Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and applaud the efforts of the Imagen Foundation. Today, the Imagen Foundation will host its Twentieth Annual Imagen Awards and will bestow special achievement awards to a distinguished group of Latino talent for their outstanding contributions to the entertainment industry.

For the past twenty years, the Imagen Foundation has raised awareness, increased knowledge and encouraged positive portrayal of Latinos and the Latino culture in the media. Under the strong leadership of its founder and president, Helen Hernandez, the Imagen Foundation has fostered countless career opportunities to inspiring Latino actors, writers, and producers.

It is with great pride that I highlight two distinguished individuals who will be recipients of Imagen's special awards tonight. Nina Tassler will be the recipient of Imagen's 2005 Career Achievement Award. As the first Latino to head a major television network, CBS, Nina Tassler has built a remarkable career. She oversees the network's entertainment programming and uses her heritage as a tool to help her be more proactive in showcasing diverse talent. Jose Rivera, a prominent Latino writer, will receive the Norman Lear Writer's Award. He is the author of the Oscar-nominated screenplay, ``The Motorcycle Diaries,'' and a two-time Obie Award-winning playwright whose works have been translated into seven languages.

Through groups such as the Imagen Foundation and people like Helen Hernandez, more doors are opening for Latinos in the entertainment industry. Although we have seen significant progress, there is still much to be done and we need to continue to work together. I was proud to join the Imagen Foundation in hosting a workshop in my district to inform talented Latinos about the entertainment industry and how to break into it. With institutions such

as the Imagen Foundation, who are committed to fighting prejudices and committed to bringing diversity and cultural sensitivity to television and society, I look forward to the accomplishments that are yet to come.

The Imagen Foundation has been an amazing force working to develop, showcase and honor the talent in the Latino community. It is my privilege to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the Imagen Foundation.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of the House Democrats' positive education agenda, which includes specific steps to promote opportunity by strengthening our schools.

In my home State of California, nearly half of Latino and African American high school students failed to graduate in the year 2002. In Los Angeles, California, the situation is even worse. Just 39 percent of Latinos and 47 percent of African American students graduated from high school.

It is frustrating to see these staggering statistics, while Republicans insist on giving tax cuts to the very wealthy while shortchanging vital education programs. Republicans have failed American students.

The Democratic plan calls for boosting college opportunity, affordability, improving teacher quality, fully funding No Child Left Behind, and expanding pre-school opportunities for our children.

For these reasons, I support the Democratic agenda for a strong and equitable education system for all Americans. I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. Speaker, today I also rise to join my colleagues in opposition to the Dominican Republic Central American Free Trade Agreement, known as CAFTA. The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) and other Members of Congress will shortly be speaking for a special hour to take note of the negative effects that CAFTA will have not only on the American public, but also our relatives and friends that live in Central America.

I have the distinction of being one of the few Members of Congress with family that lives in Central America. I have seen firsthand for myself the conditions that people are currently living in there right now, in a small country known as Nicaragua where the poverty levels are just outrageous. There is no relief that will come through CAFTA, in my opinion.

As I see it right now, what we have learned from the NAFTA trade agreement that was passed some 10 years

ago, before I came to this House, we will see the same pillaging occur with individuals who represent Central American countries, particularly young women. The pattern does not change.

In my visit there 2 years ago, I had a chance to see women outside at 5 o'clock in the morning, over 300 women lining up to enter into these maquilas, these assembly plants, if you will, in free trade zones that were set up in El Salvador and Nicaragua. In El Salvador they were lined up to begin their work of 12 to maybe 14 hours a day, gaining maybe less than $30 a week, living far from their families in areas that would not provide them with decent housing or even sanitation. And I am concerned because when we talk as a country, a great Nation protecting the rights of our workers here, we also set an example for those individuals that represent other foreign countries when we say we want to open up fair trade agreements.

In my opinion, this is not an agreement that I support. I can tell you by hearing from people there firsthand that have told me that they do not believe that they are going to reap any benefits; that the profits will go to the big corporations, whether they are U.S. or other foreign entities. That money, I do not believe, will stay there to help restabilize and provide infrastructure, clinics, education and decent housing for the people that will be working there for many years to come.

In fact, what we have seen occur in Mexico is that, yes, we set up our maquiladoras there along the border in an area like Ciudad Juarez, and soon we found that they could go for cheaper labor by leaving there, almost half of those maquilas, and transporting their factories to China where they could get a lower cost for wage labor and provide less protections for people in the workplace. Meanwhile, those products are coming back to this country.

