Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 334, had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, later today the House will consider H. Res. 505, a bill that condemns the tragic murder of Dr. George Tiller, and offers our condolences to his wife, four children and 10 grandchildren.

He was known as a doctor of last resort and a friend to women when they were in desperate need of support and care. His murder in his church in Wichita, where he served as an usher and where his wife sang in the choir, was a violent, lawless and senseless act.

At his memorial service this past Saturday, Dr. Tiller was remembered for his generosity of spirit and his sense of humor. Let us also remember him for his courage.

Mahalo nui loa (thank you very much).

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 505, which condemns the tragic murder of Dr. George R. Tiller of Wichita, Kansas. I would like to thank the author of the bill, Congresswoman Louise Slaughter and Judiciary Chairman John Conyers for their expeditious work in bringing this bill to the floor.

We mourn the loss of Dr. Tiller, a husband, father of four, and grandfather of ten. We also mourn the loss of a man who was a friend to women and young girls around the world, who he saw through their most desperate hours of need.

Dr. Tiller, born and raised in Wichita, was the son of a physician. In medical school, Dr. Tiller planned to become a dermatologist. After his father, mother, sister, and brother-in-law died in a 1970 plane crash, he returned to Kansas to close his father's family practice. His father's patients pleaded with him to return and take over the practice. Eventually, his clinic evolved from general family practice to focusing on reproductive services.

Acts of terror and intimidation were an all too common occurrence at his clinic. In 1986, Dr. Tiller's clinic, the Women's Health Care Services, was bombed. In 1991, it was blockaded for six weeks. In 1993, Dr. Tiller was shot in both arms while trying to enter the clinic. In May 2009, vandals cut wires to security cameras and made holes in the clinic roof.

Dr. Tiller was murdered on Sunday, May 31, 2009. He was shot in his place of worship, the Reformation Lutheran Church. Dr. Tiller served as an usher and his wife, Jeanne, sang in the choir.

I would like to insert into the Record an article by Judith Warner that was published in her New York Times blog. One of Dr. Tiller's cases mentioned by Ms. Warner, that involving a 9 year-old girl who had been raped by her father, is particularly haunting.

This child was 18 weeks pregnant and her small body just would not be able to physically bear the burden of labor and delivery. There

was no doctor or hospital in her rural, Southern town that would provide her with an abortion. She was referred to Dr. Tiller, the doctor of last resort. Dr. Tiller took her case for free. He kept her under his personal care for three days. The young girl and her sister stated that even in this difficult and heart-wrenching situation, he could not have been more wonderful in his care.

On Saturday, memorial services were held for Dr. Tiller. His family and friends remembered him for his generosity and his sense of humor. Let us also remember him for his courage.

Mahalo nui loa (thank you very much).

[From the New York Times, June 4, 2009]

Dr. Tiller's Important Job

(By Judith Warner)

The 9-year-old girl had been raped by her father. She was

18 weeks pregnant. Carrying the baby to term, going through

labor and delivery, would have ripped her small body apart.

There was no doctor in her rural Southern town to provide

her with an abortion. No area hospital would even consider

taking her case.

Susan Hill, the president of the National Women's Health

Foundation, which operates reproductive health clinics in

areas where abortion services are scarce or nonexistent,

called Dr. George Tiller, the Wichita, Kan., ob-gyn who last

Sunday was shot to death by an abortion foe in the entry

foyer of his church.

She begged.

``I only asked him for a favor when it was a really

desperate story, not a semi-desperate story,'' she told me

this week. Tiller was known to abortion providers--and

opponents--as the ``doctor of last resort''--the one who took

the patients no one else would touch.

``He took her for free,'' she said. ``He kept her three

days. He checked her himself every few hours. She and her

sister came back to me and said he couldn't have been more

wonderful. That's just the way he was.''

Other patients of Dr. Tiller's shared their stories this

week on a special ``Kansas Stories'' page hosted by the Web

site ``A Heartbreaking Choice.''

One New York mother wrote of having been referred by an

obstetrician to Tiller after learning, in her 27th week of

pregnancy, that her soon-to-be son was ``so very sick'' that,

once born, he'd have nothing more than ``a brief life of

respirators, dialysis, surgeries and pain.'' In-state doctors

refused to perform an abortion.

``The day I drove up to the clinic in Wichita, Kansas, to

undergo the procedure that would end the life of my precious

son, I also walked into the nightmare of abortion politics.

In this world, reality rarely gets through the rhetoric,''

wrote another mother, from Texas, of the shouts, graphic

posters and protesters' video camera that greeted her when

she came to see Tiller.

Our understanding of what late abortion is like has been

almost entirely shaped in public discourse by the opponents

of abortion rights. In recent years, discussions of the

issue have been filled with the gory details of so-called

partial-birth abortion; the grim miseries that drive some

women and girls to end their pregnancies after the first

trimester have somehow been elided.

