Floor Statements

Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chair, I rise in support of my amendment to H.R. 1500 which would ensure at least one member of the Consumer Advisory Board be an expert in privacy.

Over a decade ago, predatory lending and lax regulation led to one of the most devastating financial crises in our lifetime or any lifetime. The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, or CFPB, was established by the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act in response to this crisis. The CFPB is tasked with implementing and enforcing federal consumer financial laws while ensuring consumer access to fair, transparent, and competitive financial products and services.

Under former Director Richard Cordray, the CFPB returned roughly $12 billion to over 30 million consumers who fell victim to deceptive financial practices, handled over 1.2 million consumer complaints about financial firms, reined in payday lenders, examined mortgage and student loan servicers, combated discrimination in lending, and held a number of bad actors accountable.

Under this administration, the CFPB's leadership ordered a number of changes that weakened its ability to protect consumers. This included firing members of the Consumer Advisory Board and reducing the size of the board. This hurt the CFPB's ability to help and protect consumers.

The board's experts help inform the CFPB about emerging practices and trends in the consumer finance industry and share analysis and recommendations. It helps ensure the government fully leverages expertise of those from outside of government.

H.R. 1500, the Consumers First Act, would reverse anticonsumer changes taken by the administration and strengthen the Consumer Advisory Board. The bill would require the CFPB director to appoint at least 25 members, at least two-thirds of which would have to represent consumers, including fair lending and civil rights experts and representatives of communities affected by high-priced mortgages. My amendment would require at least one member of that board to be a demonstrated expert in privacy.

My amendment is needed because the interplay of privacy and technology in the financial landscape has changed dramatically since 2008. As internet connectivity increases, Americans now transmit more of their personal and financial information on the internet at exponentially higher rates than in the past, and their data is at risk.

Since 2013 there have been at least 10 major data breaches compromising billions of consumers. A number of these breaches exposed consumers' financial information. For example, Marriott International's 2018 breach compromised the personal information of some 500 million customers, including credit card numbers of more than 100 million. In 2017 Equifax was breached, exposing the personal information of 143 million consumers, including Social Security numbers. In 2014 the Nation's largest bank, JPMorgan Chase, was breached, compromising 76 million, or two in three U.S. households. The list, unfortunately, goes on and on.

In the wake of these high-profile data breaches and privacy violations, consumers are increasingly concerned about their online personal and financial privacy. A recent Pew Research Center public opinion study found that over half feel that their personal information is less secure than it was just 5 years ago, and 68 percent of internet users believe current laws are not good enough in protecting people's privacy online.

Our consumers are demanding action on the issue of privacy, and our privacy laws and enforcement significantly lag much of the rest of the world. Obviously, the current system is not working to ensure that personal privacy is protected.

My amendment responds to these concerns by ensuring that an expert in consumer privacy is part of the membership of the CFPB's Consumer Advisory Board. It will make sure that these concerns are front and center at the table as the board provides its advice to the CFPB.

My amendment is a small, yet important, nonpartisan amendment in response to the growing movement in Congress and across the Nation and world to protect consumers' personal data and basic right of privacy.

Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I appreciate the comments o my colleague very much and the support. This clearly demonstrates that when it comes to consumer privacy, there is no party involved. We are all concerned about it regardless of our party. So I appreciate those comments.

I would only add that certainly this member of the board should deal not only with data breaches, but also with the basic rules and regulations that govern privacy. We need a large, massive, and increased broad government debate over our own rules on privacy in this country where, in fact, we do lag the rest of the world.

Madam Chair, I appreciate, again, my colleague's support, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce my bill, which would ensure all federal employees are treated fairly and are reimbursed in a timely manner for travel expenses during a shutdown.

Good government includes ensuring that during shutdowns, essential services are still performed. Thus, during the last government shutdown, federal employees, including TSA personnel in Hawai`i, continued to make official trips in support of their important security-related duties.