My question is, why is it that this country feels somehow that it is good to provide incentives for big corporations who do not pay taxes here and allow for the squalor and mistreatment of people in an inhumane way abroad, yet we are supposed to be setting an example?

I know that the President a year ago introduced this proposal, and he has yet to bring it up because I understand that his own party is not in support. He has many Members that are very reluctant to support CAFTA because we have seen a number of jobs, over 750,000, that have left this country. In my district alone during NAFTA, we lost more than 1,000 jobs, many in the textile and agricultural industry, many of those low-paying jobs that were held by Latinos.

So when I think about CAFTA, I think about what is going to happen again to those individuals in this country, people who are right now trying to make a living and will see soon their jobs leave this country and go abroad. What will they then be left with holding the bag?

All I can tell everyone is that there are many of us here, including the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, 14 members, a good majority of our Members, who voted against CAFTA, and I hope that everyone here is paying attention because we are not just speaking from our own districts, but we are talking also about individuals representing those different countries who have come here on different pilgrimages to come and talk and inform us as legislators. They too will be here this week to talk to us about what they see in terms of the wrongness about this CAFTA agreement.

And I hope that Members in our party as well as the other side of the aisle will come to some reason that we could maybe put this aside and maybe renegotiate this whole effort because I do believe, Mr. Speaker, that we are heading down a wrong path. I do not want to see any more of our jobs leaving and then bringing about what I would call a suppression of the workforce in those Central American countries, particularly when it affects women. When we see 14- and 15-year-old women having to work for 14 and maybe 16 hours a day, 6 days a week, not being able to go to school, not having any health care coverage, not having a decent wage to help support their own families, then I have to ask the question why are we heading down that path? And that is something that I truly believe my constituents support me on, and I have heard from them as well. We had a forum at Cal State Los Angeles recently where we had ten individual witnesses speak, and there is a resounding no for CAFTA.

So I would urge my colleagues to pay attention and to heed the concerns that we have here in the Congress such as the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) and other Members that have been leading the cause.

Madam Speaker, today I rise in opposition to the confirmation of Janice Rogers Brown who today will be debated on the floor of the other body. Her extreme views are out of touch with the mainstream and are not in touch with Americans values. She

was the only member of the California Supreme Court to find that a jury should not be allowed to hear expert testimony in a domestic violence case regarding battered women's syndrome. She even said that employers may use racial slurs against their employees.

Her record is clear. She does not protect the rights of women, workers or minorities.

Yesterday I and 14 other women members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, the Congressional Black Caucus and the Asian Pacific American Caucus sent a letter to Senate leaders stating our strong opposition to the confirmation of Janice Rogers Brown.

Given the serious concerns against Janice Roger Browns' views, I encourage my colleagues in the Senate to vote against her confirmation. Her confirmation would have a detrimental effect on women, minorities and all Americans.

Madam Speaker, today I rise to honor the courage and commitment of women who have served and continue to serve in defense of our Nation. Today, we will be voting on an appropriations bill to limit and restrict women in the military. How ironic.

Tomorrow, women Members of Congress, from this Congress, will be attending the eighth annual Congressional Caucus for Women's Issues'

wreath laying ceremony at Arlington National Cemetery. The event is an annual opportunity to recognize women who play and have played a critical role in the Armed Forces, both in times of war and peace, and currently now in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Our troops and all of our servicewomen deserve our utmost respect for protecting our freedom. As of March 2005, an estimated 203,000 women serve in our U.S. military and another 142,000 women serve in the reserve units in the U.S. Armed Forces. These women give of themselves and make extraordinary sacrifices.

The Congressional Caucus of Women's Issues is committed to supporting women in our Armed Forces. As Democratic Chair of that women's caucus, I want to thank all the servicewomen for their unyielding courage, selfless commitment, and long-standing dedication to our military and our country. Let us remember them over the Memorial Weekend.

Mr. Chairman, today I rise in strong support of the Davis- Harman-Sanchez amendment.

This amendment would repeal the current ban that forbids servicewomen and female military dependents from using their own private funds for an abortion, abortion care at overseas military hospitals.

Abortion is a very personal issue. I do not think it is one that anyone here takes very lightly, but Members have to understand that currently there are over 100,000 women that are right now serving on active duty somewhere abroad, or their family members are there near a military base. Health care for them is very important.

God forbid that one of these young women, or soldiers, is raped when we know in fact in Afghanistan and currently in Iraq there have been sexual

assaults and rapes. For God's sake, let us be rational about this discussion. Let us allow these servicewomen to pay for the appropriate care that they are willing to pay.

