Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, in November 2002, Congress authorized the creation of a bipartisan 9-11 Commission to prepare a report on the status of our intelligence prior to the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the effectiveness of our response to those attacks, and to make recommendations to strengthen identified weaknesses. I applaud the work of the commission and support their recommendations to strengthen our country against attacks at home and abroad.

It is critical to our national security that Congress act quickly and thoughtfully to implement the 9-11 Commission's recommendations. I was hopeful, therefore, that the Republican leadership would put the interest of the country ahead of political considerations and bring to the floor a bipartisan bill that would protect our country from terrorist attacks. Unfortunately, the bill before us, H.R. 10, as currently written, fails to meet this standard, and I must reluctantly oppose it.

H.R. 10 is full of extraneous provisions that have nothing to do with the 9-11 Commission recommendations. The Republican leadership has added highly divisive immigration-related provisions which have been criticized by the chairman and vice chairman of the 9-11 Commission, the families of the 9-11 victims, and even the White House. For example, the bill seeks to deport people without due process, punish those seeking asylum, return victims of torture to cruel governments, and prevent hardworking individuals from obtaining basic forms of identification.

The serious problems with H.R. 10 could have easily been avoided had the Republican leadership written this bill in a bipartisan manner. Instead, they removed provisions that were passed in committee on a bipartisan basis. At a time that our country is at war and we are threatened on a daily basis by potential terrorist attacks, it is unconscionable that the Republican leadership has turned the bipartisan recommendations of the 9-11 Commission into a politically divisive piece of legislation.

The Senate has proceeded in a bipartisan manner and passed, by an overwhelming vote of 96 to 2, an intelligence reform bill that follows the framework recommended by the bipartisan 9-11 Commission. It is my sincere hope that the serious problems with H.R. 10 will be resolved when the final product emerges. Americans are trusting that Congress will push partisan politics aside and unite in support of legislation that will truly make this country safer.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Homeland Security Appropriations conference report.

I would like to begin by commending Homeland Security Subcommittee Chairman Hal Rogers and Appropriations Committee Chairman Bill Young for their efforts to address our Nation's security needs with the unrealistic budget limits that were forced upon them.

I also thank Chairmen Rogers and Young for including in the Homeland Security conference report several items I requested to address issues of concern I raised during subcommittee hearings with representatives of the Department of Homeland Security. Included in this final conference report, for example, are the following items:

Security Training--Congress has done much to address the security of our aviation system since the events of September 2001. However, I was concerned that Congress had not adequately addressed the issue of security training for flight attendants, potentially the last line of defense in the aircraft cabin. The bill directs the FAA to issue regulations for basic security training for flight attendants.

Port Security Grants--Another of my concerns was that resources currently dedicated to port security are too often diverted to private shippers at the ports while the port authority received minimal if any funds. This bill states the committee's belief that port security grants, for the 55 ports of national significance, should be based on findings contained within port vulnerability assessments. This means that limited resources for port grants will be used where they are needed most.

Security Assessments--In addition, I was concerned that critical security assessments had not been completed. This bill establishes a deadline for the completion of security assessments for the top 1700 critical infrastructure elements and key assets identified by the Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection Directorate. This deadline will help ensure security assessments on such items as monuments, landmarks, power plants, highways, and food and water sources will be completed by the Department.

Independent Districts--Many of the districts that operate bridges and highways are independent authorities, and as such, their eligibility to apply for certain homeland security grants had been in question. The bill clarifies the eligibility of independent districts, such as bridge authorities, to compete for homeland security grants.

Immigration Officers--The bill also includes language I drafted to prevent the Department of Homeland Security from moving forward with the unnecessary and potentially dangerous privatization of key immigration officers at the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services. These officers are responsible for handling classified information used to prevent fraud and the exploitation of our immigration laws. I am pleased that this inherently governmental work will continue to remain the responsibility of trained and experienced federal employees directly accountable to the Department and not to the bottom line of a private company. And I take the opportunity to thank the ranking member, David Obey, and ranking member Martin Sabo of the Homeland Security Subcommittee for their efforts to keep this language in the bill.

In addition, the bill addresses two issues of importance to urban communities such as my own.

First, funding for the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) grant program to protect high threat urban areas was more than doubled for a total of $1.3 billion. These additional resources are critical to our Nation's large urban areas which face a higher terrorist threat than other parts of the country.

Second, state and local emergency managers will benefit significantly from an increase of $56 million for Emergency Management Performance Grants. In California, emergency managers use these grants to develop plans to help prepare our residents for disasters such as earthquakes, fires, floods, or terrorist attacks. Although Congress has called this grant program ``the backbone of the Nation's emergency management system'' it has been drastically underfunded for years, and this funding increase is certainly a step in the right direction.

