Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, on September 7th and 8th, 2004, I was delayed in returning from my district due to official business and I missed rollcall vote Nos. 422, 423, 424, 425, 426, 427.

If I had been here I would have voted in favor of rollcall vote No. 422, to name the Harvey and Bernice Jones Post Office Building, and rollcall vote No. 423 to name the General William Carey Lee Post Office Building.

I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 424, the Previous Question regarding the Rule for the Labor Health and Human Services and Education Appropriations bill for Fiscal Year 2005.

I would have voted in favor of rollcall vote No. 425, Ms. Jackson- Lee's amendment to increase funding in the CDC and NIH for Lupus. I would have voted in favor of rollcall vote No. 426, Ms. Jackson-Lee's amendment to increase funding in the CDC for Hepatitis C.

I would have voted in favor of rollcall vote No. 427, Mr. Sander's amendment to increase funding for the low-income home energy assistance program and the weatherization assistance program by $22,000,000.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the drastic and shortsighted measure to strip courts of their authority to review the Constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act. This is a very clear and easy vote for me, but in no way does that make it insignificant. To the contrary, this is the most important civil rights vote of the year. Congress has not passed a federal court stripping measure since 1868, though it has been attempted on nearly every hot button issue in the past 50 years (prompted by Brown v. Board, Roe v. Wade, Loving v. Virginia, and others), always with the premise of the need to ``limit activist judges.''

Republicans are trying to undermine the legitimacy of these justices because they are not elected. The founders deliberately created an unelected body that would not have to make the political calculations that the President and Members of Congress need to consider in our controversial decisions. Justices are, by design, removed from the political or electoral process to serve lifetime appointments where they can make independent decisions. Naturally, these decisions often come before the public is quite ready for them. Such was the case with the prohibition of interracial marriage. In 1967, the Supreme Court stated that such a prohibition would ``deprive . . . liberty without due process of law in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.'' We now look back on the prohibition of interracial marriage as abhorrent and appreciate the court's decision in Loving v. Virginia in helping us reach this realization.

This bill is not about marriage, as the title claims. This bill is about denying a day in court for an entire class of Americans. This is a question of fairness, equality, and social justice. We cannot, in the interest of fairness to all, exclude selected groups of Americans from enjoying equal protection under the law. Furthermore, court stripping is blatantly unconstitutional. It violates the separation of powers, due process, and equal protection clauses in our Constitution.

If you think this is an easy vote because it will never pass constitutional muster to become law, I remind you of the oath we all took the day we were sworn into office. Every single one of us has sworn to ``protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.'' A vote in favor of this bill is an attack on the very document that we have sworn to defend.

This body is not at liberty to pick and choose which of the laws we pass should be subject to judicial review. The founders created three equal branches of government, a true system of checks and balances that has served us well for over 200 years. The power of one should not outweigh the other or the system will be fundamentally undermined.

I urge my colleagues to vote against this measure to condone discrimination, undermine the Constitution, and disrupt the democratic process.

Mr. Chairman, I wish to state for the record my vehement opposition to this amendment.

This amendment purports to deny funds to any state that permits undocumented immigrants to obtain driver's licenses or other ``comparable'' identification documents and to deny funds to any state or local government that has passed a policy that limits disclosure of immigration status to federal authorities.

Withholding funds from local governments and from our frontline first responders in local level would undermine their effectiveness in a critical mission.

Local law enforcement authorities across the country have made it clear that if the federal government abrogates their responsibility and forces them to take on what is a federal obligation with regard to immigration enforcement, this will be an unfunded mandate, depleting critical resources of time and funding.

The effectiveness of local law enforcement, and our safety, depends on their being able to count on cooperation from their neighbors, regardless of their immigration status. When local authorities are perceived as immigration enforcers, immigrant communities, who may have critical information with regard to homeland security, will be very reluctant to cooperate or even speak with law enforcement.

Due to unfunded mandates and a neglect of real security needs at the local level, municipal governments and local police are already strained, and this amendment would increase that strain.

This would undermine homeland security, and the safety of immigrants themselves. In particular, victims of domestic violence would have to decide whether they are willing to risk deportation before seeking help from authorities.

This amendment would undermine security for all who reside in this country, and the safety of immigrants in particular. Immigrants who are victims of domestic violence would have to decide whether they are willing to risk deportation before seeking help and reporting abuse to authorities.

The provision withholding federal funds from states that permit undocumented immigrants to obtain driver's licenses or other ``comparable'' identification documents is similarly nonsensical and counterintuitive.

