Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce a bill to provide free postage for absentee or mail-in ballots in federal elections.

Since voter participation rates are shockingly low in this nation where we pride ourselves on our democracy, our leaders must do all we can to encourage voter turnout and remove obstacles.

We know that not everyone can make it to the polls on Election Day and we know that some voters prefer to vote from home because they have more time to review their options and do not want to wait in line to vote.

While only 6 percent of voters used the vote by mail option in 1979, that number has risen to around 40 percent in areas where voters can vote by mail for any reason such as in my district in San Diego.

In our fast-paced hectic society, voting by mail is an option that works for many people. We need to make voting by mail as convenient as possible. Making ballots postage free is a step in that direction.

The price of a stamp is not a burden for many people though it certainly is for some. For these people, adding a stamp to a ballot is a sort of poll tax and that is wrong.

For those for whom a stamp is affordable, it is not always easy to acquire a stamp or to know how much postage to put on an odd-sized ballot envelope. In fact, a postal employee even told me she drives around with her own mail in her truck for days because she can't find the time to weigh it and buy stamps.

With election deadlines, voters do not have time to wait until they can stop to pick up stamps. They should be able to vote and put their ballots in any mailbox without worrying about finding the right amount of postage.

We must also realize that providing postage for mail-in ballots does not come at tremendous cost to the federal government. Postage for ballots is managed in bulk making them eligible business reply rates which cost less than individual first class pieces. But more importantly, each voter need not figure out how much postage to put on.

It is hard to give an exact cost estimate of this bill since the number of mail-in voters varies election to election. However, if the federal government paid for the mail-in ballots in the 2004 election, the cost would have been around $23 million. That is a small price to pay when you compare it with the billions we are spending on election machines and other costs.

In Congress, we have become accustomed to sending mail out with just the frank. We don't worry about having the proper postage. Shouldn't we share that privilege with the voters?

Creating postage-paid mail-in ballots is just one of the three major improvements we can make to mail-in voting. The others are allowing no- excuse absentee voting and implementing a ballot tracking system similar to that which we use for overnight packages. I have introduced legislation addressing these other areas as well.

If voters could vote by mail for any reason and know that they could just toss their ballots in any mailbox without having to worry about postage and if they knew they could track the progress of their ballot, more voters would vote by mail, the strain at the polls would be less and I suspect voter turnout would increase dramatically.

I want to express my strong support for the Torture Victims Relief Reauthorization Act, H.R. 1678. This important legislation funds treatment centers for torture survivors who now live in the U.S.

With help, torture survivors can recover from their trauma, rebuild successful lives, and be contributing members of our society. When these new Americans rebuild their lives, we all have much to gain.

I also want to take this opportunity to recognize the efforts of Survivors of Torture, International (SURVIVORS) in my district of San Diego, California. SURVIVORS is an independent, nonprofit organization dedicated to caring for survivors of politically-motivated torture and their families living in San Diego County.

Approximately 11,000 torture survivors are living in San Diego County today. These survivors are from countries where the systematic use of torture is documented, including nations in Africa, Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and Latin America.

Since its founding in 1997, SURVIVORS has helped more than 650 torture survivors from more than 50 countries to recover from their trauma through a holistic program including medical, dental, psychiatric, psychological, legal and social services. There is also a need to continue to make services even more comprehensive.

SURVIVORS empowers torture survivors to reclaim the strength and vitality that were stolen from them by brutal dictators and governments. The specialized care SURVIVORS provides these vulnerable individuals helps them to become self-sufficient, healthy members of their own families and of our community. SURVIVORS currently serves more than 300 survivors of torture and their families living in San Diego County.

SURVIVORS works with refugees, asylees, asylum seekers, and immigrants who are survivors of torture. By working with this large population in San Diego County, SURVIVORS is strengthening the Nation: many of its clients move to other communities in the United States after receiving the care and services necessary to successfully build a new life here. As SURVIVORS continues to work in the community, it receives an increasing number of referrals and requests for services each year.

The professional backgrounds of SURVIVORS' clients include: business, religious, government, and farm leaders; university students and educators; journalists; physicians and nurses. The significant majority of SURVIVORS clients suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder, major depressive disorder, or both. These are normal yet disabling reactions for ordinary people who have endured the extreme trauma of torture.

Madam Speaker, the TVRRA also authorizes a contribution to the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture (UNVFVT). Funding from the U.N. helps many centers feel more secure in the dangerous work of aiding those that a regime has identified as its enemies. The UNVFVT supports nearly 200 treatment programs all over the world, including nearly all U.S. centers.

H.R. 1678 is a vital piece of legislation which funds essential services for survivors of torture throughout the 53rd District of California and San Diego County, and enhances the standing and reputation by exporting America's values in the form of support for foreign treatment centers. I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill that is so important to so many.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to express my deep sadness at the passing of my friend and colleague, Congresswoman Juanita Millender-McDonald, a dedicated public servant, who worked tirelessly on behalf of her constituents and her country.

I had the privilege to serve with Congresswoman Millender-McDonald on the House Administration Committee and also previously in the California State Assembly, and can attest to the passion, dignity, and grace she brought to her work.