However, Mr. Speaker, despite the fact that this Homeland Security Appropriations conference report resolves several of the issues I raised in hearings and increases funding levels in certain accounts, I remain seriously concerned that this bill as a whole underfunds important homeland security initiatives and programs.

I am disturbed that the measure retains the current formula for state-wide grants that continues to underfund the homeland security needs of my home state, California. Over the past several years, the Department of Homeland Security has distributed 60 percent of these formula grants on a per capita basis that does not consider critical infrastructure, vulnerabilities, or the actual risk of terrorist attacks. For example, although California is the most populous state with the most areas deemed at high risk of terrorist attack, it actually receives far less funding on a per capita basis than any other state. In a time of heightened national security and limited local resources, we need to ensure that federal resources are targeted where they will be most productive in fighting the war on terror.

I am also concerned by the deep budget cuts this bill makes to the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services. This bureau is charged with processing work authorization and citizenship applications for immigrants in our country. This bill includes only $160 million to reduce the backlog of these unprocessed documents, a decrease of nearly $75 million from fiscal year 2004. These funding cuts simply do not make sense given that during the last 3 years, the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services the last 3 years, the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services has fallen far short of meeting its six month goal for processing citizenship applications. In fact, the backlog of these applications has grown from three million to more than six million nationally. These backlogs send the wrong message to our nation's immigrants who are eager to become full participants in our society, but must wait years before their citizenship applications can be reviewed and processed. I am hopeful that next year the President's budget will request enough funds to realistically address the Bureau's huge case backlog.

And lastly, it is disappointing that the bill reduces to 75 percent the federal contribution given to airports to install state-of-the-art in-line baggage screening equipment. Previously, certain airports had signed letter of intent (LOI) agreements committing the federal government to pay 90 percent of these costs. Reducing the federal contribution creates an additional burden for our communities and their airports. I regret that Congress will not honor our original commitment to pay 90 percent of the costs.

Unfortunately, fully addressing these and other critical national security concerns requires resources that Republican congressional leaders simply do not provide in this bill.

Nevertheless, Mr. Speaker, I will support this conference report to provide the resources, although limited, to help make our country safer.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise in support of House Joint Resolution 57, which I introduced last year with my distinguished colleague, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics, the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher).

I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher) for his support and his assistance in bringing this resolution to the floor. This resolution, I am proud to say, has the unanimous support of the California delegation in the House of Representatives, and I thank all of them for their sponsorship.

Mr. Speaker, House Joint Resolution 57 names the proposed learning center in the city of Downey the Columbia Memorial Space Science Learning Center. This naming is in honor of the seven brave astronauts who lost their lives on the Space Shuttle Columbia on February 1, 2003.

The city of Downey, which I am proud to say is in my 34th Congressional District, was home to the former Rockwell International plant where key components of NASA's space shuttle fleet, including the Columbia, were built. The history of America's space program runs deep through the fabric of Downey where virtually everyone in the city boasts of having a relative or a friend who played a key role in engineering or building our Nation's space shuttle fleet.

When NASA closed the shuttle manufacturing facility, it was Downey's great pride in its space heritage that motivated city leaders to incorporate a space science learning center as a cornerstone of its economic redevelopment plan. Former Representative Steve Horn's early support was key to this effort, and his ability to secure Federal resources for the center was instrumental in moving the project forward.

I am pleased to continue his work and to be able to have finalized the transfer of the former NASA site from the State of California to the city of Downey. When completed in 2006, the learning center will memorialize the Columbia astronauts, the rich space history of Downey, and all who helped realize our Nation's dream of space exploration.

To effectively teach current and future generations about this proud history, Downey has contracted an historian familiar with aeronautic development and its special context in southern California.

His or her work will be the principle source for history-oriented exhibits and programs at the center. The Columbia Learning Center, however, is also about the future of space exploration. Downey's leaders recognize that the city's legacy goes beyond astronauts and aeronautical engineers or the shuttles, Apollo modules, and moon capsules that were built in Downey during the last half century.

They know the future lies in our youth. The Columbia Memorial Space Science Learning Center will therefore design programs and exhibits to excite our youth about the sciences and to inspire them to become our country's future scientists, engineers and astronauts who will explore the universe and make discoveries we can now only imagine.

I cannot think of a more fitting memorial than to name the Downey Space Science Learning Center in honor of the brave men and women of the Columbia crew who gave their lives in the pursuits of space science and space exploration.

I am proud to sponsor this legislation with the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher) and the entire California delegation, and I urge its adoption.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in reluctant support of the Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations bill for Fiscal Year 2005.