``Late abortion is not a failure of contraception. It's for

medical reasons,'' Eleanor Smeal, the president of the

Feminist Majority Foundation, who has worked to defend

abortion providers like Tiller against harassment and

violence since the mid-1980s, told me this week. ``We've made

pregnancy a fairy tale where there are no fetal

complications, there's no cancer, no terrible abuse of girls,

no cases where to make a girl go all the way through a

pregnancy is to destroy her. These are the realities of the

story. That's what Dr. Tiller worked with--the realities.''

There was a great deal of emotion in the air this week as

the reality of Tiller's death set in. Much of it was

mournful, some was celebratory, some was cynical and self-

serving.

There were the requisite expressions of disapproval and

disavowal by politicians from both sides of the abortion

divide. And yet it seemed to me that even from pro-choice

politicians, the response was muted. In death, as in life, no

one wanted to embrace this man who had specialized in helping

women who learned late in their pregnancies that their

fetuses had gross abnormalities.

It seemed that no one wanted to be too closely associated

with the muck and mire of what Tiller had to do in carrying

out the risky and emotionally traumatic second- and third-

trimester abortions that other doctors and hospitals refused

to do. In news reports, there was a tendency to frame the

``abortion doctor's'' murder almost as a kind of combat

death: a natural occupational hazard.

Yet Tiller--who went to work in a bulletproof vest, lived

in a gated community and drove a bulletproof car--was a

doctor, not a soldier. And it is precisely this kind of

thinking--this viewing of his life and work through the lens

of our most gruesome cultural warfare, this slippage and

mixing up of medicine and politics--that left him largely

unprotected at the time of his death.

Someone resembling Scott Roeder, the man charged in Dr.

Tiller's murder, was seen on Saturday trying to pour glue

into the lock on the back door of a Kansas City clinic.

Before that, abortion providers around the country had been

telling local law enforcement and the United States Justice

Department that harassment at their clinics was on the rise,

and they were scared. The Feminist Majority Foundation had

been hearing all spring that the atmosphere outside clinics

was heating up in the wake of the new pro-choice president's

election. ``We all lived through Clinton, the shootings in

'93 and '94. We were concerned some of the extremists said

they had to take the fight 'back to the streets,''' Smeal

said.

There are legal protections in place that ought to keep

abortion providers like Tiller safe. The Freedom of Access to

Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act, passed by Congress after the

1993 murder of Dr. David Gunn outside his Pensacola, Fla.,

women's health clinic and the attempted murder of Tiller that

same year, prohibits property damage, acts or threats of

force, and interference with and intimidation of anyone

entering a reproductive health care facility.

When the federal law is backed by complementary state laws,

and when local law enforcement officers apply those laws

assiduously, serious violence greatly declines. When the

law's not applied strenuously, when vandalism goes

uninvestigated, when protesters are allowed to photograph or

videotape patients arriving at women's health clinics, when

death threats aren't followed up, more serious acts of

physical violence follow. In fact, when intimidation occurs

at a clinic, the reported rate of violence triples, the

Feminist Majority Federation's 2008 National Clinic Violence

Survey found.

``We really do need to arrest people who are trespassing.

Arrest people who are gluing locks. Committing more minor

violations of the law so criminal activity doesn't escalate,

so these criminals don't feel emboldened,'' said Vicki

Saporta, the president of the National Abortion Federation.

``In places where the laws are enforced, you don't see

violence escalate. Protesters generally go someplace where

there's a more hospitable climate,'' she told me. But, she

added, in a lot of communities, law enforcement views clinic

violence as a political problem. ``They don't view it for

what it is: criminal activity outside of a commercial

establishment,'' she said. ``Law enforcement can't treat this

as a political issue. It's a criminal issue.''

We as a nation cannot continue to provide a hospitable

environment for the likes of Roeder because the thought of

what happens to fetuses in late abortions turns our stomachs.

We have to accept that sometimes terrible things happen to

young girls. We have to face the fact that sometimes desired

pregnancies go tragically wrong. We have to weigh our

repugnance for late abortion against the consequences for

women and girls of being denied life-saving medical

treatment.

Only a tiny handful of doctors in this country will, like

Dr. Tiller, provide abortion services for girls or women who

are advanced in their pregnancies. These doctors aren't well

known to patients or even to other doctors, but they're

closely monitored by antiabortion groups, who know where they

work, where they live and where they worship. Roeder may have

been a lone gunman, but in the largest possible sense, he did

not act alone. The location of Tiller's gated community was

prominently featured on an easily-accessed Web site, along

with a map of the streets surrounding his house. It was

really only a matter of time before someone was unbalanced

enough to take the bait.

Most Americans, I'm sure, do not believe that a 9-year-old

should be forced to bear a child, or that a woman should have

no choice but to risk her life to carry a pregnancy to term.

By averting our eyes from the ugliness and tragedy that

accompany some pregnancies, we have allowed anti-abortion

activists to define the dilemma of late abortion. We have

allowed them to isolate and vilify doctors like Tiller.

We can no longer be complicit--through our muted

disapproval or our complacency--in domestic terror.

Madam Speaker, aloha! I rise today in support of the Reuniting Families Act, a bill introduced by Congressman Michael Honda. I am proud to be an original cosponsor of this important bill.

