Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 10th Anniversary of the landmark El Monte garment worker slavery case.

In 1995, I was shocked to learn one of the worst sweatshops in recent U.S. history was operating in the city of El Monte, California--in my congressional district. Seventy-two Thai workers lived and worked in substandard conditions. Sixty-seven of them were women. Most of these workers had been held in slavery for up to 17 years at an apartment complex and were made to sew clothes for some of the Nation's top manufacturers and retailers. The workers labored over 18 hours a day in a compound enclosed by barbed wire and armed guards. They had left their homes in Thailand in search of a better life and wound up enslaved just outside Los Angeles.

While the El Monte sweatshop is a terrible example of substandard working conditions and human trafficking, it is not uncommon. Approximately 600,000 to 800,000 people are trafficked across international borders each year for forced labor, domestic servitude, or sexual exploitation. When including the number of victims who are trafficked within borders, the total number rises to between 2 and 4 million.

Approximately 50,000 people are trafficked to the United States each year. Los Angeles is one of three major ports of entry for human trafficking. Most come from Southeast Asia and the former Soviet Union. About half of those are forced into sweatshop labor and domestic servitude similar to the El Monte sweatshop. The rest are forced into prostitution and the sex industry, or in the case of young children, kidnapped and sold for adoption. While many victims come willingly, they are not aware of the untenable terms and inhumane conditions they will face.

I have worked very hard--in the California state legislature and now in Congress--to support efforts to eliminate this inhumane and criminal activity. Beginning with the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act passed in 2000, the United States began a concerted effort to combat human trafficking into the United States and around the world.

Established under this law, the ``T'' visa has been critical to combating trafficking in the U.S. These visas allow victims of trafficking, who would face retribution if they were sent back to their home country, to remain in the U.S. for 3 years, and then apply for permanent residency. The ``T'' visa has allowed many victims of trafficking realize their dream of living in the U.S.

In 2003, Congress renewed the Trafficking Victims Protection Act and increased funding for anti-trafficking programs by more than $100 million for each fiscal year. The act also refined and expanded on the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking that governments must meet. The legislation created a yearly ``special watch list'' of countries that the Secretary of State determined were not taking action to combat human trafficking.

In 2005, Congress will again renew the Trafficking Victims Protection Act. I am proud to be a cosponsor of this important legislation, which will close loopholes and increase assistance to victims of trafficking. The bill also addresses the needs of child victims of trafficking and directs relevant government agencies to develop anti-trafficking strategies for post-conflict situations and humanitarian emergencies abroad.

We have made progress since 1995 when the El Monte slavery case thrust the issue of human trafficking into the national spotlight. We must continue our work to eliminate trafficking within the United States. We must also work with foreign governments and non-governmental organizations abroad to end human trafficking and eliminate the conditions that foster trafficking, such as widespread poverty, crisis and warfare.

I am proud to join the Thai Community Development Center to recognize the 10th Anniversary of the Landmark El Monte Garment Slavery Case. This organization has been an amazing force working to raise awareness and efforts in eliminating slavery and trafficking. It is my privilege to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the Thai community and to honor the Thai workers.

Mr. Speaker, I want to tell you that I am in opposition to the Energy Policy Act of 2005. In my opinion, the bill does nothing to reduce our dependency on foreign oil. It does not reduce gas prices. It does not make our Nation more secure.

Instead, the bill will increase gas prices for consumers in California, where I come from, by requiring the increased use of ethanol. It threatens our water supply by rolling back the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Clean Water Act, and a trade-off I do not find acceptable at all. It overrides our States rights to oppose drilling offshore by including language requiring an inventory.

Mr. Speaker, I commend my colleagues for choosing not to include MTBE safe harbor provisions in the bill, but that alone does not guarantee that this is a good bill.

The bill is a missed opportunity. I do not support this legislation. And I know we must continue this debate on cleaning up our environment and protecting our consumers.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 5. It is an ill- conceived, ill-crafted bill that does nothing to help drive costs down. Studies have shown that this is not the way to go. In fact, insurance companies are the ones that are gaming us right now.

