Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the month of October as Domestic Violence Awareness Month. Domestic Violence Awareness Month is a month-long project dedicated to addressing the victimization of men, women, and children in our nation and raising awareness of the devastating impact of domestic violence. This month, we honor the survivors of domestic violence, whose struggles and successes continue to inspire us all as we rededicate ourselves to ending domestic violence in our communities.

Domestic violence touches the lives of Americans of every background and circumstance and affects every sector of our society. It can be defined as a pattern of behavior in any relationship that is used to gain or maintain power and control over an intimate partner. Abuse can be physical, emotional, sexual, or behavior used to coerce, threaten or humiliate another person.

When it comes to domestic violence, there is no standard victim. It affects people from all walks of life, and individuals of every race, ethnicity, religion, gender, and socioeconomic background. Domestic violence is not restricted; it can happen to any couple, homosexual or heterosexual, whether they are married, living together, or dating.

Mr. Speaker, despite the progress and achievements we have made in the recent past, there is still so much more to do. It is time to put an end to this devastating crime. Far too many families in this nation are affected by domestic violence. It is a growing epidemic affecting local, national and international communities alike.

In the United States, one in four women and one in thirteen men will be the victim of domestic violence at some point in his or her lifetime and over 3.3 million children witness domestic violence each year. Further, domestic violence can also act as a precursor to more serious crimes. In 80% of intimate party homicides, regardless of which partner was killed, domestic violence was present during the relationship prior to the killing. We must remember that these victims are not statistics, but people.

Mr. Speaker, victims of violence often suffer in silence, with limited options, not knowing where to turn for support and guidance. We need to break this silence. Local domestic violence agencies, shelters, victim services providing legal, emotional, and medical support are vital to helping victims and their families heal. To effectively respond to domestic violence, we must support efforts to help expand these services and to continue to foster awareness.

The Recovery Act passed by Congress in 2009 and signed by President Obama provided a total of $225 million to the Office of Violence against Women for grant funding for programs which expands efforts to curtail domestic violence.

These vital funds help communities develop and enhance strategies to curb domestic violence, enhance services to people victimized by domestic violence, and work in cooperation to develop education and prevention strategies directed towards issues of domestic violence. Through knowledge, action and awareness we can take the necessary steps forward to reduce the prevalence of violence in our communities.

In addition, as part of the Affordable Care Act, women will receive free preventative care, including domestic violence screenings and counseling as well as ensure that insurance companies may no longer classify domestic violence victims as people with pre-existing conditions.

This month, let us recommit ourselves to ending domestic violence in our communities. We have a responsibility to continue to broaden our efforts to end violence against men, women and children. But we cannot solve this crisis alone. We must work together to create support, expand resources and eliminate barriers for victims of domestic violence. Stopping domestic violence means saving lives.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of Domestic Violence Awareness Month. I urge all Americans to take time this month to honor domestic violence survivors, applaud their strength and courage, and find out what you can do to help prevent domestic violence in your community.

I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, my amendment is intended to strike the provision that reduces the amount of funding to implement the Diesel Emissions Reduction program.

Five years ago, Congress passed the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act as a part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. The program was authorized at $200 million per year for 5 years. In 2011, the Congress acted responsibly, and in light of our fiscal crisis situation, we reduced that amount by a hundred million per year.

This amendment brings into question whether it makes sense to reduce a proven successful program that is not increasing regulations, as my former colleague just mentioned, but in fact is helping companies to be able to meet those regulations in a cost-effective way.

DERA has helped fund more than 360 retrofit projects to date, which has reduced well over 1.6 million tons of emissions and provided more than $4 billion in public health benefits while employing thousands of workers who manufacture, sell, and repair diesel vehicles and their components in each of our States.

Recognizing today's budgetary challenges, industry, environmental, and public sector representatives support the return of full-year 2008 funding levels for DERA, or $50 million for 2012.

The United States relies upon diesel power to transport commuters, tourists, and students, harvest our crops, build infrastructure, and move our freight. New clean diesel technology is reaching near zero emissions but fleet turnover will take us many more years to come. Emissions from older diesel vehicles and equipment can be reduced, and we can help to make that happen.

Some of our program results have been 119 projects affecting more than 14,000 diesel-powered vehicles and equipment, new State clean diesel grant programs in over 50 States, 2,200 tons of particulate matter emissions reduced, 580 million benefits to health, and--this is a very important one--3.2 million gallons of fuel that has been saved per year by implementing this program.

This is why in the last Congress I introduced legislation that extended DERA for 5 more years. The legislation received bipartisan support on both sides of the aisle and was signed by the President.

In February during debate on H.R. 1, there was an amendment put forward by a Representative on the other side of the aisle that would have eliminated full funding for DERA. The amendment in the continuing resolution at that time was soundly defeated by both of us, both sides of the aisle, 352 Members. In fact, the chairman of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee, Mr. Simpson, called the cuts to DERA--and I'm talking about my colleague from the other side--the wrong choice. I'm here to present that this cut is still the wrong choice.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I find it interesting that the gentleman would say that this might be irresponsible. What I heard of the comments was I didn't talk about the legislation within itself. We're talking about the amendment of how this is going to be paid for. And so the question before the House is going to be, is it appropriate to take additional funds to use DERA as the whipping boy time and time again for a program that is helping what my colleague from the other side is saying?

I would actually say that DERA is responsible. What's irresponsible is continuing to put the health of Americans in jeopardy. I will repeat the quote for my colleagues from the chairman of the Interior, Environment and Related Agencies, Mr. Simpson. He called the cuts to DERA ``the wrong choice.'' We have already been responsible, and DERA has already paid its fair share, and it's being cut as other programs have been cut. The question is, is it right to continue to deplete this program?

