Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez) for yielding me this time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H. Res. 22, the so-called Small Business Bill of Rights. There is nothing that is right about this resolution since it does not recognize the right of small businesses to have access to capital that meets their needs.

Last night I offered an amendment to the Committee on Rules that recognized the right of small businesses to have access to capital; and I am extremely disappointed that, despite valiant efforts on the part of Democrats, this amendment was not made in order. Small businesses need the 7(a) loan program, the microloan program, and other SBA access to capital programs that help them maintain and expand their businesses.

My amendment would have also recognized the importance of the microloan program, which provides small loans to startups that are not served by traditional lenders. I know for a fact that access to capital programs are vitally important to small businesses in my district because when I held a small business roundtable meeting, access to capital was the number one issue each business brought forward as being an obstacle; and I know that this is the number one issue across the country.

Why are we not helping small businesses? They produce two-thirds to three-quarters of all the new jobs in this country, and they are the backbone of our economy. Unfortunately, many small businesses continue to face barriers to accessing the capital they need.

And I believe that Congress needs to take a stand today and strengthen these programs. It is time for Congress to go on the record in support of access to capital programs, like the microloan program, like the 7(a) loan program. Small businesses need more than just rhetoric and good intentions. They need action by this Congress.

So I urge my colleagues to oppose this resolution because it leaves out this critical priority.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong opposition to the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act. This is simply another example of anti-woman and anti-choice legislation that jeopardizes a young woman's health and is at odds with the United States Constitution.

This bill will leave young girls like Spring Adams completely unprotected. Spring was a 13-year-old sixth grade student from Idaho who became pregnant as a result of her father's shameful actions. When Spring's father became aware that she planned to terminate the pregnancy, he shot and killed her. If H.R. 748 were law, girls in Spring's tragic circumstances would be more vulnerable to harm since young women will be forced to notify the same parent that sexually abuses them of their plan to seek medical care. Is that the dangerous situation we want to put an abused girl in?

What is worse is that H.R. 748 does not contain a health exception which is dangerous to a young woman's health. Under this bill, doctors will be guilty of a crime if they do not wait 24 hours before performing an abortion, a medical procedure, on a young girl even if the girl is at risk for serious injury. This means that in some circumstances conscientious doctors must sit on their hands and wait for 24 hours as young female patients suffer from complications and risk permanent injury.

Mr. Chairman, 24-hour delays are not always an option when a young girl is pregnant and experiencing medical complications. And if these victimized girls ask a caring grandparent or aunt to drive them to another State for an abortion, even if the girl is at risk for serious injury or has been sexually abused by a parent, their family members will be guilty of a crime and may wind up in prison.

That is a heavy price to pay for trying to help and protect a loved one. Doctors and grandparents should not have to make the unthinkable choice between protecting a patient or granddaughter from serious physical injury and going to jail. This bill forces them to make that impossible choice. For this reason, I urge every Member of this body to stand up for women's health, stand up for the U.S. Constitution, and vote ``no'' on this bill.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise in opposition to the Central American Free Trade Agreement, otherwise known as CAFTA. As many of my colleagues here know, CAFTA is nothing more than a green light for corporations to outsource American jobs.

I am appalled by some of the awful provisions in this shameful trade agreement. When you look at the restrictions on Central American workers and the outsourcing of American jobs, you will quickly realize that there is nothing free about the Central American Free Trade Agreement.

My friends, make no mistake, if we ratify this agreement there will be no jobs left in this country to outsource. Did we not learn anything as a body from the NAFTA agreement? The lesson we should have learned from NAFTA was that not all free trade agreements give us fair trade.

For instance, NAFTA, which was supposed to be this great jobs creator, middle class creator in Mexico, failed to create the middle class that it promised. Since NAFTA, the rich are getting richer in Mexico while poverty and income disparity are more prevalent than ever. As NAFTA failed to protect the middle class, so will CAFTA.

Congress needs to step up and tell the administration that worker protections matter. We need to do what is right and support trade policy that is fair and balanced. We need to do what is right and make agreements that strengthen labor protections, not overlook them. We need to do what is right for safeguarding the environment. We need to do what is right for all working people and scrap this terrible agreement. We have a moral obligation to make trade fair for all Americans and the rest of the world.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the so-called Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005.

