Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 46, let the permanent Record reflect I intended to vote ``aye.''

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I plan to withdraw my amendment after I give a summary of the serious condition of the floodway levee system near the Rio Grande River in Texas.

My friend and colleague, Mr. Lloyd Doggett, has brought some charts and shown what he understands to be the problem. I was born and raised there. I remember 1967 when six brothers were told by my dad that we were going to stop and shut down our business to go and help control what was happening on our levees that just could not stand the over 28 feet of water that was coming down the Rio Grande River and that our levee system was unable to stand up to that pressure.

So I am here to say that we today are appropriating billions of dollars to help New Orleans recover because we did not spend the millions necessary to maintain our levee system. Because of our shortsightedness, the residents of New Orleans are displaced and many died trying to escape the flood waters. I am here today to plead with you to not let this tragedy happen in my part of the country.

The International Boundary Water Commission is charged with maintaining over 500 miles of levees along the U.S.-Mexico border. A recent study by the U.S. Corps of Engineers shows that numerous sections of these levees are too weak, they are too low to hold back flood waters from the devastating Rio Grande River.

More than a million people call the Rio Grande Valley home, and 2.5 million people live on the Mexican side of the Rio Grande River. This region is the poorest in the Nation, and I am sure we do not want to see more images on television of the poorest of the poor losing what little they have.

My colleagues in Congress need to know that the Rio Grande Valley is also the gateway through which much of our Nation's commerce flows. Should a devastating flood hit the valley, factories and small businesses in Indiana, Illinois, New York, and throughout the Nation will shut down because of their inability to get just-in-time deliveries of the parts and supplies from maquiladoras that come through the valley's international border ports.

My constituents are not only afraid of the effects of a category 4 or category 5 hurricane, such as we experienced with Hurricane Beulah in 1967, but we are worried that even a slow-moving tropical storm could make them homeless like their neighbors in New Orleans. Heavy rains in the mountains of northern Mexico could cause a catastrophe because those flood waters empty into the Rio Grande River in areas from El Paso to Laredo to Roma and to Brownsville, Texas.

The IBWC estimates that $125 million would fix all of our inadequate floodway levees in South Texas.

My border colleagues and I, in a bipartisan collaboration with other members of the Texas delegation, will be asking the appropriators for most of this funding over a 5-year period or sooner through the regular appropriations process.

This evening, I spoke with Chairman Wolf and have agreed to work with him on ways to resolve these concerns. I welcome that opportunity.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.

Offered By: Mr. Hinojosa

Amendment No. 3: In the item relating to ``Diplomatic and

Consular Affairs'', after ``United States Institute of

Peace'', insert ``: Provided further, That of the amount made

available under this heading, $10,000,000 shall be available

for the United States Section of the International Boundary

Water Commission, United States and Mexico''.

Offered By: Mr. Hinojosa

Amendment No. 4: At the end of title III (before the short

title), add the following new section:

Sec. 30__. The Secretary of Agriculture shall use

$50,000,000 of funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation to

replenish the fund established by section 32 of the Act of

August 24, 1935 (7 U.S.C. 612c), to make payments with

respect to emergency disaster assistance for agricultural

producers: Provided, That the amounts provided under this

section are designated as an emergency requirement pursuant

to section 402 of H. Con. Res. 95 (109th Congress), the

concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2006.

Offered By: Mr. Hinojosa

Amendment No. 5: At the end of chapter 1 of title II, add

the following:

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to rise in support of H. Res. 668, a resolution to celebrate the 40th anniversary of

Texas Western's 1966 NCAA basketball championship.

I am proud to join my colleague and very good friend, the resolution's author, Congressman Silvestre Reyes from El Paso, in commemorating the 40th anniversary of this watershed event in our struggle for racial equality.

On March 19, 1966, Texas Western College's Coach Don Haskins led an all-black starting lineup to a 72-65 win over an all-white team from the basketball powerhouse, University of Kentucky. For Coach Haskins, he was simply putting his best players on the floor. For the Nation, he delivered the message that in competition, talent and ability mattered more than race. This is a lesson that we are still learning today.

The young men who took Texas Western College to a 28-1 championship season braved racism and hostile crowds to carry their team and their college to victory. I invite you to see this 1966 team photo in front of Memorial Gym, courtesy of the University of Texas El Paso. These champions were Bobby Joe Hill, Orsten Artis, Togo Railey, Willie Worsley, David Palacio, Dick Meyers, Harry Flournoy, Louis Baudoin, Nevil Shed, Jerry Armstrong, Willie Cager, and David Lattin.

