolution honoring the Greensboro Four.

As the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Miller) said, those of us who were old enough were immediately inspired by the Greensboro Four. They showed the awesome power of nonviolent, collective direct action, and they also showed the vulnerability of the racist power structures in the South.

I was a college freshman at the same time, at Cornell University. And almost immediately, we formed a group and had sit-ins in at the Woolworth's in Ithaca, New York, in solidarity with those that were going on through

North Carolina and other States in the South.

The sit-ins immediately educated us. That is, even though we were informed, even though we were progressive, we had no idea of the specific indignities of the segregated lunch counters, the signs that said ``whites only'' and ``colored'' for drinking fountains. We knew the schools were desegregated supposedly back in 1955. We saw the Montgomery bus boycott in 1956. We saw the power of direct action in the African states who first gained independence at the same time.

But what occurred amongst the students in Greensboro spread throughout the Nation like wildfire, not just in the South but also in the North. We believed what Martin Luther King, Jr. stated so eloquently from the Birmingham jail: ``Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor. It must be demanded by the oppressed.''

And we saw the sit-ins, a simple and quiet act perhaps, but one of great courage, considering the risks they were running, the Ku Klux Klan sitting at the same counters or nearby these first demonstrators.

Those of us in the North who thought we were brothers and cousins of those in the South started talking about what we should do, how we should help.

I remember, in fact, meeting the gentleman from Georgia (John Lewis), a colleague of ours from Atlanta, just a few months after that, and we ended up on the same bus to Jackson, Mississippi, and the Freedom Rides that took place to help desegregate the interstate facilities that were still segregated. We saw the interstate facilities as a focal point for Federal action. And those of us who went to jail managed to bring those cases before the Supreme Court, and just as the sit-inners had got the desegregation of the lunch counters so quickly, the interstate and other related facilities were desegregated because of the Freedom Rides.

I see the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Watt) here today. I know he was personally inspired by what was happening with the Greensboro Four. Many of us in this Congress, as the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Miller) pointed out, were so inspired. We put our bodies on the line, we put our beliefs in action, and the Greensboro Four helped to shape and inspire the movement all across the country.

So we honor the Greensboro Four for demanding freedom for the oppressed, and we once again look to them today for inspiration in our struggle against the more subtle forms of racism that still exist today and the injustices that continue to plague our Nation. We will continue to look to the Greensboro Four for inspiration as we continue the still unfinished journey of America to become a Nation that is free from discrimination and racism.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) and all of those on the Republican side who are so concerned about my district. I represent the California border between Mexico and the United States.

This so-called fence that you want to put in my district is really a giant public works project that does enormous harm. I wish you were equally concerned about the 50 million gallons of sewage that flows into my district that we should be treating. I wish you were concerned about the legal border crossings, that take four or five hours some days. I wish you would be concerned about my local health facilities who treat the undocumented and refund those dollars.

But, no, you want to put a public works project in that waives all existing environmental laws necessary to ensure the construction of roads, barriers, cut and fills, taking down mountains. This would result in an enormous waste of millions of Federal and State dollars that have already been contributed to restore and protect this area in San Diego, its historical, its cultural, its environmental resources.

Ironically, the United Nations Ramsar Convention recently bestowed the prestigious label of ``Wetlands of International Importance'' on this 2,500-acre national wildlife refuge and state park that you are going to destroy.

Now, we know we have to have border security. We live right there. You think we want to be overrun with terrorists? We know what it takes. We know what a smart border is. And what you are suggesting is not a smart border. For a minimal security benefit and maximum dollars spent, you will do irreparable damage to areas along the western portion of the U.S.-Mexico border.

This multitiered fence, road building, cut and fill, shaving down of mountains will destroy, as I said, an environmentally sensitive area, violate several sections of the Coastal Act and destroy acres of sensitive habitat and wetlands and coastline.

This sensitive habitat plays a vital role in the sustainability of the binational ecosystem. Vote down this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time of the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).

Mr. Speaker, as a member of the House of Representatives Committee on Veterans Affairs, I rise to urge my colleagues to support the gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham) and myself who have reintroduced H.R. 302, the Filipino Veterans Equity Act. This bill addresses a 60-year-old injustice which has cut to the heart of each and every Filipino American in this Nation and which was acknowledged in the last congressional session by over 200 cosponsoring Members of Congress, many veterans service organizations, religious organizations and many State and local officials in addition.

