Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to strongly oppose the Republican's ``Cut, Cap, and Balance Act.'' The only thing balanced about this bill is that it has the word balance in the title. The actual title should be ``Cut, Default, and End Medicare Act'' since it would have a devastating effect on all American families and businesses. This legislation makes significant cuts to social programs, and caps spending at unprecedented levels.

Quite simply, this is the worst piece of legislation I have seen while serving in Congress. This legislation seals tax breaks for richest Americans, while gutting Medicare for seniors and other critical programs for students, such as Pell Grants. In order to eliminate tax breaks for the richest two percent of Americans, a supermajority of Congress would be required for approval. This bill will adversely impact the Hispanic community and will substantially weaken the American economy.

The Republican plan is not the balanced approach Americans favor: spending cuts and revenue increases, but instead the Tea Party plan will lock in cuts over the next 10 years as severe as those in the Ryan budget plan that they passed in April. In fact, according to a CBS News Poll released Monday, 66 percent of Americans say an agreement to raise the amount of money the nation can borrow should include both spending cuts and tax increases. This bill would exacerbate the debt crisis by making it more difficult for the U.S. to pay its bills by August 2nd and force the passage of a constitutional amendment that would require a two-thirds approval to raise any revenue in the future.

This bill would require slashing $111 billion immediately from critical programs, in FY2012, without regard to the 9.2 percent unemployment rate. These cuts would cause the loss of roughly 700,000 jobs in the current weak economy. In fact, the Republicans' slash and burn politics have not created a single job for hardworking middle class families in over the 200 days they have controlled the House. Instead of rebuilding our economic infrastructure by investing in roads, ports, bridges, and education and job training programs to help middle class Americans, they push a radical and dangerous ideological agenda.

H.R. 2560 also continues the Republicans assault on our nation's seniors. Their plan will inevitably result in the end of the Medicare guarantee, shifting thousands of dollars of health costs onto seniors, shredding the social safety net and our promise to protect our most vulnerable. Social Security would also be affected, even though Social Security doesn't add 1 penny to the deficit.

Rather than focusing on innovation, infrastructure, education, and jobs, Republicans want to manipulate the Constitution to make it easier to cut Medicare and Social Security than to close special interest tax loopholes.

The bill destroys Social Security and Medicare as we know them. These programs are extremely important to seniors, especially to those in my district. H.R. 2560 is nothing more than an ideological piece of legislation to pursue a radical policy agenda of attacking the livelihood of our seniors, while protecting tax breaks for special interests and the wealthiest Americans. For these reasons, I strongly urge my colleagues to oppose this legislation and stand firm in support of our seniors, children, and most vulnerable.

Mr. Speaker, it is with a heavy heart that I rise today to share the news of a great loss to El Paso, to Texas, and to the Nation. My dear friend, Colonel Retired James ``Buster'' Hayden was a class of 1945 West Point Graduate, retired Army officer with 30 years military service, long time area West Point Admissions Representative, and the Chairman of my Military Academy Advisory Board for over 15 years.

Col. Hayden came from a long and distinguished line of West Point graduates. His great-grandfather was a member of the Civil War Class of 1862, and his grandfather graduated in the Class of 1888. In the 20th Century, his father was in the World War I Class of 1917, and Col. Hayden--well known to everyone as ``Buster''--graduated with the World War II Class of 1945 after securing an appointment on his fourth try!

Col. Hayden's distinguished career of 30 years included tours of duty with the Constabulary Force during the occupation of Germany, in an armored field artillery battalion during the Korean War, at the Pentagon, and with the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He retired as the Deputy Assistant Commandant of the Air Defense School in 1975. Just a year later, he started working with the West Point Admissions Field Force, beginning his long and distinguished journey of molding the next generation of leaders.

With his passing, our community has lost one of the greatest advocates for El Paso youth wishing to serve in our Nation's Armed Forces. After his family, what he loved most was inspiring scores of young El Pasoans every year to never give up on their dreams. Since 1976, he helped recruit talented cadets from the El Paso area and Southern New Mexico to West Point.

Over the last 15 years, Col. Hayden devoted countless hours, along with the other members of my Academy Advisory Board for the 16th Congressional district, to overseeing the annual process of nominating El Paso's finest young men and women to our Nation's service academies.

