Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, this week is National Small Business Week, and the Small Business Administration is celebrating its 50th Anniversary. I would like to congratulate the Small Business Administration, its employees and all of its resource partners on this truly momentous occasion.

Created by the passage of the Small Business Act in 1953 during the Eisenhower administration, the SBA was charged to ``aid, counsel, assist and protect'' the interest of small businesses in this nation.

Mr. Speaker, the SBA has made tremendous strides following its original mandate over the past half century. According to the agency, nearly 20 million small firms have received either direct or indirect assistance over the past fifty years.

Small businesses are the engine that drives our nation's economy, generating over half of the nation's Gross Domestic Product (GDP), and the SBA plays a key part in ensuring the engine remains strong and viable, especially in tough economic times.

There are currently about 23 million small businesses in the United States, which represents 99.7 percent of all private sector employers. Small businesses also generate 60 to 80 percent of net new jobs annually.

American small businesses are extremely diverse. Women owned small businesses generated $819 billion in revenues, and employed more than 7 million workers in 1997, the last year such data is available. In that same year, 5.8 percent of small businesses were owned by Hispanic Americans, 4.4 percent by Asian Americans, and 4 percent by African Americans.

Small businesses also made up 97 percent of all identified exporters and produced 29 percent of the known export value in fiscal year 2001.

As the Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Tax, Finance and Exports, I am especially proud of the agency and its tireless efforts to help all small businesses.

Two weeks ago, I held a field hearing in my District, Long Beach, California, where a very distinguished group of panelists discussed the importance of small businesses to not only southern California but to the nation as well.

I was pleased to learn during the course of that hearing that the SBA Los Angeles District Office is the number one business lending office in the United States. Over the past three years, the office has provided $128 million in financing to 381 businesses in my home District.

I am sure that there are many more success stories nationwide about the hard work the SBA does on behalf of our nation's entrepreneurs, and I am sure that the SBA will be helping small businesses in their efforts to keep our economy strong for years to come.

Congratulations on 50 years of service to our small businesses.

Mr. Speaker, today marks the second year since one of the most devastating attacks occurred on United States soil in our history.

Many of us remember exactly where we were when we first received news of the two planes flying into the World Trade Center complex in the borough of Manhattan.

We also remember the unimaginably horrible sight of both towers crashing downward, and the residents of New York running for their very lives through the streets and over bridges leading away from the site.

On this day, we also remember the dedicated workers of the Pentagon who perished, and the brave men and women of United flight 93, who sacrificed their own lives to prevent another horrific incident.

This devastating act of terrorism has affected the lives of every single American living in this country today.

Thousands of Americans lost their lives on September 11. These were ordinary, hard working people, who had no knowledge that they would be on the front lines of a cowardly act that would forever represent a new battle, the ``war against terrorism.''

Mr. Speaker, America is a special place. Despite differences in race, culture, creed, and faith, we hold certain ideals close. Americans believe the words of the patriots who met at the Second Continental Congress, ``that certain truths are selfevident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.''

Americans believe that all people, in the words of Martin Luther King, Jr., ``will bow before the altars of God and be crowned triumphant over war and bloodshed, and nonviolent redemptive goodwill will proclaim the rule of the land.''

Finally, Mr. Speaker, Americans believe that we are one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Mr. Speaker, the war against terrorism continues to this day, but the resolve and spirit of the American people can never be defeated, our thirst for peace and democracy never quenched.

On this day, let us remember the victims, their families, and all who were touched by the tragic events of 2 years ago. God bless them all, and God bless America.

Mr. Chairman, I want to voice my vigorous opposition to the proposed legislation to implement a school voucher program in the District of Columbia.

We cannot in good conscience ask the cash-strapped schools in the District of Columbia to impose another layer of bureaucracy on its school system when positive changes are now underway to improve the quality of public education for the most needy of students. Already, the District is showing improvement through its 15 transformation schools which were created using the lowest performing schools attended by the city's poorest students, who have made significant gains in their Stanford 9 achievement scores. Also, the District has shown great success through its 42 charter schools which represent the largest number per capita in the nation. Instead of adding an unproven new program, scarce federal resources would be much better spent shoring up these two popular and proven education options. Why can't Members of Congress and local elected officials in the District focus on funding the programs which are working and are supported by most parents? We should not be in the business of funding risky ventures like school vouchers when public schools are being overlooked for funding. Furthermore, we should not authorize funding school vouchers here in our second home when Congress has already opposed vouchers in the rest of the country. The District of Columbia should not be used as a laboratory for an educational experiment that few if any Members would try in their home districts.