Unfortunately, these employees did not receive formal guidance on how or if they would be reimbursed for the official travel expenses they paid for using their own credit cards. This could have resulted in late payments and penalties, impacted their credit scores, and increased interest rates for both their personal and government cards.

No government employee should be held liable for the government's expenses during the shutdown. They should not have to pay for government travel on their personal travel cards without knowing when, or if, they will be reimbursed. My legislation would improve government functions by ensuring federal employees do not have to personally take on these liabilities.

Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Chair, I rise in support of my amendment to H.R. 9, which would recognize the importance of the oceans to our global climate system and the international efforts under way to include our oceans in nationally determined contributions, or NDCs, under the Paris Agreement.

When we talk about the impacts of manmade climate change, we focus on the worlds of our lands and air, but we tend to forget the largest world of all, our oceans. Yet, some of the foremost negative consequences of climate change, as well as the positive vital processes that have kept our climate on an even keel until recently and can continue to do so, lie in the ocean.

We cannot forget the oceans. No climate change solutions can work if our oceans are not in the room.

The ocean covers more than 70 percent of the Earth and directly affects weather around the globe. The temperature and currents of the ocean determine storm patterns and strength.

We have seen increases in measures of intensity, frequency, and duration, as well as the number of the strongest--category 4 and 5-- storms since the 1980s.

The ocean also absorbs many of the most immediate consequences of carbon pollution, buffering us from some

of its most damaging impacts. The ocean has absorbed 93 percent of the total excess heat energy taken up by greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. Additionally, the ocean is the largest sink for anthropogenic carbon dioxide, or CO2, absorbing roughly one-third of CO2 emissions.

The increase in temperature and carbon in the atmosphere and oceans are directly impacting communities throughout the world. According to the 2018 Fourth National Climate Assessment, or NCA, released by the U.S. Global Change Research Program, made up of 13 Federal agencies: ``Human-caused carbon emissions influence ocean ecosystems through three main processes: ocean warming, acidification, and deoxygenation.''

Additionally, the NCA states: ``The social, economic, and environmental systems along the coasts are being affected by climate change. Threats from sea level rise are exacerbated by dynamic processes such as high tide and storm surge flooding, erosion, waves and their effects, saltwater intrusion into coastal aquifers and elevated groundwater tables, local rainfall, river runoff, increasing water and surface air temperatures, and ocean acidification.''

In just one compelling instance of many from around the world, my State of Hawaii's oceans and coastlines are on the front lines of dealing with the impacts of climate change in our oceans and coasts.

For example, the Honolulu tide gauge, a constant for over a century now, has measured a sea level rise of nearly half a foot since 1905.

Over 70 percent of our beaches in Hawaii are in a state of chronic erosion, likely caused by a combination of shoreline hardening and ongoing sea level rise.

The frequency of high tide flooding in Honolulu since the 1960s increased from 6 days per year to 11 per year.

We have also seen in Hawaii sea level rise impact traditional and customary practices, including fishpond maintenance, cultivation of salt, and gathering from the nearshore fisheries.

About 550 cultural sites, 38 miles of major roads, and more than $19 billion in assets will be vulnerable to chronic flooding resulting from a 3.2-foot increase in sea level. Such widespread flooding will change the character of the islands by affecting cultural heritage and daily commerce and lifestyle, and this is chronic throughout the entire Pacific.

We also, in Hawaii, face just one example of the impacts of ocean warming, acidification, on our reefs.

We have seen globally averaged sea surface temperature increase by 1.8 percent Farenheit over the past 100 years.

We have seen over nearly 30 years of oceanic pH measurements, based on data collected from Station ALOHA, Hawaii, show a roughly 8.7 percent increase in ocean acidity over this time.

We have seen increased ocean acidification reduce the ability of marine organisms to build shells and other hard structures, adversely impacting coral reefs and threatening marine ecosystems.

We have seen extended periods of coral bleaching, which did not even occur first until 2014 but now are becoming much longer.

This is, again, true throughout the entire Pacific Ocean. And we are not alone, because the ocean is interconnected throughout our world, and we are a clear example of what the world is facing.