Sixty years ago, Filipino soldiers living in the Philippines, which was a territory of the United States, were drafted into service during World War II by an executive order of President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Under the command of General Douglas MacArthur, Filipino soldiers fought side by side with forces from the United States mainland, defending the American flag in the now-famous battles of Bataan and Corrigidor.

Thousands of Filipino prisoners of war died, both on the Bataan Death March and in prisoner of war camps, at the rate of 50 to 200 a day. They endured 4 long years of occupation by the Japanese. The soldiers fortunate enough to escape capture, together with other Filipino citizens, fought guerilla war against the occupation forces. These guerilla attacks foiled the plans of the Japanese for a quick takeover of the region and allowed the United States the needed time to regroup to defeat the invading army.

After the liberation of the Philippines, the United States used the strategically located Commonwealth of the Philippines as a base from which to launch the final efforts to win the war in the Pacific.

With their vital participation so evident, one would assume that the United States would be grateful to their Filipino comrades, so it is hard to believe that soon after the war ended Congress voted in the 1946 Rescissions Act to take away the benefits and recognition that many Filipino World War II veterans were promised.

These veterans are now in their eighties and in need of health care. Many are dying each year. Their last wish is to be recognized as honored veterans of the United States Armed Forces. Please support H.R. 302 to restore the rescinded benefits to Filipino World War II veterans, many of whom have now become citizens of the United States. Please cosponsor H.R. 302 to restore the dignity of Filipino World War II veterans for their defense of our common democratic ideals.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from California for the time, and I thank the committee and the gentleman from California (Mr. Issa) for bringing this to the floor.

Congressman Saund, whom we are recognizing today, represented parts of the gentleman from California's (Mr. Issa) district and parts of my district, the 51st district, Imperial County in California. So I am really thankful that he is doing this, and we are honoring a great man.

We have heard how he triumphed in spite of the prejudice that was around him. He did this through hard work, constantly turning the other cheek; and he was a charismatic individual.

Coming to the United States after his undergraduate education in India, as we heard, he got a Ph.D. from the University of California, Berkeley, in 1924, but could not get a job because of his nationality. Rather than give up, go home perhaps, maybe where he could use his education a little bit more to better himself, he decided to stay in the United States and work to improve the situation.

That is when, in 1925, he moved to the Imperial Valley to become a cotton picking crew foreman, as we have heard. That is right, a man with a Ph.D. in mathematics from Berkeley became a foreman of a cotton picking crew to make ends meet; and through sheer hard work and determination, he was able to save money to start his own farm growing lettuce.

He always had an interest in politics. He carried this enthusiasm over to the Imperial Valley; and even though he was not a citizen or able to vote, he became a constant presence at official meetings, I hate to tell the gentleman from California (Mr. Issa) this, of the county Democratic Party central committee where he promoted the policies of Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

In 1937, Congressman Saund organized the Current Events Club in Imperial Valley to discuss the major topics of the day with other politically active members of the community and became a member of the Brawley California Toastmasters.

So we see, even though he was not a citizen, he was becoming an integral part of the community in which he lived. In fact, if he was doing irrigation of his fields on the Toastmasters nights, he would take his dress suit with him to the field, at six o'clock change, set the irrigation to go for 3 hours, go to the Toastmasters meeting, come back to work, change clothes and go on with irrigation. Now, that is a Horatio Alger, the American Dream, for someone who was not an American citizen.

He was actively involved in trying to get naturalization rights for natives of Asia and India particularly, and President Truman actually signed the law to end the ban on Asian naturalization in 1946; and one of the earliest applicants under this new law was, in fact, Dalip Singh Saund, who became a citizen in December of 1949.

As we heard, his first task as a citizen was to run for office. He ran for justice of the peace in Westmorland, California, in Imperial County. He won the ballot, but a lawsuit said he had not been a citizen the year before, and so he was declared ineligible. Typical of Congressman Saund, or Judge Saund as he was known, he became chairman of the county Democratic central committee even after he lost the judgeship.