He influenced the lives of hundreds of service academy graduates, who have pursued successful careers in the military, education, business, and industry. In fact, Col. Hayden helped shepherd more cadets into the United States Military Academy at West Point than anyone in the history of the Academy. His efforts in our region have led to over 1,200 offers of admission to young men and women, resulting in no less than 622 graduates.

Col. Hayden never gave up on a single applicant, nominee, or appointee, even when he was feeling sick from the effects of cancer. Even near the end, his daughter found him in his office looking for information to reach a cadet. Once he got the phone number, he spent 30 minutes talking to the cadet. That is how he was with ``his'' cadets as well as those seeking a future at our military academies. In fact, in one of life's great ironies, I was at an event the night he passed away speaking with a second lieutenant of the 1st Armored Division from Fort Bliss who was proud to be ``one of Hayden's soldiers.'' He told me how Col. Hayden had changed his life by mentoring him from prep school to graduation at West Point. I have heard from many soldiers I have visited with around the world who tell of how Col. Hayden kept in touch and mentored them. That was the ``Hayden way.'' He always had words of encouragement for our young applicants and loved to recount the story about the challenges he himself faced in gaining entry into West Point. In his own self-deprecating way, he talked to candidates about how it took him four tries to get in, and he urged them to never give up on their dream.

During 30 years of active duty and another 35 years supporting Admissions and many other programs connected with West Point, Col. Hayden has truly espoused the motto of the United States Military Academy: Duty, Honor, Country.

His love for the Academy and for our Armed Forces was unparalleled, and we will all miss him. It was a privilege to know Buster and to work with him. He leaves a great legacy and will have a lasting impact for many generations to come. Our Nation and our community are deeply indebted to him for his service and dedication to our young people.

Madam Chair, I rise in strong opposition to the underlying bill for its drastic and extreme cuts to various critical food programs funded through the Department of Agriculture. While we face a great challenge in reducing the deficit and creating jobs, the greater challenge is to do this in a way that is consistent with our values. Slashing funds for programs that help put food on the table for the neediest of Americans, young children, pregnant mothers, the elderly, and those struggling to make ends meet, is not good policy.

The Special Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), the Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP) which serves predominantly low-income seniors, and The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP) which works with states to assist food banks are just some of the programs that were targeted for extreme cuts.

The cuts to WIC concern me the most. WIC provides food to new mothers, babies, and children under five who have been identified as nutritionally at risk. Nearly 50% of the babies born in our country each year rely on WIC. On top of that, it is incredibly cost-effective, serving nearly 10 million people each year, and costing less than $100 per person.

In my district, nearly 54,000 children and women suffer from food hardship, and depend on WIC to make ends meet.

This is yet another chapter in the Republican attack on working families to give handouts to special interests.

First they came after seniors who rely on Medicare, and now they're coming after children and mothers who rely on food assistance.

We cannot let Republicans destroy programs on which our most vulnerable population depend to pay for $45 billion in tax breaks for millionaires.

According to the Center for American Progress, if we got rid of tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires for one week, we would pay for the entire WIC program for a year.

I urge my colleagues to protect working Americans, not millionaires and billionaires.

Thank you.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the Boehner resolution on Libya. As a combat veteran myself, I am extremely concerned any time that we commit to using our armed forces to support military actions, and I believe that close scrutiny of our country's involvement in the NATO-led operation is essential.

I understand the frustration being expressed by many here today about their level of consultation in the decision to commence military operations in Libya, but, as my colleague from the Armed Services Committee Adam Smith noted, Congressional leaders were invited to a White House briefing and substantial information has been provided to Congress since then.

Based on my personal experience as Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, the Obama Administration's level of consultation with Congress on these sorts of issues is much more extensive and timely than during the Bush Administration.

I, myself, had additional questions which were not fully addressed by this week's briefings, and, while my colleagues were debating the rule for this resolution, I simply called the White House to request the information demanded in this resolution. Much of the information was provided immediately, with the rest due back in the next few days. And when I asked the White House about requests for information they had received on operations in Libya, they told me they had responded to all Congressional requests for briefings.