Contrary to its name, this bill does not protect consumers and it certainly does not help honest, hard-working families with financial problems. The only thing that this bill does is distort our bankruptcy laws so that working families are treated more like criminals than people in need of relief.

Our bankruptcy laws must strike a fair and practical balance between debtors and creditors. This means that honest people with financial troubles can make a fresh start by getting creditors off their backs.

But this bill does the exact opposite of that. Instead of helping struggling families in debt, this bill erects harsh legal and monetary roadblocks for people who are trying to file bankruptcy.

The vast majority of people who file for bankruptcy, 9 out of 10, do so because they have either lost their job, suffered a medical emergency, or there has been a divorce or separation in their family. These are not people who are abusing the bankruptcy system.

We are talking about recently divorced, single working mothers trying to support their children who may not be getting their child support. We are talking about young men and women in our Armed Forces returning home after serving their country in Iraq. We are talking about some of the 1.6 million families who have lost their private-sector jobs since 2001 when a Republican administration took over the White House. These are honest, hard-working families who have resorted to bankruptcy to find some relief for their debts and a chance to start their lives anew.

This is a terrible bill. It is harmful to struggling families and goes against the basic policy of our bankruptcy laws, helping families in financial trouble get a fresh start.

I urge every Member of the House to stand by America's working families by voting no for passage of S. 256.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to H.R. 1268, the Emergency Supplemental Wartime Appropriations Act for FY 2005. My opposition to this bill does not mean that I do not support our troops. I wholeheartedly support our troops and believe that we should fully fund our troops so that they have the necessary equipment to ensure their safety. Also incorporated into this bill is funding for Tsunami relief efforts for affected Southeast Asian countries. Having gone to Sri Lanka and personally seen the devastation, I know how important our relief efforts are for these countries.

Sadly, I'm opposing H.R. 1268 because it includes the REAL ID Act of 2005. The REAL ID Act of 2005 would deny drivers' licenses to immigrants, and slam the doors on refugees seeking asylum from persecution. The REAL, bad, ID Act has nothing to do with supporting our troops, let alone national security.

It is such a shame that Republicans had to incorporate the REAL ID Act in the Iraq Supplemental and Tsunami Relief when it has nothing to do with these two pressing issues. This is an unprecedented move on the part of the Republican leadership and this concerns me.

The REAL ID Act, H.R. 418 will not make us safer. What H.R. 418 will do is undermine several key security features that were dealt with responsibly in the Intelligence Reform legislation which was based on the 9-11 Commission Recommendations.

If the Republicans and this administration really want to strengthen national security, they should start by providing full funding for

the Department of Homeland Security, particularly the security improvements authorized in the Intelligence Reform bill. Yet the President's 2006 budget did not include funding for 10,000 new border guards, 40,000 new detention beds to hold people awaiting deportation, and 4,000 new immigration inspectors as the bill dictates. The administration merely funds 210 new border patrol agents.

As the proud daughter of immigrants, I am pleased to be serving my country as a Member of Congress. It is a great honor to be giving back to America, a country that has given my family so much. Like millions of immigrants, my parents came here in search of the American Dream and to give their children the opportunity to secure a promising future.

Again, I am outraged and saddened that Republicans are using the pretext of national security to attack immigrants who pose no real threat to our safety. America is a country built by immigrants, and we should remain a country that is open and welcoming to those seeking freedom. The U.S. has always been a beacon of hope and we must continue to guard the light of liberty for those who are oppressed or displaced.

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

I rise in support of the Maloney-Sanchez-Crowley amendment. Let me tell my colleagues a little bit about what this amendment is about, and I will try to be brief.

It is about providing women with hygiene kits that include soap, aspirin, sanitary napkins. I, like some of my colleagues before me, had a chance to travel there and see what the UNFPA is doing there, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the Sanchez-Crowley amendment.

This is what the UN Population Fund distributes to women devastated by the tsunami. By voting for this amendment, you. will affirm your support for women and children in dire need of our help.

The Maloney Amendment will aid the tsunami recovery effort by providing UNFPA with much-needed funding. It's a shame that the U.S. Government has not offered their support to this organization.