I reserve the balance of my time.

Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, in closing, I would say, I think I've said twice now, the issue that we have before us is the question of this amendment whether DERA is the appropriate funding source that would be considered for the offset. That's the question that we have before us.

It's interesting that Mr. Whitfield himself has benefited from this program. In Kentucky, the construction ports utilized $1.16 million to retrofit 73 pieces of nonroad construction equipment. Also, the Kentucky Association General Contractors benefited from retrofitting 87 pieces of equipment. I would say to you it's irresponsible to have the American public driving on our highways and roads and going through our airports breathing this air.

What I've reached out to the other side is that it's important. We're talking about EPA regulations. Why would we reduce funding of a program that helps companies to meet the regulations? It's counterintuitive and it doesn't make sense.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' for the Richardson amendment; and the Richardson amendment is intended for exactly that, to eliminate cutting this program.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Republic of China, also known as Taiwan, which will occur on October 10, 2011.

On October 10, 1911, revolutionaries led by Dr. Sun Yat-sen launched an uprising in Taiwan to overturn dynastic rule that prevailed in China for over two thousand years. The Provisional Government of the Republic of China was established, declaring the Republic of China (ROC) an independent and sovereign state and the first republic in Asia. Dr. Sun Yat-sen served as their first president. October 10th is now celebrated annually as ROC's national day, also known as ``Double Ten Day.''

In honor of the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Republic of China, we remember and celebrate the struggles the Republic of China faced in order to become a democratic republic state. We also acknowledge Dr. Sun Yat-sen's dedication to the principles of nationalism, democracy and the people's livelihood. Since its founding nearly a century ago, the Republic of China has undergone tremendous transformations and has matured into a free-market, multi-party democracy that plays key roles in the global economy and in maintaining regional peace and stability.

As a proud member of the Congressional Taiwan Caucus, I have had the privilege to travel to Taiwan this past May as part of a bipartisan delegation. I had the pleasure of meeting President Ma Ying-jeou and other government officials. I was strongly encouraged by their commitment to maintaining strong ties with the United States.

As we celebrate Taiwan's progress and development during the past century, we must also applaud their commitment to the ideals of freedom and democracy. I would like to congratulate the people of Taiwan for continuing in the traditions of Sun Yat-sen and maintaining the vibrant democracy that is a model for the entire world.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in honoring the Republic of China on the 100th anniversary of its founding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the 685,000 workers of the United States Postal Service who are facing a very devastating future without our action. If Congress doesn't act now, we could potentially lose 120,000 jobs, imagine that, that are in jeopardy today.

The United States Postal Service offers a very affordable system, but right now they are in jeopardy. Why? Because back in 2006, they were, I would say, in a discriminating way, required to pay $5.5 billion in overcharge into benefits that are not incurred at this time. Based on long-term projections, they have an estimated surplus--imagine that in this time--of $55 billion to $75 billion. Without this mandate, the USPS would actually have a $611 million benefit that could help out in this tough economy.

Mr. Speaker, there are 685,000 workers who are not at fault for this requirement, and this $5 billion requirement needs to stop now so our postal service can continue.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the 685,000 workers of the United States Postal Service (USPS), who face a devastating future which may close thousands of post offices, eliminate hundreds of mail processing facilities, lay off 120,000 of their colleagues, cut their pay, and end their collective bargaining rights.

Each day, the USPS processes an average of 584 million pieces of mail and delivers to 146 million addresses. In my home State of California alone, there are a total of 38,000 active and retired letter carriers.

These employees are fixtures within their communities and are some of the most dedicated, hardworking people out there. That is why I have been a strong advocate for letter carriers throughout my career in public service.

The United States Postal Service offers the most affordable postage in the industrialized world, while being able to sustain efficient delivery schedules at no expense to the taxpayer.

Established in 1775, the Postal Service and the thousands of families who depend on it now face an unprecedented crisis.

Since 2006, an unsustainable retiree healthcare system has saddled the USPS with a $5.5 billion overcharge to be paid in full at the beginning of every year. Based on longterm projections which are routinely called into question, this fund has established an enormous, unused surplus, estimated by the Postal Regulatory Commission and the Inspector General of the Postal Service to be between $55-75 billion.

No other Federal agency or private business is forced to pre-fund retiree health benefits in this manner. Since it is not funded by taxpayers, this requirement puts the USPS at a distinct competitive disadvantage. Fixing this problem would allow the Postal Service to compete more effectively with the private sector and return to profitability.

Without this mandate, the USPS would have actually been profitable to the tune of $611 million over the last 4 years, saving its $15 billion line of credit from the U.S. Treasury to ride out the bad economy. Instead, the entire agency, which has not taken taxpayer funds for 30 years, is facing default. Its line of credit is nearly exhausted.

Mr. Speaker, the real financial struggles at USPS do not stem from the cost of labor, but from the 2006 congressional mandate requiring the USPS to pre-fund future retiree benefits.

Unfortunately, House Republicans are bent on destroying the Postal Service as we know it and using this crisis as an opportunity to weaken collective bargaining rights.

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee conducted a hearing in April entitled: ``Are Postal Workforce Costs Sustainable?'' Led by Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, this hearing was held to investigate a recent agreement between the USPS and the American Postal Workers Union.

Chairman Issa's decision to hold a hearing to scrutinize and interfere with the collective bargaining process represents a dangerous precedent that could lead to more GOP interference in labor-management agreements.