In California, malpractice rates have actually come down because we have enacted tough legislation, as was mentioned earlier. We need to do more to provide for, I would say, a level playing field so that the insurance companies do not walk away taking advantage of our consumers.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Interior-Environment appropriations bill. I want to especially thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis), the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Taylor) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks), the ranking, for their work on this legislation.

I am particularly proud of the steps that Congress has taken today to require the application of stringent ethical and scientific safeguards of intentional human dosing studies, and to stop the testing of pesticides on pregnant women and children. And I would like to thank all of your staff for their leadership on this issue.

I yield to the gentleman from Washington.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I would like to also submit that our staffs have worked very hard, and the outside organizations that worked in tandem with us, religious organizations, the scientific, environmental community, as well as activists. In fact, the United Farm Workers also submitted a letter of support.

This should never have happened. It should never have taken place, the testing of pesticides on humans, and particularly children.

So I know that I stand here before you in the Congress to say that this is a good moment for us in this particular time. Thank you very much.

Mr. Speaker, as co-sponsor of this amendment, I rise today to support the application of stringent ethical and scientific safeguards to intentional human dosing studies of toxic chemicals and applaud the inclusion of this language in the Interior-Appropriation bill.

This amendment forbids the EPA from considering any intentional human dosing study unless it meets the minimum ethical and scientific safeguards outlined in the February 2004 National Academy of Sciences report and the 1947 Nuremberg Code adopted after World War II. I am submitting copies of the NAS report and the Nuremberg Code into the Record.

In particular, this amendment prohibits intentional human dosing on pregnant women, infants, or children, and requires the creation of a review board to evaluate the ethical and scientific propriety of intentional human dosing studies before they can be conducted, considered, or relied on. In 2002, the National Academy of Sciences convened a panel to examine the issue of intentionally dosing human subjects with pesticides and other toxic substances.

The report of the NAS, published in February 2004, recognized that these experiments can be ``troubling'' and in some cases ``repugnant.'' For this reason, the NAS concluded that to be ``ethically justified,'' a human pesticide experiment must pass ``rigorous scrutiny on both scientific and ethical grounds.''

All of the studies currently pending before EPA are scientifically and ethically suspect and appear to fall far short of the stringent criteria for EPA consideration outlined by the NAS and the Nuremberg Code, and required in this amendment. EPA provided Congress with a list of all human intentional dosing tests under consideration by the agency. An extensive evaluation of these tests shows that they are rife with ethical and scientific flaws and do not approach the standard for acceptability.

Representative Waxman and Senator Boxer evaluated the serious flaws in these studies in

a report released last month entitled Human Pesticide Experiments, which I am submitting into the Record.

It is also clear that EPA's draft regulation regarding human testing similarly fails to meet the minimum criteria required in this amendment. EPA circulated internally a draft rule among the agency's various offices on June 20, 2005. EPA's draft rule, slated for proposal next month, would have allowed the systematic testing of pesticides on humans. The draft rule does not comply with the recommendations of the NAS and the Nuremberg Code, and it contains multiple loopholes that invite abuse.

The EPA draft is inconsistent with the standards we require in this amendment. EPA originally commenced its rulemaking in response to a wave of industry pressure to permit intentional dosing of human test subjects with toxic chemicals.

The pesticide industry has mounted a campaign to expand testing of pesticides on humans in order to weaken health standards. Because of the stricter requirements imposed by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996, the pesticide industry has been under growing pressure to reduce the risks that pesticides pose to infants and children. The industry has adopted a strategy to evade these requirements by testing pesticides on a small number of adult human subjects, and then cite these tests to argue that the chemicals are safe.

EPA's proposed rule encourages this strategy and is contrary to the recommendations of the NAS and the ethical guidelines of the Nuremberg Code that we require in this amendment. I am submitting for the record a June 2005 report titled Flash Report: New EPA Proposal Encourages Human Pesticide Experiments.