I've traveled to some of the areas hardest hit by the tsunami, and I can attest to their tremendous work. Our support for the UN Population Fund should be a top priority, because it's one of the few organizations that provides resources for the care of women and newborn children. Again, we're talking about soap, toothpaste, and sanitary napkins--basic needs.

UNFPA also distributes birthing kits, which are vital. Nearly half of all women give birth without a skilled attendant present, or any medical care whatsoever. These kits are sometimes all that's available to birthing women. For women who have no access to hospitals, we must support organizations that provide these kits. It's a matter of protecting life.

UNFPA provides the bare essentials. These supplies are critical to stopping the spread of diseases, like malaria.

Today, Congress can make a, statement to those hit hardest by the tsunami. We can show our commitment to the recovery effort by supporting UNFPA funding. Today we have a chance to put politics aside and support the' work of an organization that is pro-mother and pro- child care.

Helping those in need is the right thing to do. This shouldn't be a political issue, this is a moral issue. I urge you to vote yes on the Maloney/Sanchez/Crowley Amendment to help the victims of the tsunami.

Mr. Speaker, this week marks Stop Violence Against Women Week. I rise to show my support for victims of domestic violence. I grew up in a large family. I am the sixth of seven children, and my family has always supported me. Nothing can replace the strength you draw from those that you love and trust. Tragically, it is even more devastating if family members or significant others violate this trust and become abusive.

Domestic violence is an enormous problem in this country, one that deserves immediate attention. According to the American College of Emergency Physicians, domestic violence is the largest cause of injury to women between the ages of 15 and 44 in the United States, more than car accidents, muggings and rapes combined.

Each year, between 2 million and 4 million women are battered, and 2,000 of those women will die from their injuries. Nearly one-third of American women will experience intimate partner violence in their lifetime.

We can no longer afford to ignore this issue. This year is especially important because 2005 marks the tenth anniversary of the Violence Against Women Act. Later this year, VAWA will come up for reauthorization. I urge my colleagues to do their part to support VAWA and support the efforts of women's advocates and to end the cycle of violence.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to S. 5.

The sponsors of this bill call it the Class Action Fairness Act, but nothing about this bill is fair, especially for the victims of corporate wrongdoing. This bill erects a nearly insurmountable barrier for everyday Americans, who have been hurt or wronged, to have their day in court. Thanks to the so-called Class Action Fairness Act, people who have had their civil rights trampled on will no longer be able to bring their claims to State court. It does not matter if the laws of their home State provide better civil rights protections or that it may be more convenient for the victims of discrimination to seek justice in a court where they live. With S. 5 they must go to Federal court.

The same burden is put on the backs of hourly wage workers who sue for back pay that they are owed. These folks are struggling to put food on their family's table, and they almost certainly cannot afford the high cost of multistate litigation. With S. 5 they, too, must bring their claims to a Federal court that may not even be in their State just so that they can get the back pay that they do.

I ask all the proponents of this bill, is that their idea of fairness?

Let us be real. S. 5 is not about reducing venue shopping. It is not about the mythical scourge of predatory plaintiffs' lawyers, and it is not about the fabricated economic drain of excessive jury awards. What this bill really is about is doing a favor for unscrupulous, negligent corporations by making it harder for their victims to sue them. It is protecting big businesses who are guilty of wrongdoing from liability.

I am a lawyer and I acknowledge that there are some members of my profession who file frivolous suits. But if the lawyers are the ones that they claim are ruining this legal system, why are the sponsors of this bill making it harder for the victims?

This bill makes about as much sense as locking the door of a hospital in order to lower health care costs. Kicking people out of the system does not solve the problem, and that is exactly what S. 5 does. It penalizes the victims of wrongdoing without doing anything to improve our legal system, and it shields bad actors from having to face the consequences of their action. Where is the personal responsibility? That is why I oppose this bill.

I urge all of my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the final passage and to vote ``yes'' on the Conyers substitute.

Mr. Chairman, I am a proud daughter of immigrants who is honored to serve my country. I consider it a privilege to be able to give something back to this country that has given so much opportunity to generations of immigrants over the years.