In June, Chairman Issa proposed H.R. 2309, the Postal Reform Act of 2011, which would establish a ``solvency authority'' with the power to unilaterally cut wages, abolish benefits, and end protection against unfair layoffs. It orders $1 billion worth of post office closures in the first year and another $1 billion worth of facility closures in the second year. It also ends Saturday deliveries.

Mr. Speaker, 6-day delivery is an important service that the USPS provides to the American people and is vital to its long-term sustainability. Ending Saturday deliveries reduces incentive for the American people to send mail through USPS and would lead to more jobs lost and larger reductions in service.

If Saturday delivery ends, it is possible that 80,000 full- and part- time jobs could be eliminated. At a time when we are still recovering from the worst economic recession since the Great Depression, now is not the time to put thousands of jobs in jeopardy.

The USPS estimates that cutting deliveries on Saturday will cut costs by 5 percent, but will slash mail delivery by 17 percent. Clearly the money saved by eliminating Saturday delivery is negligible and does not justify the lapse in efficiency and the loss of jobs that would certainly follow.

Reducing mail delivery service to 5 days a week would cause delays in the delivery of mail and would inevitably lead to increased costs due to the overtime Postal Service workers will be forced to endure in order to handle the backlog of mail. It is also vital for seniors who depend on mail-order prescription drugs and small businesses that need Saturday delivery to meet payroll.

Most importantly, ending Saturday service will remove the Postal Service's key strategic advantage over its competitors and result in a massive loss of revenue for the program.

We can't allow House Republicans to pursue an agenda that threatens the wellbeing of thousands of working families in California and across the Nation. They want to turn back the clock on the progress that has been made over the last century to ensure that American workers have the right to organize and demand fair wages and benefits.

We cannot stand by while thousands of American workers lose their jobs, and House Democrats are putting forth solutions that will take immediate steps to end this crisis without cutting jobs or resorting to taxpayer funded bailouts.

Take for instance H.R. 1351, the United States Postal Service Obligation Recalculation and Restoration Act of 2011, which would realign the Postal Service's retiree health prefunding schedule to a larger time period consistent with what the Postal Service can afford. It would do this by first establishing the exact size of the surplus and then transferring it to the Postal Service Retiree Health Benefits Fund where it belongs.

Furthermore, when the Post Office Department became the Postal Service in 1971, employees who belonged to the Federal pension fund started contributing to the new Postal Service. For employees who worked for both the Post Office Department and the Postal Service, the Federal and the postal pension funds shared responsibility. However, the Federal fund paid for retirements based on 1971 salaries, not final salaries. In essence, the Federal fund collected full contributions, but paid only partial benefits. The USPS was shortchanged $75 billion as a result of this error.

H.R. 1351 takes necessary steps to correct this by altering the methodology used to determine the allocation of costs for retirement benefits between the Federal government and the USPS. By making these changes, Congress

has the ability to significantly help the USPS cover its expected $238 billion shortfall for the next decade.

Now more than ever we must fight to preserve the legacy of the letter carrier and promote the value of the services that the workers of the United States Postal Service provide to millions of Americans every day.

H.R. 1351 is supported by the National Association of Letter Carriers, the National Association of Postal Supervisors, the American Postal Workers Union, the National Rural Letter Carriers' Association and the National Postal Mail Handlers Union. Advocating for working people is very personal and important to me. You see, you are looking at a Member of Congress who had the opportunity to have a mother who was part of a bargaining unit, who was a member of a union.

She had an opportunity to have someone advocate on behalf of not only herself, but her two daughters as well. And because my mother had that support, she was able to send her daughters to good schools, she was able to put braces on our teeth, and she was able to ensure that, yes, that little girl back in Los Angeles, California, would have an opportunity to one day become a Member of Congress.

Now more than ever, postal workers, teachers, firefighters, police officers and all other public employees must stand together to protect their jobs and their families, in California and across America.

Mr. Speaker, the alternative to H.R. 1351 is a violent downgrade of Postal Service operations which would cost tens of thousands of jobs immediately. Between their recent willingness to hold the nation's economy hostage for spending cuts and their attacks on worker's rights in Wisconsin, it appears that House Republicans would risk a total shutdown of the Postal Service if it meant further weakening the rights of public sector unions.

That is why I stand with 192 of my colleagues in our support for the thousands who play an essential role in connecting our people and building our communities. We cannot afford to lose so many jobs and hard-won benefits by failing to act on a common sense fix to an immediate crisis.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2887 Surface and Air Transportation Programs Extension Act of 2011. When I came to Congress I fought to become a member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee because I know the importance of these issues for the people of the California 37th district as well as every American. Transportation is an issue that affects virtually every American every day and should never be put on the backburner.

H.R. 2887 will ensure that thousands of workers stay on the job and critical infrastructure projects do not come to a halt. Although I would much rather see a bill that reauthorizes our surface transportation and FAA programs long term, this bill will give the time we need to craft bipartisan long term bills. This bill extends the FAA and Surface Transportation reauthorization at the current level which is the lowest we should go. Not extending these programs would result in over 164,000 jobs lost in California infrastructure jobs alone. We have to look no further than August to see what happens when this Congress fails to act on reauthorizing these programs. Nearly, 90,000 jobs were put in jeopardy, over 3,600 FAA experts furloughed, $11 billion in contracts in limbo, and millions of dollars were lost. We have seen what shutting down can do--now we should see what investing can do.