I would think that those who rail against the presence of the undocumented in this country would welcome the opportunity to increase safety by allowing those who are undocumented to be identified by authorities. Allowing undocumented immigrants to obtain forms of identification would make the job of law enforcement easier, and allow immigrants access to necessary basic services such as opening a bank account. All other things being equal, it would be better to have more of the people who are in this country identified and to have as many drivers as possible obtain a proper license. Both of these conditions would contribute to increased public safety.

This amendment is an attempt to blackmail local governments into following an agenda that would endanger their safety, by threatening to take away critical resources. The States that would suffer the most from passage of this amendment include my own state of Arizona as well as Alaska, California, Colorado, Washington, DC, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin.

I find it outrageous that a member of this body would suggest withholding critical funds, from programs such as the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program, Byrne grants, and many others, just to impose an extreme personal view about what local governments should be doing. This is not the time for zealots to push unfunded mandates through bills providing for the security of us all.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 2507, the bipartisan bill to reauthorize the Child Nutrition and WIC Programs. In this hot political climate, I am pleased to see that members crossed the aisle to compromise in the interests of hungry children. There are a number of provisions in this bill which will improve the program through increased access and innovative programs.

Migrant and seasonal farm working families, the families that put food on our tables, face unique challenges in accessing this program. The average farm worker earns just $7,500 a year--leaving most of their families well below poverty level. The hardships that the children in these families face are only amplified by their migratory lifestyle. Their parents, who are poor, uneducated, and often with limited literacy in their native language, face many barriers helping their children apply for services every time they move. S. 2507 would make homeless, runaway and migrant children automatically eligible for free lunch and breakfast. It will extend automatic eligibility to children who qualify for migrant educational services under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

It will be easier for parents to apply for free or reduced price meals by requiring only one application for the household and making that application valid for the full school year. Additionally, children in Food Stamp and TANF households will be directly certified to participate in the program.

Common sense and scientific knowledge tells us that eating breakfast improves school performance. Yet a number of barriers keep schools from offering this service, ranging from cost, stigma, and transportation. This bill would encourage more schools to serve breakfast by studying the logistical impediments that make it difficult, and finding ways to reduce those impediments.

Children who are hungry during the school day suffer even more during the summer when the appropriate resources are not available. S. 2507 authorizes a new pilot project to examine ways to reduce transportation barriers and increase access to summer feeding programs in rural areas.

Childhood obesity has become a national epidemic. Nearly a quarter of Hispanic children are overweight, and at high risk for Type II Diabetes. This program is in the position to significantly impact this national health crisis. In addition to requiring schools to create a wellness policy, this bill would authorize grants for outreach and education on obesity prevention activities to communities with high Limited English Proficiency populations.

This bill would expand the Fruit and Vegetable Pilot program, allowing it to target high poverty areas. Additionally, it authorizes an evaluation of the impact of fruits and vegetables on childhood obesity through pilot programs in WIC.

I stand today in support of this reauthorization bill because it offers real solutions to families and children who are most in need of our help. S. 2507 is a comprehensive piece of legislation that increases access, simplifies the application process, offers outreach, creates innovative pilot programs for targeted communities, and promotes the health and well being of all children served in the program. I encourage my colleagues to support this important bipartisan reauthorization.

Mr. Speaker, we are standing here today to consider pieces of legislation that the House passed overwhelmingly just a year ago. These were not controversial bills at the time they were first considered and they are not controversial now. It seems clear to me that the House Republican Leadership would like to distract the American public from the real issues that need to be addressed. Instead of being down on the floor to discuss

legislation that we all agree on and already passed, members of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce should be spending time working on the legislation that would offer real solutions to students struggling to pay for a college education.

Tuition is rapidly rising in nearly every state. The buying power of Pell grant has dropped significantly in the last 30 years. Students are graduating from college with enough debt that they could buy a car or even a house, which significantly hinders their ability to contribute to economic growth. Students are increasingly turning to a part time education just so they can support themselves while in college.

These are clearly dire times when it comes to college affordability, but instead of spending our time crafting legislation that would offer real solutions to students, we are rehashing legislation that we already passed to fulfill the political needs of the House Republican Leadership.

The Higher Education Bills that we are considering today are bills that I supported in the past and will support again in today, but today's debate is merely a distraction from the real problems that students face in paying for college.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of Enrique, Jesus and Julio Zapata, and in particular, their honorable service in the Vietnam War. I am proud to say these three brothers, who gave so much to our country, were born and raised in my district in the city of Nogales, Arizona.

During the Vietnam era, Enrique, Jesus and Julio made the courageous decision to enlist in the United States military.

Jesus Zapata served his tour of duty in Vietnam from June 4, 1965, to July 4, 1966. Enrique Zapata served two 6-month tours of duty in Vietnam with the United States Navy, enlisting July 20, 1964. Julio Zapata served in Vietnam from April 30, 1967, to April 30, 1968.