These impacts are happening all over the world and our country.

Madam Chair, 39 countries--conspicuously, not including the U.S.-- have embraced the challenges and promise of our oceans in facing climate change by signing the Because the Ocean initiative, which has encouraged progress on the incorporation of the ocean in climate change policy debate, with a special focus on the inclusion of ocean action into nationally determined contributions under the Paris Agreement. The efforts of these countries and their partners will be invaluable as we face the crisis of climate change.

Mr. Speaker, today, with my colleagues Mr. Young of Alaska and Mr. Huffman of California, I am proud to introduce the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Commissioned Officer Corps Amendments Act of 2019.

The women and men of the NOAA Corps proudly and professionally operate NOAA's highly specialized fleet of research and survey ships and aircraft, including the famed Hurricane Hunter aviators. Several of those ships are based in my State of Hawaii and conduct surveys used to manage our fisheries and protected species and study and map the ocean floor.

Like the other uniformed services, the NOAA Corps officers spend most of their careers away from home at sea, in the air, and in remote locations such as Antarctica conducting this important work but are often overlooked in the legislative and administrative process, resulting in a patchwork of statutory authorities, benefits, and obligations of service.

Our bill will help the NOAA Corps improve recruitment, retention, and diversity to attract the best and the brightest commissioned officers and better align this great Corps with the other uniformed services as they continue their great service to NOAA and to our Nation.

I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this bill and support the efforts of the NOAA Corps.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the groundbreaking contributions of the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope and Submillimeter Array, located on the 13,803-foot summit of Mauna Kea on my home island in Hawaii, and to celebrate their contributions to a truly international effort producing the first-ever image of a black hole.

Part of the Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration, the JCMT and SMA joined six other telescopes around the globe to form an Earth-sized telescope of unprecedented power and resolution able to photograph the supermassive black hole in the M87 galaxy. Hawaii's key contribution was to place world-class telescopes in the middle of the Pacific Ocean.

Astronomers partnered with renowned Hawaiian language and cultural practitioner Dr. Larry Kimura to suggest the Hawaiian name ``Powehi,'' meaning embellished dark source of unending creation.

These Hawaii observatories pioneered the study of black holes, and thanks to powerful new capabilities, perfect conditions atop Mauna Kea, and dedicated personnel, we can all look forward to more of JCMT and SMA's cutting-edge discoveries in the future, in addition to the continued growth and reputation of Hawaii as a world leader in exploring our heavens.

Mr. Speaker, most of our fellow Americans just want us to assure them that the necessities of life are available and affordable: food, shelter, education, safety. Are they available and affordable?

Most of our fellow Americans would add to that available and affordable to all Americans, because the promise, opportunities and responsibilities of citizenship are shared, and are best shared by all of us. Nowhere is this more evident than in healthcare.

The question before us all now is how to ensure that quality healthcare is available and affordable for all Americans.

We can, should, and must continue the great debate over how best to do so, for healthcare remains unavailable to tens of millions of Americans, unaffordable even when available, and widely inconsistent on quality.

What we can't, shouldn't, and must not do is take a giant step backward to strip tens of millions of Americans of any semblance of available, affordable, quality healthcare. That is exactly what we would do if the Affordable Care Act were repealed by this Congress or our courts.

To those few who don't agree with our basic promise to start with, please get out of the way. To those who do, but don't agree that this is the best way forward, let's hear your concrete proposal.

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

Mr. Chair, I rise today to speak in favor of my proposed amendment.

This amendment will empower small dollar donors to participate in our elections process and focus the attention of candidates and political parties on earning financial support from a broader base of voters.

All across our political spectrum, we decry the historically low esteem in which Congress is now held, as well as the utter absence of many, if not most, of our fellow citizens from their government, as if the two were unrelated. For, of course, low esteem breeds absence, and absence breeds low esteem. Most Americans simply feel left out, without a voice, unvested, unwanted, and, thus, the downward cycle.