There are currently 5.8 million people in the family immigration backlog waiting unconscionable periods of time to reunite with their family members. The Reunifying Families Act takes important steps toward fixing our broken family immigration system by reducing the waiting times for legal immigrants.

One important piece of Mr. Honda's bill is the inclusion of the Filipino Veterans Family Reunification Act (H.R. 2412), a bill I have introduced for the past two congressional sessions. My bill would exempt the sons and daughters of Filipino World War II veterans from the cap on immigration numbers that have resulted in waiting periods for up to two decades for immigrant visas to the United States.

I have listened to many heartbreaking stories of our Filipino veterans, many of whom are in their 80s and 90s, waiting patiently with the hope that one day that their children will be able to come to the United States to care for them. I am glad that the Filipino Veterans Family Reunification Act is a part of the Reuniting Families Act.

The family bond is precious and it is the bedrock of society. Any policy that would keep family members apart for decades at a time, husband from wife, mother from child, is not morally defensible. The real solution is to reward immigrants for following the law, not punish them with unreasonably long separations.

I look forward to working with my colleagues by providing for the reunification of all our families.

Thank you very much. We are going to be focusing on health care tonight for this hour, and I just wanted to share with all of you a little bit of my background because I know what it's like not to have health care.

I came to this country as an immigrant. My mother brought me and my brothers to Hawaii, lucky me, and raised us as a single parent. We didn't have much, and she worked for many years in a job that did not have any benefit, no vacation, no health care, and I remember growing up that my greatest fear was that my mother would get sick, and if she did, she wouldn't be able to go to work, and if she didn't go to work, there literally would not be money for food or rent.

So, today, in our country over 45 million people have no health insurance. I know what that's like. Our current system does not serve these millions of people, nor does our current system serve those who have health insurance because of rising costs which have not kept up with wages.

Our current system also does not serve our businesses well, where employer-based health insurance premiums have nearly doubled since 2000 and continue to rise.

We're spending in this country over $2 trillion annually on health care with no one happy, certainly not 45-plus million people without any insurance, certainly not the business community, certainly not those people who literally, many of them, in fact, many individuals who file for bankruptcy in our country do so because of catastrophic health problems and costs.

And our current system is spending almost 16 percent to 18 percent of the gross domestic product on health insurance, and yet with this kind of expenditure are we getting the kind of results that you would expect for each of us, spending something like $67,000 a year on health care? No.

American children are two times as likely to die by the age of five as children in Portugal, Spain, or Slovenia. Pretty amazing, isn't it?

It is. Did I mention the costs go up and up and up? There's no end in sight, frankly, to rely upon the private health insurance carriers to resolve this problem which has been with us. Remember, when I came here and my mother didn't have health insurance, it was a number of decades ago. I won't tell you how many, but the problems remain.

And this is why the Progressive Caucus is very much focused as we focus on reducing costs and maintaining access and choice for doctors and health care plans and really focusing on affordable quality health care, that we want to have a public option, a public option to give the people of our country a choice as to whether or not, if they have their current private carrier insurance and they're happy with it, they can stay with that. But for those who want to have another option, who want to see competition in the health insurance market through a public option, that's what the Progressive Caucus wants to see.

This is why so many people from all across the country are supporting health care reform. It's not just top down. We have all been having reforms all across the country, in my own State, and I can talk about that a little bit more. I think I have been sort of hogging the time, so why don't I send it over, if you don't mind.

Will the gentleman yield?

I also mentioned the fact that so many of our working families who file for bankruptcy do so because of catastrophic medical expenses. And in a country that is spending $2 trillion a year on medical care and 45 million-plus people not insured, it's astounding that we continue this system, which obviously is not working for people who are working, middle class families, for businesses.

We have to do something. And the great thing is that we have an opportunity now, looking at all of this data, to come together to make some changes. For the first time, we have this wonderful opportunity, in over 15 years, to make some changes to the system that is not working for anybody, really.

Yes, I'll yield.

It just points out how broken this health care system is when people who are working, when people who are educated and when people who have good jobs cannot afford their health care. So, again, it points out that there are things we need to do.

In fact, I had mentioned earlier in my remarks that many of us have been having health care forums in our communities. I had one in my community last week on the big island of Hawaii, and we had representatives from the hospitals, from the medical profession and from the dean of our medical school. While this whole health care issue is very complicated, certain common themes came out.

First of all, of course, is the recognition that the cost is astronomical and that there is no end in sight. In terms

of what we can do, I was really interested to know that there was this focus on prevention, on primary care. These are two areas that our current system does not reward, that it does not pay attention to, so we've got this topsy-turvy kind of a system where we're actually paying a lot of money for quantity, not quality, because if you really cared about saving cost--just focusing on the cost of health care for a moment--we would be spending a lot more on prevention so that people wouldn't have to go for long periods of time until their illnesses would be exacerbated and then they would have to go to the emergency rooms or wherever they would have to go to get much more expensive care. So prevention is really important, but our current system does not really pay attention to prevention.