Like millions of immigrants here today, my family came to this country in search of the American Dream: a better life for their children so that their children could receive a quality education, some day own a home, and earn a fair wage.

I stand before my colleagues today angered and outraged that under the guise of national security, the Republican Party is trying to punish those seeking the same dreams that my parents sought. If the Republicans and this administration really want to strengthen national security, they should start, I would think, by providing full funding for the Department of Homeland Security. Instead, the administration's budget slashes funding for the COPS program by $480 million and guts funding for local firefighters by $215 million. This leaves our first responders without the critical resources they need.

The administration's budget also breaks the promise of putting an additional 2,000 border patrol agents on the job in 2006 as promised in landmark intelligence reforms passed last year and endorsed by the 9/11 Commission. Instead, the President's budget provides funding for a mere 210 agents, a 90 percent cut over the 9/11 Commission recommendations.

The truth of the matter is that Republicans are using national security as a facade to alienate law-abiding, hard-working, and tax- paying immigrants. There are 8 million undocumented immigrants in this country who are cleaning our offices, caring for our children and elderly, and picking the fruits and vegetables that we consume. Most of these jobs most Americans do not want. Without these immigrants, our economy would falter.

What we should be doing is allowing immigrants a path to citizenship and access to driver's licenses so they become a part of our American system. This will make our country safer, and it will strengthen our national security.

We need comprehensive reform that supports our economy and values our immigrants. If the REAL ID Act is passed today, it will deny driver's licenses to those immigrants and slam the door shut on refugees seeking asylum from blood-thirsty regimes.

America is a country built by immigrants, and we should remain a country that is opening and welcoming to those who seek freedom. It is a sad day when Republicans use the pretext of national security to attack immigrants who pose no real threat to our security. Americans deserve better, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on H.R. 418.

I want to recognize and congratulate one of my most distinguished constituents from the 39th Congressional District, Mr. Amador ``Cal'' Calleros. I commend him for his invaluable contribution to his family, to his company--Southern California Gas, to the Whittier community, and to the Los Angeles area. On January 15, 2005, Mr. Calleros retired from the Southern California Gas Company after 34 years of outstanding service.

Born and raised in East Los Angeles, Mr. Calleros grew up as the oldest of three children, providing a shining example to his sisters. His father Sirilo, who was born in Springfield, IL, and his mother Helen, who was born in Riverside, CA, met in Los Angeles. Mr. Calleros, who was raised by his hard-working father and loving mother, also spent time with his grandmother Maria and his step grandfather Prieto.

In 1965, Mr. Calleros graduated from Montebello High School, where he excelled as the star catcher on the baseball team. After high school, Mr. Calleros attended Los Angeles Trade Tech for a short time before he decided to enlist in the military, where he pursued a special interest in the communications branch of the Army. The war in Vietnam was escalating and Mr. Calleros wanted to serve his country. He was stationed in Strasbourg, Germany, for 2 years from 1966 to 1968, where he awaited the call to the Far East. Though he never was asked to serve in Vietnam, Mr. Calleros suffered the loss of countless friends from East Los Angeles who were killed in the Vietnam War. Upon his return, Mr. Calleros helped bring comfort to these families during their time of grief.

In 1970, which proved to be a milestone year for Mr. Calleros, he met and married his wife, Esther, and began his career at the Southern California Gas Company. In 1972, Amador and Esther moved from Monterey Park to Whittier, and still live in the same house. Amador has been a devoted husband to Esther, a supportive father of two sons, and a loving grandfather of one. Though committed to his work, he has always put family first, and this commitment has helped to create a strong family and nurtured immediate and extended family members.

Having lived in Whittier for over 30 years, Mr. Calleros has volunteered his time at Lambert Little League, Gunn Park (now called Adventure Park), California High School, and St. Gregory the Great Parish. His greatest passion is coaching baseball. Through coaching, Mr. Calleros has provided instruction, mentoring, and guidance to hundreds, if not thousands of youth from Whittier, La Mirada, and other surrounding areas of the 39th Congressional District.