Nor is this just about low esteem and absence. For the vast majority of Americans are not vested in our government, and if our government is only supported and is only representative of the very few, mostly moneyed and influential, interests of our country, then that does not lead to representative decisions and erodes the consent of the governed, the political and social consensus on which our democracy is based.

As just one manifestation of this dangerous and worsening syndrome, the Center for Responsive Politics reviewed 2018 election-cycle contributions and found that, still again: ``Only a tiny fraction of Americans actually give campaign contributions to political candidates, parties, or PACs. The ones who give contributions large enough to be itemized, over $200, is even smaller. The impact of these donations, however, is huge.''

In fact, according to the center, while less than a half percent of the population contributed $200 or more, their contributions totaled 71 percent of all individual contributions in 2018 to candidates, PACs, parties, and outside groups.

The clear corollary is that the vast majority of Americans do not participate in our elections with their financial support and that, of those who do contribute, their voices are drowned out in a sea of larger contributions from a precariously narrow interest base.

This is why leading reform groups such as Issue One and its ReFormers Caucus, a fully bipartisan group of now over 200 former Members of Congress, Governors, and Cabinet members committed to nonpartisan solutions to fixing our broken system, cites increased and broadened voter participation in the election process through means such as amplifying the voices of small donors as key to returning our government to the people.

My amendment would take one small but meaningful step in that direction by authorizing national political party committees of any party to contribute up to $10,000 to a candidate, twice the amount currently authorized, if the amount consists solely of individual contributions of less than $200, and by making corresponding changes in the limit on coordinated expenses.

By permitting such committees to provide enhanced support to their candidates through use of separate, small dollar amounts, this change would incentivize greater attention by committees of all parties to small dollar donors, greater participation by such donors in the political process, and representation of a broader and more representative America by those elected.

I urge support for my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Chair, I appreciate the comments of my colleague, but I did not detect in his comments any objection to the amendment, and I hope that that means that he would agree that a much broader and more representative group of Americans should, in fact, be incentivized to participate in the political process.

I hope he would agree that one of the basic problems we have in this country today is the disincentivizement and the disenfranchizement of too many people who just simply don't feel a heart and zone of participation. I hope he would agree that this amendment, at least, is one way to accomplish that.

Speaking also to the broader purpose, he made reference to the fact that this was a partisan bill, and I would refer him to Issue One, which I referenced in my comments, and to the ReFormers Caucus, which is about 100 each, Republicans and Democrats, Members that he would recognize, leaders of both parties, now retired, who have looked back on their service in this Congress and have concluded that many of the provisions in this bill are the right way to go, not just this amendment, but many, many of those provisions, and I hope he would reference those leaders of the party for guidance going forward with respect to the intent of this bill.

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

Will the gentleman yield?

No, that is not correct. It provides that if contributions are received from donors of $200 or less, those may effectively be pooled into a segregated account by either political party and then contributed to candidates in an amount over and above the amount allowed for contributions of over $200. So, therefore, you will see that that would incentivize both parties to start to think a little more seriously about getting contributions from donors at less than $200.

Mr. Chairman, first of all, to my colleague, I accept the gentleman's offer to work in a bipartisan way to fix some of these major problems. I look forward to it, number one.

Number two, the gentleman referenced that special interest groups had drafted this amendment. If there is a special interest group, it is the ReFormers Caucus, on a bipartisan basis.

I yield to the gentleman.

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

Mr. Chair, I rise today to speak in favor of H.R. 268, the Emergency Disaster Appropriations bill.

This bill would appropriate funds for programs supporting communities rebuilding after suffering through numerous natural disasters throughout 2018. My home State of Hawai'i is in particular need of assistance. It was hit hard by multiple devasting storms over the islands and by the sustained eruption of Kilauea Volcano.

Among the impacts on Hawai'i Island by the volcanic eruption were:

716 dwellings destroyed by lava;

Roughly 30 miles of roads covered by lava; and

About 60,000 earthquakes striking the area from April through August, with the largest a magnitude 6.9 earthquake.