It is not taxpayer dollars that we are expending on this particular procedure, and I think it is a gross misrepresentation for Members to think that somehow this is an abuse of unwanted children. The fact of the matter is that there are women who do need this health care and many women who are in the service who are rape victims.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to denounce the Republican abuse of power. Right now, the Senate Republicans are trying to jam through judicial nominations that will hurt the American people, as well as women.

Specifically, I am extremely concerned about the nomination of Janice Rogers Brown from California. Her views are out of the mainstream and out of touch with American values, and this is why: she was the only member of the California Supreme Court to find that a jury should not hear expert testimony in a domestic violence case about Battered Women Syndrome. Janice Rogers Brown was the only member of the court to oppose an effort to stop the sale of cigarettes to children. She even said that a manager could use racial slurs against his Latino employees.

Her record is clear. She does not protect the rights of workers, women, or minorities. She is so far out of the mainstream that she, in my opinion, is viewed as extreme. We cannot allow the Senate Republicans to abuse their power to jam through such extreme judicial appointments.

Our current and effective system of checks and balances protects our judicial branch. The American public must be shielded from individuals like her.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

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

This amendment would ensure that the Environmental Protection Agency could not use funds in this legislation to accept, consider, or rely on studies from outside parties that intentionally expose human beings to pesticides. It would also ensure that the EPA could not spend any funds conducting its own studies which intentionally expose humans to pesticides.

According to EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson back in 2001, EPA ``believes that we have a more than sufficient database, through use of animal studies, to make licensing decisions that meet the standard, to protect the health of the public, without using human studies.''

I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina.

Mr. Chairman, no rollcall vote.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I thank the gentleman from North Carolina.

Mr. Chairman, I will submit the remainder of my statement for the Record, and I would ask that Members of the House approve this amendment. It is long overdue. I am very grateful to accept support from the other side of the aisle.

Despite this statement, the EPA can devise and conduct studies where humans--children and adults--are exposed to pesticides.

Current practices also allow the EPA to accept studies from the pesticide industry and other outside sources so these studies can be used to help develop regulations or approve pesticides.

Right now, the United States Environmental Protection Agency--the agency in charge of protecting public health from environmental toxins--is encouraging industry to use human beings as guinea pigs.

What may be the greatest offense yet, is that the EPA is conducting and engaging in these studies with no binding safeguards to make sure these tests protect public health.

The EPA has chosen to go against the recommendation of the National Academy of Sciences and against the wishes of its own Science Advisory Board and Science Advisory panel.

Not only are there no binding safeguards for EPA conducted studies, but many of the outside studies which the EPA accepts fail to meet minimum international standards established in the Nuremberg Code and in the Helsinki Declaration of the World Medical Association.

This behavior is deplorable, unethical, and wrong.

Our amendment is critical because, in the absence of binding standards at EPA, the pesticides industry has increased its use of human testing studies and putting more humans at risk for what are frequently statistically invalid studies.

The trend of using humans--both children and adults--as guinea pigs is a trend that needs to stop.

The EPA needs to have binding safeguards in place, and we need to have information about how a better understanding of how dangerous and toxic these pesticides are for our children.

Without these safeguards the EPA should not be conducting tests which dangerously expose humans to pesticides nor should it be developing policy based on third party studies which fail to meet even basic internationally accepted standards.

My colleagues, the Solis-Bishop amendment is supported by environmental and diverse religious organizations and among more than 80,000 others who have written to me saying they oppose the CHEERS study and support a moratorium on this type of testing.

I urge you to support our amendment and prevent the unregulated and unethical testing of pesticides on humans.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Bishop), the cosponsor of this amendment.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 1279. This punitive bill does nothing to help fight and deter the root of the gang problem plaguing our neighborhoods. I represent communities that are afflicted with gang violence, and I know first hand the suffering that families have to go through as a result. I support a combined approach to the gang problem that encourages prevention, intervention and suppression.

This bill is filled with criminal sanctions that would only help exacerbate the gang problem. The legislation would federalize a host of crimes currently and competently handled by the states. It would also penalize even non-violent drug dealing and some misdemeanors as crimes of violence. Without reason, the legislation expands the definition of criminal street gang. The bill imposes unduly harsh and discriminatory mandatory minimum sentences and expands the use of the federal death penalty to new offenses.