Debating the bill before us may provide a convenient opportunity for opponents of the President to make political statements, but it does so at the expense of our troops who are actively engaged in combat operations. This resolution threatens our critical NATO alliance and emboldens our enemies.

The Boehner resolution--like the Kucinich measure which we are also debating today--potentially sends the message to our NATO allies that the United States does not stand by its commitments. At a time when we are relying more and more on our NATO allies to support the joint mission in Afghanistan, now is not the time to turn our back on NATO.

Beyond straining relations with our closest allies, this resolution sends an even more dangerous message to Colonel Qaddafi. This resolution is effectively telling a despotic dictator, who has murdered and terrorized his own citizens, that he can simply wait out the military effort to protect the Libyan people because the United States will not hold true to its word.

As a member of the Armed Services Committee, as a combat veteran, and as an American, I will continue to ask the hard questions of our military and civilian leaders about military operations over Libya. But I will not vote for a measure that I believe threatens the security and safety of our country and undermines our President.

Mr. Chair, I rise to support the amendment offered by Mr. LaTourette and Mr. Pascrell to restore funds for FIRE and SAFER Grants in the FY2012 Homeland Security Appropriations Bill.

The Assistance to Firefighters (FIRE) and Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) grant programs provide much needed support to local fire departments to help them afford critically-needed equipment and training as well as to hire additional firefighters. Funds from the FIRE and SAFER grants can be used by local fire departments to equip, train and maintain personnel, as well as to prepare them to respond to emergencies from natural disasters to terrorist attacks. These programs address the immediate, individualized needs of departments efficiently and effectively.

Unfortunately, the FY2012 Homeland Security Appropriations Bill slashes these critical programs by almost 50 percent the amount requested in the President's budget, an amount that was already lower than previous year's funding. I concur with Mr. Price's sentiments that these cuts ``break faith with the states and localities that depend on us as partners to secure [and protect] our communities.'' In fact on Sunday alone, the Texas Forest Service responded to 20 fires consuming over 1,370 acres. This is in addition to three large ongoing fires that have consumed over 1,000 acres across Texas.

While our State and Federal agencies are working together to battle this inferno, we need to ensure that fire fighters have the equipment and resources that they need.

As local governments continue to face difficult times, these Federal grants help ensure that our communities continue to have the funds to hire and retain firefighters and purchase the equipment necessary to keep our communities safe. The FIRE grant program has provided over $7 billion in funding to local fire departments across the country since it's authorization in FY2001. One of the most recent grants awarded to El Paso, Texas, which I represent, was over $1 million to help offset the costs of constructing new fire stations across our quickly expanding city which has welcomed over 20,000 additional soldiers.

Indeed, the FIRE and SAFER grants are a critical piece to our security efforts, and I'm proud to say that I have supported legislation to strengthen these programs to ensure that communities facing financial hardship are able to apply for funds.

The LaTourette/Pascrell Amendment restores funding to the FIRE and SAFER Grants, and the spending increase is offset by cutting other funding.

I urge my colleagues to support our fire fighters by voting in favor of this amendment.

Mr. Chair, I rise to support the amendment offered by Mrs. Lowey to restore funds to the State and Local Grant Programs account in the FY2012 Homeland Security Appropriations Bill.

As you know, various programs under the Department of Homeland Security such as the Urban Areas Security Initiative, Operation Stonegarden, and FIRE and SAFER grants, provide communities across the country with the resources and tools necessary to keep us safe.

Unfortunately, the FY2012 Homeland Security Appropriations Bill funds the State and Local Grant programs almost 65 percent below the President's request. And, while I appreciate the Committee's efforts to consolidate and streamline the process, I concur with Mr. Price's sentiments when he says that these cuts ``break faith with the states and localities that depend on us as partners to secure [and protect] our communities.''

These steep reductions have prompted President Obama to release a Statement of Administration Policy expressing great concern regarding the insufficient amount of funds that are critical to support ongoing homeland security prevention and preparedness programs to ensure that all levels of government have the capacity to respond to threats. As our local governments continue to face financial challenges, these federal grants help ensure that our communities have the resources they need to stay safe.