As outlined in more detail in this report, EPA's proposed rule violates the ethical and scientific safeguards now required by this amendment, by failing to establish a national review panel to prevent abusive experiments, and by failing to provide full protections for children and other vulnerable populations.

Furthermore, the EPA draft rule does not clearly require that pesticide experiments comply with even its sub par standards. To the contrary, EPA proposed to accept all experiments as long as they ``substantially'' comply. This provision overtly undercuts the protections in the rule. The vague standard of substantial compliance wrongly sends the signal that EPA will not demand strict adherence to ethical standards in human pesticide experiments.

Intentional human toxicity testing has a troubling history that includes manipulation and abuse of the most vulnerable members of society. The amendment that I am supporting today will ensure that EPA may not consider or rely on any intentional human-dosing study that does not meet the minimum ethical and scientific criteria recommended by the NAS and expressed in the Nuremberg Code.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to debunk a couple of myths that we will probably hear today driving the debate over medical malpractice, H.R. 5.

Myth number 1: There is an explosion of malpractice lawsuits that are driving up premiums. Not true. A study by Kaiser Family Foundation found that lawsuits are not the cause of doctors' high premiums. In fact, another recent study found that insurers increased their premiums while claims went down.

Myth number 2: Malpractice lawsuits are the cause of rising health care costs. Not true. According to the CBO, malpractice costs amount to less than 2 percent of overall health care spending. Thus, even a reduction of 25 to 30 percent in malpractice costs would lower health care costs by a minuscule 5 percent.

Myth number 3: The malpractice bill is about weeding out frivolous lawsuits. Not true. The proposed limits on damages would apply to all cases, no matter how serious the injury was or how egregious by the doctor, hospital, nursing home, or drug manufacturer.

Any time we are talking about taking away the rights of Americans, you have to be measured and cautious, something House Republicans are unwilling to do.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on H.R. 5.

Mr. Speaker, I thank our ranking member for yielding me this time, and I thank the Members in the House tonight.

I have to tell the Members that, as a proud member of Congress, the only Member of Congress of Nicaraguan descent, I am proud to say that my mother just returned from Nicaragua. The news was not a happy sound at all. Poverty, yes, is very bad. The people there are looking for leadership in the U.S. House of Representatives. They are asking us to vote down CAFTA because they know that the government there does not realize that the people there have been suffering for over 40 years. And to this day, they are looking for Members in the House to provide support so that people there can have dignity and respect.

Why is it that we can pass an agreement like this that does not allow for people in those countries, in El Salvador and Nicaragua and Costa Rica, to collectively bargain? Why is it in El Salvador two people who were trying to organize were shot to death in front of their houses? Why is it that we have to stand up and allow for that disgrace to occur when this country is so rich and so wealthy that we cannot provide other types of aid and assistance so that people can be empowered to do what they choose to do, to build their houses, to have dignity, to have health care?

What we are doing and are proposing tonight is that the pharmaceutical companies would take away very important medical assistance to people who are dying of HIV and AIDS in Guatemala. How dare we decide the destiny of people in Guatemala by saying we are going to raise the price of medicine for them and for their children. Yes, they are going to want to come to this country because do the Members know why? We are cutting them off at the knees.

And as a proud member of the Hispanic Caucus, 14 members, a majority of that caucus, voted against DR-CAFTA.

We need to go back to the table. We need to have more transparency. We need to stand up for those young women who are going to be drawn into those jobs, who are going to be abused, who are currently being abused even in Mexico.

I would just like to tell the Members that in Mexico, where my father was raised, in the area of Ciudad Juarez, the people who were attracted to those jobs were ages 14 to 20 years old. These are young women who were drawn into the maquiladores. They are the same type of individuals that we have drawn into these types of factories that will work in El Salvador and Nicaragua. Right now there are some free trade zones there. The people that I see lining up for those jobs are 14 and 16 years of age, working 12 hours a day, in an encampment where they are not even allowed to go to the restroom without having permission.