Reports from engineers to reports from truck drivers outline the unacceptable current state of our deteriorating transportation system and have called for an immediate investment. As a country we waste billions of dollars every year with unnecessary delays due to a crumbling and over-congested surface transportation system. We must simplify our transportation programs and focus on a performance based system. We must also make the difficult choices about how these programs get funded and avoid having to continuously path the highway trust fund.

I have introduced several pieces of legislation that take a commonsense approach to these reoccurring problems. It provides solutions like strengthening Title VI so that projects are not delayed and redesigned when they over look low income and minority based communities. Establishing a Freight Corridors of National Significance Program will improve the efficiency, operation, and security of the national transportation system to move freight by prioritizing, investing, and promoting partnerships that advance interstate and foreign commerce, promote economic competitiveness, job creation, and improve the mobility of goods. Finally, with the growing number of states with strong environmental controls, we should make every effort to eliminate duplicative procedures that delay projects, while maintaining environmental safeguards.

I urge my colleagues to support this clean extension of these two critical programs so we can get back to work on a long term full reauthorization. I look forward to working with Chairman Mica and Ranking member Rahall in the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee to develop these common sense ideas that will create jobs and rebuild our infrastructure.

Mr. Speaker, as we approach the tenth anniversary of one of the darkest days in American history, I would like to use my time to remember those we've lost, reflect on the lessons we've learned, and consider what we can do as a nation to ensure that an attack of this magnitude never occurs on American soil again.

Mr. Speaker, as America helplessly watched the terrifying images of thick clouds of grey smoke rising from the World Trade Center towers in New York and the Pentagon in Washington, emotions of shock, anger, fear, and tremendous sadness washed over the body politic. Never having experienced an attack of this magnitude on American soil before, the events which unfolded on 9/11 engendered a profound shift in the way we conceptualize national security and left an indelible impact on the psyche of every American citizen. This was a day that would have a profound impact on the way every American lives, and would shift a large amount of our country's focus and resources toward a new challenge: the Global War on Terror.

In the days after the 9/11 attacks, we were introduced to a man named Osama bin Laden and the organization he led, al-Qaeda. These previously esoteric monikers became ubiquitous terms synonymous with hate, terror, and anger. Yet, despite the dastardly events that unfolded on that day ten years ago, tales of selfless acts of heroism and tremendous bravery in the face of evil--indicative of the American spirit--made us proud and provided a ray of hope in the fog of uncertainty.

Ten years later, it is important to reflect on the lessons we learned from those brave men, women and children who were unjustly taken from us that day. My heart still aches for all 2,819 people we lost in the attacks, including the 343 firefighters and paramedics, 60 police officers, and those on board United Airlines 93, American Airlines 77, American Airlines 11, and United Airlines 175. We remember the bravery of the PDNY and NYPD first responders who courageously ran up the World Trade Center towers, while thousands of others rapidly evacuated. We also remember the remarkable story of those on United 93 who attempted to regain control of the cockpit after their flight had been hijacked by a group of terrorists that pointed the aircraft in the direction of the building where I currently stand.

I would also like to remember those who still suffer, whose hearts still ache over the loss of so many innocent and interrupted lives. My heart goes out to the 3,051 children who lost a parent, and to the spouses, parents and relatives of the victims. Just as we promised shortly after the attacks, we will never forget.

In the days and months following 9/11, we saw the true strength of the American people. It was during these times that people were able to momentarily suspend all political, regional, ethnic, and economic divisions to mourn and seek hope in one another. We healed as a Nation; we grew as a Nation. The petty differences that we so often magnify in our society were put aside and we focused on what we had to do to keep our country moving forward in the face of such adversity.

In the decade since 9/11--thanks to American vigilance, resilience, and resolve--al-Qaeda has been unsuccessful in carrying-out another attack on our Nation's soil. Several plots by would-be terrorists trained by al-Qaeda have been foiled by our Nation's intelligence agencies and local law enforcement, including a 2009 plot to bomb New York City's subway and a 2010 plot to place explosive devices on cargo planes entering the U.S.

Our military campaign in Afghanistan successfully overthrew the tyrannical Taliban and significantly hampered the power and mobility of al-Qaeda and its sympathizers. After years of dedicated service by the brave men and women who put country above self in our armed forces, America is safer and Afghanistan is now a fledgling democratic society. However, these accomplishments came with a price. Since 2011, the U.S. has spent over $1.2 trillion on Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom. We also paid for these wars with the lives of 6,026 of our bravest young men and women who made the ultimate sacrifice in defense of our country. In my district, we suffered the loss of 12 remarkable servicemen. We remember Long Beach residents: Pfc. Stephen A. Castellano; Sgt. 1st Class Randy D. Collins; Sgt. Anthony J. Davis, Jr.; Sgt. Israel Garcia; Pvt. Ernesto R. Guerra; Pfc. Lyndon A. Marcus, Jr.; Spec. Roberto L. Martinez Salazar; Spec. Astor A. Sunsin-Pineda; Pfc. David T. Toomalatai; Pfc. George D. Torres; and Staff Sgt. Joshua Whitaker, as well as Carson resident Pfc. Daniel P. Cagle of Carson who were all killed in action.

As the troops in the battlefields of Afghanistan begin their withdrawal, we are reminded of the reasons why we entered the war in the first place: to exact justice on those responsible for the attacks on 9/11 and to eliminate their sympathizers' ability to conduct a similar attack in the future. In those two regards, I would argue that we have been extraordinarily successful. Perhaps the most consequential victory of the War on Terror came earlier this year when Osama bin Laden's life was finally ended by a group of Navy SEALs who deftly carried-out a covert operation at bin Laden's secret compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. I am extremely thankful for President Obama and his Administration's firm leadership in the effort to bring bin Laden to justice. The sense of victory experienced by Americans after the death of Osama bin Laden was so powerful that it seemed to carry us into a new chapter of the War on Terror, one less concerned with fighting the enemy overseas and one more concerned with protecting our citizens at home.