Professionally, Mr. Calleros distinguished himself within the Southern California Gas Company. He began his career as a field technician with his shiny, white Gas Company pick-up truck. Having excelled as a technician, he moved on to become a meter-reader, a field service representative, a measurement analyst, and eventually a measurement technologies expert. The latter two jobs were completed as a member of the management team. It was rare for someone who started out in meter reading to ascend to management, but Mr. Calleros did, paving the way for others to do the same. He continually gave his coworkers inspiration and valuable leadership, which enabled them to succeed.

Mr. Calleros has generously offered support to his family, his baseball players, his neighbors, his colleagues, and his friends. He has dedicated his entire professional career to one organization to which he remained loyal. I am pleased to commend and thank him for his excellent work and look forward to many more years of his service to the community.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 11 expressing profound sorrow on the occasion of the death of the Honorable Robert T. Matsui.

I am saddened by the loss of a great man and wonderful colleague in Bob Matsui. He was a person dedicated to others, not just in his remarkable public service, but also in his warm and embracing character. His passing is a loss to the people of his district, California, and all Americans who benefited from his wisdom in Congress for the past 26 years.

Most of all, my heart goes out to his family. His wife, Doris, his son, Brian, his daughter-in-law, Amy, and, of course, his granddaughter, Anna, were the most important things in the world to him, and I only hope that their grief can be tempered by the knowledge of his constant and unwavering love for them.

While it will be difficult for Californians, and all of Bob's colleagues in Washington to accept this tragic loss, I think we owe it to him to remember all of the positive things that Bob stood for. He was the first Japanese-American elected to the Sacramento City Council and one of the first Japanese-Americans to serve in the U.S. Congress.

These are remarkable feats for any American, but are simply astounding coming from Bob Matsui, who was forced into an internment camp, along with his family, when he was only six months old.

But Bob would never hold a grudge against the country that had done him and so many other Japanese-Americans wrong. He was too great a man, and he had too big a heart. He continued to strive for what was right for decades, using his energy to improve those systems that so many Americans rely on. He was as committed to Social Security and protecting older Americans as he was to upholding the ideals and principles of the Democratic Party, creating a strong future for the next generations.

Bob Matsui was a terrific mentor and a terrific friend to me. While our time together was cut too short, he provided an excellent role model of how to stay true to your beliefs even in the face of adversity. Today I join all Californians and Americans in mourning Congressman Robert Matsui. Serving with him in this body will always be one of the great honors of my career.

Mr. Speaker, on December 6, 2004, Marco Antonio Firebaugh, the Assembly Majority Floor Leader for the State of California, will term-out of the Assembly after six distinguished years of public service.

Assembly Member Firebaugh was born on October 13, 1966, in Baja California, Mexico. He made California his permanent residence in 1970.

In 1990, Assembly Member Firebaugh earned his Bachelor's of Arts Degree in Political Science from the University of California, Berkeley. He subsequently earned his Juris Doctorate from the University of California, Los Angeles, School of Law in 1997.

Assembly Member Firebaugh was first elected to the California State Assembly to represent the 50th Assembly District in November 1998. He easily won re-election and was sworn into office on December 2, 2002, to serve his third term.

As Assembly Majority Floor Leader, Firebaugh has been responsible for all matters that are relevant to the order of business on the Assembly floor. Furthermore, he has served as one of the chief negotiators for Assembly Democrats.

In 2002, Assembly Member Firebaugh was elected Chair of the California Latino Legislative Caucus and thus was responsible for developing the annual Caucus' Agenda for California's Working Families. He has focused on providing resources to schools, increasing access to health care and affordable housing, and championing immigrant rights.

His legislative tenure has been highlighted with far-reaching accomplishments in numerous policy areas. Assembly Member Firebaugh's effort to ensure that California high school students have the opportunity to pursue a college education, regardless of their immigration status, illustrates his strong commitment to the people he represents.

As Chairman of the Select Committee on California-Mexico Affairs, Assembly Member Firebaugh has done extensive work in establishing a strong working relationship between California and Mexico. Through his committee work, he has launched creative initiatives to establish a Sister-State partnership with Jalisco, a key state in Mexico. He has also led efforts to reform money transmission services and disclosures to protect consumers in California.