By approving the use of school vouchers here in the District, a competition will be set in motion between public and private schools fighting for the same pool of scarce federal education funding. Any new federal funding should be allocated to schools made accountable to the public--charter schools and the District's public schools. The three- sector approach in the Senate's companion bill would avoid making private schools accountable, and the addition of funding for public schools seems to be an afterthought in order to push the voucher legislation through. This intent is quite apparent through the Senate bill's attempt to authorize private school vouchers for five years while making only a one-time appropriation to public schools.

Given that the Government Accounting Office (GAO) conducted a study which indicated no difference in achievement levels between students attending public schools and those using vouchers to attend private schools, we would be seriously remiss in allowing vouchers to prevail.

If we care about changing the quality of the District's public schools to truly benefit all children, we must continue to support public schools with all available resources.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

Mr. Chairman, as a former elected official at the local level and knowing the importance of joint powers of authority, I rise to support the Jackson-Lee amendment.

I cannot understand why Houston should be held to a higher standard than any other city in this Nation. As a senior member on the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, I am cognizant of the fact that light rail is the driving force in cities across this country. It is important that light rail becomes part of the Houston intermodal transportation because of the rapid increase in population in Houston.

So we should not leave the fate of the Houston light rail system to the Houstonians and the stakeholders of Harris County? The people of Houston have been fighting for years to develop a light rail system that will help to reduce traffic congestion. We know the importance of reducing congestion now, and this is one of the reasons in the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure we are fighting to try to bring about light rail, because of the congestion and to maximize regional mobility and ensure adequate funding for transportation improvements to maintain Houston's status as an attractive place to live.

It is important that we look at cities like Houston in trying to move the congestion by bringing on light rail. This is why the Texas Metro Board has held public hearings to obtain the input of the voting public of Harris County in Houston, Texas. A referendum will be held on November 4, 2004, to cover the entire Houston Metropolitan Transit Authority service area.

Mr. Chairman, it is just absolutely unconscionable that one would try to circumvent Houston local authorities from having the authority to control their own fate in terms of light rail. I am adamant about this particular amendment, trying to be hijacked. I support the Jackson-Lee amendment.

I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas.

Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, to the contrary, local governments have tried to ensure and to maintain their local control, thereby not asking the Federal Government to intrude at all. In my experience as a mayor of a city, I know firsthand how joint powers of authority work independent of Federal Government, and this is the way it should be in Houston, as it is in other cities around the country.

Mr. Speaker, let me thank the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bell) and the distinguished gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis) for their input on this important bill. I would also like to recognize my colleague and friend who represents Long Beach with me, the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher), and my dear friend who served with me as co-chair of the Congressional Caucus for Women's Issues, the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert). All of us have come to honor Steve Horn.

Before I do that, let me congratulate also and be a part of the voices to congratulate Lance Armstrong who represents the best of America and has won his second championship in the Tour de France. We are all very honored that he is an American who represents us very well.

Mr. Speaker, it is an honor for me to offer the Stephen Horn Post Office Building Designation Act, H.R. 2309, today. The post office is located at 2300 Redondo Avenue in the city of Long Beach, in my district, in honor of our distinguished former colleague Steve Horn.

Before being elected to Congress, Steve Horn served in the world of academics. From 1970 to 1988, he served as the President of Cal State University Long Beach, and remained as a trustee and professor of political science at the university from 1988 to 1992. His distinguished academic career reads as follows: A Bachelor of Arts degree from Stanford University and an M.P.A. degree from Harvard University in Cambridge, and a Ph.D. from Stanford University as well.

From 1960 to 1966, Steve Horn first began to mix his academic prowess with his politically inclusive sensibilities, serving as a legislative assistant to former California Senator Thomas H. Kuchel. From 1966 to 1969 he continued his academic pursuits as a senior fellow at the prestigious Brookings Institute in Washington, D.C.

From 1992 until his retirement in 2002, Steve Horn was a colleague and friend to many of us in Congress, and he remains a friend to us. His pursuit of good public policy and fairness consistently crossed party lines. As a colleague on the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, it was my pleasure to serve with Steve Horn for 7 years, during which time we grappled with many challenges together, especially the 1998 transportation reauthorization bill, TEA-21.