Therefore, I believe that now is the appropriate time to begin a significant withdrawal of troops from war zones in Afghanistan and other parts of the Arab world. Committing millions upon millions of taxpayer dollars to nation building abroad at a time when millions of Americans are unemployed and struggling represents a fundamental misallocation of resources. While keeping the American people safe should always be our top priority, more resources need to be focused protecting our homeland and educating, training and employing the beleaguered American workforce.

We have come a long way in the past 10 years, and we should be proud of the progress we've made as a nation adapting to a post-9/11 world. However, we still have a long way to go to ensure that an attack similar to those on 9/11 never happen in the U.S. again. As Ranking Member of the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Response and Communications, I am keenly aware of the improvements that need to be made in order to keep the American people safe. For example, I represent a district that is home to the largest port complex in the nation. Each year, over 350,000 containers of cargo pass through the Port Los Angeles alone. These large shipping containers provide would- be terrorists with an excellent way to get hazardous materials into the country. That is why I am a strong proponent of working toward the implementation of a 100% container check rule on ports around the nation. This will ensure that cargo entering the U.S. is safe and will provide peace of mind to millions of Americans who reside near our Nation's ports.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I would like to say that despite some questionable decision making during the previous administration, our country is stronger and safer than ever before. Although we still have a long way to go, the progress we've made in the last decade to secure our homeland from attack by unconventional forces should make everyone proud. Again, my heart goes out to the families of those who were lost during the attacks and to those who lost their lives fighting the perpetrators of those tragic events. While our country

must never stop moving forward, we must also never forget. The victims of 9/11 are not forgotten.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in remembrance of John Thomas Weemes, a man who was an active member of the Los Angeles community. Mr. Weemes was born April 2, 1925 in Los Angeles, California to Annie Wardell Brown and Albert Thomas Weemes. Affectionately known as ``Johnny,'' he was the fifth of six children. John was educated in the Los Angeles Unified School District and attended 20th Street Elementary School, Lafayette Junior High School, and graduated from Thomas Jefferson High School in 1943. That same year, John was drafted into the United States Army and served our country proudly from 1943- 1946 during World War II. After his tour of duty, John enrolled in California State College and earned his Bachelor and Master of Arts degrees. Throughout his career, John worked as an elementary school teacher, pupil service and attendance counselor, and administrator. He was also a member of the Associated Administrators of Los Angeles. After retiring in 1987, John continued to work part-time for the District.

John was baptized and engaged in fellowship at Ward A.M.E. church in Los Angeles, California. On July 8, 1951, John was united in holy matrimony with Lenicia Boggs, who preceded him in death. To this union, Stephen John Weemes was born. On July 31, 1981, John united in holy matrimony to Toni Anthony Brown, thanks to the late Clayton Moore for playing Cupid.

John was a kind, generous, loving, warmhearted, and cordial gentleman. With his outgoing and infectious personality, John knew no strangers. He enjoyed spending time with family, friends, and colleagues. Some of his favorite leisure activities were golfing, reading, and watching all sports on television. John also loved to travel, and cruising was his and Toni's favorite mode of transportation. John took pleasure in walking and playing with his beloved dogs; first ``Princess Lui,'' and currently ``Lexie,'' a.k.a. ``Pooh.''

John Thomas Weemes passed away on August 31, 2011. He was preceded in death by his parents, siblings Emma Bess, Annie, Albert, and Carrie. He leaves to cherish his memory his loving wife, Toni A. Weemes (Ruby), son Stephen John Weemes, daughter-in-law Sheyrl Nickles-Weemes, sister Evelyne Brown, Lexie, and a host of relatives and friends.

I ask all members to join me in a moment of silence to honor the memory of the late John Thomas Weemes.

Mr. Speaker, Labor Day is a holiday which recognizes the economic and social achievements of American workers. Today, we celebrate the hard-working men and women who have raised this country to unprecedented levels of productivity and prosperity not seen in any other country around the globe.

While we take a day to celebrate the history of American workers, we must also take a moment to reflect on their present struggles. Millions of Americans who helped to grow our nation to the way it is today are now unemployed, and millions more are fighting to get through a grueling economic recession.

After the first Labor Day occurred in New York City, celebrations spread to other states as workers fought to win better working conditions and wages at a time when they had little power. Today, we stand by those who fought for their rights, because they fought for us; our families and our children. And we are united in our resolve to preserve the American Dream and to ensure the continuing validity of the promise that anyone willing to work hard and play by the rules can make it in America.

But to Democrats, ``Make It In America'' isn't just a dream--but a plan to help make dreams come true. It's a plan to create jobs and restore economic growth by promoting an encouraging environment for businesses to innovate and make products here in the United States.

While we are still waiting on Republicans to put forward a true, comprehensive jobs plan, we stand ready to revitalize American industries and innovation and help to put more Americans back to work. I urge my colleagues to stand with me and support this plan to create well-paying, middle class jobs and help ensure more families can make it in America.

Mr. Speaker, Labor Day signifies the end of the summer and the beginning of a new fall season. Schools are back in session, and many Americans return from their end-of-summer vacations. Well, I say it's about time that Republicans returned from their 244-day vacation of failing to put forth any job creating legislation, and join Democrats to enact our bipartisan solutions and the ``Make It In America'' initiative.