Also, if we had more emphasis and support for primary care providers, it would be the same thing. We would probably save billions and billions of dollars every year by enabling people to see their primary care providers. Of course, we know that we don't have as many primary care physicians and nurse practitioners and others as we need; but if we spent more time on the primary care side, then we would avoid some of these really expensive kinds of treatments later on. So this system is very topsy-turvy.

I yield back.

Thank you for yielding.

That's the thing. This system is so broken that you've got people from all segments. You have Republicans and Democrats. You have doctors, nurses, hospitals, and providers.

Small businesses. You have them all coming in, saying: Let's really fix this. Let's identify the problem and let's fix it.

In our country, we like competition, but I don't think anybody could really say that there is competition going on among the private health insurance carriers. It's all very complicated. Jan talked about how, if you don't read the fine print, you don't even know if you're not covered for something that you think you're covered for. So it's all very nontransparent.

That's why the Progressive Caucus is supporting a public insurance option that is accountable and that is transparent. Believe me, those two adjectives do not apply to the private insurance carriers, because insurance is traditionally regulated, or in a manner of speaking, very little regulation actually occurs at the State level. I'll use Hawaii as an example.

The State of Hawaii regulates the rates for automobile insurance because Hawaii is a ``no fault'' State. The State regulates the rates for workers' compensation. I would say most States regulate workers' compensation insurance rates, but there is no rate regulation, and there is no review of the rates that private insurance health care carriers charge. In fact, most States, I would venture to say, don't even require any kind of information from their private insurance carriers. That is why there is no competition.

As Americans, we like competition. We want to see competition between a transparent, accountable public insurance option and a private option. Believe me, if people like their private options, or their private carriers, then that's what it is. It's a choice, and they can keep it. If they are satisfied, they ought to be able to keep it.

I think that when the American public finds out what we're talking about with a public option that they will support it because it's choice. Nobody is forcing anything down anyone's throat. So when the American public receives accurate information, as opposed to being scared to death, I think they know what the appropriate answers are. That's part of what we need to do here. That's what we're doing tonight, to talk about these options that we have to talk about, what kind of focus we should have in terms of how we're going to use our health care dollars: Are we going to use it for prevention? Are we going to use it for primary care? Are we going to make those kinds of decisions with regard to how we spend $2 trillion every year? We hope we can reduce that. But with accurate information, I think the American public is perfectly able to make the correct decisions or appropriate decisions.

When you talk about the people who are already being covered by Medicare or are about to get there, the fact of the matter is that our country is a rapidly aging country; and, in fact, Hawaii has one of the fastest aging populations in the entire country. So the issue of health care coverage and how we're going to do it is very much on people's minds. When you talk about, how are people supposed to take care of their long-term care needs, that is a huge, huge concern in our country.

So what we should be also talking about is, how are we going to help our elders age in place as opposed to having to be institutionalized where the costs are so much greater? There are just so many choices that we can be making that truly enables the people of our country to sleep soundly at night, knowing their needs are being met.

I don't think there is anything wrong with the single- payer. But as you say, we are dealing with a lot of interests and ideas, and as President Obama said, this is a time when all of the perspectives ought to be given consideration and due respect. And I think that moving this discussion to a consideration of a public insurance option is a pretty large step, in my view. And if you add that in addition to the promoting of the use of information technology for medical records, and there are a number of other things we can do to move the ball so that we can get quality medical care for more people and have it affordable, I think that what we are talking about right now with the public option moves that ball in that direction.

Ditto for me.

As I had mentioned earlier, it is generally the States regulate, so-called regulate, insurance companies. So most States do not have the kind of resources or even the laws that allow them to look at what the health care insurance companies are doing, how they are basing their cost increases or their premium increases. So there really is a lack of transparency and accountability. And when you don't have the ability to look at the relationship between the rates they are charging and what the claims are, how can you even begin to say that people's needs are actually being met or that cost containment is actually occurring? You can't.

You can't.

Health care is a right, not a privilege, and everyone in our country deserves quality, affordable health care with choice.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce the North Maui Coastal Preservation Act of 2009, a bill directing the National Park Service to study the suitability and feasibility of designating certain lands along the northern coast of Maui, between Sprecklesville and Paia, as a unit of the National Park System.

The citizens of Maui strongly support preservation of this coast, which provides important open space and public beach areas. Thousands of post cards in support of creating a national park or national seashore along this coast have been sent to me and to my predecessor.

This beautiful coastline is under significant development pressure. Its closeness to major population centers in Maui and its popularity with both visitors and residents makes protecting access a major concern.

Supporters of this park have asked that it be named after Congresswoman Patsy Takemoto Mink, a native of Maui who grew up in the Hamakua Poko/Paia area. While this bill, which authorizes a study, does not direct what the prospective national park would be named, I would certainly support naming it after Patsy Mink, whose commitment to the people of the island and state was without question.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Ka`u Coast Preservation Act, a bill directing the National Park Service to assess the feasibility of designating coastal lands on the Ka`u Coast of the island of Hawaii between Kapao`o Point and Kahuku Point as a unit of the National Park System.