I say reluctant, because while there are some good things in the bill, it is lacking due to the fact that the House Republican leadership has failed to reach a budget agreement with the Senate Republican leadership. As a result, the bill before us has an inadequate budget allocation for the important health and human services programs it funds.

While Democrats have reluctantly supported appropriations bills this year in order to move the process forward, we all recognize they are woefully inadequate based on the needs of the country. Nevertheless, my support of this bill is based on the fact that Chairman Ralph Regula and Chairman Bill Young are to be commended for the work they have done with the unrealistic budget limits they have been given, and the fact that I appreciate Chairman Regula including in the bill and report several important items I highlighted during our subcommittee hearings.

First, the bill contains an increase for the national folic acid education program. Representative Jo Ann Emerson and I were the authors of this program that was established by the Children's Health Act of 2000. Severe brain and spinal defects have dropped 27 percent in the U.S. since the government, in 1998, began requiring makers of cereal, pasta, bread and flour to fortify their foods with folic acid. However, a national public and health professions education campaign designed to increase the number of women taking folic acid daily is still imperative to eliminate these birth defects.

Second, language was included commending the Secretary of Health and Human Services for establishing an interagency committee on underage drinking and moving forward with a national media campaign, to be conducted by the Ad Council, to combat underage drinking. I feel certain that the final bill will include funding for the second year of this important national media campaign. These significant accomplishments by the department and by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration acting as the lead agency, stem from a bipartisan effort that I have been proud to lead with Representatives Frank Wolf, Rosa DeLauro, Zach Wamp, and Tom Osborne and supported by Senators Mike DeWine and Chris Dodd.

Also, a number of other issues have been addressed in our report, including the migrant and seasonal head start program, farmworker housing programs, a pending regulation in the Department of Labor regarding personal protective equipment for employees, and newborn screening initiatives. I ask the various departments to pay close attention to the committee's directives on these important subjects and the issues they raise based on the experiences of the many affected constituent groups and the input from the administration during budget oversight hearings.

In the end, however, this bill will be evaluated on the resources it provides to the many deserving programs within our subcommittee's jurisdiction. And unfortunately, due to the budget constraints I have already mentioned, the bill in front of us shortchanges some of the very programs and the very needs that so many witnesses told us about in their testimony.

For example, Congress and the President made a commitment to our nation's children though the No Child Left Behind legislation passed with so much fanfare two years ago. Unfortunately, against the backdrop of record school enrollments, unprecedented federal education accountability requirements, and rising demand for college assistance, the bill provides only a 3.6 percent increase for the Department of Education's discretionary programs. No Child Left Behind is actually cut $120 million below the Administration's request, and the bill provides $9.5 billion less than the funding promised by the No Child Left Behind authorization. While 4-year public colleges and universities have experienced an

average 26 percent tuition increase in the last two years, the bill freezes the maximum Pell Grant for low-income college students at $4,050.

Training America's work force is the key to competing in a global economy, and training is also essential to prevent the loss of American jobs to competitors overseas. Despite a loss of 1.8 million private sector jobs since President Bush took office, the bill provides $40 million less than last year for employment and training assistance programs administered by the Department of Labor.

Health programs point out the real dilemma in our bill. Although the bill does substantially increase funding for community health centers, global disease detection, AIDS drug assistance, and chronic disease prevention, a number of other programs are cut including rural health outreach grants, health training programs in primary care medicine and dentistry, the Maternal and Child Health Block Grant, and the Preventive Health and Health Services Block Grant. Funding for the National Institutes of Health is increased, but the 2.6 percent increase is the smallest in 19 years and less than the 3.5 percent increase estimated to cover inflation costs for biomedical research.

Democrats don't just criticize, however. We offered revisions to the budget resolution that would have allowed this bill to make a greater investment in education, health care, and medical research. When the bill was considered by the subcommittee and the full Appropriations Committee, we again offered amendments to add $7.4 billion to the bill by reducing by 30 percent the 2005 tax cuts for people with incomes over $1 million. In fact, polls consistently show that the American public is far more interested in preserving important education and health priorities than in tax cuts that benefit primarily the rich.

I agree with the common-sense approach to this problem that has been consistently laid out by Ranking Member David Obey. Let's simply reduce--not eliminate, but reduce--the tax break we give to millionaires--those with adjusted incomes greater than $1 million. By doing so we can increase Title I, add funding for No Child Left Behind programs, maintain college affordability by raising Pell grants, shore up our health safety net programs, rebuild our public health system to respond to disease outbreaks and possible terrorist attacks.