Our country owes a debt of gratitude to these fine citizens and the countless Vietnam veterans who have not been accorded the full respect and appreciation they deserve from our country. As I speak today, they sit in the gallery of the House of Representatives. I hope those of my colleagues who meet them will thank them and extend their appreciation from all of us for the service they gave this country.

On Cinco de Mayo, when we celebrate and acknowledge our diversity, let us also acknowledge the shared sacrifice that all Americans have made for this country.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a moment to commend a group of students from my district for their civic engagement. Along with their teacher, these 23 students developed a proposal for curbing bullying in Arizona schools. This proposal was taken up in the Arizona State legislature with bipartisan support. The bill was introduced by Representative Phil Lopez and Representative Linda Gray, and has already passed the Education Committee and has garnered the support of Gov. Janet Napolitano. If passed, the bill would require that school boards adopt and enforce procedures that prohibit the harassment, bullying and intimidation of pupils.

Using the skill of civic engagement, taught through Project Citizen, these students have made a positive impact in their community, and serve as role models for their peers. Project Citizen is a curricular program for middle school students that promotes competent and responsible participation in local and State government. The program helps young people learn how to monitor and influence public policy. In the process, they develop support for democratic values and principles, tolerance, and feelings of political efficacy. The Project Citizen program is administered by the Center for Civic Education with the assistance of the National Conference of State Legislatures. It is funded by the U.S. Department of Education by act of Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud of the contribution of these students and applaud their efforts to be actively involved in efforts to improve their community. On behalf of the schools and children of Arizona I would like to thank the following students for their admirable interest in civic engagement. I hope their enthusiasm for government is shared among their peers.

Marina Ardt, Eva Baisan, Edward Barnes, Amanda Belt, Katie Brown, Audrey Bustamante, Nicholas Franco, Taiya Gehrels, Brianna Herreras- Crouse, Shelby Kline, Katie Knight, Mounir Koussa, Alison Lambert, Ben Langworthy, Pricilla Martinez, Dillon McCallum, Dylan Monke, Danny O'Sullivan, Johnny Police, Joy Ratanavongsa, Tanisha Sosa, John Taylor, Jessica Willy, and their teacher, Cheri Bludau of the Mansfeld Middle School of Tucson.

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to submit the attached article from the Tucson Citizen recognizing the valiant efforts of these young adults.

Kids' Assignment Turns Heads at State Level

Here is a brief primer on the workings of the Arizona

Legislature from an expert who has learned how to write a

bill, have it introduced by a lawmaker, then watched it

advance through the Legislature:

``It is a very long process,'' explained Tashina Sosa.

``It's like a never-ending thriller book.''

Thriller book? Perhaps.

Horror story? More often.

But who am I to argue with an insider--someone who has seen

firsthand the laborious and languorous way that the

Legislature goes about its work.

There are several thousand professional lobbyists at work

in Phoenix right now who are being paid well--very well--to

get their employers' messages to lawmakers.

Tashina Sosa isn't one of them, although it is quite likely

that she will be more successful than most of those

professionals.

Sosa is a freshman at Tucson High Magnet School. And work

that she and her classmates started last year when they were

enrolled at Mansfeld Middle School may soon result in a law.

This law, unlike many of those passed by legislators,

actually makes sense and actually is needed. It would require

each school district to enact an anti-bullying policy.

Sosa and 23 other Mansfeld students were enrolled last year

in a law-related education class taught by Cheri Bludau. Part

of the class was a project called We the People-Project

Citizen, a national program that promotes student

participation in government.

After discussing several ideas and conducting research on

matters ripe for change, the students settled on the issue of

bullying, Bludau said.

But there were some concerns. Some students feared the

topic may be too ``childlike'' and of little interest to the

Legislature, Bludau said. Others were afraid that a law would

be meaningless--that bullying was not something that could be

stopped with legislation.

But the research was persuasive. Studies found that

bullying is one of the most underrated and serious problems

in schools. Students involved in murders in school and

students who commit suicide are far more likely to be victims

of bullies than the average student is. Education and federal

officials estimate that nationwide, 160,000 students miss

school every day because they fear being bullied.

``A majority of adults see it as a right of passage,''

Bludau said, ``but the students know it is impacting their

lives.''

Using laws written in other states as a starting point,

Bludau's class wrote a bill it hoped to have introduced in

the Legislature. Class members took the bill to Project

Citizen's state competition last year and won first place.

They then submitted it for national competition and earned a

``superior'' rating--the highest award.

Last summer, Bludau e-mailed a copy of the proposed bill to

Gov. Janet Napolitano. Within 45 minutes, Napolitano wrote

back, saying she would be very much behind it.