Late last year, the National Park Service issued a reconnaissance report that made a preliminary assessment of whether the Ka`u Coast would meet the National Park Service's demanding criteria as a resource of national significance.

The reconnaissance survey concluded that ``based upon the significance of the resources in the study area, and the current integrity and intact condition of these resources, a preliminary finding of national significance and suitability can be concluded.'' The report goes on to recommend that Congress proceed with a full resource study of the area.

Although under significant development pressure, the coastline of Ka`u is still largely unspoiled. The study area contains significant natural, geological, and archeological features. The northern part of the study area is adjacent to Hawaii Volcanoes National Park and contains a number of noteworthy geological features, including an ancient lava tube known as the Great Crack, which the National Park Service has expressed interest in acquiring in the past.

The study area includes both black and green sand beaches as well as a significant number of endangered and threatened species, most notably the endangered hawksbill turtle (at least half of the Hawaiian population of this rare sea turtle nests within the study area), the threatened green sea turtle, the highly endangered Hawaiian monk seal, the endangered Hawaiian hawk, native bees, the endangered and very rare Hawaiian orange-black damselfly (the largest population in the state), and a number of native endemic birds. Humpback whales and spinner dolphins also frequent the area. The Ka`u Coast also boasts some of the best remaining examples of native coastal vegetation in Hawaii.

The archeological resources related to ancient Hawaiian settlements within the study area are also very impressive. These include dwelling complexes, heiau (religious shrines), walls, fishing and canoe houses or sheds, burial sites, petroglyphs, water and salt collection sites, caves, and trails. The Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail runs through the study area.

The Ka`u Coast is a truly remarkable area: its combination of natural, archeological, cultural, and recreational resources, as well as its spectacular viewscapes, are an important part of Hawaii's and our nation's natural and cultural heritage. I believe a full feasibility study, which was recommended in the reconnaissance survey, will confirm that the area meets the National Park Services high standards as an area of national significance.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce a bill that recognizes the contributions of Jesse Kuhaulua, known professionally as Takamiyama Daigoro, a trailblazer in the sport of sumo wrestling.

Maui-born and a graduate of Baldwin High School in Wailuku, Jesse made his debut as an aspirant in Japan's national sport in the winter of 1964 in Osaka. At the time, he knew little of the Japanese language and the subtleties of the sport itself. In this initial test, he wondered if his stay in Japan would be counted in weeks or months.

On June 15, 2009, Takamiyama Daigoro will retire from a 45-year long sumo career filled with historic milestones. This day marks the day before his 65th birthday by which senior members of the sport must retire.

Takamiyama Daigoro was the first United States born wrestler to enter the sport of sumo. In 1972, he became the first foreigner to win the Emperor's Cup, a top division championship in the sport. He was also the first foreign-born wrestler to climb to the sumo's third highest rank of sekiwake. Takamiyama also stands as the only foreigner to open his own stable, to train future generations in the sport, after he stopped actively competing himself.

Takamiyama opened the door for others from Hawaii to join him in this most ancient of sports. This group includes Saleva'a Atisano'e, also known as Konishiki, who became the first foreigner to reach the second- highest rank of ozeki; as well as Chad Rowen, also known as Akebono, who became the first foreigner to hold the highest rank of sumo, that of yokozuna; and Fiamalu Penitani, also known as Musashimaru, who became the second foreigner to hold the title of yokozuna.

I urge my colleagues to support this recognition of Jesse Kuhaulua, a true ambassador of aloha spirit.

Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of the Kilroy amendment to H.R. 916, the FAA Reauthorization Act, which directs the GAO to study, within one year of enactment, the effectiveness of FAA oversight activities related to preventing or mitigating the effects of dense continuous smoke in the cockpit of commercial aircraft.

There are several incidents every week where an aircraft must land due to the presence of smoke in the cockpit. In the great majority of these cases, pilots are able to land the aircraft or disperse the smoke before a catastrophic accident results. There have, however, been several accidents over the years caused by the inability of pilots to see

due to the presence of unstoppable, dense, continuous smoke.

Interestingly, the aircraft of the Secretary of Transportation, the Secretary of Homeland Security, senior military leaders, and the Federal Aviation Administration have technology aboard that ensures that, even in cases of dense unstoppable blinding smoke, pilots can see.

I was surprised to learn, however, that there is no FAA requirement that passenger airliners or military aircraft have an equivalent system to ensure that pilots can see under these conditions. The technology in question costs approximately $25,000 to $30,000 per aircraft--which equates to a penny or so per ticket over the life of the system.

As I understand it, the FAA's minimum safety standard is that any failure of systems or components that result in catastrophic consequences must be ``extremely improbable,'' and that ``extremely improbable'' is defined by the FAA as not one catastrophic event in one billion flight hours.

According to Boeing data, American certified planes have not flown one billion flight hours worldwide in the last 50 years. There have, however, been numerous catastrophic fatal airliner accidents in which smoke in the cockpit has been a cause or a factor during that period.

