Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, our Nation's history is filled with heroes who, through personal sacrifice and a strong commitment to their cause, have left a mark upon society.

Today, I am proud to honor the life and accomplishments of the late, talented union organizer and human rights advocate, Cesar E. Chavez.

Born on March 31, 1927, to a farming family in Yuma, Arizona, Chavez learned early that life is filled with challenges, particularly for those who work the fruit and vegetable fields of this great country.

Those fields nurtured Chavez's desire to create a farm workers union, which we know today as the UFW.

Cesar Chavez brought dignity and respect to the farm workers and became an inspiration and a resource to other people engaged in human rights struggles throughout the world. From 1965 to the 1980s, Chavez worked tirelessly to increase wages as well as public awareness of the plight of migrant workers. Chavez defended the rights of farm workers until his death on April 23, 1993.

Chavez's courage and perseverance continues to be a source of inspiration for me and many others dedicated to the interests of America's working families.

Today, Chavez would have celebrated his 77th birthday. I am proud to celebrate his life and his work. May his spirit and dedication continue to be an inspiration to those engaged in human rights struggles throughout the world.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Republican budget because it provides virtually no hope for the 20 million women without health insurance in this country.

Mr. Speaker, nearly 75 years ago, farmers gathered beneath the soaring camphor and depending on the weather and production level, set the price of hay around the world.

The Hay Tree, a 50-foot-high camphor, thought to be more than 100 years old--is considered one of the few remnants of the once-thriving dairy and hay industry that ruled southeastern Los Angeles County and Northwestern Orange County. From the 1920s through the 1950s this area was called ``The Hay Capital of the World.''

The Paramount Hay Tree has recently been named the latest historical landmark in California by the State Historical Resources Commission. It was the first awarding of landmark status in southeast Los Angeles County in 10 years. The Hay Tree joins 1,100 landmarks throughout California, only 11 of which are also trees.

According to the Office of Historic Preservation, an object must meet one of the following criteria to be eligible for landmark status: It must be considered the first, last or only one of its kind in the state or region, or it must be connected to a person or group having a significant influence in California history.

The towns of Hynes and Clearwater--which would later incorporate together as Paramount--were the hub of the southern California dairy country and became the world's largest hay market. The alfalfa was shipped in from as far away as Arizona and Montana. Each day's median hay price was quoted in major newspapers as the national and international standard. It was under the Hay Tree--an informal gathering place for truckers, farmers and workers--that the representatives from the area lots would compare notes and come up with the composite price figure.

The Hay Tree still holds sway over Paramount's newest addition--Civic Center Plaza, and will be the focal point of the new Plaza and Botanical Garden. A small park, set aside as open space in perpetuity, will surround the graceful camphor, signifying its sentimental and historical standing in town.

Paramount's oldest banner, the Hay Tree, is one of California's finest monuments--it speaks praise without boasting and will be a blessing to all for years to come.

Mr. Speaker, today Chairman Manzullo and Ranking Member Velazquez held an important hearing for the small business. The hearing focused on the increase in steel prices.

Consumers of Steel expected that the removal of the tariffs by President Bush in December would decrease the price of steel and increase steel imports. However, this did not happen. For the past 2 months the price of steel has increased approximately by 30 percent.

The continuing increase in steel prices affects many parts of the economy, but particularly small manufacturing companies who buy their steel at market price. These small companies have not only been dealing with the increase in steel prices, they are now facing shortages in steel products. With these factors combined, it is virtually impossible for small manufacturers to survive.

I would like to share a story of a constituent of mine who has been dealing with this crisis. Argo Springs Manufacturing Company, located in Norwalk, CA, is a family company that has been in business for almost 40 years. They produce numerous products from springs to compression coils. Their customers range from the commercial and aerospace industry to military agencies.

Argo Springs currently employs 70 people, but with the sudden increase in prices and shortages in steel, it has become difficult for the company to compete in the manufacturing market. Randy Fox, vice president of Argo, told me and I quote,

On February 15, I bought steel at 34 cents a pound, but by

March 2 the price of steel had increased by 59 cents. I am

worried that the company will have to start laying-off

workers and eventually go out of business. I'm not sure the

company will outlast the crisis.

This story highlights the true impact of this crisis on small business owners. I am worried that if this crisis is not resolved, many small manufacturing companies like Argo Springs will not be able to continue doing business. This is unacceptable.

After talking to my constituent, Randy Fox, one thing is apparent to me--we need to do something about this crisis in the steel industry. Small businesses are the economic backbone of our Nation. It is imperative that we

create a viable and reasonable economic environment for them to maintain their businesses and grow.

Mr. Speaker, due to illness, I was absent for rollcall vote No. 34 on H. Res. 530 and rollcall vote No. 38 on H.R. 1561.

Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on each of these rollcall votes.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the Unborn Victims of Violence Act and in support of the substitute bill offered by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren), the Motherhood Protection Act.

I believe very strongly that violence against pregnant women is one of the most morally reprehensible crimes. Any act of violence against pregnant women should be condemned, and I support legislation that protects women and their unborn fetuses from violence.

However, I have to rise and oppose the Unborn Victims of Violence Act that we are considering on the floor today because it jeopardizes a woman's right to choose and fails to protect women from violence. This bill is a blatant attempt to undermine a woman's right to choose, disguised, sadly, as an effort to protect women from violence. Under the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, for the first time anywhere in Federal law, an unborn fetus at any stage of development will be treated as a person that can be an independent victim of a crime. It is not that hard to figure out that it is a direct attack on a woman's right to choose as established in Roe v. Wade.

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act is also inadequate for protecting women from violence. If the proponents of this bill were, in fact, sincere in their desire to prevent harm to unborn fetuses, they would start by preventing harm to pregnant women. It is very telling that the Unborn Victims of Violence Act is silent on the issue of preventing and punishing violent crimes against women and that the proponents of this bill will not accept the substitute bill offered by Ms. Lofgren, the Motherhood Protection Act.

The gentlewoman from California's (Ms. Lofgren) substitute provides women and fetuses with the protections they need. It creates a separate Federal crime. It is not merely an enhancement. It is a separate Federal crime for harm to pregnant women and imposes a penalty of up to 20 years in prison for injury to embryos or fetuses. If a woman's pregnancy is terminated in an attack, the penalty can be up to life in prison.

The Lofgren substitute is a far better bill than the Unborn Victims of Violence Act because it protects women, it protects fetuses, and it still preserves a woman's right to choose. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to show women in this country that we will protect them from violence by voting no on the Unborn Victims of Violence Act and voting yes on the superior Lofgren substitute.

Mr. Speaker, I am here this evening to highlight one of the most important issues facing this country and this Congress: how to make our immigration system work for us, not against us.

First of all, I think it is a positive sign that President Bush has put forward his proposal to get this debate started again. I wish he was as concerned for employees in this country as he is for employers. But whatever his motivation, his involvement does put pressure on his Republican colleagues in Congress to at least consider taking action to address our failed immigration system.

The Democrats have also put forward their immigration reform principles outlining the changes necessary to shape immigration policy in this country. The Democratic plan is much more comprehensive, compassionate, and concrete. Our principles put a face to the immigrant who is trying to build a better life for himself and his family while making a better America for all

of us. These 8 million workers are an integral part of our society, and reality dictates that we recognize that and find a fair way to integrate them fully into our society. We can do this while still protecting the labor standards in this country by wage and hour enforcements. We need to take our failing immigration system and turn it into something that can work for all Americans. And failing it is. We have a huge, and I mean a huge, backlog of visa applications pending that are preventing husbands from being with their wives and parents from being with their children.

The current delay in reunifying families from the Philippines is 22 years. Is this a humane system? That is outrageous. Not only do we have to speed up the process; we have to make more family and employment visas available. This bottleneck needs to be opened up. The first and foremost action we should take to fix our immigration system is to bring families back together and allow them to be reunified. Sadly, however, the Bush proposal does nothing to help solve the problem of family reunification.

Secondly, we need to offer a future to those immigrants who have been working in this country for years, have paid their taxes, abided by our laws, and contributed to their communities all over this Nation. The fact is that they are here now, and they have earned their right to stay. While some may not have come through the proper channels, they should not be condemned outright for leaving despair and poverty behind for a better life. These workers have had a positive impact on this country through their contributions, and a guest-worker program alone does not even begin to acknowledge this reality.

Not only does earned legalization take this hidden work force out of the shadows, but it provides certainty for employers and hope for the employees that they can work towards a meaningful goal: legitimate acceptance in the United States. Another reality is that the immigrant children of these workers also deserve a place in our society. It is only to our benefit that they have access to a good education. They should be granted a vehicle for obtaining lawful permanent status and qualify for in-state educational benefits and financial aid.

Again, the Democrats take this into account in the overall debate on immigration reform, but the Republican Party chooses to ignore this quick and easy change that could go forward right away without further delay.

The Bush administration and the Republican leadership also ignore the fact that legislation already exists to expand the current guest-worker program. If President Bush is serious about moving forward on immigration reform and not just playing election-year politics, he should call on the Republican majority in the House to pass the Berman Ag Jobs bill. We can get this done now.

Finally, let us focus our national security efforts on protecting this Nation against real terrorist threats instead of using it as an excuse to round up 8 million law-abiding workers and kicking them out of this country. I do not know about other Members, but I would much rather have the Department of Homeland Security knowing the identities of the people living here because they are no longer hiding from authorities for fear of deportation.

