Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1720, the Veterans Health Care Facilities Capital Improvement Act. I would like to recognize the very necessary and hard work of my colleagues on the House Veterans Affairs Committee, from both sides of the aisle, and our Chairman Congressman Rob Simmons of Connecticut, on this critical issue.

H.R. 1720, as amended, authorizes a new approach to funding VA construction after the Department addresses a number of compelling needs identified throughout the system. Through this measure we have outlined Congressional priorities for the types of projects VA should fund, but would allow VA to identify the locations where there is the most need.

I am particularly interested in VA's plan to address the needs of veterans in far south Texas. Parts of my district have the worst access to hospital care in the country. I am especially pleased that the amended version of H.R. 1720 contains a section that authorizes the development of a strategy by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to address the great need for hospital care for veterans who reside in far south Texas. Under H.R. 1720, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs would be required to submit findings to the Senate and House of Representatives no later than January 31, 2004.

Mr. Speaker, it is shameful that veterans in McAllen, Texas, just east of my district, must travel up to 6 hours one-way to reach the San Antonio VA Medical Center. Data collected for VA's Capital Assets Realignment for Enhanced Services (CARES) process showed that veterans in one of the area's markets--the Valley Coastal Bend--have the worst access to acute inpatient hospital care of veterans in any other VA market in the United States.

The time has passed for us to address this crisis in access. This bill will put VA on a sure path for doing that, and I will eagerly await the opportunity to respond to VA's recommendations for increasing access for South Texas veterans. This bill is an important step to ensure that VA keeps its promise to veterans.

Mr. Speaker, once again, we failed to provide for our veterans. If today is like many other days since Operation Iraqi Freedom began, wounded troops will continue to arrive at Walter Reed Army Hospital or other military treatment facilities. About 10 each day have continued to arrive.

The military lists thousands. In fact, a couple of weeks ago it is over 1,500 that have been wounded in action or disabled, nonbattle injuries since the conflict in Iraq began. Thousands more may have come to our veterans hospitals in search of the medical care for conditions that may become evident the days and months after their military service has ended.

This summer, this House broke that promise with our veterans. Our budget resolution promised to add $1.8 billion for veterans. Yet the appropriations we approved for the VA added nothing. I had an opportunity and I went before the Committee on Rules and you had an opportunity to correct that, and at the same time I mentioned to you that you have provided $2 million for health care for Iraqis but you could not allow the opportunity for us to provide that $1.8 billion as an opportunity for our own veterans as they come back.

We have had another chance to add these funds, and we have continued to fail. This supplemental rightly addresses the needs of our troops, but it also allows the military to provide better equipment and supplies, but we have to continue to remember that we also have an obligation to those veterans after they come back and as we just this week on Tuesday, we had a chance to visit Walter Reed, and we saw those veterans, where they have lost some of their limbs.

So I ask and appeal to my colleagues that right now, just to be able to complete and continue to provide the services that we provide now, we need $1.8 billion for our veterans health care to be able to do that, not to mention the fact that we need additional resources.

Mr. Speaker, last week I went to the Committee on Rules during its consideration of the supplemental request for Iraq in order to seek protection for an amendment to transfer 1.8 billion to our veterans when it came from the Iraqi reconstruction to

veterans health care. My amendment was not protected, thus not found to be in order. So I greatly appreciate the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) for offering this motion, and I urge all my colleagues to support it.

I would consider this vote, if you look at additional monies that the Senate has allocated for our veterans at this time, if today, like many other days since Operation Iraqi Freedom began, wounded troops will continue to arrive at Walter Reed Army Hospital and other military facilities on an average of 10 each day, 10 veterans who need services and who need assistance.

The military lists thousands, in fact, close to 1,600 now, that have been injured, have lost their limbs. Thousands more may come to our veterans hospitals in search of medical care for the conditions that may become evident in days and months after their military service has ended.

This summer the House broke its promise with our veterans. Our budget resolution promised to add $1.8 billion for veterans, yet the appropriations we approved for the VA added nothing. We have another chance to correct that situation. We have a chance to do the right thing for our veterans. We have asked them to go to Afghanistan; we have asked them to go to Iraq. And they have been willing, but we have to be there for them when they come back home.

This money will allow the military to provide better equipment and supplies to men and women who also have volunteered to defend our country. We also need to recognize that these veterans, this additional resource is not money that is above and beyond; it is for existing services. So it becomes important that we do the right thing. We ask that you support the efforts of the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) on this motion.