Thus emboldened, the students went hunting for a legislator

who would introduce the bill--and they found support from

state Rep. Phil Lopes, a Tucson Democrat. He liked the bill,

but because he is a member of the minority party, he needed

help from a Republican. Rep. Linda Gray, a Glendale

Republican and chair of the House Education Committee, signed

on.

The bill was formally introduced and assigned a number and

title: ``HB2533--Schools; policies; bullying'' and scheduled

for a hearing and debate last week before the Education

Committee.

The students were scheduled to go to Phoenix to testify in

support of their bill--but they were foiled by another state

issue. It was time for them to take part of the mandated AIMS

test. Nonetheless, the bill easily passed the committee.

The bill is scheduled to be heard in the House Judiciary

Committee today. Lopes is optimistic that it will eventually

pass both houses and be signed into law by Napolitano.

``The kids did all the work,'' Lopes said. ``It's just

incredible. I knew nothing about the substance of the topic.

But I saw what they had done and said, `My God, we've got to

help them out.' ''

Sosa is excited that her class's work may soon be

memorialized in state law. And so is her classmate, Mounir

Koussa, also now a freshman at Tucson High. ``It's good for

me to know that a student can make a difference in society,''

Koussa said.

It has taken almost two months for the bill to make it to

this point in the legislative process, and Bludau still can't

quite believe her students have been so successful.

``Way back in January, little did we know that we could

have this kind of impact on the state of Arizona,'' she said.

``I'm very proud of my students, as you can tell.''

Cheri Bludau's students have completed their assignment.

Now legislators must complete theirs.

Mr. Speaker, the passage of H.R. 1779 is a welcome first step in addressing the serious problems facing our National Guard and Reserve today. But as we once again mobilize more troops and send them off to fight, and possibly die, in an increasingly hostile environment, we must ask ourselves why legislation such as H.R. 1779 has become a necessary stopgap measure.

The very fact that Guard and Reserve members feel compelled to withdraw funds from their IRA's in order to pay the bills at home is unacceptable.

Yet, this is precisely the problem: Current compensation and benefits programs for the National Guard and Reserve were developed more than 50 years ago, when it was expected that they would be mobilized only in the most dire national emergency. Over the past dozen years, the Guard and Reserve contract has changed dramatically, with more than 40 percent of members being called to duty and in some cases, being repeatedly deployed without fulfilling the requisite off-duty time period. H.R. 1799 is a band-aid measure temporarily mending a broken system. Congress must and can upgrade Guard and Reserve compensation and benefits to better offset the demands and sacrifices imposed on the Guard and Reserve community.

It is a great injustice that those who selflessly and voluntarily serve our country are not repaid in kind. By this I mean that Guard and Reserve members are ineligible for military health coverage, except while on active duty or after age 60. Although covered by TRICARE when mobilized, many Guard and Reservists and their families are faced with changing doctors and dropping private coverage. We must provide adequate and comprehensive health care coverage for the Guard and Reserve community. It is my hope that this year's Defense Authorization Act will include permanent authority for a fee-based TRICARE coverage for all drilling Guard and Reserve members, and offer all such members the option to have the government pay part or all of their employer coverage premium during extended activations.

Loan forgiveness and increased education infrastructure funding for Guard and Reservists and their families should also be a top priority during this year's budget deliberations. Earlier this year, I received a letter from one of my constituents and his wife who are both Guard Members. Both were more than willing to serve their first tour of duty in Iraq, knowing full well that this would delay by a semester their graduate course studies. Six months later, both were facing yet another extension of active duty. Along with delaying their studies and future career path, they are now also incurring interest on a loan which is not being utilized. Congress must improve educational opportunities and benefits for Guard and Reservists by providing deferments and interest payments for borrowers of student loans who are called to active duty.

Health care, timely compensation, and education funding are only a few of the many

things we should and CAN provide to our Guard and Reserve members. Extending the military pay raise, providing meaningful tax relief for military families, and improving overall quality of life entitlement programs is the very least we can do for the families and servicemembers who have endured extraordinary--and in some cases-- supreme sacrifices for our country.

The mistreatment of our Guard and Reservists and its repercussions on them and their families' morale and well-being must stop. Is it too much to ask that our government provide basic necessary services such as comprehensive health coverage and timely compensation to our Guard and Reserve members?

I urge my colleagues to include funding for these measures in this year's Defense Authorization Act and to push for passage of the many proposals addressing these issues which are currently stalled in Committee.

Mr. Speaker, today we must take a moment to commemorate the life and legacy of a national leader Cesar Estrada Chavez. It is an honor for me to have this opportunity to discuss the life of this man. Cesar E Chavez was born and died in the district that I represent, in Yuma and San Luis, Arizona. Today would have been his 77th birthday.