It is fitting that on this 40th anniversary of the 1966 Miners breaking the color barrier in the NCAA championship game, that we reflect on how far we have come and how far we have yet to go. College enrollments are at an all-time high; and yet black, Hispanic, and low- income students are not enrolling and graduating at the rates we need for our Nation to put its best players on the floor.

Texas Western College is now the University of Texas El Paso. As an institution, it continues to lead the charge in developing our best talents without regard to race, ethnicity, or family income. The University of Texas El Paso is one of our Nation's leading Hispanic- serving institutions: 72 percent of its students are Hispanic. It is third in the Nation for producing Hispanic undergraduates, and is also rated the top engineering school for Hispanics. Since 1988, it has been led by a Latina, Dr. Diana Natalicio, a top administrator and a trailblazer by anyone's measure.

The University of Texas El Paso, in the spirit of the 1966 championship Miners, continues to break barriers and continues to refuse to let race, ethnicity, or family income trump talent and hard work.

I hope that all my colleagues will join me in celebrating this milestone in college athletics and racial equality.

Please join me in saluting the Miners on the 40th anniversary of their NCAA championship, and I urge you to vote for this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 6\1/2\ minutes to my friend and colleague from El Paso, Texas (Mr. Reyes), the author of this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis).

(Mr. DAVIS of Illinois asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to another good friend and colleague from the great State of Texas, Congresswoman Sheila Jackson-Lee of Houston.

Mr. Speaker, I have no more speakers, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I regret that I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 12, and ``no'' on rollcall No. 13.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this ill- conceived and harmful legislation, H.R. 4437. Our immigration laws are in need of a complete overhaul. There are bipartisan proposals on the table, but the majority is not interested in solutions. It is interested in finding its next wedge issue for this 2006 campaign season. Our Nation will suffer as a result.

For the past 20 years we have taken a get-tough enforcement-only approach to this immigration problem, and the result has been the situation we find ourselves in today.

Those of us who represent border districts live on the front lines on the immigration issue. Let me give you a view from where we live. Our schools, hospitals, law enforcement, and social services are being stretched to the limit. At the same time, we have experienced a surge in economic activity and growth. My area has one of the fastest rates of job growth in the Nation.

Immigration is both a challenge and an engine for growth. We need laws that are up to the challenge.

For a perspective from the front lines, listen to the words of John McClung, the president of the Texas Produce Association: ``Attempting to solve our border problems by passing draconian `enforcement' legislation, absent a credible guest worker program, would be enormously destructive to the economy, unfair to employers, ruinous to our relations with Mexico, and, yes, that really does matter.''

Mr. Chairman, I will submit the full text of this letter into the Record.

This bill will not help families. In my district, our caseworkers and our advocacy organizations, on a daily basis, work with families who have been waiting 10 years or more to be re-united with loved ones--a spouse, a sister, a child, a grandparent. The backlogs are enormous, and the system is capricious and error-ridden. Call for information on your immigration case, and the temporary contract worker at the call center with little to no training in immigration rules will give you a different answer every time.

This bill does nothing to fix our immigration system. It is not reality-based. It should be rejected.

Texas Produce Association,

Mission, TX, December 13, 2005

Hon. Ruben E. Hinojosa,

Washington, DC.

Dear Rep. Hinojosa: I am writing the Texas Congressional

delegation in the belief that the Congress is perilously

close to passing ill conceived immigration reform legislation

that will do grave injury to this country, and fail in its

objectives.

My office is about five miles from the U.S./Mexico border.

My home is about a third of a mile from that border. I am as

mindful as any American--more than most--of the surge of

illegals into this country, and I certainly understand, and

sympathize with, the need most of us feel to return to the

rule of law. From the front yard of my house in the rural Rio

Grande Valley, I often see groups of illegals trudging down

the road. Many times I've watched the Border Patrol agents

chase them down, cuff them, and haul them away. I can tell

you that there's no satisfaction in it, no sense of the good

guys prevailing. Only a sad recognition that this country's

immigration laws are a dismal failure by any measure:

economic, humanitarian, political. The saving grace is that

enough illegals, get through to do most of the jobs that need

doing, as disgraceful, flawed and inefficient as our

nonsystem may be.