Mr. Speaker, this month the National Breast Cancer Awareness Month (NBCAM) Campaign celebrates nineteen years of educating women about breast cancer, especially the importance of detecting the disease in its earliest stages through screening mammography. Since its inception, the number of women obtaining mammograms has more than doubled.

Today, October 17, 2003, is National Mammography Day. Mammograms are one of the most important prevention tools for breast cancer with the ability to find a cancerous growth an average of 1.7 years before a woman can feel the lump. Any breast cancer survivor can tell you that even days can make a difference.

Unfortunately, women who have limited access to care are less likely to receive mammograms. This is why I am proud to be participating, along with the Alamo Breast Cancer Foundation (ABCF), Atascosa County Ministerial Alliance, Atascosa Health Center, Atascosa Interagency Council, Greater Pleasanton Hispanic Chamber of Commerce and South Texas Regional Medical Center in Jourdanton, as an honorary sponsor of ``Keeping Women Healthy,'' a breast cancer screening and awareness day in my district tomorrow, October 18, 2003.

I am proud of the efforts of the San Antonio Metropolitan Health District and the ABCF to purchase a mammography van to take their message to our neighborhoods. Recently, their dreams were realized as the Avon Foundation awarded them a $569,000 grant, which will allow them to purchase and operate a van throughout the greater San Antonio area. They are great advocates and work tirelessly to ensure that women in the San Antonio area have access to critical prevention and treatment services.

The fight against breast cancer is a long and hard one. In my home state of Texas, an estimated 13,700 cases of breast cancer will be detected in 2003. If breast cancer is detected early, however, a woman's chance of survival is improved by 95 percent. Nevertheless, together we have shown that we can make a difference. We must continue the fight against cancer. We only celebrate breast cancer prevention for one month, but by getting our voices heard and our message across, we can give millions a whole lifetime to celebrate.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.

Mr. Chairman, there is a glaring omission in this emergency bill. We have once again neglected to provide resources for our veterans. I sought to add an amendment of $1.8 billion from the Iraqi Relief and Reconstruction Fund to the Veterans Health Administration.

Today, as we move forward, each day over 10 to 11 people come in that have been injured in Iraq, over 1,500 to this day. We need to make sure that we have additional resources for our veterans. That $1.8 billion does not begin to even address additional programs. It is to make sure we keep existing services as it is.

This administration has chosen to come forward and disallow Priority 7

and Priority 8 veterans. Now, they have also come forward with a lot of fuzzy math when they came with a proposal for $3 billion for veterans, when that $3 billion consisted of $1.8 billion from copayments of veterans alone, and an additional $1.2 billion when there were copayments from prescription drug payments from themselves. The other was supposed to be efficiencies.

The money is not there. There is a need for us to concentrate and provide resources for our veterans.

Let me also add that the previous time that we dished money for Iraq, a little bit over $79 billion that has gone out for the war on terrorism, there was $2 billion in there for health care for Iraqis. Well, I am only asking for $1.8 billion for our own veterans right here. As they come home, and as we have over 1,500 that have been identified as needing services, we need to be there for them. I ask that we take that into consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Syria Accountability Act. Syria has been on the State Department's list

of countries sponsoring terrorism since the list began in 1979, and recent intelligence reports have only confirmed what we have long thought to be true--that Syria remains an incubator of terrorism and instability in the Middle East and throughout the world.

Syria has refused to shut down the offices of the Islamic Jihad, has permitted weapons to flow freely to Hezbollah, and has allowed Hezbollah to expand terrorist training operations. These terrorists have attacked innocent men, women and children in Israel, and Syria's unwillingness to put a halt to this lawlessness threatens not only Israel but also stability and peace in the region.

In addition to the devastating effect of the Syrian government's willingness to crack down on known terrorist groups within its borders, Syria has allowed fighters seeking to harm American troops to cross its borders. As we ask more and more American service members to put themselves in harm's way in defense of our Nation, it is critical that we also take steps to protect them from known threats.

We must act now by sending a clear message to Syria that they must take a strong stand against terrorism, and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the Syria Accountability Act.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in honor of Ms. Rosa Walker for her 38 years of dedicated service to the working men and women of Texas.

