Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to inform President Bush about what my constituents in the San Gabriel Valley and East Los Angeles are saying about Social Security.

In my district where there are nearly 60,000 Social Security beneficiaries, people are very concerned about the risky privatization scheme. To date, my office has held 15 senior center visits, high school visits, parent center visits, and health care facility visits. Over 500 constituents have been contacted about this issue. My constituents at Club America and the Federation of Seniors, whose members reside in east Los Angeles and the San Gabriel Valley, are overwhelmingly opposed to privatizing Social Security. I have received well over 300 letters in the past 2 weeks from people who are very worried about their benefits. In fact, Mr. Raymundo Romero from Los Angeles says: ``President Bush is claiming a mandate to privatize Social Security. I'm writing to tell you that he has no mandate from me, or from most other Americans, to cut Social Security benefits or add to America's financial burdens in order to reward Wall Street backers with risky private accounts.'' And I have about 300 letters that say about the same thing.

So I urge our Members of Congress to reject privatization.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman so much. I would be remiss if I did not first off thank the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson) for being so outstanding and helping us provide this special hour here tonight.

As you know, we were at another engagement honoring women, new Members of Congress as well, and also to be joined with other distinguished Members of our California delegation and our cochair for the Women's Bipartisan Caucus, as well as the Democratic Caucus.

Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield further, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) did a wonderful job.

I want to thank the gentleman. I cannot think of a more important issue that needs to be discussed at this time in our history than Social Security, and the fact that this administration would lead you to believe that there is a crisis occurring in our country with respect to Social Security.

As the gentleman and I know, some of us held some forums in our district this last week and a half, and we happened to have 15 of those in my districts, and we found resoundingly that people are saying wait a minute, stop the clock; who says there is a crisis here, when we know that this system has been working for so many people.

In my district, I represent 59,000 people who right now receive Social Security, the majority of them being elderly women. It is unfortunately in the district I represent in Southern California, the majority there are minority

women, women of color, Hispanic-Latino women.

This is something that I want to talk about, because people do not understand that women work very hard, those that have the ability and chance and sometimes have to for no other reason. If they take time out of that career to raise their children or to care for someone in the family household who is ill, those quarters are missed; they do not pay into the Social Security system. So on the whole, women tend not to be able to obtain the same kind of financial privileges that most males do, and in fact women only get 70 cents on the dollar. So that also adds to the frustration of women not being able to have the full benefits as others in our society, and it hurts.

I want to point this chart out here, if we might, to just go over what some of the myths and maybe realities that need to be pointed out.

Women, as you know, rely more heavily on income from Social Security. That is probably true across the board. Social Security provides well over half, 50.8 percent, of the income of women 65 and older, and just over one-third, 35 percent, for older men's income. So that is a substantial difference there.

Women have to rely on that source. Social Security provides 90 percent or more of the total income for 44 percent of all nonmarried, 44 percent. In these categories, widowed, divorced and never married. So we are talking about single women. Women 56 and older, 74 percent of the older non married African American women rely on this source. 66 percent of older nonmarried Hispanic women rely on this source. Without Social Security over half of all women 65 and older and 40 percent of older men would be poor. Social Security was invented 70 years ago to be that, Social Security, that protection so people could live their lives out of poverty and it is something that we have to keep talking about to educate the public.

Thank you so much. Again, I want to also reiterate as we said earlier, women earn 70 cents on every dollar earned by a man. On the average, that is about $11,000 less income earned each year compared to men. So that is something that we have to put in perspective. And as a result, women have less money to invest in private accounts, so there goes that theory about, gee, we have disposable income to put away to put in a private account. That is not necessarily the case for many people that I represent in my home district. And I know we are hearing a lot from our constituents right now. In fact, in my office alone, we have received well over 300 correspondence saying no privatization. Privatization, what does that mean?