At least, they get through for now. I represent an industry

that employs thousands of semi-skilled laborers, and

increasingly is unable to find anywhere near an adequate

supply of willing workers. Most people don't want to do stoop

labor in the fields, no matter the pay scale. They certainly

don't want their kids doing it. So we truly need guest

workers from Mexico or Central America or wherever. So does

the restaurant industry, and the construction industry, and

every other industry that requires numbers of semiskilled

workers. And what is the U.S. Congress doing about this mess?

Preparing, it appears, to make a very bad situation a lot

worse.

Most of us get it down here in rural Texas.

Why can't more members of Congress get it?

Is the need to act tough for the media so compelling? Is

the ideologue mantra of no amnesty (adjustment of status?)

for lawbreakers going to be allowed to jeopardize American

agriculture, and conceivably the national economy? Is the

fact that these illegals want essential jobs in this country

that none of our own citizens will take at any realistic pay

rate of no consequence at all because they're ``illegal'' or

``undocumented''?

Attempting to solve our border problems by passing

draconian ``enforcement'' legislation, absent a credible

guest worker program, would be enormously destructive to the

economy, unfair to employers, ruinous to our relations with

Mexico (and yes, that really does matter), and ultimately

unenforceable. The Sensenbrenner bill just passed out by the

Judiciary Committee (H.R. 4437)--the Border Protection,

Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005--

is a grand example. It relies on bludgeoning U.S. employers

into submission with fines and administrative procedures, but

only after denying them the only source of labor they might

realistically have hoped for. As I hope you recognize, it's

just one of several one-sided bills designed to appease the

``broken borders'' crowd.

Here's what we're asking. The Sensenbrenner bill needs to

be shelved, as do all proposals that do not include a

practical alien worker provision. To require electronic

verification of employment eligibility without a smart guest

laborer program, and without some form of ``amnesty,'' won't

succeed. For those who gag on the idea of amnesty, the real

question isn't determining how to avoid rewarding scofflaws--

the real issue is deciding to avoid punishing this country.

The produce industry has long supported the Craig-Kennedy

AgJOBS bill (Flake-Kolbe on the House side), and continues to

do so. If you and your colleagues can engineer a better bill

than Flake-Kolbe, that would be great. If you can't, pass

AgJOBS. Either way, please help lead the nation away from a

politically expedient catastrophe.

Thank you for your consideration.

John M. McClung,

President and CEO.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I support H.R. 856, entitled Federal Youth Coordination Act. I would like to commend the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Osborne) for bringing this bill forward. I would also like to add that I admire the gentleman's exemplary work in support of our youth from mentoring and outreach programs to this type of effort to coordinate Federal youth programs.

His commitment to young people is genuine, and his leadership is greatly appreciated. His Federal Youth Coordination Act would establish a Federal Youth Development Council consisting of all of the Federal agencies that have youth development programs. With input from the community, this council would be tasked with ensuring communication across Federal agencies serving youth and developing a plan and set of recommendations to improve Federal services to youth.

I think that we can all agree that coordination is sorely needed. Today's population of adolescents and young adults is the largest in our Nation's history. High schools and colleges are seeing record enrollments.

Tragically, the White House Task Force on Disadvantaged Youth reported that one-quarter of our young people are at serious risk of not achieving productive adulthood. We know from numerous reports that nearly one-third of our high school students fail to earn a diploma with their peers. For African American and Hispanic students, the number is even worse with only 50 percent graduating. Furthermore, many of our young people are not leaving high school ready for college or for work.

It is incumbent upon all of us to build communities with the educational opportunities and support system in place to help our youth become successful adults. Our record number of teenagers must become a record number of high school and college graduates, and a record number of teachers, scientists, doctors, lawyers, and unskilled professionals. We must not allow this generation to produce record numbers for the juvenile justice, runaway, and homeless youth or foster care systems.

Clearly, success will require strong coordination, schools, families, community-based organizations, employers, health providers, and social service agencies all working together. The Federal Government should lead by example, coordinating its own efforts to support our youth, and H.R. 856 is a step in the right direction.

I would note one concern with the legislation as drafted, however. The amended version of the bill requires the council to report using the results from the Office of Management and Budget's program assessment rating tool, often referred to by the acronym PART. This tool is the subject of significant controversy. For example, a recent GAO report highlighted the closed nature of the PART process and its emphasis on short-term budget planning over long-term goal setting.