We do not need DR-CAFTA. Please vote for humanity, for respect for the people of Latin America and Central America. I stand tall with the Democratic Party.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address the Republican leadership's failure to bring up legislation that actually addresses the health care problems of American families.

Currently, 45 million Americans are uninsured. Uninsured numbers are even worse for the Latino communities which have the highest uninsured rate of any racial and ethnic group; 13 million Latinos are uninsured. That is more than one-third of the Nation's Latino population.

Latinos make up 14 percent of the U.S. population, nearly 42 million people. Yet the administration's leadership continues to ignore the significant population. This week's legislation on association health plans and medical malpractice demonstrates the Republican leadership's inability to acknowledge the devastating impact these proposals will have on my community.

These proposals will facilitate rampant fraud, raise premiums, and reduce benefits to Latino families. If the current Republican leadership really wants to reduce the number of uninsured and reduce health care costs, then it needs to bring up legislation to the floor that addresses health care problems for all American families, including the 9.1 million Latino families in the U.S.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment and the effort to bring attention to the murders of more than 400 women and girls over the past 12 years in the border town of Ciudad Juarez, Mexico and Chihuahua City, Mexico. The latest victims of this violence, two 7- and 10-year-old girls, were raped and brutally murdered in May.

As the author of House Concurrent Resolution 90, which has garnered more than 100 bipartisan cosponsors, I know we must do more to help end these murders, bring the true perpetrators to justice, and bring closure to the families of victims who have disappeared but their bodies never identified.

Women and young girls from all parts of Mexico have migrated to Ciudad Juarez, just 5 minutes from the U.S. border, in hopes of finding work, including jobs at American-owned maquiladoras. Women have been kidnapped on their way home from work at the maquiladoras, and many are later found in deserted or abandoned areas--with their bodies showing signs of rape, torture and mutilation.

I have worked closely with my House and Senate colleagues on this resolution and other efforts to encourage the Bush administration to put pressure on the Mexican government to protect the women in Ciudad Juarez and bring their murderers and rapists to justice.

This spring, I worked with Senator Bingaman from New Mexico to ensure USAID funding for independent forensic investigators from Argentina to work in Ciudad Juarez. These independent investigators are working to identify up to 70 victims who up until now have been nameless casualties of horrific violence. The Reyes amendment, as well as my resolution, states the importance of these independent, impartial efforts.

I was also pleased to learn that the United States Ambassador to Mexico, Tony Garza, traveled to Ciudad Juarez yesterday to meet with the independent forensic investigators and the District Attorney for the State of Chihuahua. It is important that the United States continues to work with Mexico not only to identify remains of women already murdered, but also to thoroughly investigate these crimes and bring an end to the murders.

Congress of the United States,

Washington, DC, May 3, 2005.

Mr. Adolfo Franco,

Assistant Administrator, Bureau for Latin American and the

Caribbean, U.S. Agency for International Development,

Washington, DC.

Dear Mr. Franco: As you know, we are very concerned about

the murders and disappearances of women in Ciudad Juarez and

Chihuahua, Mexico. We have visited Ciudad Juarez and have led

Congressional Delegations to Juarez on several occasions, and

we recently introduced Congressional Resolutions (H. Con.

Res. 90 and S. Con. Res. 16) encouraging the U.S. government

to help Mexico resolve this tragedy.

In our visits with the families of missing and murdered

women, they have told us that they are requesting the

services of independent experts to help identify their family

members. There are more than 60 unknown victims in Ciudad

Juarez and Chihuahua that require forensic and DNA testing.

There are also families that are requesting identification

services because they have credible doubts about the results

of prior forensic testing.

It has been our understanding that USAID had been making

progress to assist in this very important forensic effort to

identify all of the unknown victims. However, without any

rationale, we have been informed that USAID will no longer be

able to assist in the effort to secure independent scientists

to conduct exhumations and forensic testing.