Additionally, Hurricane Lane wreaked havoc across Hawai'i in late August. Up to 50 inches of rain fell in parts of Hawaii Island and 35 inches on the island of Kaua'i. This caused massive unprecedented flooding that these communities in Hawaii continue to deal with.

The natural disasters of the past year affected all parts of our Hawai'i, from major damage throughout O'ahu and the Neighbor Islands to disruption of our tourism and agriculture industries and beyond. These sorely needed funds will assist those affected to recover and carry on with their lives.

The programs and funding in H.R. 268 is a step in the right direction of how government should be working and responding to the needs of our constituents.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill to help residents across the country rebuild and move forward after these devastating natural disasters.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1, the For the People Act, of which I am a very proud cosponsor.

H.R. 1 is a critical step toward reversing the accelerating deterioration in our Nation's most cherished democratic foundation--the consent of the governed--and taking back our government for all citizens. It would fight voter suppression; simplify voting; promote election security; curb special interests and dark money in politics; incentivize smaller, broader donations; and fortify ethics laws.

I wish especially to recognize contributions of Issue One and its ReFormers Caucus. These over 200 now-former Members of Congress, Cabinet members, and Governors have dedicated themselves on a nonpartisan basis to ``Fix Democracy First.'' My own motivation to return to Congress arose from my membership in this caucus, and my pledge to my constituents in Hawaii and throughout the country was and is to fight to fully return our government to the governed again.

H.R. 1 is first and foremost for the people, and I urge its prompt passage. Everything else depends on that.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the proposed Ka`u Coast Preservation Act, a bill directing the National Park Service to assess the feasibility of designating coastal lands on the Ka`u Coast of the island of Hawai`i between Kapaoo Point and Kahuku Point as a unit of the National Park System.

In March 2005, I wrote to the National Park Service to ask that it conduct a reconnaissance survey of the Ka`u coast to make a preliminary evaluation of the unique natural resources of the area to determine its suitability for inclusion as a unit within our National Park Service.

The draft reconnaissance report providing an overview of the natural and cultural resources of the study area is currently in the final stages of review, but the draft I have reviewed concludes that ``Based upon the significance of the resources in the study area, and the current integrity and intact condition of these resources, a preliminary finding of national significance and suitability can be concluded.'' The draft report goes on to recommend that Congress proceed with a full resource study of the area.

At present, the beautiful coastline of Ka`u is largely pristine: unspoiled, undeveloped, and uninhabited. It contains significant natural, geological, and archeological features. The northern part of the study area abuts Hawai`i Volcanoes National Park and contains a number of notable geological features, including a huge ancient lava tube known as the Great Crack, which the NPS expressed interest in acquiring in the past.

The study area includes both black and green (olivine) sand beaches as well as a number of endangered and threatened species, most notably the endangered hawksbill turtle (half of the Hawaiian population of this rare sea turtle nests within the study area), the threatened green sea turtle, the endangered Hawaiian monk seal, the endangered Hawaiian hawk, native bees, the endangered and very rare Hawaiian orange-black damselfly (the largest population in the state), and a number of native endemic birds. Humpback whales and spinner dolphins frequent the area. The area also boasts some of the best remaining examples of native coastal vegetation in Hawai`i. Although the NPS was unable to conduct a full survey of marine resources, it is expected that the varied and undeveloped habitats in the study area support high levels of biodiversity.

Archeological resources reflecting ancient Hawaiian settlement in the study area includes the Puhi`ula cave, dwelling complexes, heiau (religious shrines), walls, fishing and canoe houses or sheds, burial sites, petroglyphs water and salt collection sites, caves, and trails. The Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail runs through this area. The area is also remarkable for its magnificent viewsheds.