In fact, the administration has used the PART as a means to eliminate programs that are not viewed as priorities. Some of these programs are critical to youth and young families, such as the Even Start Family Literacy program, TRIO program, and the GEAR UP and Dropout Prevention programs. It would be ironic to have the PART tool used to provide a rationalization for eliminating programs to help youth rather than expanding their reach and effectiveness.

It is my hope that our focus on accountability for programs will remain with the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993, our public law that provides for an open public process for developing objective information on the effectiveness and efficiency of Federal programs and spending.

In closing, I would like to encourage my colleagues to support this legislation, H.R. 856, to coordinate our Federal youth programs. May it spark an even greater sustained investment in our young people.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis).

Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to work with Congressman Osborne, and I want to say that I think this piece of legislation is one that is going to be very beneficial.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise to support H.R. 288, recognizing the 30th anniversary of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, now known as the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, or by the acronym IDEA. I am proud to join our committee chairmen, chairman of the committee of the whole, Mr. Boehner, and the chairman of one of the subcommittees, Mr. Castle, as well as our ranking members, Mr. Miller and Ms. Woolsey, to commemorate this important occasion.

I remember the hope that was ushered in with the passage of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975. As a member of the Texas State Board of Education at that time, I chaired the Committee on Special Populations which oversaw programs for migrant children, bilingual education programs for limited English proficient children, gifted and talented programs and programs for children with disabilities. In those days, it was a struggle to provide even basic access to schools for children with disabilities.

We have come a long way. IDEA currently serves an estimated 269,000 infants and toddlers, as well as 679,000 preschoolers and 6 million children ages 6 to 21. There has been a dramatic reduction in the number of children with developmental disabilities who must live in State institutions away from their families. The number of children with disabilities who complete high school with standard diplomas has also grown significantly since the enactment of IDEA.

Finally, the number of children with disabilities who enroll in college as freshmen has more than tripled since the enactment of IDEA 30 years ago.

Although we have come a long way, we still have a way to go. The Federal Government's promise to schools across the country was to share 40 percent of the cost of providing free and appropriate public education to children with disabilities. Today, in 2005, we are only halfway there and seem to have lost our momentum.

In 2004, IDEA reauthorization authorized full funding by the year 2011. Unfortunately, the President's fiscal year 2006 budget proposal for IDEA, part B, was $3.5 billion less than the authorized level for fiscal year 2006. The House fiscal year 2006 bill is about $3.9 billion less than the authorized level.

Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that if we continue to increase IDEA funding at the same percentage as the increase between fiscal year 2005 and the 2006 House bill, we will never reach full funding.

As we celebrate the 30th anniversary of this landmark education and civil rights act, let us redouble our commitment to keeping our congressional commitment and promise in 2004 to fully fund IDEA.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I enjoyed listening to the remarks by our chairman of the Education Committee. I, too, am saddened that the ranking member of our committee, George Miller from California, and the ranking member of one of the other committees that deals with this issue, Lynn Woolsey, was unable to make the hearing so that they could participate and express their own thoughts. But I can say this, that everything that the chairman said is correct, that we have made great strides.

But coming from an area that has a great rural community in Texas that I represent, I have met with many parents who have children who need this type of education. Their children are disabled, and they talk about the frustration that they have. They wish that the State government would invest much more, together with our public schools. Unfortunately, throughout the country, States find themselves lacking the wherewithal and the financial ability to put more money into many of our public schools. So it is up to the Federal Government, who has a $2.5 trillion budget, to be able to find the money to increase that investment as we promised 30 years ago and to get to that full funding as we promised then, because I see a lot of potential in those disabled children who, but for the money that the Federal Government could invest, they are not getting the best education possible.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis).

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1790, entitled the Child Medication Safety Act.

Later today, we will be considering a resolution. In fact, we just finished that resolution where we are celebrating the 30th anniversary of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. So it is fitting that we consider this bill to reaffirm parents' rights on this day, and I thank the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Kline) for bringing this legislation forward.

One of the most difficult decisions for parents is choosing the best course of care for a child with mental health needs. Teachers and other school personnel often play a very important role in bringing problems to the attention of parents because children spend the majority of the day in the classroom. They help to identity children's mental health needs and behavioral problems and assist children and their families in overcoming these barriers toward academic achievement.