I believe that I can speak safely for the members of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure in saying that his voice and perspective will be missed on our committee. The naming of this post office is a combination of Steve Horn's contribution as Congressman, former president of the Cal State University Long Beach, and as an honorable private citizen.

Specifically, the naming of this post office highlights Steve Horn's efforts to secure a separate ZIP Code for the city of Signal Hill. For years, Signal Hill city manager Ken Farfsing said the city and its 9,000 residents had had problems with higher insurance rates, misreported sales taxes affecting the city's revenue, and misapplied utility taxes by long-distance companies. Thanks to Steve Horn's tireless efforts, the city of Signal Hill finally received a separate ZIP Code in early 2002.

The length that Steve Horn went to secure a separate ZIP Code for Signal Hill is indicative of the passion and persistence he brought to his job as a Member of Congress. It is a great story. Some in Signal Hill might call it a great epic. It is worth repeating.

When Steve Horn came to Congress as Signal Hill's Representative in 1993, he made securing a ZIP Code for the city one of his top priorities. He met with city and Postal Service officials to try to address concerns raised by postal officials. In 1994, the Signal Hill City Council requested that the Long Beach postmaster place the Signal Hill Post Office on the 5-year capital improvement plan and that he complete the ZIP Code survey.

Early the next year, the Long Beach postmaster rejected Signal Hill's request, stating none of the existing facilities have the ability to house additional routes for Signal Hill. The city filed an appeal with regional headquarters, which was sent to the Postal Service Washington headquarters. A few months later, Postmaster General Runyon upheld the denial.

Postmaster General Runyon wrote Congressman Horn in June of 1995 stating, ``ZIP Code analysis for 20 years for code 908O4, 90806, and 90807 indicates that no additional ZIP Codes are required before 2014. The growth rate remains stable and the resultant density and mail volume will not require new ZIP Codes in the foreseeable future.'' However, Congressman Steve Horn met with the postmaster, who would not change his position.

This continued into 1996, as Postmaster General Runyon wrote letters to both Congressman Horn and Senator Barbara Boxer denying their request on behalf of the city of Signal Hill. In 1997, the Signal Hill City Council authorized a postal survey and retained the Economics Department of California State University Long Beach to review the Postal Service model. The completed survey found that 85.1 percent of residents supported a single ZIP Code. The survey was then sent to the postmaster and Congressman Horn wrote him as well, but again to no avail.

Frustrated with the lack of responsiveness on the part of the Postal Service, Steve Horn in 1998 introduced H.R. 4429, legislation requiring ZIP Codes for communities with 5,000 or more in population. In 2000, he introduced another bill, H.R. 3739, requiring single ZIP Codes for small cities split by multiple ZIP Codes. In that same year, he amended the Postal Service appropriation bill to require that the Postal Service report back by August 1 on the Signal Hill ZIP Code.

Finally, the Postal Service began to demonstrate some awareness of the problems created by the city of Signal Hill in being split into three Zip Codes. It began a study of the situation, and in August of 2000 began researching for a vacant property for the West Carrier Annex in the city. The next month, Congressman Horn, along with Signal Hill's mayor, Mike Noll, and City Manager Ken Farfsingm met with Long Beach Postmaster Jenkins and District Supervisor Shapiro to discuss the status of the annex.

In October, the Postal Service selected a site for the annex. Unfortunately, in March 2001, postal officials placed a hold on all capital projects. Six months later they indicated that all Postal Service projects would be indefinitely delayed due to the anthrax attacks that took place that fall.

At this point Congressman Horn met with the new Postmaster General to discuss the idea of using the existing postal facility in Signal Hill for the Signal Hill ZIP Code. In November 2001, the Postal Service mailed out a survey to residents completed the next January. Finally, in January 2002, with the completed survey showing two-thirds of the residents wanted a unified Signal Hill ZIP Code, the city got the good news it would receive the recognition desired for so long, its own ZIP Code.

This was vintage Congressman Steve Horn, passionate and persistent in making sure that this city, which deserved its ZIP Code, got it. Steve Horn's refusal to take no for an answer, his commitment to his constituents,

and his persuasiveness in pressing the argument with postal officials had enabled the city of Signal Hill to prevail.