Juanita Millender-McDonald devoted much of her life to public service. In her career she was an educator and an advisor, a member of Carson's City Council, a California State assemblywoman and finally a Member of Congress.

Congresswoman Millender-McDonald's passion and drive were unmatched. She was an unwavering advocate for minority rights. She was a champion of women's health issues. She was an adamant opponent of the genocide in Darfur. And she was committed to securing election reform and security for our Nation's ports.

I admired Congresswoman Millender-McDonald's leadership and fervor in her many roles: as community leader, Member of Congress, and Chairwoman. All those who knew her and worked with her know the void she leaves with her passing. I extend my heartfelt condolences to her husband, James, her children and her grandchildren. She will be missed.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of

Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Mail-In Ballot Tracking Act of 2007--a bill to implement procedures for tracking the growing number of ballots in States throughout the country that are transmitted through the mail.

Although voters across the Nation are increasingly choosing to cast their ballots by mail because it is more convenient and they have more time to study their choices, many voters have been hesitant to do so because, quite frankly, they are worried that they cannot determine for certain where their mail ballots are in the system and whether they were actually received and counted.

In most cases, the fears of one's mail-in ballot somehow being lost in the system are unfounded--but we all know the fear is still there. Our Nation's voters deserve electoral procedures that are transparent and which strengthen their faith in democracy.

Sometimes there is reason for concern. I have heard horror stories from people who simply did not receive a ballot they requested.

Other voters have called their overwhelmed elections offices and waited on hold for too long trying to find out whether their ballot has been mailed or received. Even when they get to speak with an informed elections official, that official often cannot tell the voter where the ballot is because it is somewhere in the postal system.

The good news is that it is possible and practical to track mail ballots.

We have been tracking the process of overnight packages for years by using the Internet and the telephone. There is no reason why we cannot track ballots using similar technology.

In fact, some jurisdictions such as San Mateo County, CA are already tracking ballots with great success.

The United States Postal Service is currently introducing an ``Intelligent Mail'' system which, if applied to election mail, will allow voters to find out via the Internet or the telephone which postal processing facility last handled their ballots and when they were handled there.

Quite simply, the technology will soon exist to seamlessly track ballots from the time they are sent out from the appropriate elections office to the time they are received back and include all the key postal points along the way.

Implementing ballot tracking systems will bring voters peace of mind and reduce the burden on elections offices which are often barraged with phone calls from voters trying to determine the status of their ballots.

This legislation will also allow a voter to know whether his or her ballot passed the verification stage and will be counted.

Not only is mail ballot tracking feasible and helpful, but it is also affordable.

Setting up systems at an elections office can be as simple as redesigning a website.

Adding barcodes to envelopes already going through the postal process can cost tiny fractions of a penny per piece.

Purchasing any additional scanning or telephone equipment is also relatively inexpensive for election technology.

Mail ballot tracking could even help elections offices save money in the long run as call volumes will likely go down and the strain on staff declines.

Mail ballot tracking is a win-win for all.

I believe it will increase voter participation as it increases peace of mind.

We should follow the lead of the trailblazers who are already tracking mail ballots and ensure this level of security, transparency, and accountability to all voters who either choose to vote by mail or who live in one of the growing number of localities holding all-mail elections.

I ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in supporting this effort to strengthen the democratic process and give American voters the electoral certainty they deserve.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Vote by Mail Act of 2007--a bill to provide grants to states to help them offset the costs of adopting Vote by Mail election systems and to study the benefits of those Vote by Mail election systems.

While I love the ritual of going to the polls to vote, I know that getting to the polls on Election Day is often difficult. For some, it's impossible. And for some elections, it simply does not make sense to open the polls.

That is why I have introduced a bill that builds upon the growing trend of states to bring the polls to the voters. I believe we should try to meet our constituents halfway by increasing access to the electoral process.

Oregon, the only State to adopt Vote by Mail, historically has one of the highest voter participation rates in the country. Oregon has also dramatically decreased its costs.

Under current law, certain States and jurisdictions may conduct certain elections by mail but only under limited circumstances and they are not given Federal funding to make that adjustment to vote by mail.

This bill would help States who want to conduct Vote by Mail elections by creating an $18 million, 3-year grant program to provide a portion of the funds they need.

Under this bill, States would have the option of adopting Vote by Mail statewide, within a group of selected counties, or even in a single county.

Further, this bill instructs the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to conduct a very important study.

With the popularity of Vote by Mail increasing dramatically, it is crucial that we invest in some valuable research to learn about its benefits, find remedies for any problems and share best practices.

This bill will instruct the GAO to compare traditional voting methods with Vote by Mail with respect to: the likelihood of fraud and misconduct; the accuracy of voter rolls and election results; voter participation in urban and rural communities and by minorities, language minorities, individuals with disabilities, individuals who are homeless, and individuals who move frequently; residual vote rates, broken out by voter age, education, income, race, or ethnicity or whether a voter lives in an urban or rural community, is disabled, or is a language minority; public confidence in the election system; and cost savings.