I strongly oppose the provision that allows the government sole discretion in deciding whether or not to try juveniles as adults. It is a proven fact that prosecuting children as adults increases, not decreases, crime. Study after study has shown that youth transferred to the adult criminal justice system are more likely to re-offend and to commit more serious crimes upon release than youth who remained in the juvenile system. At a time when the Bush administration has proposed huge cuts to programs that serve our youth, it is irresponsible to pass legislation that would only destabilize our communities and aggravate crime.

This bill is a simplistic approach to a complex problem that has its roots in the lack of a quality education and after school programs and negative influences from adults and broken families, among other problems. Our society must provide young people with meaningful alternatives that will draw them away from the gang lifestyle. We should not be soft on crime; my community has suffered for many years and we know how gang violence has scarred our families. That is why we must punish those who need to be punished while also remembering to give youth the opportunity to succeed in life. I support effective measures to combat gang-related crime and this bill completely fails to do that.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise very proudly to congratulate Antonio Villaraigosa as the newly elected

mayor of the City of Los Angeles. Believe it or not, the last Latino mayor elected in the City of Los Angeles, which is overwhelmingly Latino and African American and Asian, was back in 1872. Can we imagine what a whirlwind of change has occurred?

Antonio Villaraigosa is one of the Nation's most promising leaders of our country. I served with him in the State assembly and he served as the assembly speaker for the great State of California, where he helped to expand the Healthy Families program, which we know here as at the Federal level as the S-CHIP program, and helped to pass one of largest park bonds in the State of California which helped to identify areas in low-income communities to establish urban conservancies. And my district was a proud recipient of one of the largest urban conservancies in California.

Antonio is one of those individuals who will bridge the gap in our communities. He is about empowering people, empowering our communities, putting public safety and education first, and helping to fight crime.

I look very much toward his leadership and know that the country is looking at our great State of California, and especially Los Angeles; and I am proud to say that a portion of my district, he and I have similar jurisdiction in the community of El Serreno. So he is a champion, someone I continue to work with, and I extend the best wishes to him and his family.

Madam Speaker, today I rise to denounce the Republican attack on our system of checks and balances that has existed in our country for well over 200 years.

Led by the Senate majority leader, the Senate Republicans are creating an unnecessary showdown over judicial nominations that will hurt the American public and especially women.

The truth is that since President Bush took office, the Senate has confirmed 208 of his judicial nominations and turned back only 10, which is a 95 percent confirmation rate.

There are reasons the Democrats are concerned about the judicial nominations. As Chair of the Democratic Women's Working Group, I am concerned about the nominations of Janice Rogers Brown and Priscilla Owen to the circuit court seats. Both these

nominees would come to the Federal bench with an agenda to roll back civil rights and labor protections, many of which would affect women and all Americans.

We have held these values dear for many decades, and I cannot stand quiet and allow the Senate Republicans to abuse their power. Eliminating the filibuster would destroy the procedures that would protect democracy in this institution.

The American public must stand up and be heard.

Mr. Chairman, during rollcall vote No. 169 on the Weiner amendment to H.R. 1544, I was unavoidably detained.

Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. Speaker, during rollcall vote No. 170 on final passage of H.R. 1544, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today, along with my colleagues from California, Ms. Pelosi, Mr. George Miller, Mr. Baca, Mr. Becerra, Mr. Berman, Ms. Capps, Mr. Cardoza, Mr. Costa, Ms. Susan Davis, Ms. Eshoo, Mr. Farr, Mr. Filner, Ms. Harman, Mr. Honda, Mr. Lantos, Ms. Lee, Mr. Lofgren, Ms. Matsui, Ms. Millender-McDonald, Ms. Napolitano, Ms. Roybal-Allard, Ms. Linda Sanchez, Ms. Loretta Sanchez, Mr. Schiff, Mr. Sherman, Mr. Stark, Mrs. Tauscher, Mr. Thompson, Ms. Waters, Ms. Watson, Mr. Waxman, and Ms. Woolsey, to pay tribute to Miguel Contreras, who died unexpectedly on Friday, May 6, 2005. As Executive Secretary-Treasurer of the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor and a Vice President of the California Labor Federation, Miguel was a friend to many of us in Congress from California. More importantly, he was a staunch champion for working families in Los Angeles and throughout the country whose leadership brought much needed vigor to our Nation's labor movement.

As the son of migrant farmworkers, Miguel grew up in Dinuba, California, where he worked in the Central Valley's fields from the age of 5 alongside his parents and 6 brothers. Following his parents' example, Miguel became active in the labor movement, where his skills were recognized by the legendary Cesar Chavez, who hired him as a union representative for the United Farm Workers. For 6 years, Miguel worked under Chavez, gaining critical leadership, strategic, and political skills at the helm of one of our Nation's greatest civil rights heroes.