The celebration of his life is a legacy that he leaves with us; however, upholding a chronological, biographical statement of the life of Cesar E Chavez would not embrace the essence of what he stood for in life or the expectations and opportunities he left for others. I stand before you to honor a man, not for what material wealth he accumulated or positions he held, rather for his pursuit for justice.

For me to make Cesar E Chavez bigger than life and to describe him as a hero would be offensive to him. He was a man that did not want to be bigger than life. He was human and stayed that way but his beliefs and way of life are the future and the legacy that he left all of us to uphold. Cesar E Chavez, cofounder, along with Dolores Huerta, of the United Farm Workers' Union, initiated a historic struggle for labor unions, grassroot efforts, and mobilization to show power of the people.

The United Farm Workers' Union and the tactics that Cesar E Chavez incorporated for justice changed the face of activism and consumerism. His non-violence and popular education approach made the country recognize that renouncing a system of injustice was the right of all Americans. He reminded us then, and now, of our role to seek humanity and justice; and to be aware of our decisions in life from minor accountability, like where to buy basic home products, to protecting our soldiers and looking for effective non-violence approaches as an alternative to war.

Through the influence of Cesar E Chavez and the UFW, the face of labor unions in this country was changed. The awareness of strikes, went beyond the bargaining table for basic rights such as just pay and benefits. Strikes become a responsibility for all consumers to demand justice and peace of mind to the consumer and the employer that the employee was respected in all aspects. The union struggle also became more inclusive in fighting for justice in this country, going beyond the calls for labor rights to include human rights, immigrant rights, and civil rights. Labor unions across the country are currently among the leaders of creating coalitions and developing the grass roots community to strengthen representation for all Americans.

The concept of grass roots and the belief in the power of the people was strengthened through the works of Cesar E Chavez. The leading energy/influence in providing a voice for the masses was simply stated in three words iSi, se puede!, which roughly translates to yes, it can be done. A simple phrase that Cesar E Chavez coined, but like his life and legacy a powerful action that cannot be measured. This assurance in people and the ability of communities and movements resonates throughout our great Nation today. iSi, se puede! is an attitude and way of life for change, hope, and our constituency, especially our youth.

Cesar E Chavez, although a Latino, did not limit the group he strived for to an ethnicity. He understood the need to be inclusive in his service to others in the plight for justice. The legacy he leaves us is to uphold his approach to life and to educate our youth for future generations on his teachings of non-violence, justice, and equity for all. I challenge my colleagues to remember Cesar E Chavez not

only for his history, but also for his approach to life and the example he left us.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman very much for yielding. I appreciate the opportunity.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today on this Earth Day to comment that while our Nation is distracted by war and terrorism, the Bush administration has systematically and methodically been dismantling our most fundamental public health laws such as the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act; but the people of America and in my community, in addition to wanting peace and security in the world, also want a clean and healthy environment for themselves and for their children to live in.

On this Earth Day we state clearly, and I want to repeat, we state clearly that Americans want and deserve clean air to breathe, clean water to drink, and natural places to experience. We want our most special lands like our national parks to be cared for so they can be enjoyed by future generations as we do today.

But the test results are in, and it is official. The George W. Bush Presidency is the worst environmental Presidency in the history of this country. From our urban areas to our national forests, the Bush administration is sacrificing our health, our environment for the benefit of corporations. Communities of color continue to suffer disproportionately from Bush's policy to lower air and water quality standards and to gut funding for Super Fund cleanup programs, which impact communities across this country.

Our constituents are eating mercury-tainted fish, drinking lead- tainted water, living near toxic contamination sites. Our national parks are deteriorating. Our national forests and public lands are being opened up for polluting uses like oil and gas development, mining, and logging. Meanwhile, the administration disputes that global warming exists and refuses to take steps to address this growing and imminent threat.

This administration is, to say the least, industry-friendly. But we also want one that is Earth friendly. We do not have to sacrifice our economic future for a healthy environment. We can have both a healthy economy and a healthy environment.

We Democrats in Congress are fighting for our environment. My colleagues have fought to keep oil drilling out of the Arctic, to ensure that polluters clean up their messes, to prevent our forests from being clear cut for profit, to keep our air and water clean. We have called for comprehensive and sensible energy policy that does not reward the polluting industries with massive subsidies, but enhances opportunities for renewable energy sources.

As we reflect on the Earth's environment on Earth Day, let us not forget that we have only one Earth to live on. Let us keep our environment and our families healthy by fighting for the protection of our air, water, and land. America's environmental laws have succeeded in improving people's health and lives. Let us continue that legacy by protecting what we have gained and enhancing what we still need to gain.

On this Earth Day, at stake for all Americans is the very essence of what makes us unique as a country and as a people: our land, our people, and our public places. At stake is our public health. At stake is the protection of our natural resources. At stake is a legacy that we all share in, a shared legacy and responsibility about protecting our environment and protecting the health of our people.