Ms. Walker's dedication to public service is deeply ingrained in her character. A native Texan of Hemphill, her interest in the labor movement grew while employed with Southwestern Bell. As a member of the executive board for the Communications Workers of America (CWA), Ms. Walker was persistent in her commitment to protect and empower the working people of Texas.

She continued on this path as an organizer for the Industrial Union Department of the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) and an employee of the Harris County

Mr. Speaker, we are fortunate in San Antonio and the 28th District of Texas to be home to one of the few national parks located within an urban center, the San Antonio Missions National Historic Park. Today the missions represent a virtually unbroken connection with our past. Bearing the distinctive stamp of generations of Indian and Spanish craftsmen, the historic missions are still part of our daily lives as active parishes and cultural centers. In addition, some 1.5 million tourists visit the missions each year.

The four mission churches--San Jose, Concepcion, Espada and San Juan--are colonial era churches which the Spanish established to bring European religion and culture to the native and immigrant populations of the region. Today, the San Antonio Missions are among the relatively few intact examples of the colonial missions in the Southwest. Unfortunately, the four missions were largely neglected after secularization in 1824 as the functioning farms and ranches ceased operation. Today, the mission church structures are in dire need of restoration and preservation to protect the unique record of the architecture, art, and culture of the Spanish colonial period in Texas.

With the goal of preserving and restoring the church structures of Mission San Jose, Mission Concepcion, Mission Espada, and Mission San Juan, community leaders have formed the Las Misiones capital campaign. By educating all Americans about the historic, economic, architectural, cultural and spiritual significance of the churches and surrounding buildings, the three-year initiative will culminate with the restoration of the four mission church structures.

I would like to take this opportunity to commend the San Antonio community as they launch Las Misiones de San Antonio week, October 5th--October 11th. The missions are part of every Texan's history. The missions contributed to the agricultural and commercial development of central and south Texas, and they were critical to the growth of San Antonio

region and the state as a whole. It is my wish that we as a community unite to preserve San Antonio's first skyline and the largest cluster of Spanish missions in the United States. By preserving our past, we help build our future.

Mr. Speaker, let me first of all say that what we have before us is two bills. Neither one is worth the paper they are written on, and they are not going to respond to the issues that confront us.

The approach that the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) is providing is to try to look at what is best and try to make something happen. The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sam Johnson), I know he is from Texas also, and I am from Texas, and I have counties that right now do not have any access to any type of health care because they have chosen to leave, they were not making the profits they wanted, and we are having a rough time.

That bill is not going to be responsive. You are saying you are concerned about being fiscally responsible. My God, you are taking money from cancer, which is kind of robbing Peter to pay Paul. You are taking money from people dying from cancer to try to fill another need. We are here to tell you there are needs on both sides. That bill does not meet those needs.

So one of the things we have to come to grips with is we have a problem before us, and you are choosing not to deal with it directly, and you are choosing to play games with Americans.

Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to instruct.

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

I rise today to join my colleagues in expressing my support for the brave men and women who are risking their lives to defend our Nation. I rise to urge my colleagues to express that support by voting in favor of my motion to instruct conferees.

When hostilities broke out in Iraq, the first military member to die in combat was Marine Lance Corporal Jose Gutierrez, an immigrant from Guatemala who volunteered to serve his adopted country. He died an American hero, but he did not die an American citizen.

Lance Corporal Gutierrez was only the first of 13 noncitizen soldiers killed in Operation Iraqi Freedom. Thousands of noncitizen soldiers are currently serving in Iraq, and only 37,000 are noncitizen soldiers who serve in the Nation's Armed Forces.

The motion I am offering today expresses the continued support of the House for the Armed Forces Naturalization Act which passed, by the way, on June 4 by a vote of 414 to 5. The House has already gone on record in support of the bill to give immigrants serving in our Armed Forces more rapid naturalization and to establish protections for their families if they are killed in action.

The 37,000 immigrant soldiers have already met the same rigorous evaluation as U.S. citizens before their enlistment. In fact, the military's criteria are more challenging than the naturalization requirements demanded by the Department of Homeland Security.

Besides meeting the qualifications for military service, noncitizen soldiers have passed an even more important test: they have proven their loyalty to the United States by pledging to defend our Nation and our values with their bodies, their minds, and their lives. Their service in defense of our Nation and our country and their willingness to put their lives on the line speaks to their devotion to the United States.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this small token of gratitude as a demonstration to these 37,000 Americans who are brave soldiers, to show that we appreciate their patriotism.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Linda T. Sanchez).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis), who has also authored legislation in this area.