I can think of no other appropriate recognition for Steve Horn than to name that post office after him. He is a rarity, Mr. Speaker, a bipartisan public servant. That is why I ask that this legislation receive prompt consideration and passage. I thank all of the gentlemen and gentlewomen who spoke on behalf of the Steve Horn Post Office designation.

Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 452, I was detained by constituents that precluded me from getting to the floor. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, I stand here with my colleagues tonight to talk about the need for affordable prescription drug coverage for women. Because women suffer more from chronic illnesses requiring medication than men do, they pay more out of pockets for medicine though their financial resources are often limited.

The proposed House bill would fail to offer meaningful prescription drug coverage to the millions of low-income women with incomes below the 135 percent poverty level who do not meet the requirements of asset tests. Also, the House bill would raise the amount of co-payments that our country's poorest women Medicare beneficiaries are forced to pay.

Unlike the House bill, the Senate proposal, while not perfect, would be far more helpful to elderly women who range from 74 to 160 percent of the poverty level. Under the House bill, the out-of-pocket costs paid by elderly women will still make it difficult for them to get their much-needed prescriptions filled. If the House bill is enacted, our struggling women seniors who are in greatest need of assistance will receive up to 40 percent fewer prescriptions than those seniors who are able to afford private insurance. Our elderly women, who are among our most vulnerable citizens, deserve far better treatment than this. It is critical that as Members of Congress, we help women and all seniors by expanding Medicare to offer a prescription drug benefit that is universal, affordable, dependable, and voluntary. We can do no less than to offer elderly women access to adequate healthcare that they can afford and easily access.

Our Republican colleagues are offering a plan that gives no real guarantees or assistance to those who need quality prescription drug coverage the most.

Furthermore, the House plan would force seniors to purchase their own private insurance, a tactic that will benefit insurance companies, and not seniors. This is a catastrophe we can avoid if we craft the right policy to benefit our elderly now. When it come to our elderly women, we know that:

Women make up 58 percent of the Medicare population at age 65, and 71 percent of the Medicare population at age 85.

Overall, elderly women have more chronic health problems than elderly men do.

On average, women live another 19 years after retirement, while men typically live another 15 years after retiring.

Due to the obstacles they face in enrolling, almost half of elderly women with incomes under the poverty limit are not enrolled in Medicare.

As compared to married women, widows are four times as likely, and divorced or single women are five times as likely to live in poverty upon retiring.

Many elderly women survive on fixed incomes. Over half of the older women age 65 and above earn less than $10,000 annually, and three out of four earn under $15,000 yearly. In contrast to elderly men, older women age 65 and above earned $14,820 as compared to $26,543 for men in the same age group.

Once retired, women earn less than men because:

Women tend to save less than men do throughout their lives which decreases their lifetime earnings.

Elderly women usually have smaller Social Security benefits and pension incomes than men do.

Minority women are much more likely to earn less and live in poverty than are White women. Even when they have similar educational backgrounds, minority women tend to earn less money and own fewer assets.

The sad fact is, the older and poorer a woman is, the higher her out- of-pocket health care costs will be, and the more help an elderly woman requires, the less likely she is to receive assistance. As a nation, though we are facing a great economic crisis, we are still obligated to provide assistance to our most needy citizens. Let us take good care of our elderly women and men by not enacting a prescription drug policy that will force them to choose between either buying food or paying for necessary medication.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to offer my support for H.R. 923, the Premier Certified Lenders Program Act of 2003.

Mr. Speaker, small business owners all over this nation have long been faced with a number of hurdles that limit their ability to be successful. Health care costs have risen at an astronomical rate, Federal regulations are being issued that establish competitive advantages for large firms, and, perhaps most importantly, access to capital is extremely limited.

In an attempt to address concerns about small business financing issues, 3 years ago Congress established the Premier Certified Lenders Program (PCLP) as a permanent Small Business Administration program.

The PCLP delegates substantial authority and autonomy to selected Certified Development Companies (CDCs) participating in the Small Business Administration's 504 Loan Program to offer long-term, fixed- rate financing for major fixed assets such as land and buildings.

My district is home to a CDC, the Long Beach Area Certified Development Corporation, and it serves the Cities of Long Beach, Signal Hill and Southern Los Angeles County. Ms. Regina Grant Peterson does an excellent job in reaching out to my constituents, doing all she can to promote economic development in the community.