The record of the Bush administration on rollbacks of protections and giveaways to special interests is a destruction of that very essence and that legacy. I think the people of America deserve much more. They deserve a country that values its people, protects its environment, and assures that we protect the very essence of what makes us different as a country.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to take a moment to commemorate and celebrate the life of Cesar Chavez, a life that was a life with inspiration to all of us in this country because it meant the very best for all of us.

Cesar Chavez had a vision for this country, and his legacy is a living legacy because of that vision; and the realization of that vision continues to be a work in progress and a work that we must all undertake. His vision was about inclusion, that all of us in this country deserve a place at the table and deserve to be treated with respect and with the humanity we all deserve. His vision was about fairness.

This country is about all people regardless of who they are, where they came from, what they look like, what language they speak, that we all be treated fairly and equally. And his vision was the dignity of each person, that we are all entitled, all born with a dignity and a self-respect that merits the rest of us living to that legacy.

And that is the living legacy of Cesar Chavez, and we commemorate his life today as a legacy that we must all continue to strive for and to make a reality in this country.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Mr. Boehner, Mr. Castle, Mr. Miller, and Ms. Woolsey for working on this reauthorization in a bipartisan fashion. I am very pleased to see a number of provisions in this bill that will help the Hispanic community, and specifically the migrant and seasonal farm working community to access the services they are entitled to.

The average farm worker earns just $7,500 a year--leaving most of their families well below poverty level. The hardships that the children in these families face are only amplified by their migratory lifestyle. Their parents, who are poor, uneducated, and often with limited literacy in their native language, face many barriers in helping their children apply for services every time they move. These are the families that put food on our tables and these barriers are leaving their own children hungry. It is our responsibility to help them overcome these barriers because all children suffering from poverty deserve a nutritious lunch through this program.

This bill includes a number of provisions that will help these eligible children gain access to free or reduced price lunches. It requires that materials sent to the parents be in an understandable and uniform format, and to the extent practicable, in a language that the parents can understand. By dismantling literacy and language barriers many more eligible families will be able to access information and be empowered to better make sound choices regarding healthful diet and lifestyle.

Significant improvements have been made to the certification and verification process. Children will now be certified for one full year--helping migrant children in maintaining access through the school year, wherever they are. It will extend automatic eligibility to children who qualify for migrant educational services under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. It allows for the direct certification of such children if they are identified by the district's migrant education coordinator. Schools will have the option to verify income data through Medicaid and the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations, FDPIR, in addition to TNF and Food Stamps. Schools will have the option of substituting applications under criteria established by the Secretary when they have independent knowledge that the household selected for verification is eligible, and they know that certain barriers will prevent them from responding.

In addition to improvements to the certification and verification process, the bill encourages schools to consider the needs of ethnic minorities, who are at higher risk for obesity and diabetes, in the development of their nutrition education programs.

These program improvements are significant, and as indicated in the bill title, they will certainly improve the program as well as increase the program's integrity. I recently decided to become a cosponsor of this bill, and I urge my colleagues to support its passage.

Again, I would like to thank the leaders of the Committee on Education and the Workforce for considering these provisions a priority and for moving forward in a cooperative and bipartisan fashion during this reauthorization. Additionally, I would like to thank Mr. Ehlers for his commitment to migrant children during this reauthorization. I would also like to thank the staff on both sides of the aisle for their

persistence and dedication to working cooperatively during this reauthorization. I urge my colleagues to support this reauthorization bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of Albert M. Elias for 50 years of service to organized labor and to the progressive political community in Tucson and Pima County as a member of International Typographical Union/Communications Workers of America Local 7026.

Albert M. Elias represents the highest ideals of the labor movement. While others talk about the need for a strong labor movement to protect and enhance the lives of working people, Albert, for more than 50 years, has worked to advance these goals. While others have talked about how Pima County and southern Arizona need progressive political success to empower the ordinary and disadvantaged among us, Albert has worked long hours helping politicians and movements advocate on behalf of these people.

Using the printing skills he has honed for most of his life, the knowledge he has gained over more than five decades of how the printed word can help realize worthy goals, and the personal contacts his honesty, integrity and goodwill have forged, Albert has achieved much and has helped others achieve even more in advancing political movements, and the labor movement in particular.

Albert, 75, a fourth-generation Tucson native, joined the International Typographical Union of his maternal grandfather Francisco S. Moreno in January 1954 and committed himself to a career in the printing trade. Albert believed that union membership would improve the professional quality of his work as a printer, and enable him to develop meaningful, long-term relationships in his community that would benefit himself and his family, as well as his union brothers and sisters. Union membership, he believed, also would provide him with better income and with vacations and holidays off to spend quality time with his family. It was Albert's goal to provide his children with the wherewithal to excel in education through high school and go on to college if they desired.