In my opinion, it means that there is going to be money that is actually going to be taken out of their benefits, and in the long run, our young people that are paying, say, would pay into something like that are not going to receive the same return once they are eligible for that. And, in fact, those people that choose not to set up a private account are also going to be penalized. So over the long haul, I do not think that privatizing Social Security is actually going to end what the President is saying is a crisis because it is bankrupt. In fact, it will not do anything to make it solvent. Privatization will not do that. So I think we need to keep this discussion going.

And I would like to point out in this graph here we are talking about women's issues tonight because it is appropriate. This is Women's History Month, the month of March. And why not? Is it fitting to talk about the reality of how women fit into this figure of Social Security and how that piece of pie is divvied up.

And retired workers, for women basically represent 33 percent. Very different from a pie chart that you would see for males. Widows and mothers, 20 percent. Disabled adult children, 1 percent. Wives, 11 percent. Dually eligible, 24 percent. Disabled workers, 10 percent. This is how money is divvied up for these different categories of women who are affected and how the funds are distributed.

I can tell you now this would change dramatically if this whole new privatization effort came in and we changed the criterion formula. I do not want to tinker with it. I have parents right now who are on Social Security and I also have a family member who benefits right now from survivor relief because she also lost her spouse and had three children to raise. They were teenagers and one was a younger child. Two have now gone on to get married. One is still with her. And if it was not for that small check that still helps her out, she probably would have had to sell her home, change her lifestyle, would not be living the comfort life that she does, and I do not mean comfort by being extreme and wealthy or anything. I just mean by being able to hold a family together. And most people do not see that face. They think that it is somebody else

I just want to say how grateful I am to our colleagues in the House for allowing us the opportunity this special hour to have this special presentation on how Social Security, the proposed Social Security changes that the administration is proposing, the Bush administration, would affect our constituents. And, in fact, women are going to be disproportionately affected, and especially if you come from communities of color or you have not had a long history because of maybe illness or because you were raising your children and took time out of the workforce to do that. You are going to be penalized.

And I just want to make it clear for the very young people or those that are looking to put money away and that this privatization is going to help them, they need to understand it is not the same thing as a 401(k). What they put in is not what they are going to bring out. And they need to understand that if we go forward, if the President moves forward with this plan, we are going to have to give up $2 trillion over 10 years that will be paid out. Somebody is going to have to pay that back and it is going to come back in the form of lower benefits for people who go into these private accounts and those that do not.

So I am not for it and I am telling my constituents to call us, to let Members of Congress as well as the administration know where they stand. And I am hearing that there are not quite a few members on the other side of the aisle that are convinced that the plan that the President has is one that truly will address the shortages, the so- called shortages or bankruptcy that might be occurring.

So I am very pleased that we have an opportunity and we will be back as much as we can in the next few weeks to talk more about this very important issue that we know thousands and thousands, if not millions of people rely on a source of income and livelihood.

Just as you said, I have several constituents whose only sole source of income is that one check that comes in. And maybe 2 or $3 out of that check that can give them a chance to get out of the house to go and have a meal with another friend or to go visit the senior center and pay $1.50 to get a reduced meal to share with others, knowing that they are all in the same kind of situation and they are horrified to hear that someone wants to take it away. So with that, I believe our hour might be up. If not, any concluding remarks?

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to claim the gentleman from Ohio's (Mr. Strickland) time.

Mr. Speaker, tonight I rise in strong opposition to the Central American Free Trade Agreement, otherwise known as CAFTA, or DR-

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to denounce the so-called Social Security crisis that President Bush is trying to sell the American public.

As the Democratic chair of the Women's Caucus, I am especially concerned about the impact of privatization on women. The President is proposing drastic cuts in Social Security survivor benefits. Nationally, 50 percent of Social Security beneficiaries receive all or part of their benefit either as a widow or widower, spouse or child of a worker or a disabled worker. Over 80 percent of the beneficiaries are women and children. Right now the typical widow receives a Social Security benefit of $865 a month. If the 45 percent cut projected by the Congressional Budget Office were to take effect currently, they will only receive $476 per month.