Mental health professionals often work with teachers and other school personnel to help create classroom environments that best support children's mental health needs. The information that school personnel provide to the health care professionals about a child's behavior in the classroom is critical to an accurate diagnosis of a child's emotional disorder, learning disability, or other disability. However, the decision to medicate a child to treat mental health problems such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, better known as ADHD, belongs solely to the parents. It is a matter between the child, his or her parents, and qualified health and mental health care professionals. That is what this suspension bill today is aimed at achieving.

I support this bill because it achieves this goal while especially recognizing the critical role of teachers and other school personnel in promoting positive child adjustment together with parents.

Mr. Speaker, our intent here today is not to cause school administrators to become overly cautious or to discourage teachers in aiding parents in the identification of children with serious emotional disorders but to ensure that the decision to use medication to treat serious problem behavior remains with the family.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I was delighted to participate in the discussion and debate on this legislation. I want to urge my colleagues to support and vote for H.R. 1790, the Child Medication Safety Act.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to one of the most pre-eminent trailblazers in the Hispanic community--the recently departed former Congressman Edward Roybal from the great State of California.

Recently, we celebrated the unveiling of the portrait of Romualdo Pacheco--the first Hispanic elected to this body from the State of California. The man we honor today, Congressman Edward Roybal was the second Hispanic Member of Congress, elected in 1962--over 80 years since Congressman Pacheco served.

Congressman Roybal was a founding member of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. He was also one of the founding members of the National Association of Latino Elected Officials (NALEO) and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute. He made sure that the voice of the barrio was heard loud and clear in our Nation's capital. His example looms large over all of the work we do today.

Congressman Roybal wrote the first bilingual education law. He was a tireless champion for children and families whose first language was not English. He made a personal commitment to ensuring that language was no barrier to education, health services, voting rights, our court rooms and other areas vital to the community.

He was a champion for elderly Americans. He served on the Select Committee on Aging and fiercely protected programs such as Meals on Wheels.

As we prepare for the reauthorization of the Older Americans Act, his handiwork is evident, and his spirit lives on.

After leaving Congress, he found new venues for his advocacy. In 1993, former Representative Roybal used his leftover campaign funds to found a non-profit research agency dedicated to improving the quality and effectiveness of health and human service delivery to older persons, now called the Edward R. Roybal Institute for Applied Gerontology at the California State University--Los Angeles campus.

Here in the halls of Congress, his legacy continues. The Congressional Hispanic Caucus that he founded is now 21 members strong and poised for growth. His daughter, our friend and colleague, Congresswoman Lucille Roybal-Allard, carries on the family tradition of service and great leadership. Lucille has earned the respect of Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle the same way her father did it during his many years of service in Washington.

The best way we can honor Edward Roybal's memory is to continue the fight to improve the quality of life for our community--young and old, immigrant and native born, English speakers and speakers of other languages. To the Roybal family, I offer my heartfelt condolences and my pledge to continue the fight.

Madam Speaker, tomorrow the leadership of this House will bring up a budget reconciliation bill which makes cuts to Medicaid, food stamp programs for children, student loan aid programs that will force thousands of college students to leave school and prevent thousands more from even beginning higher education at the community college or university of their choice.

At a time when we are importing scientists, engineers, doctors, nurses and other highly trained workers to keep our economy running, this House is going to siphon off student aid dollars to provide $70 billion of tax cuts for the rich. According to the Congressional Budget Office, there will be nearly $8 billion in new charges to students and families that will raise the cost of their college loans at a time when the cost of higher education is rising much faster than the rate of inflation.

This reconciliation bill is not about controlling runaway Federal spending. It is about destroying our future for the short-term benefit of a privileged few. I urge my colleagues to oppose this shortsighted budget reconciliation bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the rule on H.R. 1461. It adds an anti-minority, anti-family provision that was not included in any of the sections of the legislation I supported in committee.

The rule will prohibit nonprofit groups involved in voter registration and get-out-the-vote activities from receiving money from the affordable housing fund created by the bill.

It will negatively impact good civic organizations in my district such as Amigos del Valle, National Council of La Raza, and Catholic and faith-based organizations.

This rule is strongly opposed by large Latino groups, including NALEO, LULAC, NCLR, and others.

The newly added provision is included in the manager's amendment and appears to be aimed at suppressing the civic engagement of low- and moderate-income and minority families. I respectfully urge that these provisions be removed before the amendment and bill come to the House floor for a vote.