Currently, because of antiquated laws, CDCs participating in the PCLP must keep financial reserves in excess of what is actually necessary to safeguard against potential losses, and are not allowed to withdraw from these reserves until loans are paid in full.

This severely limits the lending potential of these entities, costing small businesses nationwide millions of dollars in unused capital.

H.R. 923 addresses this issue by allowing participating lenders to withdraw from their loan loss reserves attributable to the payment of principal on outstanding loans.

In addition, the legislation would also create a Bureau of Lender Oversight within SBA that will oversee the calculation of loan loss reserves, thereby insuring that government monies are used appropriately.

Mr. Speaker, as a Ranking Member of the Small Business Committee, I enthusiastically support this measure, and I support its swift passage.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer an amendment to the Homeland Security Appropriations Act.

This germane amendment would direct the Secretary of Homeland Security, in conjunction with the appropriate federal agencies, such as the Federal Transit Administration, to determine the percentage of frontline transit employees who have received training in emergency preparedness and response training.

This amendment would have also directed the Secretary of Homeland Security is to Report to Congress no later than 90 days after enactment of this legislation the percentage of ``frontline transit employees'' who have received emergency preparedness and response training.

In addition, the Secretary of Homeland Security would coordinate with the appropriate federal agencies such as the Federal Transit Administration and provide recommendations on what training on emergency preparedness and response training shall be provided to ``frontline transit employees.''

Mr. Chairman this amendment would have provided this new agency with guidance for years to come.

Understandably, we are all grappling with setting priorities and funding levels for new security programs and emerging threats.

By establishing a baseline of what security training our transit workforce needs, it will assist us in establishing priorities and funding levels in future years.

But make no mistake about the importance of establishing a comprehensive transit security-training program for our nation's frontline transit employee workforce.

We need to start now in order to properly plan for the future.

For years, governments around the world have recognized that public transportation is a major terrorist target.

Until 9/11 the United States has been largely spared the kinds of terrorist campaigns waged against public surface transportation.

However, we cannot wait for a tragedy to happen to prompt us to address our vulnerabilities. We must act now!

An October 2001 study released by the Mineta Institute, Protecting Public Surface Transportation Against Terrorism and Serious Crime: An Executive Overview cites that between 1920 and 2000 there have been approximately 900 terrorist attacks and other significant criminal incidents involving public surface transportation systems.

However, all but 14 of these attacks occurred after 1970, the year that marks the beginning of modern terrorism.

Attacks against transportation and transportation infrastructures accounted for 42 percent of all international terrorist attacks, according to the most recent statistics provided by the USDOT Office of Intelligence and Security in 1998.

Again, Mr. Chairman, I offer my statement for the Record.

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to talk about port security and the critical importance that increased funding for port security would have for my region of Long Beach and Los Angeles and to the American people.

Mr. Speaker, last night I appeared before the Committee on Rules about an amendment that would provide funding for container security and port security. Regrettably, this amendment was not made in order. If my amendment had been made in order, this germane amendment would designate $20 million to establish a secure container and safe mobility pilot program. Further, this project would be carried out at the Nation's port with the highest volume of container traffic. This program would work in conjunction with existing city and local infrastructure in developing fast, efficient, effective and secure ways to move containers through the port complex and through surrounding cities and communities throughout the Nation.

We recognize that not all containers that come into our country are inspected. We must provide resources to port security initiatives that help us utilize our existing infrastructure while making sure that our communities that receive these containers are protected. A program like this will set the standard for similar communities around the Nation that provide the infrastructure that move our Nation's goods out of the Nation and keep our economy moving forward.

Long Beach and Los Angeles, our port complex, the largest in the country and the third largest in the world, receive 45 percent of the Nation's containers. These ports are a vital economic link to the rest of the Nation. Eighty percent of the goods that come into the country from the Pacific rim comes into our ports. If these ports in the communities that support this supply chain of goods movement were ever threatened or damaged, our economy would be stalled.

In October of 2002 our Nation witnessed firsthand what happened to our economy when our ports are not moving goods out of the country. The lockout that occurred at the western ports served as a grim reminder of just how interconnected and how dependent we are on one another in moving our Nation's goods. The lockout that occurred at the western ports cost the U.S. economy an estimated $1 billion a day.