In my own family, I have a relative who is a widow whose family receives Social Security survivor benefits for her last child. She had three. If it was not for that amount of money, she would be living in poverty.

Democrats believe that all American workers should get the benefits they paid for. We will fight to improve the Social Security system and not dismantle it.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize and honor the past and present achievements of African Americans as we celebrate African American History Month.

African Americans in arts, business, education, literature, music, politics, science and sports have helped shape the nation. Overcoming enormous obstacles and racial barriers, the African American community has made enormous contributions to our everyday world. Let us remember not only outstanding heroes such as Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Frederick Douglass, and former Congresswoman Shirley Chisholm, but also the extraordinary lives of ordinary people who have helped build our great nation.

This year, I want to acknowledge and thank the thousands of the African Americans serving in the Armed Services. African Americans have fought with distinction in every war since the Revolutionary War. We honor this proud history and all African Americans who risk their lives defending freedom and democracy. We are grateful for their service.

During this month and throughout the year, I encourage those living in California's 32nd Congressional District and around the country to take the time to learn about the vast accomplishments of African Americans and honor African American history.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise in opposition to the President's budget proposal to turn his back on low-income and ethnic minority students, particularly Latino and African Americans, and in particular first-generation students who have never had a chance to go to college.

And I say that because in the President's budget proposal he wants to eliminate completely the GEAR UP Program, the Upward Bound Program, and the Talent Search Program. As a result, 1.3 million students, 70 percent who are minorities, will lose a chance to go to college.

California was awarded about 15 percent of the funding for the GEAR UP program. In fact, in my school district in East L.A., El Sereno Middle School and Belvedere Middle School are the recipients of the GEAR UP program, middle school meaning 7th and 8th grade students who are learning about the opportunities to go to college.

How dare the President turn his back on our youth, on those who want to succeed and go on to college. We need to ensure that this President has to keep the compassion that he says that he has for all people of color.

And I would ask my colleagues and urge them to reject these proposals that will put back our community by many, many decades. Let us restore funding in higher education for all of our students.

Mr. Chairman, I would simply like to submit my statement for the Record on this particular issue in opposition to the REAL ID Act.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong opposition of the REAL ID Act. H.R. 418 is mean-spirited legislation that threatens our national security by depriving law enforcement officials of critical information on many adults who are physically present in the United States. The driver's license REAL ID Act will also impose additional requirements on states, without providing funding, and interfere with what is inherently a state responsibility. The REAL ID Act will also raise insurmountable hurdles for refugees seeking asylum.

This bill will negatively affect women refugees seeking asylum from honor killings, rape and sex trafficking, since most women cannot provide direct proof of torture. I do not understand how supporters of this bill can turn their backs on victims of sex trafficking in the name of protecting homeland security.

Finally, I am particularly disappointed that the authors of this bill have ignored real security threats. Like the need to upgrade the safety of our chemical and nuclear plants. Instead they have introduced a sweeping new law that allows the Department of Homeland Security to unilaterally strip away civil rights, labor, health and environmental laws to build a border fence. This will be done without any recourse for the average American citizen impacted by the construction. This doesn't make our country safer, it just takes away the liberties that make America a model for the world.

I strongly urge all Members to vote ``no'' on H.R. 418.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise concerning the budget cuts President Bush has proposed on the Department of Veterans Affairs. It is nothing more than a smoke screen to make the overall budget numbers look better while veterans are going to have to shoulder

most of those costs. The budget makes veterans pay $250 to enroll in health services and doubles their copayments for prescription drugs, changes which will affect more than 2 million veterans. It makes veterans wait longer for claims to be processed, delaying very vital medical services. It provides a dismal 1.7 percent increase in funding, far from the 14 percent the Veterans Affairs Department really needs to sustain its current services.