But these fiscally responsible efforts by Mr. Obey and other Democrats have been defeated by the Republican majority at each turn, resulting in the bill we are considering today.

The bill before the House is governed by a rule that prevents us from having these choices because the Republican leadership knows that given the opportunity this House would vote overwhelmingly to adequately fund this bill.

The Labor-HHS-Education bill, which is one of the most important bills that comes out this House, contains the most deserving programs administered by the federal government in support of the well-being of our people. These programs are also cost-effective in providing worker training and protection, helping to educate our children from Head Start to Pell grants, and in contributing to a healthy populace through our public health system and health safety net programs.

The bill in front of the House today is the best that can be done under the circumstances. But it does not reflect the aspirations of American society. I believe we can do more for America's children, America's workers, and America's future. Although I will support this bill today, I will continue to work with my colleagues on the Appropriations Committee and in the House to look for opportunities before we complete our work this year so that the future of America's children and America's families will be bright.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a woman whose 42 years of public service to the City of Los Angeles serves as an example to us all. On behalf of my esteemed colleagues, I would like to acknowledge this remarkable woman whose reputation for hard work, humility, and effectiveness is well deserved.

Ms. Cardella began her career in 1960 as a senior clerk stenographer for the Los Angeles City Health Department. In 1963, she transferred to the office of 13th District Councilman James Harvey Brown. Four years later, she joined the office of Fowler D. Jones, the first Chief Legislative Analyst for the Los Angeles City Council. Over the next 34 years, Ms. Cardella faithfully served as the Executive Assistant to each succeeding Chief Legislative Analyst.

She has had the opportunity to work with many of the city's leaders, including 4 mayors, 8 City Council presidents, 67 city council members, 4 city administrative officers, and all 7 chief legislative analysts. Ms. Cardella even worked for the city when my father, former Congressman Edward Roybal, started his career in elected office as a Los Angeles City Council Member.

As part of the team of workers that have led Los Angeles, Ms. Cardella played a role in responding to Los Angeles's triumphs and tragedies--working to prepare the city for the 1984 Olympic Games and to rebuild our city after three major earthquakes, two episodes of civil disturbance, and the Baldwin Hills Flood.

Ms. Cardella has meant many things to many people. To her neighborhood, she is a graduate of Benjamin Franklin High School. To others, she is an alumnus of Glendale College, where she received an associate of arts degree. To her family, she is a loved and respected mother and grandmother. To the city that she proudly served, she is the standard to which few can lay claim, but toward which all employees strive. All who know and have worked with Ms. Cardella, know that her loyalty to her office was second only to her loyalty to the citizens of Los Angeles themselves.

Therefore, Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I take this opportunity to express my thanks, and that of a grateful city, to Joyce Cardella for 42 years of dedication and public service.

Mr. Speaker, due to circumstances affecting the health of a family member, I was not present for rollcall votes 385 through 389 on Thursday, July 15. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall vote 385, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 386, ``no'' on rollcall vote 387, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 388, and ``yea'' on rollcall vote 389.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

The Chairman pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, let me begin by thanking the gentleman from Kentucky (Chairman Rogers) and the gentleman from Minnesota (Ranking Member Sabo) for their hard work on this very important bill.

Mr. Chairman, my amendment would prohibit the Citizenship and Immigration Service under the Department of Homeland Security from needlessly and dangerously contracting out work that is inherently governmental in nature and essential to maintaining our national security. This work is performed by immigration information officers, contact representatives and investigative assistants who are well- trained to understand our country's complex immigration laws and regulations. In the course of performing their duties, they often use highly classified information to prevent immigration fraud and ensure terrorists do not exploit our immigration laws.

The Office of Management and Budget, OMB, will argue that privatizing immigration officers will save taxpayers and the Federal Government money. The General Accounting Office, however, has challenged OMB's estimated savings derived from privatization. The Comptroller General recently stated that GAO cannot verify OMB's claims because government agencies do not have accounting systems to provide reliable tracking of costs and savings, but even if savings could be realized, the fact remains that the bottom line should never take precedent over our national security.

We need to have reliable, well-trained and experienced immigration personnel, employees who are directly accountable to the Department of Homeland Security and not motivated by production quotas set by profit- oriented contract employers with an historically high rate of turnover.

Of greater concern, however, is the Department of Homeland Security's inability to protect sensitive information and maintain quality control of contract workers. This danger is highlighted in a July 2003 GAO report that found that the Immigration Service did not have the basic infrastructure, including the oversight information and workforce, to ensure that its contracting activities were effective.

Furthermore, in a December 2003 report and in a March 2004 follow-up report, the Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security listed contracting procedures as a major management challenge for the Department.