(Ms. SOLIS asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the right to close.

Mr. Speaker, let me take this opportunity first of all to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith). I want to appeal to him. I know that even in the case of the example that I had indicated and that is Marine Lance Corporal Jose Gutierrez, who came here illegally, who was one of the

first killed, he came here illegally. We also have another young man, the majority of who are here, by the way, legally.

We have another young man, and I want to pinpoint in case because this is a sad story. This is Army Private Juan Escalante. It just came out in the paper in Seattle. The young man served in Iraq, and I want to give the gentleman a copy of the article because I think it is important to note. He is a 19-year-old. And I will read part of this.

He is like many of the other soldiers, sailors and airmen settling into civilian life except for the one key fact that Private Escalante is an illegal immigrant. Unlike the tens and thousands of noncitizen soldiers, of which we have 37,000 soldiers that have served our country with so-called green cards, military folks, President Bush has also praised their service, by the way, according to the newspaper. And Escalante fits into an entirely new separate area and I would hope that you would kind of take these cases into consideration.

Here we have a soldier who at the age of 4, at the age of 4 he was brought here by his parents. So he has been here and he is now 19 serving our country in Iraq. He has gotten the combat patch and the whole thing. And now his parents and himself are being looked at for being sent back.

When he graduated from high school he bought a fake green card and joined the Army. And you might say, well, that is fraudulent. But we have had a lot of other fraudulent cases in which people have joined the Army and lied about their age. And he trained as a mechanic, and he later on was deployed to Iraq. Escalante says that he has volunteered and he has enjoyed the work and is extremely proud to have served our country during Iraq and during that particular war. And now he finds himself in a situation where his family is being sent back.

Immigration lawyers and experts argue that the law has long allowed noncitizens who have served honorably during a time of combat, and I know the gentleman is familiar with this, to be eligible for naturalization under Executive Order 13269 signed by President Bush on July 3, 2002. It provides for expedient naturalization for those active during Operation Enduring Freedom.

I would ask the gentleman on that particular case that he please look at and see if he can help that young man, in addition to helping the 37,000 that are here. But I would also want to just go back and say that Mr. Escalante indicated that in the dialogue on this issue is something that is extremely of concern to a lot of other veterans that are out there.

So as we postpone and continue to postpone this, it is important.

I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. Speaker, I know that might not be government policy, but we do have them and we do have the cases. I mentioned to the gentleman Mr. Escalante who served and defended and he has been here since the age of 4. His parents might have violated the law but he has been here since the age of 4. And wherever he came from, I am not sure if he is from Mexico or Central America or whatever, but I know that when you look at a person at the age of 4, are you going go to say that he violated the law?

I understand that, but the fact is the reality is that we do have and there is 37,000. By the way, that is nothing new. For example, similar action has been taken in past history where we had 143,000 noncitizen military participants in World War I and World War II. We had 31,000 members in the Korean War. We had an additional 100,000 who fought in Vietnam and in the Persian Gulf. These have all been noncitizens.

But the majority of them, those 37,000, are still not citizens.

The gentleman is correct in that, but I did want to mention this, too. But for all the others, the 37,000 that are here, the legal permanent residents that are here and fighting and defending, we want to be able to not give them anything extra except expedite what everyone else has to go through. That is to also help them through their waivers in allowing them an opportunity to waive the fees, and I think the gentleman would be supportive of that. The gentleman would also, I think, be supportive of reducing the waiting period for citizenship, and I think the gentleman would also be supportive of allowing them to proceed as quickly as possible when they are overseas.

One of the problems when they are overseas is that they cannot move forward on their citizenship. So it is important for us to do that. I think we owe them at least that amount to be able to do that. I would hope the gentleman would help us out in that way, in terms of that.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I know what the differences are, but there is a game that is being played, and the reason why we are doing this is we need to push forward on this, both the Senate and the House is controlled by Republicans, and so my colleagues can make it happen. We can move forward on this, and we can push forward on this, and the importance is to look at those 37,000, and as the gentleman indicated, these are persons, the majority, with the exception maybe of one or two or three of the two that I mentioned, that are all permanent residents and here now legally but need to move forward on the citizenship.