We have attempted to call you to find out why these efforts

have been stalled, without success. We, along with our other

congressional colleagues, are committed to alleviating the

anguish and uncertainty of many families of their missing and

murdered family members. Please provide us with a detailed

explanation as to whether or not USAID will be able to fund

independent forensic testing to help identify the remains of

the missing or unknown victims. A timely response would be

appreciated by May 11, 2005.

Sincerely,

Hilda L. Solis,

Member of Congress.

Jeff Bingaman,

U.S. Senator.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise in opposition to CAFTA because it is a bad policy for families that I represent in my district, particularly Latino families not only in the United States but in Central America.

CAFTA will outsource valuable American jobs. In fact, in the last 10 years when we approved NAFTA, we lost 1,000 jobs in my district alone.

CAFTA will destroy the jobs of subsistence for farmers and others who depend on the environment in Central America.

As the only member of Central American descent, I think I do have the right to say that poverty there is still something that is very real for many of the people that live in Central America and particularly they will be most affected, whether it is their health care, access to medicines, whether it is farming jobs there. All that is at stake for people in Central America.

I am afraid to say that if we take away those opportunities, those individuals might want to come here to this country. And I know that there is a movement here in this country to say close the borders, but at the same time we are sending signals that we are going to be helping the very wealthy in these countries and not those who need it very much.

So I would oppose CAFTA and ask my colleagues to do so as well.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to an extraordinary woman, Corina Villaraigosa, the First Lady of the City of Los Angeles.

Corina is a working mother whose proven ability to balance a successful career while never losing sight of her first priority--her family--has made her a role for model for countless Latinas and other women. Corina is a very talented and giving person whose love for her children and her students has no boundaries.

For nearly 20 years, Corina Villaraigosa has extended her love for children beyond her home and into the schools of the Montebello Unified School District. Thousands of young Californians, many of them English language learners, have been fortunate enough to call Mrs. Villaraigosa their teacher. Whether at home or in the classroom Corina creates an enriched environment that enables children to embrace the gift of learning and to become productive members of our society. She understands that education is the great equalizer for the Latino community and all communities. For Corina, teaching is truly a vocation, a calling to help young people--our Nation's greatest treasure.

Corina's strong sense of civic duty was learned at an early from her beloved parents. As a mother, a teacher and now as the First Lady of Los Angeles, Corina has always served her community with grace and distinction. The residents of Los Angeles are proud to call Corina Villaraigosa their First Lady.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in saluting Mrs. Corina Villaraigosa for her selfless and extraordinary dedication to her family and community. She is a role model for future generations of Mexican-American women and all women, and I am honored to recognize her today.

Mr. Speaker, this morning I would like to announce that the Democratic Tri-Caucus on Health Care is going to be convening a meeting in Chicago, Illinois. This is the Hispanic Caucus, the Black Caucus, and the Asian Caucus of the Democratic Party that will be meeting to talk about health care access.

Principally, we will be discussing a piece of legislation that we are going to be reintroducing known as the Health Care Equality and Accountability Act. It will expand health care coverage through Medicaid and the State Health Insurance Children's Program. It will remove language and cultural barriers. It will improve workforce diversity by allowing for different

community folks from our districts to be a part of the health care profession. It will also improve funded programs to help reduce health care disparities such as chronic illnesses, asthma, diabetes, and obesity.

It will improve data collection in our respective communities with respect to race, ethnicity, and language and promote accountability through the Office of Civil Rights and the Office of Minority Health at the Department of Health and Human Services. Lastly, it would help to strengthen health care institutions that serve minority populations.

We look forward to visiting our friends in Chicago, Illinois.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to acknowledge some guests that have visited us today, and I am proud to stand with my colleagues from both sides of the aisle. The Women's Caucus of the U.S. Congress had a meeting earlier today, along with Iraqi women who represent their government, members of the Provisional Assembly.

We met to talk about reforms that are much needed in their Constitution and respect for women's rights, and I am happy and pleased that our Members stood with them today and also were in the presence of the State Department who brought these courageous women here.