Let us get real about the immigration dilemma in this country, real about the kind of hard-working, sincere people these immigrants are, how they have benefited this country, and what it would take to put the immigration system back in working order. Let us take our heads out of the sand and get to work on real immigration reform. I am serious about the work ahead, and I challenge my colleagues in the House to give more than lip service to the idea of meaningful immigration reform.

Mr. Speaker, due to the inclement weather my flight was cancelled yesterday and I was absent for rollcall vote No. 6 on H.R. 3493, and rollcall vote No. 7 on H.R. 1385.

Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on each of these rollcall votes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks about this sham Medicare proposal that I oppose.

Mr. Speaker, in order to deal with the recent floods that struck the Lynwood, South Gate, Watts, and Willowbrook areas of my district, I was absent for rollcall vote 620 on S.J. Res. 22, recognizing the Agricultural Research Service; rollcall vote 621 on S.J. Res. 18, commending the service of Inspectors General; rollcall vote 622 on H. Con. Res. 299, honoring Sargent Shriver; and rollcall vote 623 on the motion to change the meeting times for Tuesday, November 18, 2003, to 10 a.m. for Morning Hour and 11 a.m. for legislative business.

Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on each of these rollcall votes.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend Chairman Shays and Ranking Member Kucinich for calling this important hearing on Public Safety Interoperability. Earlier this year, I met with Fire Stations and Police Departments in my district. Each one of them highlighted the need for a communications system that would allow law enforcement, fire fighters, and other first responders to talk to one another.

To this end, the Los Angeles County Fire Department with minimal resources and funds initiated an interoperability communications pilot program, known as the Los Angeles Regional Tactical Communication System (LARTCS). This system enables various agencies to directly speak to another on one channel for both short-term and long-term incidents.

The pilot program only serves a portion of the County, while the Los Angeles County Fire Department provides services to 58 municipalities and spans a 3,000-mile radius. This includes dense, rural, and remote suburban areas.

The LARTCS has already proven to be a success, particularly in the southern California wildfires. According to the Los Angeles County Assistant Fire Chief, Eric Ekeberg, ``the fires hit the region really hard, but it could have been a lot worse if the communication system was not in place.''

I commend the foresight and dedication of the Los Angeles County Fire Department and all participating agencies that includes law enforcement, EMS, and other first responders for establishing this pilot program. Amazingly, this system was put in with minimal funds.

This successful pilot program proves that Congress needs to do more to fund interoperability systems, whether it is through additional FEMA grants or cutting the red tape, so that the first responders of LA County, and multiple counties throughout California and the nation, can talk to one another.

We need to do more to protect our public servants as well as the general population. Therefore, I look forward to the testimonies of the witnesses who might shed some light on this salient issue, not just for first responders, but all Americans.

Again, I would like to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for holding this very important hearing.

Madam Speaker, due to a death in the family, I was unavoidably absent and missed rollcall votes on October 30, 2003.

Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on rollcall vote Nos. 580-585; ``no'' on rollcall votes 586 and 587; ``aye'' on rollcall votes 588-591. Furthermore, I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 592 because the FAA Reauthorization Act, H.R. 2115, still privatizes our air traffic control system, does not mandate terrorist training for flight attendants, and jeopardizes our air space when greater security is needed.

Had I been present I would have voted ``aye'' on rollcall votes 593 and 594; ``no'' on rollcall vote 595; ``aye'' on rollcall vote 596; ``no'' on rollcall vote 597; and ``aye'' on rollcall vote Nos. 598-600. I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 601 because although I support our troops, the Iraq Supplemental Appropriations bill diverts billions of dollars to reconstructing Iraq, while working families in America are struggling to pay their bills.

Finally, I would have voted ``no'' on the voice vote to H. Res. 424.

Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to The Basic Pilot Extension Act of 2003 (H.R. 2359) and urge all of my colleagues to vote against this bill.

The Basic Pilot Program is a new, more reliable way for employers to verify that employees are legally eligible to work in the United States. I support the Basic Pilot Program and I support an extension of the program for an additional five years.

However, I oppose the Basic Pilot Extension Act because this bill goes well beyond just extending the program for an additional five years.

This bill makes the Basic Pilot Program a national employee verification system available in all 50 states. Currently, the Basic Pilot Program is being tested in only 6 states so that flaws in the program can be addressed. Those flaws were detailed in a report by the Institute for Survey Research at Temple University. The report concluded that the Basic Pilot Program is not ready for larger-scale implementation at this time, and that the Program should remain available in only 6 states until the many problems with the program are addressed.

The problems described in the report include inaccurate and outdated information in the INS databases used to verify employment eligibility. The report also describes problems with the reliability of the training and system software, hardware, and telephone systems used in the Basic Pilot Program. The report also described how employees had their privacy violated, were not fully informed of their rights under the Basic Pilot Program, and that employers failed to submit forms in the required time deadlines.