I will insert at this point in the Record two letters to Speaker Hastert. One is dated October 24, 2005, by NCLR, LULAC, and the League of United Latin American Citizens. The second letter is from the Jesuit Conference, and that letter is signed by the Reverend Bradley Schaeffer.

October 24, 2005.

Hon. Dennis Hastert,

Speaker, House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Dear Mr. Speaker: It has come to our attention that the

House Leadership has forged a compromise with members of the

House Financial Services Committee regarding the Federal

Housing Finance Reform Act of 2005 (H.R. 1461). The newly-

added provision is included in the Manager's amendment and

appears to be aimed at suppressing the civic engagement of

low- and moderate-income and minority families. We urge that

these provisions be removed before the amendment and bill

come to the House floor for a vote.

With strong bipartisan support, H.R. 1461 (Federal Housing

Finance Reform Act of 2005) passed the House Financial

Services Committee. The bill contained a measure that would

create an affordable housing fund, potentially generating

billions of dollars for development. As you know, with

housing prices continuing to rise, many communities suffer

from a lack of affordable rental and homeownership

opportunities for hard-working families.

Unfortunately, after passage, a compromise was struck

between the House Leadership and the Financial Services

committee that would preclude most nonprofits from accessing

the funds. Many of the organizations that would be left out

are uniquely positioned to develop the affordable housing

needed in their communities. Specifically, nonprofit

applicants would be restricted from participating in voter

registration and many classic civic engagement activities in

the twelve months before the time of application. In

addition, the nonprofit applicants would be deemed ineligible

if they are affiliated with an organization that engages in

these activities. Notably, for-profit organizations would not

have the same restrictions.

As representatives of diverse Hispanic constituencies, we

have the following concerns:

Minority Voter Suppression. The Latino community has

experienced a long history of voter suppression. Nonprofit

community-based organizations have played a critical role in

fighting against those who would limit the voice of Latinos.

The groups often serve as the main point of contact in

Hispanic communities and, in many cases, they are the only

local organization addressing their social, civic, and

educational needs. The proposed Manager's amendment to H.R.

1461 wi11 force these trusted community centers to choose

between providing civic education and affordable housing.

For-Profit Double Standard. Inexplicably, under this

provision, for-profit developers would not face similar

restrictions and would likely become the majority of fund

recipients. Even for-profits with a dubious track record

would be eligible to receive funds while public interest

social service providers would not.

We urge you to preserve the integrity of H.R. 1461 by

fighting to remove the restrictions on nonprofits.

Sincerely,

National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed

Officials.

National Council of La Raza.

National Puerto Rican Coalition, Inc.

League of United Latin American Citizens.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 484, in recognition of National Runaway Prevention Month. I would like to commend the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Porter) for bringing it to the floor.

The prevalence of runaway and homeless youth in our Nation is staggering, with studies suggesting that between 1.6 and 2.8 million young people live on the streets of the United States each year. Each year roughly 5,000 of these troubled young people die from assault, illness, and in some cases from suicide. In my home State of Texas, more than 100,000 young people ages 7 through 17 run away from home each year. It is literally a matter of life and death that we raise awareness and do everything in our power to prevent runaways.

In the aftermath of hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the system of support for runaway and homeless youths is being stretched to the limit. This is especially true in Texas where many of the victims of these terrible storms have sought refuge.

National Runaway Prevention Month is a time to encourage the development of community-based solutions to prevent runaway and homeless episodes among our Nation's youths. More importantly, it is a time to draw attention to the need for resources to combat this problem.

During National Runaway Prevention Month, the National Runaway Switchboard and the National Network For Youth seek to raise community member awareness of the widespread nature of runaway situations and the importance of strengthening families and engaging their involvement in crisis intervention communities.

In Texas, our hotline started in 1973 as Operation Peace of Mind after the devastating discovery of 27 young men, many runaways, who were brutally murdered. Today, our hotline operates 24 hours a day and provides critical services which include the following:

Crisis intervention and counseling; information and referrals for callers seeking food, shelter and transportation home; confidential conference calls between youth and their families;

and, yes, it provides a message service to promote communication between runaways and their families.

Mr. Speaker, runaways are the Nation's most vulnerable youth. We must be united in helping them find a safe, healthy, and productive place where they can fulfill their potential. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my good friend and colleague from the great State of Illinois (Mr. Davis).

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.