Of equal concern is information in memos from the Department of Homeland Security that I received from Senator Lieberman's office. These memos contain evidence that Immigration Service management tried for months to discourage Homeland Security leadership from implementing the privatization review.

Let me quote two passages from a document prepared by consultants from Grant Thornton and PEC Solutions for Immigration Service officials. The first passage reads, ``Accomplishing the A-76 study under present scope will not achieve the A-76 program's overarching operational efficiency objectives, and also will not address the current extensive customer service problems.''

The second passage reads, ``Moving forward with an A-76 competition based on business processes limits the agency's ability to implement substantial organizational and operational improvements.''

Clearly, Mr. Chairman, contracting out of immigration provisions has every potential of endangering our country's ability to meet our goals of having a Department of Homeland Security that is well-armed to protect our country from those who would do it harm.

In closing, Mr. Chairman, my amendment does not attempt to address the overall issue of contracting out Federal jobs. My amendment is narrowly drafted to ensure that the work of immigration officers, which is inherently governmental in nature and critical to our national security, continues to remain the responsibility of trained and experienced Federal employees directly accountable to the Department of Homeland Security and not to the bottom line of a private company.

I urge my colleagues to support this very important national security amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Offered By: Ms. Roybal-Allard

Amendment No. 1: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following new section:

Offered By: Ms. Roybal-Allard

Amendment No. 2: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following new section:

Mr. Speaker, I will be voting for the resolution today because I agree with its praise of our troops in Iraq, who under difficult circumstances continue to display high standards and professionalism during the occupation and rebuilding of Iraq.

However, I am very disappointed in the resolution and will vote for it with reservations. The primary purpose of the resolution should have been to deplore any abuses which have occurred while prisoners are in U.S. custody, and to demand swift prosecution of those who committed illegal or unethical acts, including those responsible in the military chain of command. Atrocities in the Abu Ghraib prison, and anywhere else they may have been committed, must be thoroughly and openly addressed through congressional investigations. These investigations must also include the conduct of American contractors who had a role in overseeing prisoners. Irresponsibly, these important points are left out of the resolution the House is considering today.

The recent abuse of prisoners in the Abu Ghraib prison is not only disgraceful, it is damaging to the interests of the United States, and ultimately it endangers our men and women in uniform not just in Iraq but around the world. We must act quickly to convince the court of world opinion that the American people do not tolerate illegal or unethical conduct by Americans and will take the necessary steps to stop it and prevent it from happening again.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join my colleagues in recognizing the 18th National Minority Cancer Awareness Week.

We continue to make great strides in the fight against cancer. As a member of the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee, I was pleased to hear from Dr. Elias Zerhouni, the director of the National Institutes of Health, just this morning. Dr. Zerhouni and Dr. Von Eschenbach, the director of the National Cancer Institute, spoke about the enormous strides that are being made in cancer research. There are now 10 million cancer survivors in the U.S. compared to 3 million in 1971. Death rates from the four most common cancers--lung, breast, prostate, and colorectal--continue to decline.

However, cancer continues to take a significant toll in the U.S. This year, 1.3 million Americans will be diagnosed with cancer and, unfortunately, 556,000 are expected to die. Cancer remains the number two killer in the U.S.

I am particularly dismayed to see that the benefits of the research-- the breakthroughs that have been made in terms of prevention and treatment--are not being enjoyed by all communities equally. Sadly, minority communities continue to bear a disproportionate burden of cancer cases.

We know the consequences of such health disparities, and we know that many of them stem from inadequate access by our minority communities to preventative services and early detection. Minorities also have a lower survival rate. Clearly, these will continue to be significant issues that need to be addressed by the National Cancer Institute and the National Center for Minority Health and Health Disparities.

I was very pleased to visit this week with constituents from my congressional district representing One Voice Against Cancer. My constituents included Ivonne DeCorra from Huntington Park and Julie Fleshman from Los Angeles, who is also the executive director of the Pancreatic Cancer Action Network. Another visitor, Michele Perry, knows the heartache of cancer first hand. Having lost her mother to cancer at a young age, Michele was herself diagnosed in 2000. Her personal trials however, have driven her to become an advocate for cancer research and patient programs so that she, her daughter, and countless other will never have to feel the heartache of cancer again.

It is that type of dedication and commitment--stemming from sometimes tragic personal experiences--that have made One Voice Against Cancer an effective voice in advocating for adequate funding for cancer research, prevention and treatment. I and my colleagues heard their message this week, and despite difficult budget circumstances, we will continue the fight against cancer.