Under this plan, we can rebuild our infrastructure, invest in innovation and clean energy, and level the playing field for American businesses and workers by demanding that our trading partners, including China, play fairly in global trade.

Later this week, President Obama will address a joint session of Congress and unveil his plan to create jobs for the millions of persons who desperately want to work and provide for their families. In addition to the Make it in America agenda, Democrats in Congress have long been promoting an agenda focusing on jobs for the American worker.

Take for instance transportation infrastructure projects with the potential to employ millions and facilitate trade across the Nation. We must pass a clean extension of the Surface Transportation Act and the Federal Aviation Administration Reauthorization Act; both are set to expire at the end of this month. These transportation programs provide funding for highway construction, mass transit systems, transportation projects and bridge repair.

If Congress does not act, the laws will expire and these programs will be shut down. Almost one million construction and other workers will lose their jobs over the course of the year. In addition, if the extension is delayed over 4,000 professionals in the Department of Transportation will be immediately furloughed without pay.

Passing a fully funded Surface Transportation bill is an essential step in protecting nearly a million American jobs and creating new opportunities for workers across the Nation. Transportation infrastructure is one of the most effective ways to stimulate the economy and reduce unemployment. Studies suggest that for every $1 billion spent on transportation projects, more than 35,000 jobs are created.

Our number one goal should be putting Americans back to work. Congress needs to work together to create jobs, strengthen the economy, and help small business owners hire workers.

Labor Day is a time to honor a movement that respects the dignity of work and reflects the decency and dedication of our workers. Let us honor the story of the American workers who built this country, who created this dream by protecting and promoting what matters to them the most--their jobs.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, August 28, was the 48th anniversary of the historic March on Washington, the most famous act of peaceful protest in our nation's history. I rise to pay tribute to the great Americans who conceived, organized, executed and participated in the March for Jobs and Freedom. That march was a seminal event in our nation's history and awakened Americans of goodwill to the urgent need to rededicate ourselves to the great unfinished task of making real the promise of America for all Americans, especially African Americans.

The March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom was a nonviolent, political demonstration that advocated for civil rights and economic justice for African Americans. The march and rally took place on the National Mall in Washington DC on August 28, 1963, the 100th anniversary of the issuance of President Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation.

Mr. Speaker, 1963 was a year of racial strife and unrest, preceded by centuries of legalized discrimination and inequality against African Americans, who faced higher levels of unemployment, lower wages, substandard housing and inferior educational opportunities.

The march was organized by a coalition of religious, labor and civil rights organizations, including the ``Big Six'': Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC); National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP); the National Urban League; and the International Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters.

In May 1963, A. Phillip Randolph, President of the International Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters, wrote to Interior Secretary Stewart Udall requesting a permit for a march culminating at the Lincoln Memorial that fall. As preparations for the march on the mall went underway, the list of organizations participating in and sponsoring the event expanded significantly.

On the day of the march, a quarter of a million people from all over the nation gathered at the Washington Monument and marched together to Lincoln's Memorial, where the crowd listened to musical performances, engaged in prayer and listened to inspirational speeches encouraging the crowd to stand up for their civil rights.

The diversity of those in attendance was reflected in the event's speakers and performers including singers such as Bob Dylan and Marian Anderson and actors Harry Belafonte, Ossie Davis, and Ruby Dee. Attendees included people of all genders, races, religions, and nationalities. Among the luminaries who addressed the gathering was John Lewis, who was then the 23-year-old Chairman of the Student Non- Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) and now one of the most beloved members of the U.S. House of Representatives.

It was at the March on Washington that the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. delivered his famous, ``I Have a Dream'' speech which is universally considered by historians and scholars as one of the greatest speeches in American history. Beneath the gaze of President Lincoln, Dr. King challenged the Nation to make real the promise of America for all Americans and shared his dream that his ``four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.''

The March on Washington was a defining moment of the rapidly expanding Civil Rights Movement of the 1960's and is credited with galvanizing the federal government to enact the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The March on Washington demonstrated the power of non violent direct action to effect social and political change. An enduring legacy of the March on Washington is that it was the model and inspiration for future social movements around the world, from Eastern Europe to South Africa to the Arab Spring uprisings witnessed earlier this year.

Therefore, I rise with pride and gratitude for the brave and courageous men and women who worked to organize the March on Washington. They fought, struggled and risked their lives in order to ensure a better nation for future generations. The leaders of the Civil Rights Movement and the March on Washington will be forever remembered for their courageous leadership and sacrifices that made our country better.

But, the best way to pay tribute to these heroes is to continue the fight for jobs and freedom. With the national unemployment rate above 9 percent--and 15.9 percent for African Americans--joblessness in America has reached crisis proportions requiring dramatic action to put people back to work. Making sure that all Americans can find jobs that pay enough to raise a family, own a home, educate their children, and care for their parents is the pressing challenge of our time and is the unfinished work to which we must rededicate ourselves today.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize August 26 as Women's Equality Day, which marks the date in 1920 that women earned the right to vote. Today, we celebrate women's equality in the United States after so many years of being treated as second-class citizens, denied the full rights and privileges of male citizens.

Mr. Speaker, voting rights are now an institutionalized right for all women. Any attempt to weaken or withdraw them would be met with universal public condemnation. Unfortunately, there are other historic advances for women which face an uncertain future. One of these is Medicare, which 1 in 5 women rely on for basic health insurance protection.

Since its enactment, Medicare has been a great equalizer for women's rights. By removing some of the burdens associated with being primary caregivers, Medicare freed women to pursue roles outside the home.