President Bush's budget also forgets about the new veterans serving abroad. Over 1,400 have been killed, 11,000 injured, and 10 in my district alone have been killed. These military families are struggling right now. They lack mental health care and other needed services such as bilingual services. They also lack burial funds. Let us keep our commitment and not cut back the budget.

Mr. Speaker, today Ms. Brown-Waite of Florida and I rise on behalf of the Congressional Caucus for Women's Issues to honor the achievements of two outstanding women. Congresswomen Shelley Moore Capito and Louise M. Slaughter proudly and capably served as the Co- Chairs of the bipartisan Women's Caucus in the 108th Congress.

The Women's Caucus has a proud history, which began on April 19, 1977, when fifteen Congresswomen held the first meeting of the Congresswomen's Caucus. They were drawn together in the spirit of bipartisanship with the common goal of improving the lives of women across the country. This tradition has been carried on for three decades.

Congresswoman Capito, the Republican leader of the caucus, has lent her expertise in financial services to promote financial literacy among women. She also spearheaded the passage of a House resolution honoring the important contributions of working women in World War II. The ``Rosie the Riveter'' resolution had the unprecedented sponsorship of every woman Member in the House. For these contributions and many more, the membership of the Women's Caucus honors her service.

Congresswoman Slaughter, the Democratic leader of the caucus, has a long history of fighting for women's rights. She played a major role in the passage of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 and has continued to lead the caucus in the fight against sexual assault in the military and the promotion of equal opportunity under Title IX. We are grateful for her commitment and dedication to improving the lives of women nationally and internationally.

On behalf of the Congressional Caucus for Women's Issues, we are proud to build on the momentum established by the dedicated leadership of Congresswomen Slaughter and Capito. Their invaluable perseverance on behalf of women has set an important legacy that the Caucus will build upon for years to come. Thank you for your outstanding service as Co- Chairs of the Women's Caucus.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to denounce the phony Social Security crisis that the President is trying to sell the American public. As the new Democratic Chair of the Women's Caucus, I am especially concerned because women are the first targets to be thrown off the lifeboat. Women account for 70 percent of all Social Security beneficiaries older than 85 years of age. Women depend more on Social Security because they often live longer than their spouses, anywhere from 7 to 10 years. Many have less retirement savings because they stopped working to raise their children and to take time out to take care of a family member.

In the community I represent in East Los Angeles and the San Gabriel Valley, there are nearly 60,000 Social Security beneficiaries. Many are disabled women, widows and wives who rely very heavily on their hard- earned monthly Social Security benefits.

Democrats believe that all American workers should get the benefits they paid into. We will fight to improve the Social Security system, not dismantle it. As one of my colleagues said, ``Let's not throw grandma out with the bath water.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 57, expressing the Sense of the U.S. House of Representatives that the European Union should not lift its embargo on the sale of arms to China.

After the 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre the European Union imposed a ban on arm sales to China. I support this embargo, as I believe it helps ensure peace in the region and deters China from the use of arms against Taiwan. In the world we live in we should strive to ensure peace, liberty and democracy. I feel strongly that the European Union's lifting of the arms embargo would be detrimental to the fragile peace that we are striving to maintain, and I am proud to join my colleagues in support of the embargo.

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to denounce the fake Social Security crisis that President Bush is trying to sell to the American public.

As the new Democratic Chair of the Women's Caucus, I am especially concerned because women and children are the first targets to be thrown off the lifeboat.

We expect women to raise families, support elderly family members and take care of children.

But, women lose more years of retirement savings when they stop working to raise kids or take care of parents.

Therefore, they depend more on Social Security when they retire. Social Security has been a strong program for its beneficiaries. In my district in East Los Angeles and the San Gabriel Valley in LA County, there are 59,525 Social Security beneficiaries who rely heavily on their hard-earned monthly Social Security benefits. The average Social Security benefit for these individuals living is $787 a month.