Time proved Albert to be correct. All three of the children of he and his wife Viola Baine are college graduates who are serving others in pursuit of their careers. Their eldest, Ana Elias Terry, has a master's degree from the University of Arizona and has worked as a bilingual speech therapist for Tucson Unified School District for 22 years. Son Albert is also a University of Arizona graduate and has been an urban planner for almost 20 years with the City of Tucson, where he is now the planning director. Son Richard parlayed his University of Arizona degree into winning election to the Pima County Board of Supervisors and becoming its vice chair.

Albert and his sister Aida Elias, the children of Alberto Spring Elias and Ermelinda Moreno Elias, always have lived their lives as Christians and are dedicated to their religious faith. Albert has maintained an active lifetime role in his Roman Catholic parish, based at St. Augustine's Cathedral in downtown Tucson. He served for many years as a member of its Parish Council.

Albert's interest in the printing trade goes back to his childhood in the 1930s. His grandfather Moreno had begun publishing the Spanish- language El Tucsonense weekly newspaper as a member of the Typographical Union in 1915, but he died an early death in 1929. El Tucsonense continued publication under ownership of his wife, Rosa E. Moreno, and with the help of her five children--Ermelinda, Gilberto, Federico, Arturo and Elias. Before Albert's 10th birthday he was delivering El Tucsonense by bicycle to the Latino barrios that dominated much of downtown Tucson. He worked his way into the print shop during his years at Tucson High School to be a ``printer's devil,'' sweeping the floors, cleaning presses, and remelting the lead used to make ingots for the shop's linotype machines.

After graduating from Tucson High School in January 1947, Albert went to the Frank Wiggins Trade School in Los Angeles to learn more about printing. After completing those studies in 1948, Albert went to work in the print shop that published El Tucsonense, now being run by his uncle Arturo Moreno. That ended in late 1951 when Albert was drafted into the U.S. Army. He served in the infantry for two years before being honorably discharged. After his discharge, Albert returned to Tucson. But instead of rejoining El Tucsonense, Albert sought membership in the Typographical Union as a journeyman, skipping apprenticeship because of his experience. His skills earned him a position as a linotype operator in early 1954 with the Tucson daily newspapers, The Arizona Daily Star and Tucson Citizen.

A bitter and ultimately unsuccessful Typographical Union strike at the Star-Citizen in 1966, over job-depleting automation and the companies' rejection of the union's demand for a pension plan, ended Albert's 12-year stint with the daily newspapers. Fortuitously for Albert, El Tucsonense was in the process of folding and he and a partner, Oscar Araiza, bought his uncle's printing shop. Araiza retired in 1991 and Albert has run Old Pueblo Printers alone since then.

Upon taking control of the business in 1966, Albert and his partner began doing printing work for Tucson-area labor union locals and Democratic Party candidates for political office. One of the first campaigns for which Albert's shop printed the political literature was one of the late U.S. Representative Morris K. Udall's bids for office. Udall continued to use his services after that, as did Robert Kennedy for his assassination-truncated 1968 presidential campaign. Albert printed campaign materials for Raul Castro, who was elected as the first Latino governor of Arizona; for Ed Pastor, who was elected as the first Latino congressman from Arizona; and for longtime Pima County Supervisors Sam Lena and Dan Eckstrom. I, too, came to Albert for my printing needs when I first launched what became a 12-year stint on the Tucson Unified School District Board. I continued to use Albert's services through 13 years on the Pima County Board of Supervisors and, finally, on my 2002 bid for Congress.

During his career, Albert supported labor leader Cesar Chavez of the United Farm Workers, he supported the efforts of local Latino activists to get their fair share of federal funds to improve the homes and neighborhoods of their people, and he supported a landmark lawsuit forcing Tucson Unified School District to desegregate its schools. Albert always has been, and still is, fighting battles against those who seek to use their financial influence to their own advantage--and at the expense of ordinary working people.

Albert M. Elias deserves special recognition, honor and respect for his five decades of union membership--and for his meritorious achievements during that time on behalf of working people and the less fortunate of Pima County and Southern Arizona.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in celebration of Black History Month. Black History Month was established in 1926 to pay tribute to the many African-Americans and other people of African descent for their myriad of contributions to human civilization. It is important to remember that during the years of 1619 and 1926 African- Americans received no recognition of their achievements that are inseparable from our lives.

Under President Woodrow Wilson's tutelage, the ``Negro History Week'' was created to promulgate the African-American achievements through sets of colloquiums, lectures, and exhibitions. It was to give a balanced view of all the people that contributed to the improvements of the Western society. Since then, the government has extended the longevity of the celebration to a month in order to provide a more extensive, global recognition and educational opportunity.