The future health of America as a whole will be influenced substantially by our success in improving the health of minority and other medically underserved populations. By increasing awareness of programs and services in minority communities, we can provide an opportunity to engage these communities in the fight against cancer.

That was the message of One Voice Against Cancer this week, incorporated in their theme--``Cancer is a Burden. Finding Help Shouldn't Be.'' And that is the message that my colleagues and I must act on as we recognize National Minority Cancer Awareness Week and continue the fight against cancer.

Mr. Speaker, today, my colleagues Mr. Anibal Acevedo-Vila, Mr. Joe Baca, Mr. Xavier Becerra, Mr. Dennis Cardoza, Mr. Charlie Gonzalez, Mr. Raul Grijalva, Mr. Luis Gutierrez, Mr. Ruben Hinojosa, Mr. Robert Menendez, Ms. Grace Napolitano, Mr. Solomon Ortiz, Mr. Ed Pastor, Mr. Silvestre Reyes, Mr. Ciro Rodriguez, Ms. Linda Sanchez, Ms. Loretta Sanchez, Mr. Jose Serrano, Ms. Hilda Soils, Mr. Nydia Velazquez and I join together to honor the career of Antonia Hernandez as President and General Counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), a nationally recognized non-profit organization. Through the legal system, community education, research and advocacy MALDEF is dedicated to protecting the civil rights of the nation's 40 million Latinos. We would like to take this opportunity to congratulate Ms. Hernandez on her 23 years of distinguished service at MALDEF and to thank her for her tireless advocacy on behalf of the Latino community in this country.

In so many ways, Antonia Hernandez is a role model for all Americans. Born in Mexico, she and her family moved to the United States when she was only 8 years old. They settled in the Maravilla area of East Los Angeles where her father supported his wife and six children as a gardener and laborer. As the eldest child, Antonia Hernandez learned English quickly and excelled in school. She would later go on to attend UCLA where she received her bachelor's degree, teaching certificate and, in 1974, her law degree.

Soon after passing the California State Bar exam, Antonia Hernandez became a U.S. citizen. She later told a Los Angeles Times reporter that her patriotism to this country helped to inspire her interest in public service. ``I love (this country) more than most because I don't take the rights and privileges of an American citizen for granted. I remembered there was a knot in my throat when I took the oath (of citizenship),'' The Los Angeles Times reported in 1985.

An expert in civil rights and immigration issues, she began her legal career as a Staff Attorney with the Los Angeles Center for Law and Justice and worked as counsel to the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary under the leadership of Senator Edward Kennedy. In 1981, Ms. Hernandez joined MALDEF as Regional Counsel in Washington, DC. Ms. Hernandez was elected to MALDEF's presidency in 1985 where she was responsible for directing all litigation and advocacy programs, managing a $6.2 million annual budget, and supervising a 75 person staff.

Ms. Hernandez's management expertise guided the organization to long- term financial stability. In 1991, she created a permanent endowment for MALDEF by raising funds for the national headquarters building in Los Angeles. She has been pivotal in overseeing the national expansion of the organization, which today has offices in Chicago, Houston, Sacramento, Washington DC, San Antonio, and Atlanta. Most recently, Ms. Hernandez directed the opening of the Atlanta office in 2002, to serve the burgeoning Latino population in the Southeast.

A tireless champion for educational equity, Ms. Hernandez has numerous accomplishments in this area. She led MALDEF's legal challenge to the state of Texas in Edgewood Ind. Sch. Dist. v. Kirby to counter the economic and racial disparities used in financing Texas public schools. This legal battle, which began in 1984, ended successfully in 1995 when the Texas Supreme Court held that the Texas legislature had the authority to require wealthier school districts to share their funding with poorer districts, in turn creating an educational system that provides greater opportunities for all Texas children.

In California, MALDEF successfully challenged a similar school financing system in Godinez v. Davis. The state had a system that short-changed urban schools while providing more money to suburban areas. This case resulted in the award of hundreds of millions of dollars for urban area schools, many with a significant number of Latino students.

Antonia Hernandez fought for the rights of limited-English proficient students by mounting a case against the Denver School District in 1984 for their lack of programs to educate non-English speakers. As a result of their legal victories, MALDEF won the creation of noted bilingual and multicultural programs for the Latino students of Denver.

Antonia Hernandez also won key victories for Latino students by expanding their access to higher education. In 1993, MALDEF was victorious in LULAC v. Richards, where the Texas Supreme Court ruled that the lack of higher education programs in the predominantly Latino area of South Texas violated the state constitution.