These women are in need of our support. Their Constitution, as we were told, is fluid. It is changing. They need protections, they need assistance, and we have pledged our help, along with our colleagues from the other side of the aisle, to do as much as we can to provide support so they can continue with these reforms that are so sorely needed.

Their Constitution has changed. When we were first told upon their first visit here that they would be represented well in government, that their rights would be reinstated, they would be able to attend to their careers, we know that has changed. There is now a different edict that is coming about; and we would like to stand tall and firm with our colleagues in Iraq, the Iraqi women, and send that message to their government as well as to our government.

I yield to the gentlewoman from California.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and congratulate Dr. Dennis J. Galligani, Ph.D. for his valuable and tireless dedication to California's education system and community. Dr. Galligani has served the University of California with distinction, humility, and humanity for the last 30 years at both the Irvine campus and at the system's administrative office. The goal of educational equality and equity has been the driving force in Dr. Galligani's efforts to ensure inclusiveness in admissions, financial aid, and student services.

Dr. Galligani was an early advocate for collaborative approaches to addressing educational issues through his enduring support for, and commitment to, the California Student Opportunity and Access Program, Cal-SOAP, and the Mathematics, Engineering, Science Achievement, MESA, Program. Dr. Galligani represented the University of California for several years as a member and chair of the Advisory Board to the California Academic Partnership Program, CAPP, whose goal is ``to develop cooperative efforts to improve the academic quality of public secondary schools with the objective of improving the preparation of all students for college.''

The California Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs, GEAR UP, has benefited from the leadership of Dr. Galligani as its first Principal Investigator and his steady stewardship of this program on behalf of the Governor and his California Education Round Table colleagues. Dr. Galligani has nurtured young educational professionals, especially those from Latino, African- American, and Native American families, to assume leadership roles in academics and their communities.

I learned the importance of integrity, competence, and commitment from Dr. Galligani while I was Director of the South Coast Cal-SOAP Program and on the CAPP Advisory Board. Dr. Galligani's mentoring contributed to my professional development and desire to assume both an advocacy and leadership role with respect to enhancing the academic preparation of all students for college. I commend Dr. Galligani for his distinguished record of professional service as the Associate Vice President for Student Academic Services at the University of California and extend to him my sincere best wishes for continued success as Executive Director of the Alliance for Regional Collaboration to Heighten Educational Success, ARCHES.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to pay tribute to the women suffragettes who began their campaign for women's right to vote 157 years ago today in Seneca Falls in New York. It

would take over 72 years of perseverance for this campaign to succeed and for women to gain the right to vote, with the ratification of the 19th amendment.

Today, almost 85 years later, a higher percentage of women vote as compared to men. However, we still have about 32 percent of women in the United States who are not even registered to vote. Can you believe that? Among that group of women between 18 and 24 years of age, 45 percent are not even registered to vote.

We need to do more to energize and engage these young women in the political process. Women must have a voice in all national debates that affect them, especially on important issues like reproductive health, equal rights, and Social Security.

As an example, in the debate over privatizing Social Security, 58 percent of seniors receiving Social Security are women. Since women have a longer average life span than men, privatizing Social Security would harm them. Let us take up the banner, like the suffragettes did, and let us work hard for women's rights.

Mr. Speaker, over and over again President Bush has expressed his commitment to fighting terrorism. But how is it possible when a top administration official, Deputy White House Chief of Staff Karl Rove, leaked classified information and undermined U.S. security? Karl Rove identified a covert CIA agent in an orchestrated effort to discredit an opponent of the administration's use of intelligence for the Iraq war.

Karl Rove has top-level national security clearance in his position. Yet, clearly, he cannot be trusted with information. President Bush cannot allow his administration and top advisers to undermine the war on terror.

In October 2003, President Bush stated: ``If someone did leak classified information, I'd like to know it. And we'll take the appropriate action.'' Mr. President, it is time to take action now. Karl Rove should resign. President Bush pledged to restore honor and integrity to the White House and to the Presidency. Removing Karl Rove from his duties and position would be an appropriate first step.