Ka`u is one the last unspoiled areas left in Hawai`i. It is, however, under tremendous development pressure, despite the fact that these coastal lands are subject to volcanic eruptions, seismic activity, tsunami, and other hazards. More earthquakes occur in the Ka`u area than anywhere in the State and the hazard risk level in the study area ranges from the highest (category 1) to between 3 and 6 for the balance of the study area. The outstanding resources of Ka`u deserve protection; development along the coast poses risks to these resources and potentially to human life.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill, and invite you to come to the island of Hawai`i to visit this special area. I know that if you do so, you will be convinced as I am of the vital importance of protecting these lands.

Madam Speaker, I rise today as a cosponsor and strong supporter of H. Res. 622, a resolution to recognize and honor the Filipino World War II veterans for their defense of democratic ideals and their important contribution to the outcome of World War II. As a member of the U.S. Philippines Caucus and the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, I am pleased that the House of Representatives is considering this important resolution and urge its passage.

Just this past weekend, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, the President of the Republic of Philippines, visited my home State of Hawaii and unveiled at the National Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific a commemorative marker honoring Filipinos and Americans who served in World War II. President Macapagal-Arroyo's presence underlines the continuing closeness and importance of the relationship between our two countries.

With more Filipino-Americans in my district than any other congressional district in the country, I was pleased that President George W. Bush, at my request, wrote a message on the occasion of the centennial anniversary of Filipino migration to Hawaii. We must also continue to celebrate and thank the early Filipino migrants who came to work in the sugar plantations of Hawaii and those who fought in support of the United States in World War II.

But there is still much more to be done in support of these brave individuals.

I have introduced legislation in both the 108th and l09th Congresses advancing the interests of the families of our Filipino World War II veterans, many of whom are still waiting in the Philippines to be reunited with their loved ones living in the United States. Earlier this Congress, I reintroduced the bill (H.R. 901) that provides for the sons and daughters of our Filipino World War II veterans to receive priority preference in their respective immigration categories.

Because of the grassroots support by many in Hawaii and across the country and in the Philippines, I am proud to say that Congress is on the verge of successfully advancing legislation that will enable the children of our Filipino World War II veterans to join their parents in the United States. The objectives of H.R. 901 were included in the Senate's version of comprehensive immigration reform legislation. I continue to work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to secure this provision in conference or to pass the free-standing bill.

With the waning days of the 109th Congress upon us, we must stay vigilant and continue to urge Congress to make this and all issues affecting Filipino veterans a high priority in our busy Congressional schedule. I urge Congress to pass H. Res. 622 and to also consider H.R. 901 before the adjournment of the 109th Congress.

Madam Speaker, I commend the Gentleman from California (Mr. Issa) for introducing this important measure. I ask all members to not only support this important resolution, but to also continue to support the full federal recognition and accessibility of benefits for Filipino veterans.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to and congratulate Kumu Hula George Lanakilakeikiahiali`i Na`ope, known in our Hawai`i as ``Uncle George,'' on being chosen as a 2006 National Heritage Fellow, our Nation's highest honor in the folk and traditional arts.

Each year the National Endowment for the Arts awards the coveted National Heritage Fellowships to a select few masters of folk and traditional arts who demonstrate outstanding lifetime achievement and artistic merit. Fellows are carefully selected from among hundreds of nominees based on authenticity, excellence, and significance within a particular artistic tradition. There is no one more deserving than Hawai`i's own George Na`ope to receive this high honor for his contributions to the art of traditional hula and chant.

George was born on February 25, 1928, in Kalihi, O`ahu and grew up in Hilo on the island of Hawai`i. He began his hula studies at the age of 3 and has dedicated his entire life to this ancient art form. Na`ope's first hula lessons were under the tutelage of Mary Kanaile Fujii, the mother of Edith Kanaka`ole, and his studies were directed by his great- grandmother Mary Malia Pukaokalani Na`ope and his grandfather Harry Na`ope. He further studied under Joseph Ila`laole and opened up the George Na`ope Hula School in Honolulu after his graduation from Hilo High School.