I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Issa) for naming after this great Democrat a post office in his district. Maybe we will bring true Democracy, with a capital D, to the 49th Congressional District.

In 1955, he decided to run for Congress in what was then the 29th Congressional District, which included Riverside County and Imperial County. He easily won the primary and beat his Republican opponent, who brought in Vice President Nixon, brought in Bob Hope and even Rin Tin Tin, but that did not impress the constituents; and he was able to win and became the first Indian American Congressman of the United States of America.

He did this through politicking in grassroots style, a truly effective politician. By the way, he was the only Indian American until this very year in this Congress when the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Jindal) was elected. So we have, at last, the continuing of a tradition here.

He might have been called a liberal, but he was very active in trying to deal with foreign aid to the wrong kind of governments, and he believed that tyrants would use the money in a corrupt way, and he was right.

He was incapacitated, unfortunately, by a stroke in his third term and could not run for a fourth term. His most lasting memory, I believe, will be that of opening the door of politics to those who otherwise would not have considered running for office because of their race or national origin.

Interestingly enough, my connection with Judge Saund was not only because I became a Congressman from Imperial County, but also because his daughter Julie Fisher became a member of the San Diego school board in the 1970s. She became my mentor. She was the one who was really advocating for students in the wake of a very repressive administration and superintendent. I was able to run for the San Diego school board because of Julie Fisher's teaching. So my relationship goes back through his daughter, who is a wonderful lady and who really brought Judge Saund's politics to San Diego with a real interest in the young people of our county.

Saund always accented the positive. He never complained or even mentioned discriminatory treatment against himself, and he never made it an issue. So I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Issa) very much for bringing us this bill, and I am truly honored to have some part in the tradition that Judge Saund started.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and remember a great American leader and hero, Cesar Chavez. He was a husband, father, grandfather, labor organizer, community leader and symbol of the ongoing struggle for equal rights and equal opportunity.

Cesar was the son of migrant farm workers who dedicated his life to fighting for the human rights and dignity of farm laborers. He was born on March 31, 1927, on a small farm near Yuma, Arizona, and died nearly 12 years ago in April of 1993. Over the course of his 66-year life, Cesar Chavez' work inspired millions and made him a major force in American history.

In 1962, Cesar Chavez and his family founded the National Farm Workers Association which organized thousands of farm workers to confront one of the most powerful industries in our nation. He inspired them to join together and non-violently demand safe and fair working conditions.

Through the use of a grape boycott, he was able to secure the first union contracts for farm workers in this country. These contracts provided farm workers with the basic services that most workers take for granted, services such as clean drinking water and sanitary facilities. Because of his fight to enforce child labor laws, farm workers could also be certain that their children would not be working side by side with them and would instead attend the migrant schools he helped to establish. In addition, Cesar Chavez made the world aware of the exposure to dangerous chemicals that farm workers and consumers face every day.

As a labor leader, he earned great support from unions and elected officials across the country. The movement he began continues today as the United Farm Workers of America.

Cesar Chavez' influence extends far beyond agriculture. He was instrumental in forming the Community Service Organization, one of the first civic action groups in the Mexican-American communities of California and Arizona.

He worked in urban areas, organized voter registration drives and brought complaints against mistreatment by government agencies. He taught community members how to deal with governmental, school and financial institutions and empowered many thousands to seek further advancement in education and politics. There are countless stories of judges, engineers, lawyers, teachers, church leaders, organizers and other hardworking professionals who credit Cesar Chavez as the inspiring force in their lives.

During a time of great social upheaval, he was sought out by groups from all walks of life and all religions to help bring calm with his non-violent practices. In his fight for peace,

justice, respect and self-determination, he gained the admiration and respect of millions of Americans and most Members of this House of Representatives.

Cesar Chavez will be remembered for his tireless commitment to improve the plight of farm workers, children and the poor throughout the United States and for the inspiration his heroic efforts gave to so many Americans.

We in Congress must make certain that the movement Cesar Chavez began and the timeless lessons of justice and fairness he taught are preserved and honored in our national conscience. To make sure that these fundamental principles are never forgotten, I urge my colleagues to support this resolution. In the words of Cesar and the United Farm Workers, si se puede--yes, we can!