This year marks the 50th anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court ruling in the case of Brown versus the Board of Education, which established that every child deserves an education that is equal and substantive. This case changed the way African-American children were educated and was a catalyst that promoted change in the areas of voting, housing, and social justice.

In my home state of Arizona, before the year 1909, Arizona's schools were not segregated. However, during that year, Arizona's General Assembly passed legislation requiring African-American children to attend all black schools and be taught by black educators for the first eight years of their schooling. The first Tucson Unified Arizona District school to engage in segregation was the Paul Lawrence Dunbar School, named after a notable African-American poet. Through the collaboration of zealous teachers and caring parents, the students were able to receive a good education despite the school's inadequacies.

In 1951, Tucson Unified School District freely decided to integrate the school system, and in 1952 the school was renamed John Spring.

The school closed in 1978. To preserve the school, the Dunbar Coalition, a community organization, bought the property from Tucson Unified School District in 1995. The coalition is currently refurbishing the school and transforming it into an African-American Museum and Cultural Center. The school now serves as a venue for community events, and will be having a hearing on May 8th, 2004 to discuss the 50th anniversary of the Brown versus the Board of Education. Over 100 years ago, this building represented the inequities African-American children faced within the education system; it now symbolizes the injustices that are still present in the education system.

Black History Month, along with other celebrations, holidays and laws, has recognized the discrimination, harassment and abuse that blacks have endured. It showcases how far we have progressed, as well as reminds us that our goal in reaching true equality has not yet been completely fulfilled. Black History Month is a tool that educates and teaches the community on the African-American experience and struggle.

During this month, we acknowledge the many national African-American trailblazers such as, W.E.B. Dubois, Harriet Tubman, Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King Jr., Frederick Douglas, Malcolm X, and Hiram Revels and Shirley Chisholm, the first African-Americans elected to the U.S. Congress. Through these individuals and the dedication and hard work of countless others we, as Americans, are more tolerant, patient and accepting of others. We benefit from their legacies not in February alone, but every day.

It is important that minority groups work collectively to ensure civil rights are sustained and each person is treated with the respect and dignity they deserve, regardless of the color of their skin or ethnic background. It is my goal to build strong alliances and coalitions among all minority communities to work collectively toward reaching true equality.

I am very proud to have the opportunity to stand on the floor of the United States House of Representatives to help celebrate Black History Month. This is the time when we must commemorate and celebrate the lives of the many African-Americans that have made historic contributions in the areas of academics, politics, science/technology, and social justice. Their struggles and their triumphs are engraved in our everyday life and it is essential that we celebrate all of their accomplishments.

Mr. Speaker, violence against women is a serious problem in this country. One in three women will experience physical assault in her lifetime, with even greater risks for pregnant women. Women carrying unintended pregnancies are two to four times more likely to experience abuse. Murder is the leading cause of death for pregnant women. An average of three women are killed every day by their husband or boyfriend. Women who experience domestic violence are more likely to delay prenatal care; 4.5 million women in America are assaulted every year.

These figures are staggering and serious, but the bill under consideration today, the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, does not take the risks women face seriously. This bill completely disregards women as the primary victim of violence. You cannot harm a fetus without causing physical harm to a pregnant woman first. If this body wanted to consider violence against women, pregnant or not, seriously, I have a few alternate suggestions. We could provide adequate funds for the Violence Against Women Act so that no woman seeking help will ever be turned away from a shelter. We should insure that victims of domestic violence have equal access to programs funded under the Victims of Crime Act. Additionally we should provide women with access to contraceptive services, to thereby preventing unintended pregnancies that make them more susceptible to these dangerous situations.

All the title X funded clinics in my district, including Pima County Health Department Clinics, screen all women for domestic violence, provide appropriate counseling services, and refer women to local domestic violence agencies for additional services. They even provide small information cards in the private bathrooms that are designed for women to place in their shoes if they are at the clinic with an abusive partner. Title X clinics are one of our most valuable resources in reaching uninsured women who are victims of domestic violence. Unfortunately these programs are drastically under funded. If this Congress really would like to reach women in need, they would make funding for this program a priority.

This bill is not a real solution. This bill only applies to cases of assault that occur under

Federal jurisdiction. Between 1994 and 2000, only 130 Federal cases involved Federal domestic violence statutes. The public's broad support for preventing and prosecuting assault on women is being exploited for political purposes. This is an antiwoman bill. It disregards the woman's role in the pregnancy, and allows the law to ignore any harm inflicted upon her.

I urge my colleagues to support the Lofgren substitute which offers real solutions and real penalties for tragic violence against women, and oppose final passage of this misguided bill.