Like with U.S. Airways Flight 1549, seconds count. Fortunately, in that case the pilot could see to land, even if under very difficult conditions. If the emergency had been continuous, unstoppable smoke in the cockpit and the pilot had been unable to see, it is unlikely we would have had such a happy outcome.

I raised this issue during a Transportation and Infrastructure Committee hearing on the bill in February. The FAA contends that existing systems and procedures are adequate. I am not convinced, and I welcome an investigation of this issue by the GAO.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to reintroduce the Filipino Veterans Family Reunification Act, a companion to Senator Akaka's bill of the same name, which will provide for the expedited reunification of the families of our Filipino World War II veterans.

As you know, Filipino veterans are those that honorably answered the call of President Franklin D. Roosevelt and served alongside our armed forces during World War II. They fought shoulder to shoulder with American servicemen; they sacrificed for the same just cause. We made a promise to provide full veterans' benefits to those who served with our troops. And while we have recently made appreciable progress toward fulfilling that long-ignored promise, we have not yet achieved the full equity that the Filipino veterans deserve.

In 1990, the Congress recognized the courage and commitment of the Filipino World War II veterans by providing them with a waiver from certain naturalization requirements. Many veterans thereafter became proud United States citizens and residents of our country. However, allowances were not made for their children and many have been waiting decades for petition approval.

The Filipino Veterans Family Reunification Act would allow for the further recognition of the service of the veterans by granting their children a special immigration status that would allow them to immigrate to the United States and be reunified with their aging parents. It is important to note that the Filipino soldiers who fought under the command of General Douglas McArthur at this critical time in our nation's history represent a unique category. These soldiers were members of the United States Armed Forces of the Far East. They were led to believe that at the end of the conflict they would be treated the same as American soldiers. It took more than sixty years to begin to make good on our commitment. The Filipino Veterans Family Reunification Act recognizes the special circumstances of this group of soldiers.

I look forward to working with my colleagues by providing for the reunification of our Filipino World War II veterans with their families.

I thank my colleague for yielding me such time as I might use.

Aloha. I rise today to join my fellow congressional Asian Pacific Islander American Caucus members in celebrating Asian Pacific Islander American Heritage Month. Of course, I'd like to thank Congressman Honda for organizing this Special Order tonight and for his continuing leadership throughout the year and his service as the chair of CAPAC.

In 1978, a joint congressional resolution established Asian Pacific American Heritage Week. The first 10 days of May were chosen to coincide with two key anniversaries: The U.S. arrival of the first Japanese immigrant on May 7, 1843, and the completion of the transcontinental railroad on May 10, 1869. In 1992, Congress expanded the week to a full monthlong celebration of the Asian and Pacific Islander American community.

We certainly have added to the diversity and the cultural richness of our country. As a first generation immigrant myself, having come to this country when I was about eight years old, this country has afforded not just me, but the millions of immigrants, the first generation we call issei and nisei, opportunities that we never would have had in our home countries.

With 16.2 million residents, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders are one of the fastest growing populations in the United States. In fact, the Census Bureau estimates that by the year 2050, more than 33.4 million Asian Americans will call the United States home.

Asian and Pacific Islander Americans have made valuable contributions to every aspect of American life--from business to education to politics to the arts to the military. For example, there are approximately 1.1 million APIA-owned small businesses all across the country that employ 2.2 million workers. There are also hundreds of thousands of APIA servicemembers and veterans, including more than 53,500 brave men and women who have been deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan since 2001.

Today, I was glad to join my colleagues in supporting passage of H.R. 347, which appropriately awards a Congressional Gold Medal to the 100th Infantry Battalion and the 442nd Regimental Combat Team in honor of their extraordinary and dedicated service during World War II.

Comprised predominantly of nisei, the American-born sons of Japanese immigrants, members of the University of Hawaii's Reserve Officers' Training Corps, the ROTC, aided the wounded, buried the fallen, and helped defend vulnerable areas in Hawaii after the attack at Pearl Harbor.

In spite of these acts of courage, the U.S. Army discharged all nisei in the ROTC unit, changed their draft status to ineligible, and segregated all Japanese American in the military on the mainland out of their units. In the meantime, more than 100,000 Japanese Americans were forcibly relocated from their homes to internment camps.

Undaunted, members of the Hawaii Provisional Infantry Battalion joined the 100th Infantry Battalion in California to train as soldiers. The sheer determination and pursuit of excellence displayed by this battalion in

training contributed to President Roosevelt's decision to allow nisei volunteers to serve in the U.S. military again, leading to their incorporation into the 442nd.

Members of the 100th and 442nd risked their lives to fight for our country and allies in Europe. The 442nd ``Go for Broke'' unit became the most decorated in U.S. military history for its size and length of service, with its component, the 100th Infantry Battalion, earning the nickname ``The Purple Heart Battalion.''

I'd like to thank Congressman Schiff, the chief sponsor of H.R. 347, for providing us with the opportunity to bestow this body's most distinguished honor, the Congressional Gold Medal, to these brave soldiers on the behalf of a grateful Nation.