George would later go on to a successful career traveling throughout the United States with the Ray Kinney Royal Hawaiian Review, performing regularly at the Tropicana Hotel in Las Vegas. He still found time to obtain his PhD from the Cincinnati Conservatory of Music and to teach hula in underserved communities.

But his achievements did not stop there. George also served our country for 2 years in frontline combat during the Korean conflict with the X Corps of the American Corps of Engineers. After his return to Hawai`i he was appointed ``Promoter of Activities'' with the County of Hawaii. While serving in this capacity, he was recognized in 1960 by the Governor of the State of Hawai`i and Hawai`i State Legislature with the designation ``Living Golden Treasure''.

George Na`ope was a prime catalyst for renewed interest in and study of traditional hula, chants, music, and other aspects of Hawaiian culture. It was also during this time and with George's patronage that the world-famous Merrie Monarch Festival was founded in 1962. This festival honors King David Kalakaua who was nicknamed the ``Merrie Monarch'' because of his support for music and the arts and his encouragement of the revival of Native Hawaiian traditions like hula and mele. Forty-four years later, the festival is still going strong and has become a must-see for Hawai`i residents and visitors.

A lifelong teacher, George Na`ope has taught the dance of Hawai`i around the world and performed for dignitaries and world leaders. His lasting timeless contributions and influence, through the many students he inspired, as well as the many extraordinary contributions he made to the traditional arts heritage of Hawai`i and our Nation, are truly exceptional and worthy of national recognition.

I close by saying to Uncle George: congratulations on receiving the National Heritage Fellowship and mahalo for all you have done for our Hawai`i and our Nation's cultural heritage. Aloha!

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 9, The Fannie Lou Hamer, Rosa Parks, and Coretta Scott King Voting Rights Act Reauthorization and Amendments Act of 2006, which I am pleased to cosponsor, and in strong opposition to the amendment offered by Congressman Charlie Norwood.

Over the last 40 years, efforts to renew and restore the VRA have been accomplished on a bipartisan basis. It is in that spirit that we have all worked together to bring the bill before us to the floor today. I would especially like to thank Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, and Congressmen Mel Watt and Steve Chabot for their leadership on this issue.

Voting is the most important duty and right of Americans. By enacting the VRA, we tore down barriers to equal opportunity for minorities at the ballot box, removing the essential political mechanism that maintained the legal structure of segregation. As ruled by the U.S. Supreme Court, the equal right to vote is fundamental because it is ``preservative of all rights.''

It is with this in mind that I express great concern with the amendment proposed by my colleague, Mr. Norwood, as it essentially seeks to undermine the very means by which the VRA has maintained social justice.

Currently, section 5 of the VRA applies to any state or county where a discriminatory test or device was used as of November 1, 1964, and where less than 50 percent of the voting age residents of the jurisdiction were registered to vote, or actually voted, in the presidential election of 1964, 1968, or 1972. The Norwood amendment would change the preclearance formula by using rolling voter registration data and voter turn-out data from the three most recent Presidential elections.

My colleague argues that his amendment will ``modernize'' section 5. I believe that what his amendment really does is change the very focus of the preclearance provision, as it aims to make low voter turnout and registration the issues and not a recorded history of voting discrimination.

In fact, if the Norwood amendment were enacted, it would make my home state of Hawaii--a state without any history whatsoever of voting discrimination--the only preclearance state in our nation. This demonstrates in spades that one cannot reduce discrimination nor the need for federal oversight to so simplistic and mechanistic formula.

Reauthorization of the VRA gives us an opportunity to not only to reflect upon the progress we have made, but to maintain those gains that we have achieved. Adoption of the Norwood amendment would be a giant leap backwards.

I urge my colleagues to oppose the Norwood amendment, and all other weakening amendments, and support final passage of H.R. 9, a true bipartisan bill.

Mahalo, and aloha.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment for the same reasons as have been articulated otherwise.

But I also rise in opposition because of this amendment's specific impact on my State of Hawaii, because under his amendment, Hawaii would be, per se, subjected to a preclearance requirement solely because of relatively low turnout in recent presidential elections.