Miguel later joined the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees' (HERE) Union Local 2 in San Francisco, where his coordination of a citywide major hotel walkout led to the biggest wage and benefit increases in history for the 14,000 member local union. His efforts spread beyond California to hotel organizing efforts in Nevada and New York.

Following a 3 year stint as political director of the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, Miguel was elected Executive Secretary- Treasurer of the Federation in 1996. As head of the Federation, Miguel oversaw the operation of 350 local unions and more than 800,000 union members. Under his leadership, the Federation became a powerful voice for working families throughout Los Angeles, leading successful organizing and wage improvement campaigns for janitors, bus drivers, mechanics, trauma center workers, and thousands of other workers.

As the first Latino elected to head Los Angeles County's powerful labor organization, Miguel opened the door for thousands of Latino and immigrant workers throughout Southern California to the union movement and better wages and health benefits. In doing so, he transformed the face of not only the labor movement in Los Angeles, but of local, city, and State elected officials, and, inevitably, the city and State as well.

The Los Angeles County Federation of Labor has become a model for union organizations across the Nation. At a time when union membership is waning in other areas of the country, it grew quickly in Los Angeles County under Miguel's leadership. The superior labor organization he developed in Los Angeles and its successes are just a part of Miguel's enduring legacy to those most in need in our society.

As Members of the California Congressional delegation, we honor Miguel as champion for working families. We extend our deepest sympathy to his wife, Maria Elena Durazo, and his sons Michael and Mario, during this difficult time.

Miguel Contreras's passing is not only a tremendous loss for working families in Southern California, but also throughout the Nation. His tremendous strategic skills and dedicated passion to improving the lives of others are rare and will be missed sorely by thousands of working men and women he called his brothers and sisters.

Mr. Speaker, today I voted in support of the Fiscal Year 2005 Iraq and Tsunami Relief Supplemental Conference Report. This decision was very difficult for me. I voted for this legislation because it includes vital equipment and services that our troops desperately need. The bill also provides funding for needed vehicle armor and personal protection for our courageous troops and increases financial support to families of fallen heroes. While I strongly oppose the war in Iraq, I believe it is our government's duty to protect our troops which this Congress sent into the line of fire, as well as their families.

While I voted for this measure, I strongly oppose the REAL ID provisions in it. REAL ID gives blanket authority to the United States Department of Homeland Security to build any roads or barriers at any time and at any border without having to answer to State or Federal authorities and laws. Its driver's license provisions overturn States' rights and impose a massive unfunded mandate on States, while doing nothing to address our outdated immigration system.

I am very disappointed that the REAL ID provision was included in a bill to fund support for our military forces and their families and relief for tsunami victims. While I acknowledge that our immigration system is broken, this legislation is not the right vehicle to do it and REAL ID is not the right approach to fix it. I support comprehensive immigration reform, not attempts by the Republican majority in Congress and President Bush to give the American people a false sense of security at the cost of our civil liberties and values. That is why I urged conferees on the Supplemental bill to remove these harmful provisions from the conference report. Reform of our complex and outdated immigration system deserves a separate and extensive dialogue, and I will continue to fight for immigration policy which both protects our homeland and respects the millions of hard-working immigrants in this Nation.

While I remain deeply opposed to the REAL ID and its inclusion in this conference report, I do not believe withholding funds from our dedicated military and tsunami victims is right. There should be no question that I remain very concerned about the Bush Administration's lack of a clear exit strategy in Iraq. However, I am committed to our troops, and I will continue to fight for a clear plan so they can be reunited with their families and democracy can thrive in an Iraq run by Iraqis.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise in celebration of Asian Pacific Islander American Heritage Month. As a member of the Congressional Asian Pacific Islander American Caucus, I am proud to pay tribute to the 120,000 individuals of Asian descent that I represent in the 32nd Congressional District in California. Communities like Rosemead, Monterey Park, West Covina and other cities throughout my district have experienced firsthand the economic and cultural contributions of Asian and Pacific Islanders. Asian and Pacific Islanders in my district represent local government, entrepreneurs, educators, and patriots. This month we should also remember the great contributions that were provided by Congressman Robert Matsui, who was a great advocate and champion of Asian American issues throughout our country.

I encourage all my colleagues to celebrate with us throughout the month of May to learn more about the rich cultures of Asian and Pacific Islander Americans.