Despite these problems and despite the explicit recommendation of the Institute for Survey Research for needed improvements, this bill expands the Basic Pilot nationwide and includes provisions that go well beyond merely verifying employment eligibility.

This bill adds a new provision that allows federal, state, or local governments, not employers, to use the pilot program to access the databases to obtain citizenship and immigration status information on anyone for any reason they wish. This includes both citizens and non- citizens, and unlike other regulations that control the use of federal databases, there are no limitations that protect the employees against discrimination, privacy violations, or other misuse. This new provision is very close to the establishment of a national register of all immigrants or a national identification card program.

Madam Speaker, the Basic Pilot Extension Act should be opposed for all of the reasons I have described. Another serious concern is that the Judiciary Committee did not hold any hearings on the changes to the information sharing provisions of this bill, and the Subcommittee on Immigration did not consider this bill at all. The Basic Pilot Extension Act of 2003 will threaten the privacy of all Americans and is riddled with flaws. I urge all of my colleagues to oppose this bill.

Mr. Speaker, today, the House of Representatives is making a procedural vote on whether not to recommit the FAA Reauthorization bill to conference. What this is really is an attempt to circumvent the real legislative process--an up or down vote on the merits of their proposal. Why is the Republican leadership doing this? Because they are trying to sneak through provisions that are seriously flawed and pose a major risk to flight safety and national security.

As a cochair of the newly created Congressional Labor and Working Families Caucus, I find it appalling that Congress would consider

privatizing air traffic controllers when our security is at a greater risk that ever. This and two other provisions in this bill would do less--not more--to protect us from terrorism, and seriously undermine the airline industry in our country and jeopardize the safety of our personal air travel.

First, this bill opens the door for private companies to purchase air traffic control towers from the Government. This means our Government will no longer be in control of the safety of our airspace. Privatizing the Nation's air traffic control system is a risky and dangerous experiment at a time when public safety is of the highest importance.

Also, under this bill flight attendants are no longer required to receive antiterrorism training. Following the events of 9/11, flight attendants want to be properly trained; passengers want them to be trained; and as a frequent flyer I personally want them to be trained.

Lastly, it would allow international airlines to carry cargo throughout the United States without it being properly screened or tracked. The proposed changes would affect national security as well as jeopardize the livelihood of our domestic industry.

Ironically, after 9/11, airport screeners were federalized because we realized that our safety depended on the individuals working those posts to be under Federal supervision. It is same with air traffic controllers.

Look at it this way . . . the price of a plane ticket--$235, the price of airport parking for a week--$75, and the expertise and experience of air traffic controllers to land your airplane, priceless.

There is no price tag to our safety. For the safety for all Americans, I strongly urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' to recommit the FAA Conference Report and take out these heinous provisions. Let's put safety first.

Mr. Speaker, on August 3, 2003, the La Mirada Girl All Stars won the Girls 16-Under ``Class B'' Fast Pitch West Finals by defeating the Bullets from Idaho 7-2 for the title of 2003 Amateur Softball Association National Champions.

The La Mirada Girl All Stars, also the California state champions, in their respective age bracket, started the four-term Western Pool Playoff with a 7-2 win over Blue Thunder from Florissant, Missouri and a 9-2 victory over the Waverly Heat from Lincoln, Nebraska.

Founded in 1933, the Amateur Softball Association is a nationwide, volunteer driven, non-profit organization that has evolved in the largest softball organization in the country. The Amateur Softball Association has grown from a few hundred teams to over 250,000 teams, representing a membership of more than four million athletes. The goal of the Amateur Softball Association's youth program is to help aspiring young softball athletes learn a sport they can enjoy for a lifetime in a positive, safe and supportive environment.

The Amateur Softball Association National Championships begin at the local level with league championships, state championships and eventually culminates with national qualifiers from around the country.

The La Mirada Girl All-Star Team was made up of players from eight teams from La Mirada's 16-under division, who played a three-week season prior to their selection.

The La Mirada Girl All-Star roster included: Andrea Belluz, Amanda Fernandez, Nikki Johansen, Tiffany Johnson, Keena Levert, Jaimee Montanez, Nicole Morales, Sara Randall, Jayme Smith and Meghan Thorpe with coaches Steve Randall and Randy Tyler, and manager Laurie Montanez.

La Mirada fought its way to the National Championship by defeating teams from Overland Park, Kansas; Kirksville, Missouri; Coachella, California; Omaha, Nebraska; Augusta, Kansas; and Parma, Idaho. La Mirada outscored its competition 60-11 and went undefeated at 7-0, during the course of the tournament.

La Mirada won the championship tournament with brilliant pitching, an explosive offense and an unmatched defense. The National Champion La Mirada Girl All-Star Team will be celebrated by the players, coaches and family members not only for the games played, but also for their shared memories of their time together.