I would be remiss if I did not mention one of Hawaii's favorite sons as we celebrate this month, and that is President Barack Obama. While not ethnically Asian American or Pacific Islander himself, his ties to our community are strong ones, and his support on our issues could not be more heartfelt.

He has appointed, as mentioned earlier, Asian Americans to key cabinet positions: Steven Chu, Secretary of Energy; Gary Locke, Secretary of Commerce. By the way, Gary Locke is the first Asian American to be elected Governor outside of Hawaii. And Kauai's own General Eric Shinseki, Secretary of Veteran Affairs.

One of the issues that President Obama has supported is self- determination for the indigenous people of our State of Hawaii--native Hawaiians who deserve to have the same right to self-determination enjoyed by other indigenous groups such as the American Indians and the Alaskan natives.

H.R. 2314, the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act, would set up a process for native Hawaiians to organize a governmental entity. I look forward to working with my colleagues in the House and our President in passing this important bill.

I would also be remiss if I did not pay tribute to my predecessor, Congresswoman Patsy T. Mink of Hawaii, a trailblazer in every sense of the word. I thank my colleague, Congresswoman Richardson, for mentioning Patsy Mink, for whom title IX was renamed the Patsy T. Mink Equal Opportunity in Education Act.

Title IX changed the lives of women and girls across our country. In fact, a couple of years ago, several of the high schools in my district were given a special recognition for really promoting title IX and participation of high school girls in sports. When I attended one of these high schools to present them with a special recognition, one of the girls asked me a question that totally floored me. That question was, If you could pick a sport, what sport would you have participated in? And it floored me because it was a question that had never been asked when I was in high school.

That's the kind of difference that title IX is making. In fact, Patsy's own daughter, when she applied to a particular school and did not get accepted, the reason for that was, they told her, We have enough women in our university. This all preceded title IX. Literally thousands and thousands of lives have been change by title IX.

In closing, I'd like to also once again thank Chairman Honda for allowing us this opportunity to reflect upon how far our APIA community has come, and yet we must remember how much further our community has to go.

As we say in Hawaii, mahalo nui loa.

Thank you, Congressman.

I can tell you, having gone to the women's gym in the Rayburn Building, things have changed. We have full-size lockers now. Truly, in terms of gender equality, Patsy was a leader because she had to fight every step of the way. And, in fact, one of the other stories about Patsy is when she applied to medical school. And she was a very smart woman. She wanted to become a doctor. She applied to medical school and was refused because she was a woman. When she finally applied to law school, they put her in the international dorm because they thought she was a foreign person.

We have come a long way.

I did want to mention as long as we are talking about the challenges that immigrants face. There was a historic poll done recently focusing on immigrant women and the fact that so many of them come to this country to truly create a new life of opportunity for their children. Many of them were professionals in the countries from which they came, and so they did not come to make money. Often the kind of jobs they were able to get in this country were very poor paying with not very many benefits.

This was so reminiscent of when my mother brought us to this country. We came literally with nothing, and she started off in a very poor- paying job with no benefits. But what guided her was this immigrant spirit of wanting to create a new life for her children. That kept her going. She wanted for herself to be able to take care of her family, but to have us have opportunities that she never had.

That story is replicated in thousands and thousands and thousands of stories by the waves of immigrants from Japan, Korea, China, the Philippines, over and over. And to know that even now these women and their families face particular challenges should reinforce in us our desire to not only celebrate all of the accomplishments of the APIA community, but to know that there is much more work to be done.

One of the things that I always say is that this is a great country, and even if we are not perfect, what a country. I am reminded once again of that with the election of our first African American President.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 347.

This legislation appropriately awards a Congressional Gold Medal to the 100th Infantry Battalion and the 442nd Regimental Combat Team in honor of their dedicated service during World War II.

Comprised predominantly of Nisei, the American-born sons of Japanese immigrants, members of University of Hawaii's Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) aided the wounded, buried the fallen, and helped defend vulnerable areas in Hawaii after the attack at Pearl Harbor. In spite of these acts of courage, the U.S. Army discharged all Nisei in the ROTC unit, changed their draft status to ineligible, and segregated all Japanese-Americans in the military on the mainland out of their units. In the meantime, more than a 100,000 Japanese-Americans were forcibly relocated from their homes to internment camps.

Undaunted, members of the Hawaii Provisional Infantry Battalion joined the 100th Infantry Battalion in California to train as soldiers. The sheer determination and pursuit of excellence displayed by this battalion in training contributed to President Roosevelt's decision to allow Nisei volunteers to serve in the U.S. military again, leading to their incorporation into the 442nd.

Members of the 100th and the 442nd risked their lives to fight for our country and allies in Europe. The 442nd ``Go for Broke'' unit became the most decorated in U.S. military history for its size and length of service, with its component, the 100th Infantry Battalion, earning the nickname ``The Purple Heart Battalion''. The 100th and the 442nd received seven Presidential Unit Citations, 21 Medals of Honor, 29 Distinguished Service Crosses, 560 Silver Stars, 4,000 Bronze Stars, 22 Legion of Merit Medals, 15 Soldier's Medals, and more than 4,000 Purple Hearts, among numerous additional distinctions.