What we are saying is we have got to go and do everything we can to help them out since they have been willing to come forward. The reason why we have this motion is to basically also indicate the importance of moving forward on this act instead of playing games with the Senate and arguing that the Senate has 2 years and we have 1 year, et cetera.

The bottom line is that will not get them the opportunity to move forward and become citizens, and we have got to make that happen.

So the responsibility falls on the leadership both in the House and in the Senate, and in this case, they are both controlled by Republicans. So it becomes real important that we move forward.

The other thing is that the Senate version contains the reservists. We

have 12,000 reservists that also fall in that category, and as my colleague well knows, we have reservists doing full-time duty now, and it is important for us to also recognize that. So we have soldiers that we have asked them to be weekend soldiers, but they are spending time down there all year. So it becomes real important that we move forward on this as quickly as possible, and I want to ask that my colleagues consider the motion and ask that we come because when all is said and done, if this does not occur, then the only ones we can hold responsible is both the House and the Senate and, in this case, controlled by the Republican party and the administration.

So I would ask my colleagues for serious consideration of some passage that would allow expediting the citizenship process because they have to qualify even more so. To be in the military, they have to have had a GED or high school. They have to have, as I already indicated, the leadership and loyalty to this country and demonstrated that, and so I think we have a unique opportunity to send a real positive message to both the people that are serving our military, and both the reservists as well as the active duty, because they have all been out there for us and are willing to continue to defend our country, and we ought to be willing to move forward, and if they served honorably, then we ought to see what we can do to help them out in the process of becoming citizens and to have 37,000 people in the military that are not citizens yet and have trouble as the case that I have here before on Private Escalante, then we need to see how we can make some exceptions in those cases, and I would hope that we have that flexibility in order for that to happen.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the remainder of the time.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this motion to instruct.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, it is always an honor to recognize our public schools and their wonderful accomplishments. Today, I rise to honor two schools from the 28th Congressional District of Texas, Morrill Elementary and Rayburn Elementary, for being selected as 2002- 2003 National Blue Ribbon Schools. These two schools are among an elite number of elementary and secondary schools recognized this year by the United States Department of Education for their success in educating our next generation of leaders.

Morrill and Rayburn Elementary Schools, both in San Antonio, join only 325 Texas schools that have received Blue Ribbon status since 1982. I am proud to have them in my Congressional District, as they reflect the South San Antonio working family community. They are proof that tight knit communities such as ours can foster quality institutions. In addition, they realize it is important to involve parents in the education process. Through their parent/teacher programs, they bring closer the relationship between the home and the school so parents may cooperate intelligently in the education of our children.

I would like to recognize Principal Linda Aleman of Morrill Elementary and Principal Shannon Allen of Rayburn Elementary for their leadership and commitment to making their respective schools exemplary. They both recognize that our children are America's most valuable resource and, as such, their education is of the utmost importance.

Most importantly, I would like to recognize the students of these two schools who have persevered to obtain success. Many of them have had to overcome various obstacles in the course of their educational career. I am proud of their efforts and I know they will continue to succeed in their future endeavors, including the lifelong pursuit of education.

Congratulations to the Morrill Elementary and Rayburn Elementary communities for achieving the coveted Blue Ribbon Award.

Mr. Speaker, subject to rule XXII, clause 7(c), I hereby announce my intention to offer a motion to instruct on H.R. 1588, the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2004.

The form of the motion is as follows:

Mr. Rodriguez moves that the managers on the part of the

House at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two

Houses on the Senate amendment to the bill H.R. 1588 be

instructed to agree to the provisions contained in subtitle F

of title VI of the Senate amendment (relating to

naturalization and family protection for military members).

Mr. Speaker, today I rise on a bipartisan bill, H.R. 2433, the Health Care for Veterans of Project 112. Project 112 was a series of military tests that were conducted during the Cold War in the 1960s. Many of these tests happened at sea and some on land.

The Department of Defense has admitted that they have no evidence that test participants were ever told about the tests, so we are extremely concerned about that in some cases. It is impossible to believe that the military exposed its own troops to such potent gases such as VX nerve gas and sarin. Veterans are naturally concerned about what has transpired and the information that we have received.