As I have mentioned before, El Paso, Texas, the city which I represent, sits on the U.S.-Mexico border across from what is arguably one of the most violent cities in Mexico--Ciudad Juarez. Yet, despite this, El Paso has continued to rank as one of the safest cities in the country. Indeed, in 2010 it was ranked the safest large city. I attribute this to the great work of law enforcement in our community which is supported by the resources from programs funded through the State and Local Grants account.

With the continued violence in Mexico and other potential security threats in our area, funding for the State and Local Grants accounts is especially critical. These federal grants help ensure that our local law enforcement agencies have the resources they need to ensure that El Paso remains the safest city in the U.S.

As former Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, I know very well the importance of providing our cities with adequate resources to prepare, prevent, and protect against attacks. This is a time for our communities to remain vigilant, and it is unwise to cut off resources in such a drastic way--especially as some of my colleagues seek to paint the border as violent and lawless.

Mrs. Lowey's amendment provides necessary increases for disaster relief, police department anti-terror programs, and firefighter grant programs--restoring the latter two to their 2011 levels. If this amendment does not pass, the Republican Homeland Security Appropriations bill would dramatically reduce support for police and fire departments. This shifts the costs to local communities, forcing them to slash jobs and services, or increase taxes.

I urge my colleagues to support the Lowey Amendment to ensure that our communities remain safe.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to strongly oppose the Republican's plan to eliminate Medicare as we know it. The Republican budget ends the Medicare benefits guarantee and replaces it with an inadequate voucher system where seniors will have to buy their own health insurance in 2022. These actions

will fulfill Republicans' longtime goal of privatizing Medicare. Their plan eliminates critical provisions of the Affordable Care Act, including those that provide no-cost preventative screenings for all seniors and eliminates a 50 percent discount for brand-name drugs for seniors in the `donut hole.' Above all, the Republican plan increases the age eligibility for Medicare from 65 to 67, raising health care costs for millions of seniors who will have to wait longer to gain access to Medicare.

The plan to dismantle Medicare will have a devastating impact in my district. There are over 76,000 seniors in El Paso, and over 2.4 million seniors in Texas according to the most recent U.S. Census 2010 numbers. Based on Congressional Budget Office (CBO) analysis, the Republican plan would more than double a senior's out-of-pocket health care spending in 2022, compared to what their costs would be under traditional Medicare--increasing their out-of-pocket costs by more than $6,000 annually. By 2030, the GOP plan would nearly triple this cost to seniors.

These drastic changes to Medicare are a clear reflection of continued efforts to cut vital services for hardworking families to subsidize tax breaks for millionaires. It is simply irresponsible to balance the budget on the backs of seniors, while millionaires who can afford the high cost of health care, benefit from more tax breaks. Republicans are wrongly targeting vulnerable seniors, many of whom survive on limited incomes. Their plan will undoubtedly place additional burdens not only on seniors, but on their children, who will bear more costs to help meet the health care needs of their parents. This plan will also have a disproportionate impact on low income communities, such as those in the district that I represent, that will be overburdened with uninsured patients who will use public hospitals to meet their health care needs.

We have an obligation to protect our seniors and ensure they continue to have access to Medicare and receive the health care they need in the years ahead. That is why I will strongly oppose any effort to privatize Medicare and to increase health care costs for seniors.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Just in fairness, none of the manufacturing of this great aircraft is in my district. So what I'm saying is based on my experience and what I know about the capabilities of this great aircraft.

First and foremost, if we had had the Osprey when we went into combat in Tora Bora, we wouldn't have had the casualties that we suffered there because it's got much better capabilities than even the upgraded CH-47s that we were using at the time.

Secondly, in February, along with the chairman and another member of our committee, we flew the MV-22 in Afghanistan. I also had an opportunity to talk to the pilots and talk to the crew chief, mainly because that's what I did when I was in the Army. I was in aviation. And I wanted to get a sense from them as to what they felt about the aircraft.

All of them said this was a great aircraft with great capabilities--a technological marvel.

The bottom line is that is it effective. It is not how much have we paid for it but, rather, how many lives have we saved with it, and how many lives will we save because of it.

In closing, Madam Chair, I submit for the Record a letter from the Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps, and I want to read a paragraph from that letter.