Unfortunately, even in retirement, women are more likely to be dependent on Medicare than men. It is a critical source of health insurance coverage for nearly all older women in the United States and for many younger women who have permanent disabilities. Nearly half, 49 percent, of women on Medicare have three or more chronic health conditions and 57 percent of women on the program live below the federal poverty level.

Mr. Speaker, Medicare is a social insurance program that provides health insurance coverage to all people who are aged 65 and over as well as those who are permanently disabled.

Like women's suffrage, Medicare endured a long and difficult battle to be signed into law since it was first called for by President Truman in 1946. It was introduced in Congress every session from 1952 to 1964 and was defeated each time. Finally passed as part of the Great Society initiative under President Lyndon B. Johnson, Medicare was signed into law in Independence, Missouri on July 30,1965.

Johnson chose Independence as a tribute to President Harry Truman's efforts to pass Medicare decades before and enrolled the former President as the first Medicare beneficiary. Medicare has four different parts: Hospital Coverage, Medical Insurance, Medicare Advantage Plans, and Prescription Drug Plans which help to cover the cost of inpatient care in hospitals, doctor's visits, hospital outpatient care, preventative services, and the cost of prescription drugs.

Since the beginning of the program, Medicare has had a profound impact on the health and well-being of older women. In 1964, only 51 percent of Americans 65 and older had health care coverage, nearly 30 percent of seniors lived below the poverty line and the average life expectancy of Americans was 70.2 years old.

Today, virtually all Americans 65 and older have health care coverage, only 8.9 percent of seniors live below the poverty line and the average life expectancy of Americans has increased to 78.2 years old. Additionally, Medicare provides affordable health care coverage to over 47 million Americans, including 39 million seniors and 8 million Americans under 65 with disabilities. Among the oldest Medicare beneficiaries, those 85 years and older--70 percent are women.

Mr. Speaker, Medicare is popular and strongly supported by the majority of American women, with 72 percent regarding Medicare as extremely important to their retirement security.

House Republicans ignore or pretend not to recognize the extraordinary success of Medicare. In fact, earlier this year House Republicans adopted a fiscal plan that ends Medicare as we know it and replaces it with a voucher program that requires seniors to purchase health care from private insurance companies with a voucher that is worth $6,200 less than they receive currently under Medicare. Of course, my friends across the aisle do not explain how seniors can be expected to be better off fending for themselves with less money in a profit-based system with higher administrative costs that discriminates against older persons and those with preexisting medical conditions.

Mr. Speaker, my Democratic colleagues and I believe that Medicare needs to be preserved and strengthened so that it may be available for future generations. Just as Medicare has been kept solvent for the last 46 years; we believe it can be strengthened and maintained for at least the next 46 years.

Because women constitute the majority of individuals on Medicare, the program is therefore critically important to preserving our health and well-being. In addition, because women, on average, are paid less, live longer and have more health care needs than men, Medicare plays a greater role toward preventing illness and destitution.

Therefore, in honor of Women's Equality Day, I rise to honor the brave and courageous women of past generations who fought for the right to vote and for equality. They deserve equal attention to their long- term health, and I intend to continue fighting to that end.

Mr. Speaker, it is my sad duty to rise to pay tribute to the late Paul Duncan, the Director of Outreach for the Long Beach Community Business Network, LBCBN, and one of the leading and influential figures in the LGBT community of Long Beach, California.

Paul Duncan died on August 6, from an aneurysm in Las Vegas where he was representing the LBCBN at the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce's weeklong conference in Las Vegas. He was 72 years old.

Paul Duncan was born November 18, 1937, in Pueblo, Colo. A short time later, he and his family relocated to Los Angeles. He began his professional life in banking and later opened his own insurance and property management company and published equine magazines. He later lived in Australia, where he managed a horse ranch and deer farm for many years, before returning to the United States and settling in Long Beach.

Those who knew and worked with Paul describe him as a figure larger than life, and not just because of his imposing 6-foot-3-inch frame and fondness for cowboy hats and boots, but because of the bigger impact he had on people. Wherever he went, whomever he met, Paul made you feel that you were his ``mate.''

According to Stacey O'Byrne, president of the LBCBN, ``Paul created a vision that crossed cultural, political and generational boundaries. He was full of cheer and endless dedication to helping new and existing gay and gay-friendly businesses create lifelong bonds with other members of the community.''

Paul Duncan spent the last ten years of his life working tirelessly to connect LBCBN, known informally as the Long Beach Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce to business organizations from Hawaii to Washington, DC. Mr. Speaker, the untimely death of Paul Duncan is a great loss to his family and to countless persons who counted him as a friend. He leaves giant shoes to fill but I am confident that the work he began and advanced will be continued by all of us who have been inspired by his example.

I would like to request a moment of silence in his honor and memory.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the people of California's Thirty-Seventh Congressional District to honor the courage and service of Ms. Debbie Sutton.

Ms. Sutton, a retired nurse from Long Beach, California was the sole volunteer from Long Beach's Chapter of the American Red Cross to be assigned to help in relief efforts after a devastating tornado ripped through Joplin, Missouri in May of 2011. The tornado that passed through the town of Joplin was so extensive, that it damaged the local hospital, destroyed four local schools and left surrounding areas in tatters. Ms. Sutton, one of the lead members of a volunteer team assigned to help residents of Joplin, played an integral role in securing replacements for lost medical equipment, medicine and other goods essential to public health.

Before Ms. Sutton was called to aid in the post-tornado recovery efforts in Joplin, she had been working to set up health services in preparation for floods in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Ms. Sutton's role in assisting those in need in Joplin represents her fifth assignment as a volunteer in post-disaster recovery. Ms. Sutton also assisted in recovery efforts after hurricanes Rita and Katrina devastated Louisiana.