Under Ms. Hernandez's leadership, MALDEF helped to secure the right for undocumented students in California to attend state universities. In 2001, MALDEF developed a successful grassroots campaign in support of legislation that allows undocumented students in California to enroll at any

publicly financed California university for the same cost as other state residents. To further this effort nationwide, in 2003, she established the Ellen and Federico Jimenez Scholarship Fund for undocumented students who are ineligible for state or federal financial school assistance. This scholarship makes the critical difference in the lives of students who would otherwise be unable to afford the cost of a higher education

As a mother of three children, Antonia Hernandez also realizes the tremendous influence parents have in lives of their children. That's why, under her leadership, MALDEF graduated thousands of parent leaders from its Parent School Partnership (PSP) program, which instructs parents on how to become involved in their children's education.

In the area of employment, Antonia Hernandez has provided opportunities for Latinos by mounting legal battles for fair hiring practices. Her work on the landmark legal case of Ballasteros v. Lucky forced the food service industries to allow Latinos to work in every major grocery chain in California. The victory resulted in the hiring of Latinos in several hundred retail stores.

Antonia Hernandez has been a tenacious defender of immigration reform. Working with Congress and state governments, she has been a devoted advocate on behalf of fair and just immigration reform. Most notably, in 1985, MALDEF successfully halted the implementation of California's Proposition 187, which would have barred immigrants from receiving public education, medical services, and other public benefits.

Underlying all of MALDEF's efforts is a steadfast commitment to political empowerment in the Latino community. With this in mind, under Antonia Hernandez's leadership, MALDEF has vigorously defended the Voting Rights Act of 1965. In 1982, she helped to create a new section of the Act that explicitly outlaws discriminatory election practices. She also championed a bilingual provision to protect limited-English proficient voters. In order to ensure a strong political voice for Latinos throughout the country, MALDEF led nationwide census outreach campaigns in 1990 and 2000. Over the years, MALDEF has won many Latino- majority voting districts, one of which resulted in the first Latino seat in 100 years in Los Angeles County (1990 Garza v. County of L.A.) and another which created the state of Illinois' first Latino Congressional district as a remedy for past discrimination in the Chicago area (1995 King v. Illinois State Board of Elections).

Antonia Hernandez has worked to ensure that Latinos receive their fair share of public services, including access to medical insurance, language translation for public services, and fair and equitable treatment in land-use decisions. Just one example is the 2001 case in which MALDEF won a case against the City of Poth, a South Texas town that finally agreed to pave the streets in its Latino neighborhoods.

Mr. Speaker, Ms. Hernandez is a visionary. Through her work at MALDEF, her service to the Latino community has truly improved lives and helped to carry out the organization's unwavering mission to remove obstacles that prevent the Latino community from realizing its dreams. We thank her for her many years of public service and we are grateful that she will continue her work in the community as she moves on to serve as President and CEO of the California Community Foundation. Her courage, compassion, and, above all, her dedication to helping others have made a difference at MALDEF and in the Latino community. We trust that this is indeed not an end to her work in public service, but a new beginning to even greater victories ahead.

Mr. Speaker, at a time when our country is at war, Members of this House must stand, not as either Democrat or Republican, but together as Americans totally united in support of our troops.

For that reason, Mr. Speaker, it is with bitter disappointment and regret that I find that I must stand in opposition to House Resolution 557. By introducing this flawed partisan resolution, which is therefore tainted in purpose, the Republican leadership has chosen, once again, to try to divide us rather than unify us during this dark time in our Nation's history.

What makes H.R. 557 even more misguided is the fact that our Ranking Member Congressman Jack Murtha--who many in this

august body would surely agree has no equal in Congress when it comes to supporting our troops--was not even consulted or given the opportunity to take part in the drafting of this resolution to ensure a well-deserved bipartisan tribute is paid to our troops in Iraq.

Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I take this opportunity to extend my own personal praise and appreciation for the sacrifices and outstanding service of our brave men and women in Iraq.

Like all Americans, I am extremely proud of their service, their commitment, and, yes, their willingness, if necessary, to pay the ultimate price to protect our country at home and abroad.

Brave men and women such as Lance Corporal Henry Lopez, Army Spec. Joo H. Bahk, and Corporal Alex Argumedo, and Marines Jonathan Kirkpatrick, Juan Silva and Javier Martinez, and many others from my 34th Congressional District who are true heroes in every sense of the word.

Like all Americans, I am grateful to the thousands of soldiers who have been wounded in battle and whose lives have been forever changed because of their severe injuries suffered on our behalf. I had the privilege of meeting with some of them at Walter Reed Army Medical Center last year, and I found the experience both moving and humbling. They are truly an inspiration and deserve our praise and the support they need to heal. They also deserve and have earned every opportunity we can give them and their families to look forward to a better future.