If we are looking at just retired workers alone, they only receive $540 a month. For many people, particularly Latinos and other minorities, this benefit is their only source of income. My district is very diverse. Sixty-two percent is Latino, and 18 percent is Asian. Forty-one percent of elderly Latinos have Social Security as their only means of income. Without Social Security, over half of America's Latino elderly would live in poverty. Social Security is especially important for minority women.

They will be left most vulnerable to the Republican privatization scheme because they

earn less on the dollar as to other women. Without Social Security, 61 percent of Latinas over the age of 65 would live below the poverty line. Social Security has been the most successful anti-poverty program perhaps ever to be undertaken. According to a report released today by the National Women's Law Center, the typical widow receives a benefit of $865 per month. I am frightened to think that Republicans want to strip women of their earned benefits simply because they live longer.

Without Social Security benefits, the poverty rate for unmarried women would be about 60 percent instead of the current 16 percent! But under the leading Republican privatization plan, the benefit would be only $476 per month. This amount is equal to only 65 percent of the poverty line! Women account for 70 percent of all Social Security beneficiaries older than 85. Women still earn less than men--73 cents to the dollar--and minority women face even larger disparities in wages.

Privatization means that women who are on the edge of poverty living in my district would be at the mercy of an unpredictable stock market. Without guaranteed benefits, these women would be forced to live day- to-day, just trying to put food on the table. These women would lose the ``security'' from Social Security! Democrats believe that all American workers should get the benefits they paid for.

We want to save, strengthen, and secure Social Security for the future generations. Our senior citizens and future generations should not be guinea pigs for a political experiment. Just like the non- existent weapons of mass destruction--you have been told a scary story by the Republican majority and President Bush. Let me assure you-- Social Security is not in a crisis. Democrats will fight to protect your earned benefits.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to represent the millions of American women who would be disproportionately hurt by privatizing Social Security.

First of all, women on average earn less than men. Full-time working women still receive only 73 cents to every dollar earned by a man. This means that women count on Social Security's progressive benefits structure as their primary retirement income more than men.

Women make up about 60 percent of Social Security beneficiaries, and on average live 6 to 8 years longer, so their savings run out sooner.

In my district, there are more than 10,700 households headed by women who are the guardians of their families. The average income in my district is about $41,000, and Social Security assures economic stability for women retirees. At the end of 2003, women's average monthly retirement benefit in my district was about $798, and the men's average benefit was about $1,039.

The gender disparities mean we must fight to protect women. Let us not call Social Security a crisis. Let us fix it so that everybody is treated equally and so that benefits are stabilized.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a great gentleman who has devoted a majority of his life to civil service--Joe Governale, who is retiring as Postmaster of Covina.

Born in Chicago, Mr. Governale received a Masters Degree in Psychology from Cal State Fullerton. Married to wife Judy, and proud father of two children, Mr. Governale was first employed in the Postal Service in 1964.

While on leave from the Postal Service, Mr. Governale was in the U.S. Navy as a Corpsman from 1966 to 1970. Mr. Governale served on the cruiser USS Canabera and then with the Marines during the Vietnam War.

After returning from Vietnam to his clerk job at the Covina Post Office, Mr. Governale found a new post office had been built while he was gone and within it, he found a new home. Within two years, Mr. Governale moved into management and was appointed to the position of Director of Human Resources in 1982. Mr. Governale was selected as the Postmaster of Baldwin Park in 1986, and is the longest serving Postmaster in the history of Covina. Mr. Governale also received his teaching credentials and has taught postal operations for many years to new supervisors.

Mr. Governale is a fan of the Chicago Bears and the White Sox, and his hobbies include video poker and reading. Mr. Governale plans to retire in Laughlin, Nevada, so he can enjoy time with his family.

Mr. Governale is a wonderful example of a person who dedicated his life to civil service. I am proud to recognize Mr. Joe Governale and his many years of work as a civil servant as he retires as Postmaster of Covina.