Now, I am not proud that we have had a low turnout in recent Presidential elections; but I say to the gentleman very directly, the author of this amendment, that it is not because of any history of discrimination against our citizens with respect to voting, and we should not be subjected, by application of some mechanistic and standardized formula unrelated in any way to the facts to section 5 preclearance.

And that really demonstrates the fallacy of the amendment, the removal from relevancy of applicable conditions in any State, past, present or future in determining who is and is not subject to preclearance. It is and should be relevant, and there are available means to come out from under preclearance.

But this amendment is not that, and I urge its rejection.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Health Centers Renewal Act of 2006 (H.R. 5573), which would authorize appropriations for Fiscal Years 2007-2011 for health centers to meet the health care needs of our medically underserved populations.

Health care centers (aka Federally Qualified Healthcare Centers (FQHC)) provide essential services to our communities. More than a thousand FQHCs serve over 15 million people in 3,700 communities across the United States. FQHCs not only provide primary and preventive care, but also meet emergency care needs in their communities. My State of Hawaii has 13 FQHCs across the state, and 10 of which are in my district alone.

We are all well aware of the important role of FQHCs in providing cost-effective, quality health care to our poor and medically underserved communities. FQHCs exist in areas where economic, geographic, or cultural barriers limit access to primary health care for the working poor, the uninsured, and many high-risk and vulnerable populations. More important, these health care centers tailor their services to specific community characteristics and needs.

When Congress established the FQHC system nearly 40 years ago, we intended a unique public-private partnership by providing direct funding to community organizations for the development and operation of these healthcare centers. Federal grants, on average, constitute 24 percent of the annual budget of FQHCs by assisting communities to find partners and recruit doctors and other health professionals. Today's passage of H.R. 5573 will continue that time-proven commitment and mission by helping to reduce health disparities, meeting health care needs, and providing a vital safety net in the health care system across our country and especially in my home.

Mr. Speaker, I fully support the Health Centers Renewal Act and urge its expedited passage in the Senate.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1285, which would amend the Nursing Relief for Disadvantaged Areas Act of 1999 by repealing a provision limiting the nonimmigrant classification for nurses working in health professional shortage areas.

Nursing shortages continue to plague our country, especially our underserved areas like much of my district. A report released by the American Hospital Association (AHA) in April 2006 indicated that U.S. hospitals need approximately 118,000 Registered Nurses (RNs) just to fill current vacant positions. This is, nationwide, a vacancy rate of 8.5 percent. In November 2005, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Monthly Labor Review, stated that more than 1.2 million new and replacement nurses will be needed by 2014. Even worse, the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) reported that approximately 30 states had RN shortages in 2000.

In my state of Hawaii, the University of Hawaii (UH) reported in 2000 that we faced a nursing shortage of more than 1,000 registered nurses; this shortage is projected to increase to approximately 2,000 by 2010. Like most states, UH found Hawaii's nursing workforce tired and burnt out due to incredible stress, understaffing issues, and increased overtime without adequate support staff. What is clear from the data already collected coupled with existing information regarding retention is that a worsening shortage of nurses means a worsening shortage of quality care for patients.

These statistics and the trends and conclusions they reflect are nothing new, but what do we do about it? As one valuable initiative, in 1999 President Clinton signed into law P.L. 106-96, the Nursing Relief for Disadvantaged Areas Act. This law provided for foreign nurses to obtain temporary work visas to come to the U.S. and work in places experiencing a shortage of health professionals. By allowing experienced health professionals, particularly nurses, from countries such as the Philippines into medically shortage underserved communities, the law has contributed greatly to keeping hospitals open and, more importantly, providing quality care to patients who otherwise would have no other place to seek treatment.

Mr. Speaker, I fully support the goal of H.R. 1285 to extend this important legislation, the Nursing Relief for Disadvantaged Areas Act of 1999, for an additional three years. I look forward to working with my colleagues on this and other initiatives to ensure that Americans continue to receive the health care they deserve.