Ms. Sutton retired from the Long Beach Department of Health and Human Services in 2004, and is a truly an outstanding member of our community. In her retirement, Ms. Sutton has dedicated herself to volunteering. Her enthusiastic, adventurous, and altruistic personality serves as a model for all Americans.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues in the House to join me in honoring Ms. Debbie Sutton for her commitment to public health and public service.

Mr. Speaker, it is my sad duty to rise today to inform the House of the death of Ms. Edna Aliewine. Founder of the Watts/Willowbrook Christmas Parade and co-creator of the Watts Walk of Fame, Edna, a longtime Watts resident, devoted her life to instilling civic pride into residents of her community. Edna Aliewine passed away at her home on Tuesday at the age of 90 due to complications from lymphoma.

Ms. Aliewine was born in Los Angeles on January 1, 1921 and later went on to attend Los Angeles City College and Cal State LA. Upon graduation, Edna worked as a real estate agent and later as a private nurse, but many knew that Edna's real passion lay in community service and local politics. Ms. Aliewine was well known throughout the community for her many accomplishments and was held in high regard by those closest to her.

Among her proudest achievements, Ms. Aliewine founded the Watts/ Willowbrook Christmas Parade. Inspired by the glitz and glamour of the Hollywood Christmas Parade, Ms. Aliewine sought to bring her own version to the community of Watts. In 1964, Ms. Aliewine started the Watts/Willowbrook Christmas Parade by scraping together as much money and as many volunteers as she could. The parade has since turned into an annual event, which has spanned over 46 years and included many celebrities, such as Sammy Davis Jr. and the Jackson 5.

In 1988, along with Dr. James Mays, Ms. Aliewine decided to create the Watts Walk of Fame, a monument to community heroes. The Promenade of Prominence, as it is called, was placed along the edge of what is now Ted Watkins Memorial Park at 103rd and Success streets. Edna also served as President of the Los Angeles County Commission for Women, founded the Watts-Willowbrook Chamber of Commerce, and the Watts Community Beautiful Corp.

Edna's community involvement and selfless attitude were a powerful example for her three children: Paula Aliewine, Marsha Feaster and Wilnora Ewell. She will always be remembered by Watts-Willowbrook residents for her wonderful spirit and dedication to community improvement. I ask all Members to join me in a moment of silence to honor the memory of the late Edna Aliewine.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.J. Res. 66, approving the renewal of import restrictions contained in the ``Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003.''

I support this resolution because it is consistent with our humanitarian and democratic values against forced labor. As Americans, we must not only sustain these values in our country but we must act globally and deter other countries from tolerating or employing practices that have no place in a civilized society such as forcing innocent men, women, and children to work under harsh and slave-like labor conditions. For this reason, it is critical that we renew the import restrictions contained in the ``Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003.''

Mr. Speaker, it is helpful to recount briefly why import restrictions were placed by the United States on Burma and why it is important to renew them.

In 1990, Burma's State Peace and Development Council, SPDC, known then as the State Law and Order Restoration Council, held multiparty elections. The overwhelming number of parliamentary seats (82 percent) was won by the National League for Democracy party, led by Nobel Prize for Peace Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi. However, the military regime refused to honor the election results, however, and arrested and imprisoned both democracy activists and elected members of parliament, including Aung San Suu Kyi.

Multiparty general elections were next held in Burma on Nov. 7, 2010 as part of the ``roadmap to democracy'' proposed by the ruling military regime. The National League refused to participate over concerns that the electoral process was fraudulent, concerns that were confirmed by the United Nations and most Western countries, which noted widespread fraud, voter intimidation and cheating throughout the country.

Since then, the Burmese regime has continued its campaign of suppression and persecution against political opponents, dissidents and other minority populations. This shameful conduct has resulted in the internal displacement of more than 600,000 people and forced more than 130,000 persons to live in refugee camps along the Thai-Burma border. Additionally, during this time the SPDC regime has been protecting drug traffickers and forcing residents into slave labor.

In response to these atrocities, Congress enacted the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act in 2003, which it reauthorized in 2009. The law imposed import restrictions; froze any assets held by the regime in the United States; and expressed U.S. opposition for international lending to the SPDC. The law also prohibited the issuance of U.S. entry visas to members of the SPDC and condemned the regime's campaign against its people and expressed support for opposition groups.

These restrictions are to remain in place until the State Department certifies that the regime no longer systematically violates the human rights of the Burmese people; no longer uses slave and child labor; and halts the conscription of child soldiers. The law also requires as a precondition to lifting the restrictions that the regime make demonstrable progress in releasing political prisoners, permitting free speech, permitting the peaceful exercise of religion, and holding free and fair elections.

Sadly, Mr. Speaker, the regime in Burma has not made the necessary progress to justify lifting the restriction. According to a recent report of Human Rights Watch, the highly respected NGO, tens of thousands of villagers have been displaced and fled to the Thai-

Burma and China-Burma borders and there are many credible reports of cases of sexual violence against women and girls by Burma army troops. These reports are in line with extensive documentation of sexual violence perpetrated by Burmese military personnel over many years.

The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees recently listed Burma as the fifth largest source country of refugees in 2010, with 415,700 refugees.

In view of its atrocious record it would send the wrong signal to the Burmese regime, the international community, and, most important, dissidents working to bring real democratic change to their country.

For these reasons, I strongly support the continued imposition of sanctions on the Burmese regime. I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for H.J. Res. 66.