Throughout his career, Assembly Member Firebaugh has continuously demonstrated his dedication to his profession, community and family. An avid art enthusiast, Assembly Member Firebaugh continues to seek out resources and facilities to further enable the creativity of the community to flourish. As a family man, he enjoys spending quality time with his son Nicolas and attending his daughter Ariana's soccer games.

From one public servant to another, I praise Assembly Member Marco Antonio Firebaugh for his service and dedication to the community.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I was unavoidably detained and missed rollcall votes Nos. 473, 474, and 475. Had I been present, I would have voted: ``Aye'' on rollcall No. 473, the motion instructs conferees on H.R. 4200 to adopt the bipartisan Senate-passed provisions on hate crimes, ``aye'' on rollcall No. 474, the motion to close portions of the Department of Defense Conference Report, and ``aye'' on rollcall No. 475 for S. 2363, to revise and extend the Boys and Girls Club of America.

Mr. Speaker, I rise proudly today to congratulate Food Finders, a Long Beach community non-profit that is dedicated to providing food for the impoverished and hungry people in our region.

Food Finders' specific mission is to offer an enhanced quality of life to those in need through a food rescue program. Volunteers collect and distribute food, along with other essential items, to missions, hospices, homeless shelters, treatment centers, senior centers and children's homes in both Los Angeles and Orange County, at no cost to the recipients. Food Finders provides approximately 42,000 meals a day through its services.

Food Finders is recognized in the City of Long Beach and throughout the region as a leading community-based organization. They are the link between donors, service agencies, and the people in need. Food Finders has inspired hundreds of merchants to donate food, which they then deliver free of charge to service agencies. This makes it possible for the agencies to run more effectively and therefore feed more people.

Food Finders is also a referral source for individuals, directing them to where they can receive help. Ninety-nine percent of food never comes through Food Finders' door. Volunteers pick up and deliver about 20,000 pounds of food to recipient agencies each day. The majority of Food Finders' efforts are spent on facilitating connections between donors and recipients. They operate 200 established delivery routes that are managed by 325 volunteers.

Food Finders was started in April of 1989 by Arlene Mercer, and was at one time operated out of her home. Food Finders has since grown from delivering 251,000 pounds of food in 1990 to delivering approximately 7,000,000 pounds of food in 2003. Throughout its existence, Food Finders has delivered over 30 million pounds of wholesome food. This is equal to approximately 35,000 meals per day, or over 11,000 people who receive three meals a day because of the dedication of Food Finders in improving their quality of life.

I look forward to working with Food Finders in the future for the betterment of our community.

Mr. Speaker, I rise proudly today to congratulate the Long Beach Community Hispanic Association, a Long Beach community non-profit better known as Centro CHA, for their valuable service to the community.

Formed in 1992, Centro CHA's mission is to provide enhanced quality of life to Hispanic/Latino youth, families, and neighborhoods in the City of Long Beach through health and educational programs, social and economic enrichment, cultural arts, and after school programs.

Centro CHA is recognized in the City of Long Beach as a leading Hispanic/Latino grassroots community-based organization. Centro CHA serves as an advocate in efforts to reduce the gaps in services to low- income, underserved Hispanic/Latino youth, families, and neighborhoods.

The City of Long Beach is now the second largest city in California, with a population of nearly 458,000 new immigrants creating significant changes in ethnic distribution and a considerable increase in diversity. According to the 2000 United States Census, the Hispanic/ Latino population represents almost 40 percent of the city's total population.

Centro CHA connects the public with vital linkages and resources to access healthcare, civic leadership, and educational institutions. Through cultural community forums, collaboration, and civic leadership, Centro CHA helps local service providers to connect these services to the Hispanic/Latino community. To make the public more aware of the community's activism, Centro CHA created an annual award.

The Nuestra Imagen Award recognizes local individuals and companies for their contributions to local Hispanic/Latino communities. The award is in its eighth year, and it has grown to be one of the most widely attended non-profit awards dinners in Los Angeles County. The awards ceremony coincides with Hispanic Heritage Month, as well as Mexican Independence Day, and celebrates ``the exceptional achievements of outstanding individuals and corporations, all of whom foster the development of children, families and communities in the Greater Long Beach area.''

I look forward to working with Centro CHA in the future for the betterment of our community.