We have filed legislation and this will give us the opportunity to begin to examine these troops. We anticipate close to 6,000 troops might have been impacted by these tests. The VA has also requested this legislation to allow them to be able to do this test, and I am extremely pleased it is a bipartisan piece of legislation. So I ask for my colleagues' support of H.R. 2433.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans) for yielding me time. I want to thank the gentleman for his leadership as ranking member. I also want to take this opportunity to thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Chairman Smith) for his leadership and I want to thank, of course, our subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Simmons) on this bipartisan effort.

I think there is no doubt that this particular piece of legislation is needed, so I want to personally express my gratitude on this bipartisan effort to the gentleman from New Jersey (Chairman Smith) and the ranking Member the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans).

Project 112, as we know, was a series of military tests that began in the early 1960s and continued throughout much of the Cold War to assess the effects of chemical and biological weapons on military assets under various environmental conditions.

I introduced this piece of legislation after we had become aware of it. I also want to take note that the gentleman from California (Mr. Thompson) worked hard on this particular issue. I also want to indicate that many of these tests happened at sea and it is also referred to as Project SHAD, but others were land-based.

The tests were designed to identify the military vulnerabilities to various types of attacks, whether these attacks could be adequately detected or whether some protection measures were effective against these attacks. The Department of Defense has admitted that it has no evidence that the test participants were informed of the risk of their participation in these tests or that, in most cases, they received appropriate protection gear while conducting these tests. Some veterans are justly concerned, and have been informed that they were exposed to hazardous material.

In order to restore the trust and confidence of the American people, and particularly the American veterans in the Federal Government's response to these kinds of exposures-related controversies, we must act, and H.R. 2433 does that exactly.

It is impossible to believe that the military exposed our own troops to such potent agents such as VX nerve gas and sarin. Veterans are naturally concerned about the long-term effects of exposure to those poisons in terms of their health.

Project 112 veterans have complained of various forms of ailments such as cancer and hypertension. Given the amount of time that has passed and the relatively small number of veterans involved in such tests, veterans may never fully understand the effects of these tests. The VA has requested legislation, and that is why we are doing this, to begin to examine the participants and the ailments and the conditions of these veterans that participated in these experiments.

This authority will allow this opportunity for veterans involved in these exams and suffering from possible ailments to be able to get tested and be able to look in terms of how they might have been impacted by it. It may also give the VA a chance to see if there are discernible patterns of veterans' health outcomes. This information may help VA identify whether particular operations or exposures were particularly harmful.

It is time for us to make at least some amends to our veterans involved in these experiments, often without their consent, knowledge or adequate protection. We owe it to them for us to move in this protection.

I also appeal to veterans that might be informed or might be listening for them to become abreast of what has transpired, because a lot of the veterans are not aware that these particular tests had taken place.

So, once again, I ask for your support for H.R. 2433, and I thank the chairman, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans), the leading Democrat on the committee.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to convey remorse at having missed two votes

on an issue of great significance to me as a former educator, a vote against vouchers and a vote in favor of our public school system.

Unfortunately, I was called to act in my capacity as the Chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus to host a series of important candidate debates that will have serious implications on the future and direction of this country.

If I had been present I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall No. 478, an amendment offered by Representative Davis, to H.R. 2765, the fiscal year 2004 appropriations bill for the District of Columbia.

If I had been present I would have voted ``yes'' on rollcall No. 479, an amendment offered by Representative Norton, to H.R. 2765, the fiscal year 2004 appropriations bill for the District of Columbia.

As responsible members of Congress we must focus on ensuring all students in the District of Columbia, and across the country, have the tools for success. We must provide the necessary resources to ensure that all of our students have access to the proven keys to educational success--smaller class sizes, more parental involvement, up to date materials, and high quality instruction.

We should not give up on our public schools. Especially now just as reform efforts in D.C. are showing results. According to the D.C. Board of Education, recent reforms have resulted in improved test scores for public school students and academic gains in low-performing schools. By contrast, there is no evidence that vouchers will improve achievement for disadvantaged students.

Vouchers will not increase parental choice. Under voucher plans, the choice is in the hands of private schools, which can decide whether or not to participate in a voucher program and can discriminate in admissions.

Finally, when I supported the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act in the last Congress it was with the understanding that as a country we were focused on raising the level of accountability for the schooling of our children. The implementation of voucher programs like this undermines the public accountability component of NCLB. Private schools would not have to account to the public for how they spend tax dollars or require their students to meet the same standards or take the same assessments as public school students.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the understanding of the House and my constituents on this issue.