Mr. Speaker and colleagues, I rise today to correct an injustice that has been inflicted upon a group of World War II veterans, the World War II United States Merchant Mariners.

World War II Merchant Mariners suffered the highest casualty rate of any of the branches of service while they delivered troops, tanks, food, airplanes, fuel and other needed supplies to every theater of the war.

Compared to the large number of men and women serving in World War II, the numbers of the Merchant Mariners were small, but their chance of dying during service was extremely high. Enemy forces sank over 800 ships between 1941 and 1944 alone.

Unfortunately, this group of brave men were denied their rights under the G.I. Bill of Rights that Congress enacted in 1945. All those who served in the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force or Coast Guard were recipients of benefits under the G.I. Bill. The United States Merchant Marine was not included.

The Merchant Marine became the forgotten service. For four decades, no effort was made to recognize the contribution made by this branch of the Armed Services. The fact that Merchant Seamen had borne arms during wartime in the defense of their country seemed not to matter.

No legislation to benefit merchant seamen was passed by Congress until 1988 when the Seaman Acts of 1988 finally granted them the a ``watered down'' G.I. Bill of Rights. Some portions of the G.I. Bill have never been made available to veterans of the Merchant Marine.

In addition, they still have not received proper recognition as veterans for Social Security purposes. If they had the ``veteran'' designation, their Social Security would be calculated as if they had earned $160 more a month than they did earn during their time in service in the Merchant Marines. Of course, what this means is a smaller Social Security check, now that they are retired.

While it is impossible to make up for over 40 years of unpaid benefits, I propose a bill that will acknowledge the service of the veterans of the Merchant Marine and offer compensation for years and years of lost benefits. H.R. 23, the ``Belated Thank You to the Merchant Mariners of World War II Act of 2004'', will pay each eligible veteran a monthly benefit of $1000, and that payment would also go to their surviving spouses. It will also give them the Social Security that they are due by providing them with the status of ``veteran'' under the Social Security Act.

The average age of Merchant Marine veterans is now 81. Many have outlived their savings. An increase in their Social Security and a monthly benefit to compensate for the loss of nearly a lifetime of ineligibility for the GI Bill would be of comfort and would provide some measure of security for veterans of the Merchant Marine.

I owe a debt of gratitude to Ian Allison of Santa Rosa, California and Henry Van Gemert of Palmetto, Florida who are Co-Chairs of the Just Compensation Committee of the U.S. Merchant Marine Combat Veterans, and to Ted Metula of Lemon Grove, California for bringing this issue to my attention.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting and cosponsoring this legislation. We can fix the injustices endured by our Nation's Merchant Marines by passing H.R. 23 as quickly as possible!

Mr. Speaker, as a member of the VA Subcommittee on Health, I also rise in support of H.R. 3936 which includes, as we have heard, a lot of provisions to enhance services to our Nation's veterans. We have thanked the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans) and the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Simmons).

I would particularly like to just thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Rodriguez), the ranking member, for his service. I always say, when I get to the committee meetings, ``Ciro, you're my hero.'' The gentleman from Texas, for the 8 years he has been here, has fought steadfastly for his veterans not only in San Antonio but in the United States as a whole. He has done a tremendous amount for health care for our veterans in this Nation, and we thank him for his service. We are going to miss him.

One of the important provisions of this bill is to set up a pilot program to study new and innovative ways to improve the recruitment and retention of nurses at the VA. We all know about the shortage of nurses in our Nation, and we cannot rely on the old methods of recruitment. The use of online technology, for example, can be a valuable tool in finding nurses who are interested in serving the country through their work at a VA medical facility.

Likewise, we have to find ways to keep the nurses that we recruit. A second bill that is before us after this has a provision in fact for alternative work schedules for nurses. Allowing nurses to work these flexible hours to accommodate personal and family needs is a sure way to improve their lives and to encourage them to continue working at the VA center. In addition, this bill provides payments to States to assist State veterans homes in their hiring and retention of nurses.

I think we all know that funding for grants is vital for homeless veterans. That program will be authorized in this bill at a level of $99 million, an increase of $24 million. Although we all know that even more funding is needed to assist the homeless veterans of our Nation, this authorization is a welcome increase. Homelessness among veterans is a national disgrace. I know we are all firmly behind the gentleman from New Jersey's goal of eliminating chronic homelessness within the veterans population in 10 years. This bill will help us reach that goal.