We must provide support and precious resources to our ports to ensure that they are secure. In addition, we must provide security to the communities that are connected and support our ports. We cannot view port security as merely inside the gates. Ports are a part of our communities. The resources that we provide for port security also provide security for our Nation's communities.

Mr. Speaker, I would have offered this amendment, and I offer this statement for the Record.

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 279, I would have voted ``no''; Nos. 280, 281, 282, 283, I would have voted ``yea.'' I was detained at the airport unable to get here for hours due to inclimate weather and traffic jam and congestion.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to engage the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) in a colloquy.

As the senior member on the Subcommittee on Aviation from California, I wish to bring to the attention of this body the rapidly developing public air travel access and passenger capacity needs at certain airports across the country.

With national growing capacity needs and growth issues, airports must address attendant safety factors. In 2002, Long Beach Airport was the fastest-growing commercial airport in the country at an annual growth rate of 300 percent. Therefore, I respectfully request that the Federal Aviation Administration and Congress take under advisement such capacity and growth issues and give appropriate consideration in awarding grants under the Airport Improvement Program for airports that are experiencing major growth. Specifically, I ask the FAA to take under strong consideration the needs for runway rehabilitation in these airports across the country that are impacted by rapid growth.

I ask the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), the ranking member, we as members of the Subcommittee on Aviation and the full committee have worked hard to produce an aviation reauthorization bill that will sustain growth and enhance capacity as well as address ongoing safety needs. Providing much-needed resources to these growing airports across the country is within the principle and spirit of this aviation reauthorization bill.

I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.

(Mr. OBERSTAR asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, today I want to speak in favor of renaming the U.S. Postal Service office in Paia, Hawaii the ``Patsy Takemoto Mink Post Office Building.'' We do this in honor of the legacy of a pioneering woman and one of the most distinguished and honorable Members of the House of Representatives, my colleague and my friend-- Congresswoman Patsy Mink. I am so pleased to have had an opportunity to know her and serve with her.

Without Patsy's leadership, the passage of the hallmark Title IX of the Federal Education Act of 1972 would never have come to pass. Thanks to Patsy's hard work, Title IX created

opportunities for women and girls in athletics and all operations of college and university programs.

I shall remember her as a giant who spoke in gentle but very fierce and deliberate tones, and whose stature allowed her to tower above the crowds. Patsy challenged us all the time with the question ``Does it matter whether women are involved in politics?'' Her career exemplifies the answer. Her voice is now stilled, but her ideals and the challenges she left for us will forever be etched in our memory.

Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise today to express my support for Asian Pacific American Heritage Month. Made possible through an act of the United States Congress in 1978, Asian Pacific American Heritage Week was then expanded into a month long celebration in 1992. The month of May was appropriately chosen to commemorate the arrival of the first Japanese immigrants to the United States and the completion of the transcontinental railroad. As we celebrate the 25th year, this May is an excellent opportunity for all Americans to celebrate, honor and reflect on the many accomplishments and contributions of the Asian Pacific American community.

From the transcontinental railroad to the halls of Congress, Asian Pacific Americans have played a major role in the development of our nation with an increasing presence in the Federal government. I would like to acknowledge the many accomplished leaders of Asian descent currently serving our country. In the President's Cabinet alone, we have two prominent leaders, Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao and Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta, the first Asian Pacific American to serve in the President's Cabinet. Congressman Bob Matsui, Chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, is the first Asian Pacific American to serve in the House Democratic leadership. Washington Governor Gary Locke, Chair of the Democratic Governors Association, is the first Asian Pacific American to deliver the Democratic response to the President's State of the Union Address.

And of course, one cannot have a discussion about leadership within the Asian Pacific American community without reflecting on the career and accomplishments of my dear friend, the late Congresswoman Patsy Mink. We must continue on in this tradition by encouraging more Asian Pacific Americans to forge ahead in non-traditional sectors as my friend Patsy Mink did. Patsy was a true trailblazer. She was the first Asian Pacific American woman to practice law in Hawaii and the first woman of color elected to Congress. The APA community has come far from its humble beginnings, but there is still much work we need to do.