And Mr. Speaker, to compensate for that which H.R. 557 fails to do, I offer my deep personal sorrow, regret, and respect to those like Army Specialist Jason Kristoffer Chappell and Army Spc. Jose L. Mora who paid the ultimate price for our country. And to all the families who lost a loved one, I extend my most heartfelt condolences.

In closing Mr. Speaker, let me, once again, extend my praise and appreciation for the sacrifices made by our troops in Iraq and throughout the world. Every day, in ways both large and small, they make us all very proud to be Americans. May God continue to bless them and keep them safe.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the arrival of Korean immigrants to the United States.

On January 13, 1903, the first wave of Korean immigrants arrived in Hawaii. Although recruited to do backbreaking work on the sugar plantations, they arrived with great hope that they would find a better life for themselves and their children in this country. The second wave of Korean immigrants arrived after World War II and the Korean War. They came in search of political and educational freedom. The third influx of Korean immigrants arrived after 1965. Many in this last group were medical professionals who came to fill the shortage of health care workers in our inner cities. Since then, others have arrived and have pursued the American Dream of owning successful small businesses. These ``mom and pop'' shops have helped to revitalize declining neighborhoods and provide an important economic stimulus in communities throughout the nation. Despite language and cultural barriers and sometimes blatant discrimination, Korean Americans--like so many other immigrants who arrive to this country--are helping to keep America strong.

Toward this end, the Korean American community has shown its tremendous resiliency. Racial struggles exist in all communities. But we are obligated to reflect back upon certain tragedies as important reminders. Following the loss of life and extensive property damage in the Los Angeles riots of 1992, the Korean-American community and the Nation grieved and sought out better ways to prevent future violence. Many in the Korean-American community cite the Los Angeles riots as the historical turning point that led to the political mobilization of Korean Americans nationwide and brought about a new awareness for the need to reach out and build better relationships with other ethnic groups.

Today, as we continue to heal past wounds and embrace our differences, I can say with great pride that the growing Korean American community in this country makes up a valuable, dynamic and integral part of our diverse society. Korean Americans serve in our armed services. World War II history buffs will recall the brave and heroic acts of Colonel Young Oak Kim. He became the most decorated soldier in the 100th Infantry Battalion/442nd Regimental Combat Team. For his bravery, he earned the Silver Star Medal for saving countless American lives. As successful entrepreneurs, Korean-American business owners contribute $45 billion annually to our Nation's economy. Korean Americans have a great influence in the fashion industry, international trade, restaurants and many other community businesses. Korean cuisine is also crossing cultural lines. Enjoyed by Americans throughout the country, kimchi, for example, is a spicy pickled cabbage that is now famous for literally bringing tears to the faint.

Overall, Korean Americans have made significant contributions to this country in a wide variety of professions, ranging from the arts to medicine to the sciences. As a Nation, we are benefiting from this tremendous wealth of knowledge and talent.

With nearly 2 million Korean Americans living in the United States, Korean immigration is an important part of our Nation's history and collective heritage. Like most immigrants, Koreans brought with them the deeply embedded and cherished American values of hard work, sacrifice, and respect for family, church and community.

This was especially apparent at the January 13 gala dinner that I attended along with my colleague, Linda Sanchez. The beautiful affair brought to an end a year-long celebration marking the 100th anniversary of the arrival of Korean Americans to this country. The Centennial Committee of Korean Immigration to the U.S. and the Korean American Day Committee are to be commended for making the celebration possible.

I would like to thank both Committees for allowing me to be a part of this wonderful celebration and, above all, for their commitment to preserving the tremendous history of the Korean American community. Because of their efforts, current and future generations will have a greater awareness of the proud legacy of the Korean American community and its important contribution over the last 100 years to the beautiful mosaic that today makes up and binds our diverse and great Nation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this extremely flawed bill. A bill that takes care of drug and insurance companies at the expense of our Nation's seniors.

Instead of helping our seniors, Mr. Speaker, this bill will result in higher drug prices, increased Medicare premiums for seniors who refuse to be forced into HMOs, and the erosion of retiree coverage for over two million seniors.

These are just a few of the problems with this bill, Mr. Speaker. There are far too many to name in the limited time I have.

Our seniors deserve better. They have worked and sacrificed and contributed greatly to our country.

We must not turn our backs on them, Mr. Speaker, with the passage of this bill. Instead let us honor our seniors by defeating this bill and coming back with a prescription drug plan that is affordable, comprehensive and guaranteed. A plan, Mr. Speaker, that protects Medicare not destroys it.

Let tonight's victory be for our seniors, not the pharmaceutical and insurance companies.