It reads, ``This aircraft is safe and survivable, effective and efficient. The MV-22 has operated successfully in extreme environmental conditions--'' extreme environmental conditions like the ones we were in when we were in Afghanistan ``--during nine combined deployments to Iraq, Afghanistan and aboard amphibious shipping. It has the lowest Class A flight mishap rate of any United States Marine Corps rotorcraft in the past 10 years. In addition to being safe, our Osprey offers a very efficient use of resources. In 2010, the MV-22 had the lowest cost per seat mile of any Department of the Navy rotorcraft. Those figures will only improve as our cost per flight hour continues to decrease and our readiness rates continue to rise.''

Vote ``no.''

February 15, 2011.

Hon. C.W. Bill Young,

Chairman, Subcommittee on Defense, Committee on

Appropriations, Washington, DC.

Dear Mr. Chairman: In light of the current debate regarding

the MV-22, I appreciate this opportunity to expound upon this

important issue. The effectiveness and survivability of the

MV-22 Osprey have been demonstrated repeatedly in combat,

from land-based operations in Iraq and Afghanistan to sea-

based operations in Haiti and the Horn of Africa. The Osprey

is giving our Combatant Commanders unprecedented agility and

operational reach. As we remain actively engaged in combat

for the foreseeable future, the revolutionary capability of

the MV-22 will be a cornerstone of our Marine Air Ground Task

Force.

Without a doubt, this great country faces tough challenges

in the coming years. Continuous forward engagement, coupled

with growing fiscal pressures at home, presents a dilemma in

the face of public demands for dramatic action. The MV-22 is

the medium lift assault support aircraft for the Marine

Corps, and we must have it in sufficient quantities to

support our ground forces and ensure robust sustainment from

industry. The cost of introducing a second aircraft to make

up the difference in medium lift would be extreme. A prudent

evaluation of the facts makes it clear that the V-22 Program

of Record must be kept intact.

This aircraft is safe and survivable, effective and

efficient. The MV-22 has operated successfully in extreme

environmental conditions during nine combined deployments to

Iraq, Afghnistan, and aboard amphibious shipping. It has the

lowest Class A flight mishap rate of any USMC rotorcraft in

the past ten years. In addition to being safe, our Osprey

offers a very efficient use of resources. In 2010, the MV-22

had the lowest cost per seat mile of any Department of the

Navy rotorcraft. Those figures will only improve as our cost

per flight hour continues to decrease and our readiness rates

continue to rise.

As we consider the likely challenges of the next two

decades and how the Corps will meet them, one thing emains

clear: America needs an Expeditionary Force in Readiness that

is prepared to respond to any crisis. We are a maritime

Nation with global responsibilities requiring ready, agile

sea-based forces. These forces are organized, trained and

equipped to conduct operations in the littorals--from

humanitarian assistance to major combat--and ``such other

duties as the President may direct.'' This has been, and will

remain, the Marine Corps' primary role in providing for the

Nation's defense. The MV-22 serves as a critical linchpin

that will enable our Corps to deliver this capability across

the spectrum of operations.

Again, I appreciate the opportunity to provide these

details, and I stand ready to answer any additional questions

you or others on your Committee may have.

Sincerely,

James F. Amos,

General, U.S. Marine Corps,

Commandant of the Marine Corps.

I would like to thank the gentleman for yielding and compliment both the chairman and the ranking member for setting the tone to once again work in a bipartisan basis, as has been mentioned by all three of my colleagues that have spoken here this evening.

Mr. Chairman, each year the Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee is charged with conducting oversight of hundreds of thousands of dollars in Department of Defense programs that total more than $135 billion. All of the members of this subcommittee take this task very seriously because the troops in the field depend on Congress to provide them with what they need.

Conducting this oversight is a challenge because the budget, as we get it from the Department of Defense, is often far from perfect. It is the subcommittee's responsibility, therefore, to identify any wasteful spending, very critical at a time when the budget is under stress, find unexecutable funding and also find redundant programs. In addition, the subcommittee must also consider pressing DOD needs that are not addressed in the budget. That's the role of Congress. Doing all of that while making sure that equipment continues to flow to the troops in the field therefore is sometimes no easy task.