While APAs as a whole have flourished in the United States, there are still challenges facing certain segments of the community. Recent immigrants and refugees are still working to achieve the American dream. My district is home to Southeast Asian and Pacific Islander populations whose challenges include post-war stress and inadequate job skills. I urge my colleagues not to forget those who are struggling to overcome language and cultural barriers, as well as discrimination.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to introduce legislation that will ensure the Asian Pacific American community continues to thrive. In the 108th Congress, I have introduced the following bills:

H.R. 1984, the Filipino Veterans Fairness Act, provides veteran benefits to the Filipino veterans who fought side by side with American soldiers during World War II. In addition to providing desperately needed health care to veterans, this bill calls for home loan assistance for U.S. based Filipino veterans, educational assistance for U.S. and Philippine based dependents, vocational rehabilitation, and employment services, job counseling, training, and placement services for U.S. based veterans.

H.R. 1486 urges the Secretary of Education to commission a study to examine ways to increase the graduation rate for Native American and Native Hawaiian secondary school students, as well as for students residing in American Samoa, the Northern Mariana Islands, and Guam.

H.R. 1983, the Amerasian Justice Act, will amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to facilitate the immigration to the United States of children born in the Philippines or Japan who were fathered by United States citizens. There are now more than 50,000 Amerasian children in the Philippines and 6,000 Amerasian children in Japan burdened by social stigma and psychological stress which affect viable opportunities for employment, education or family life.

H. Con. Res. 83 honors the victims of the Cambodian genocide that took place between 1975 and 1979, and pays tribute to the survivors who made their way to the United States. It also expresses the sense of Congress's commitment to pursue justice for the victims.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to represent a district that reflects America's greatest strength--our rich cultural diversity. As we commemorate May as Asian Pacific American Heritage Month, we must celebrate the culture, traditions and achievements of Asian Pacific Americans, but we must also reflect on how to meet the challenges that will face the community in years to come.

Mr. Speaker, today I come before you to talk about how much unemployed Americans across the country will be affected when the Temporary Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 2002, TEUC, runs out at the end of this month. We all know how severely the current economic downturn has impacted not only our districts, but our States overall. In my own State of California, the unemployment rate was 6.7 percent in 2002, while the Nation's unemployment rate for the same time period was 5.8 percent. California had 1.2 million unemployed residents in 2002, leaving it tied for 46th place with the worst unemployment ranking among the 50 States and the District of Columbia. As of March 2003, the State's unemployment rate had risen to 6.8 percent, which remains higher than the national average of 5.8 percent.

With our country's ongoing economic uncertainty, it is incumbent upon us to provide all methods of support to citizens who are searching for work nationwide.

With upward of 2.7 million private sector jobs lost during the past 2 years in contrast to 1.3 million private sector jobs disappearing in the early 1990s, we must clearly provide all available resources to unemployed Americans.

If we do not act quickly, some 80,000 Americans who are out of work will be unable to receive extended unemployment benefits each week unless we act and extend the current Temporary Extended Unemployment Compensation Program. If we delay further action, as of June 1 up to 2 million unemployed workers could be denied extended benefits over the next 6 months. This is on top of the 1 million out-of-work Americans who have already exhausted their Federal extended benefits.

Given that our economy was declared to be in recession as of March 2001, and with the additional decline caused by the events of September 11, more people are losing their jobs, and experience difficulty finding other work in order to sustain their families and themselves. We are facing new, unprecedented economic challenges, and the assistance we offer to those who are unemployed must meet their needs. An extended benefits program was made available to the unemployed for 27 months during the recession of the early 1990s, and unemployed workers received from 20 to 26 weeks' worth of benefits. Now, the extended benefits program is scheduled to expire after only 15 months, and it offers only 13 weeks of benefits in a select number of States. We spent $28.5 billion to help unemployed workers a decade ago, as opposed to spending $16 billion on extended benefits for the unemployed today.

The statistics we face regarding unemployment today are grim. The Department of Labor's Job Openings and Labor Turnover report indicates that there are now more than three unemployed workers for every job opening. Many individuals and families rely solely on unemployment benefits to support themselves. With the average length of unemployment now stretching out to 19.6 weeks, we are facing a 20-year high in terms of the numbers of Americans who are seeking employment. At this time, the percentage of people who have exhausted their standard unemployment benefits stands at 43 percent over the past several months, which is a record high. Compounding that fact, the number of long-term unemployed individuals out of work for more than 6 months has tripled over the last 3 years from 596,000 in 2000 to 1.9 million as of last month.

We are facing sobering statistics in a difficult economic climate, and tough choices must be made. As we move forward in making decisions, let us be mindful of the women, men and children who are in greatest need at this time.