The bill also gives permanent authority to the VA Secretary to continue the military sexual trauma counseling program that was established in 1992. As we have heard, this program provides counseling and treatment for the men and women who have experienced sexual trauma or harassment while in the military service. Again, the gentleman from Texas was a major supporter of this program, and we thank him for his leadership once again.

Funding to open several new outpatient clinics is included in this bill, including two in San Diego County, a portion of which I represent. The VA's move to open clinics near veterans' homes has been overwhelmingly successful.

I will also continue work for a full outpatient health clinic in Imperial

County, which is also in my congressional district.

I should add that, as we look at the ways we fund outpatient clinics, the formulas used involve only population. We ought to also, I think, include ``isolation'' of a county or an area because that is also important, not just the numbers.

These are a few of the provisions in H.R. 3936. Health care of our veterans has to be a priority all the time but especially at this time when we have so many active duty soldiers fighting for this Nation. Whether they are from World War II or from the present conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, they are looking to us to meet their needs. Morale in active duty depends on how we are going to treat our soldiers when they come home, so I hope everyone supports H.R. 3936.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.

I want to thank the gentleman from Connecticut (Chairman Shays) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis), ranking member, for the courtesy rendered to me. This post office is going to open up in 3 days, and I had to try to get this naming on the bill in just the couple days we were here. The committee was very courteous to me.

The 52 members of the California delegation, both Republican and Democrat, were all very prompt in their cosponsorship. The staff that scheduled these things was very accommodating, and I not only want to thank the Democratic staff, but the majority leader and his staff showed me a great deal of courtesy, and I appreciate that very much for getting this on the calendar today.

The gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays) highlighted some of the important parts of Judge Gilliam's life. I would just like to add a few things, if I may. He grew up in a very poor section of San Diego, southeast San Diego, where his parents owned a fish market on the very street where this post office will be named after him. He had to work his way all the way through school, whether it was high school or college where he went to San Diego State and then on to law school.

He was appointed deputy district attorney shortly after being admitted to the California bar in 1957, and he became the first African American judge appointed to the San Diego bench just 6 years later in 1963 and was named presiding judge of the San Diego Municipal Court in 1971. Governor Jerry Brown named him a California Superior Court Judge in 1975, and President Jimmy Carter elevated him to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California in 1980, where he served for more than 2 decades before passing in 2001.

In his long, distinguished career, Judge Gilliam presided over numerous trials that had regional and even national importance. They dealt with drug trafficking, fraud, tax evasion, bribery, and civil matters; but Judge Gilliam always brought a fair and professional approach to the law and laid the foundation for his solid reputation, both within and outside the legal community.

He made his mark in the classroom also. The Thomas Jefferson School of Law recruited Judge Gilliam as an adjunct professor. With his background in business, economics, and law, he proved to be an inspirational and devoted instructor for the students at the Thomas Jefferson School of Law where he taught for 24 years. The moot courtroom there at the school has been in fact dedicated also to his honor.

Along with being a full-time judge, he gave his time and effort to his community in a whole number of ways. He served on the boards of organizations ranging from the San Diego Urban League to the University of California San Diego to the YMCA; and the community, in turn, honored him with a whole list of awards too numerous to mention here that attest to his unrelenting commitment to making a difference in San Diego.

The San Diego African American Lawyers Organization in 1982 honored the judge by changing its name to the Earl B. Gilliam Bar Association, and they carry on his legacy by working within our community to defend the rights of African Americans, combating racism and poverty, and fostering integrity in the legal community.

I knew Judge Gilliam for more than 30 years. He was a very big man, almost larger than life, full of energy, full of enthusiasm, love of life, great sense of humor, enjoyed life to its maximum. But he also saw the injustices around him in the community in which he was raised, and in the Nation in which he loved; and he fought to right those injustices, both on the bench and in his many community activities.

So Judge Gilliam truly was a hero who worked for all of us in San Diego. I just am so honored to have the privilege of introducing this legislation to name the post office in his old neighborhood in his honor. I hope my colleagues will support this. I once again thank this House and its staff for giving me the courtesy of allowing this bill to be passed today.