Despite these challenges, I am pleased to report again this year, under the leadership of our chairman, Chairman Bartlett, the subcommittee has put together a very well balanced product that cuts waste, reallocates funding for more critical priorities, and ensures that our troops will continue to have the very best equipment available.

I am also pleased with how the bill supports the Army and Marine Corps in particular. These two armed services have borne the heaviest burden over the past 10 years of war. And this mark does an excellent job, I believe, of helping them to rebuild combat power and prepare for the future.

H.R. 1540 fully supports and funds the Army's number one development program, the ground combat vehicle. This bill provides an increase of $425 million for additional M1 Abrams tanks and M2 Bradley fighting vehicles and keeps the production line open. The budget request assumed that a 3-year shutdown of both the Abrams and the Bradley production lines that would cost the taxpayer $1 billion, eliminate thousands of jobs, and diminish the United States defense industrial base was the way to go. We changed that. So rather than spending money to lose American jobs, this bill provides funding that will protect those American jobs while it also provides the Army with better and more modern equipment.

While this issue will not be fully dealt with in one budget year, I do believe that this bill lays down a better and smarter way that will maintain the Army's ground combat vehicle critical to the needs of both the Army and the Marine Corps. Finally, the bill fully funds the Marine Corps' $2.6 billion request for procurement of ground combat vehicle and support equipment.

For those reasons and many more, Mr. Chairman, I urge all Members to support H.R. 1540. It's the right balance and a great bipartisan product.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the outstanding accomplishments of the Americas High School Mock Trial team from my congressional district in El Paso, Texas. On March 5, 2011, at the Texas High School Mock Trial Competition, the Americas High School Mock Trial team became the first team from El Paso in the competition's 32- year history to win the Texas state title. This is a remarkable achievement that I am proud to recognize.

Mock Trial offers students across the nation the opportunity to develop critical thinking and public speaking skills, as well as knowledge of legal practices and procedures, in a real courtroom setting. Teams devote long hours to work on case theories and examinations to prepare for competition.

Undefeated in the regional competition for three years in a row, the Americas High School Mock Trial team's dedication secured their victory as they defeated the defending state champions. The team members include Enrique Esparza, Edwin Felix, Zach Fields, Joshua Monarez, Nayell Palomino, Jacob Parson, Texas Quezada, Chris Ramos, Savannah Rappe, and Anabella Tarango. In addition to the team victory, Zach Fields was awarded the Outstanding Advocate Award at the competition in a unanimous decision by the judges.

The Americas High School Mock Trial team is coached by Mr. Robert Almonte II, Assistant City Attorney for the City of El Paso, and Mr. Jaime Esparza, the District Attorney for the 34th Judicial District of Texas. The team's teacher sponsor, Teresa Candelaria, has served as their sponsor for seven seasons since 2004. I commend these three outstanding professionals for their dedication to the educational development of El Paso students.

Americas High School, located in east El Paso, is one of seven high schools in the Socorro Independent School District. The school opened in September 1996, serving a predominantly Hispanic student population.

In early May, the Americas High School Mock Trial team will travel to Phoenix, Arizona, to represent the State of Texas at the National High School Mock Trial Championship. I am pleased to honor this team for their impressive accomplishments, and wish all team members the very best in their future endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Women's Resource Center at the University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP) for highlighting Sexual Assault Awareness Month.

It is reported that worldwide, one out of every three women will be physically abused during her lifetime. In the United States, nearly two million women are assaulted each year, and more than half of all women will be physically assaulted during their lifetime. Last year in Texas, there were over 15,000 pending cases involving sexual assault or indecency with a child. In El Paso alone, there were over 850 pending cases reported.

These numbers indicate the severity of a widespread problem that can have devastating social and health-related consequences. To highlight the problem of violence against women and to support the survivors of sexual violence, the Women's Resource Center at UTEP, in collaboration with the Take Back the Night Foundation, will be one of ten partners throughout the nation that will participate in the second annual 10 Points of Light to Take Back the Night initiative on April 28th. This national initiative has assembled community organizers, campus advocates, and student leaders to illuminate the darkness of abuse, domestic violence, and sexual assault.