I urge my colleagues to support this measure.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to be removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 2110.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to reintroduce the Fair Funding for Schools Act, which reauthorizes and improves the Impact Aid program. Impact Aid benefits millions of American students attending elementary and secondary schools in every state in the country. Through this program, the federal government does the right thing by reimbursing local school districts for lost tax revenue due to federal lands within the borders of their districts and the number of military- connected students in the district.

The majority of public school funding in America comes from local property taxes. Unfortunately, this vital funding stream is drastically reduced in school districts where the federal government controls part of the land in the district. For instance, the many U.S. military bases located in Hawaii take up a vast amount of space and house large populations, but these bases do not generate local property taxes. In other states, large national parks and forests, federal prisons, and Indian lands all similarly decrease local property tax revenue. Left uncorrected, this loss of revenue would leave the children living in these areas with a second class education, funded by substantially fewer dollars than their peers living in areas with no federally impacted land.

In 1950, Congress recognized the need to address this inequity and created Impact Aid, a program by which we provide additional federal dollars to school districts feeling this financial strain.

Impact Aid is one of the most effective programs run by the Department of Education because it sends money directly to local school districts with very few strings attached. Just like the property tax revenue it replaces, Impact Aid dollars can be used to fund the most essential needs identified by the school district--textbooks, computers, utilities, and salaries, for instance. Many districts rely heavily on this money, and without it their students would be shortchanged. Therefore, we must reauthorize this program.

Even great programs need to be tweaked every so often, and this Fair Funding for Schools Act makes necessary changes in Impact Aid. The bill addresses the effects of military base realignment and troop redeployment by allowing Impact Aid payments to be calculated using current student counts instead of prior year data. This change will allow districts receiving an influx of new military families to receive their Impact Aid dollars in a timely manner.

The Impact Aid law also has become overly complicated during its 59- year history. This bill simplifies the law by eliminating some outdated provisions that added unnecessary complications. It also maintains the program's traditional focus on need, whereby payments to school districts are calculated based on the percentage of the budget lost due to federal actions and on the number of federally connected children in a district.

Madam Speaker, this is a vitally important bill for Hawaii and for many school districts across the country. The students most impacted are often from families serving in our military. Given the sacrifices we ask of military families, they deserve nothing less than the best education for their children. This bill will take us in that direction, and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting it.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Aloha. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 80, which would authorize the use of Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor Center for the 40th Annual Kamehameha Day Lei Draping Ceremony. And, of course, I encourage and invite all my colleagues to join us in this ceremony.

I would like to thank Chairman Brady for his leadership and for allowing this bill to be brought forward in an expeditious manner. I would also like to thank the cosponsors of this bill, my fellow Pacific Island delegation members: Congressman Abercrombie, Congressman Faleomavaega, Congresswoman Bordallo, and Congressman Sablan, for their support.

The Kamehameha Day Lei Draping Ceremony has been hosted by the Hawaii congressional delegation and the Hawaii State Society of Washington, D.C. since 1969. The ceremony has been held on or about June 11 to coincide with the celebration of Kamehameha Day, a State holiday in Hawaii. This year the event in D.C. will be held on Sunday, June 7.

While the Kamehameha Day Lei Draping Ceremony has been held for decades, with the Kamehameha statue being moved to Emancipation Hall, a concurrent resolution must be passed to authorize the use of this space for this year's ceremony.

Why do we celebrate and acknowledge King Kamehameha I? He was the first monarch to unify the Hawaii Islands and was the living embodiment of a leader. Born in 1782, Kamehameha I was daring, visionary, strong, and courageous, not just the kind of courage you find on the field of battle but the courage to forgive others for the greater good of all.

As a young man on the Island of Hawaii, Kamehameha participated in a raid and surprised two local fishermen who then attacked him with a paddle, leaving him for dead. These same fishermen were presented to Kamehameha for judgment for this act 12 years later as Kamehameha was then a young chief. He could have sent them to their deaths with the slightest utterance, but he did not. Instead, he blamed himself for attacking innocent people and, astonishingly, gave the fishermen gifts of land and set them free.

History records this act as the basis for the Law of the Splintered Paddle, a law which provided for the safety of noncombatants in wartime. It is a law that undoubtedly saved many lives during Kamehameha's later unification of all of the Hawaiian Islands. While this may have seemed like a simple gesture of kindness, this act took real courage and vision.

As King of all Hawaii, Kamehameha appointed Governors for each island, made laws for the protection of all his people, planted taro, built houses and irrigation ditches, restored important cultural sites, encouraged industries like farming and fishing, managed the island's natural resources, and entered into trading agreements with other nations. The flag design he ordered for his kingdom later became the Seal of the State of Hawaii. He would rule until 1819.

I would like to close by thanking the staff of the Committee on House Administration, the Office of the Architect of the Capitol, and the Office of the Sergeant At Arms, who have been real partners in making this annual event possible for these many decades.

Mahalo nui loa.