Take Back the Night is a powerful movement that started in the 1970s to combat sexual violence and abuse on campuses and in communities around the world. The UTEP Women's Resource Center provides supportive services for students, faculty, staff, and administrators at the university.

Today, I am proud to recognize the Women's Resource Center at UTEP, the Take Back the Night Foundation, and everyone who is helping with this important initiative. As a husband, father, and grandfather, I am proud to lend my voice to this effort. I encourage all Americans to raise awareness of sexual assault in our nation and help empower individuals to ``end the silence and stop the violence.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the accomplishments of the Rio Grande Safe Communities Coalition. The Coalition serves the Paso del Norte region which includes the City of El Paso, Texas, Southern New Mexico and Ciudad Juarez, Chihuahua, Mexico to build a safe drug-free environment for youth and adults. I want to honor the members of this Coalition for their tireless efforts in making a positive difference in our nation.

By implementing substance abuse preventative strategies within these communities, the Rio Grande Safe Communities Coalition helps individuals to avoid the negative consequences of drug and alcohol abuse. In order to do this effectively, the Coalition proactively identifies unsafe conditions in the community that contribute to the problem of substance abuse, and implements programs that aim to stop the behaviors creating these conditions. One such example is the Communities Against Reckless Endangerment or CARE initiative.

The CARE initiative was established in 2002 by the Coalition in response to troubling data from University Medical Center of El Paso and the El Paso Police Department regarding alcohol-related incidents among youth ages 12-17. The Coalition's response to this problem was to build a program that engages high school students to become part of the solution through peer-to-peer learning and educational awareness campaigns that warn of the dangers of substance abuse. Through this initiative, which was funded through the Office of Juvenile Justice & Delinquency Program and monitored by the Office of National Drug Control Policy, high school students created public service announcements and billboards aimed at preventing alcohol and drug abuse.

Since the establishment of the Rio Grande Safe Communities Coalition in 1999, there have been a number of initiatives to prevent and combat substance abuse. Initiatives include Operation B.R.I.D.G.E., which helped curb the problem of underage drinking by local teens who would cross into Mexico to consume alcohol, and the ``DARE 2 CARE,'' campaign that placed warnings at convenience store windows and on alcohol packages throughout El Paso regarding unsafe and illegal consumption of alcohol.

The efforts of the Rio Grande Safe Communities Coalition have helped save the lives and improve the health of countless individuals in the community. Today, I am proud to recognize their efforts in improving the quality of life

for youth and adults living in the Paso del Norte region, and congratulate the Coalition for recently marking 10 years of community collaboration.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my support for H.R. 1308 which extends the due date of the final report of the Ronald Reagan Centennial Commission from April 30, 2011, to November 30, 2011; and the final termination date of the Commission from May 30, 2011, to December 31, 2011.

The Ronald Reagan Centennial Commission was formed to commemorate the 100th anniversary of President Ronald Reagan's birth and to celebrate the life of our Nation's 40th President. Earlier this year, I was appointed one of the new members of the 2011 Ronald Reagan Centennial Commission by Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi. In that capacity, I am aware of the great events scheduled to commemorate the life of President Reagan past the original dates Congress set forth in the Ronald Reagan Centennial Commission Act. Passing H.R. 1308 today will extend the timeline and allow for the appropriate completion of these events.

I worked with President Reagan prior to serving in Congress when I worked in the United States Border Patrol. During his administration, I served as Sector Chief for the McAllen Sector in south Texas, where I worked under one of the great leaders of the former Immigration and Naturalization Service, Alan Nelson, who was appointed by President Reagan.

While most Americans remember Ronald Reagan for his unwavering optimism, his sense of humor, and his unique ability to connect to a broad spectrum of Americans, what I appreciated most about President Reagan was his pragmatic approach to immigration and border security.

President Reagan was at his best when he shared his idealism of an America that stood as a shining city on a hill, a beacon of hope, and a place where people of all backgrounds are welcomed. He reminded us of all that was great about America--a place where people have for generations come here in search of a better life, often fleeing from oppression, persecution, and deprivation.

When America was faced with a growing wave of undocumented immigrants 25 years ago, he proposed common sense solutions to fixing the problem. He never demonized illegal immigrants; he never belittled them, never used them as a scapegoat, and never blamed them for the Nation's troubles. He never inflamed public opinion, and saw the good in people. His former speechwriter, Peter Robinson, once said:

``He could picture--in his own mind's eye, he could picture those little ships that the pilgrims sailed in. He could picture the difficult, oppressive conditions under which the Chinese were brought to California. He admired people for what they had gone through to achieve better lives for themselves and their families in this country.''

He even felt compassion and empathy for those who had come here illegally. At the signing ceremony for the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, President Reagan said:

``The legalization provisions in this act will go far to improve the lives of a class of individuals who now must hide in the shadows, without access to many of the benefits of a free and open society. Very soon many of these men and women will be able to step into the sunlight and, ultimately, if they choose, they may become Americans.''

While I did not agree with all of the President's policies, I admired and respected the character of his discourse on immigration, and I believe we should all learn from his example.

As we mark this historic occasion and celebrate the life of President Ronald Reagan, I hope all of us are inspired by President Reagan's ideals and the vision he had of an America that embraced immigrants and the compassion he showed even to those who came here illegally.

In his farewell address to the American people, President Reagan closed his speech by making reference to the 'shining city on the hill' as he so often did during his political career. He said:

``I've spoken of the shining city all my political life, bat I don't know if I ever quite communicated what I saw when I said it. But in my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.''

Mr. Speaker, El Paso, Texas has a history of producing strong, passionate, and caring educators who motivate and engage our children to become lifelong learners. As a parent and grandparent, I am grateful for the contributions of our teachers in the El Paso area, and today in honor of Women's History Month, I want to take this opportunity to honor women who are serving as teachers in El Paso.

There are so many dedicated and talented women in the schools of the 16th congressional district of Texas who deserve to be recognized and thanked for their commitment to providing the best possible education to our children. From Rosa Guerrero, a pioneer in education who was awarded a lifelong membership to the Texas Parent Teachers Association and was the first Hispanic woman in El Paso to have a school named after her, to our more recent Texas Teachers of the Year, we have been blessed with many dedicated and talented women in the classroom. Across the country, female educators make up 76 percent of the classroom workforce and serve as the core of the teaching profession, inspiring and supporting our youth. El Paso has been particularly blessed with incredible female educators and their work has been recognized year after year by the State of Texas and the Texas Teacher of the Year program. I am proud to note that El Paso has had ten Texas Teachers of the Year and six have been strong and passionate women.

Today's teachers are working under a tough budget crisis. Yet, in such difficult times our teachers continue to work hard every day to educate and inspire our children. Education is one of the fundamental building blocks of our Nation, and our teachers deserve to be acknowledged for all of their hard work and dedication.

In honor of Women's History Month, I would like to salute all the women in our classrooms in the 16th District of Texas, and also enter the names of the previous female recipients of the Texas Teacher of the Year Award from my congressional district.

Names of El Paso's Female Texas Teachers of the Year

Yushica Walker, Texas Teacher of the Year for 2010--Morehead Middle School

Christine Gleason, Texas Teacher of the Year for 2009--Fabens High School

Dana K. Boyd, Texas Teacher of the Year for 2007--Dolphin Terrace Elementary School

Kyann McMillie, Texas Teacher of the Year for 2004--Canutillo Elementary School

Rosa E. Lujan, Texas Teacher of the Year for 1992--Ysleta Elementary School

Rita Harlien, Texas Teacher of the Year for 1982--Eastwood High School

I thank the gentlelady for yielding.

I rise in opposition to Mr. Burgess' amendment because the State of Texas today is facing a $27 billion deficit.

Last week, Governor Rick Perry came to Washington to ask our Republican colleagues for an $830 million bailout--and voila--we have Mr. Burgess' amendment. If this amendment passes, it will shortchange our schools and give a huge bailout to Governor Rick Perry.

Last year, as you have heard, he accepted more than $3 billion in Federal funds, but instead of going and putting that money towards education in Texas, he used it to expand the State's tax surplus rainy day fund.

Today, Mr. Burgess' amendment would absolutely give Governor Perry a blank check--how good is that?--giving an $830 million bailout to the same State leadership that robbed Texas children and Texas schools and Texas teachers of that money before.

With that, I ask support to bring down this amendment.