As the former president of the League of Women Voters of San Diego, I care deeply about the integrity of our electoral system and the rate of participation among our citizens.

I ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in supporting this effort to strengthen the democratic process and give elections officials and voters the options and support they deserve.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 66) permitting the use of the rotunda of the Capitol for a ceremony as part of the commemoration of the days of remembrance of victims of the Holocaust.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks in the Record on this concurrent resolution.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Concurrent Resolution 66, which authorizes the use of the Capitol rotunda for a ceremony on April 19, 2007, commemorating the victims of the Holocaust.

The United States Holocaust Memorial Council is entrusted with observing the Days of Remembrance. These Days of Remembrance and the solemn ceremony at the Capitol set the manner in which similar events across our country pay homage to the 6 million people who lost their lives during one of mankind's darkest periods in history.

When World War II ended in 1945, 6 million European Jews were dead, including more than 1 million Jewish children. While all Jews were marked for death, children were among the most defenseless.

This year, the Holocaust Memorial Council, which oversees the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum and organizes the annual Days of Remembrance, has selected ``Children in Crisis: Voices from the Holocaust'' as its theme.

In any day and age, among the most vulnerable targets are children, and most often they are the first victims of senseless deeds. The children of the Holocaust endured lives filled with fear and suffering. The emotional and physical cruelty forced upon them is unimaginable. It is estimated that over 1 million, and as many as 1.5 million, Jewish boys and girls were murdered under Nazi rule in Germany and occupied Europe. These children were murdered because they were Jewish, not because of any action they had taken; not because of any crime they had committed, but simply because of their religion and their ethnicity.

Mr. Speaker, I believe that a number of the Members have been to Yad Vashem, the Holocaust memorial in Jerusalem, and I have an enduring image there of the children, the stars which represent them, the luminaries which hang from the ceiling, those tens of thousands of luminaries which remind us all of this overwhelming reason for us to remember these children.

Many children of the Holocaust were confronted by overpowering and destructive forces, separated from their parents and coerced into hiding. Children who found themselves hiding in the shadows were faced with unyielding hardships, and some were subjected to dark, cramped conditions for weeks, for months and even years, while others wandered from place to place seeking refuge, never knowing who to trust.

For those who survived, the end of the war was rarely the end of the struggle. Many children found themselves alone, with no family to be reunited with. The devastating and heart-wrenching reality was that there were no surviving family members, and they would now face the future without parents, grandparents or siblings.

So, as we stop to reflect on this heinous event, let it serve as a reminder that there is no room for prejudice, oppression and hatred. As American and world citizens, it is important that succeeding generations are called upon to remember the atrocities of the Holocaust and the similarities in the hate crimes we see today.

The will of the human spirit indeed is unwavering in the face of adversity, and history has shown us that in times of despair, humanity prevails and always looks towards a brighter future.

There is no better place than the United States Capitol rotunda to embody the reverence and dignity so deserving and honoring the victims of the Holocaust, especially the children. The United States Capitol has stood as a symbol of freedom and liberty and a symbol of hopes and dreams.

It is important, Mr. Speaker, that we use the rotunda, the scene of so many historic events, to draw attention again to one of the immense tragedies in human history and to take this time also to honor our colleagues who were personally victimized by the Holocaust or whose families suffered and died, and to pledge anew that such a atrocities must not be permitted to occur. We recall the words, ``never again, never again.''

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

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

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce H.R. 1119, the Purple Heart Family Equity Act.

I am pleased to introduce this legislation along with my distinguished colleagues Congressman Roy Blunt and Congresswoman Virginia Foxx. We seek to fully honor the women of the Armed Forces who have won the Purple Heart defending our great freedoms and their families.

The Purple Heart, Madam Speaker, is a military decoration awarded to service members who have been wounded or killed while serving with the U.S. military. Modeled after the Badge of Military Merit given by George Washington to members of the Continental Army during the Revolutionary War, the Purple Heart is the oldest military decoration currently in use and was the first to be made available to every service member.

It is time we built upon the great traditions of the Purple Heart and fully recognize the women who have received this high honor. Surely, their wounds and sacrifices are just as meaningful.

Male members of the Order are allowed to invite their wives to join with limited membership benefits, according to the current Federal Charter of the Military Order of the Purple Heart. But female members are not allowed to invite their husbands. Surely, we here in this Chamber are not in the business of extending rights to our brave men who receive this award but not our brave women.

I stand here today to urge my colleagues to support the Purple Heart Family Equity Act. This bill will update the Federal Charter of the Military Order of the Purple Heart to allow husbands of female members of the Order to become Associate Members.

The first women to be awarded the Purple Heart was 1LT Annie G. Fox. She was awarded this distinction in 1941 after the attack on

Pearl Harbor where she made the ultimate sacrifice for her country. It has been 66 years and it is time we acted to fully honor the courageous women who are bestowed with the Purple Heart. Let us honor the memory of First Lieutenant Fox and the countless other women who have made unimaginable sacrifices for all of us by voting yes on H.R. 1119.

Mr. Speaker, may I ask how much time remains on both sides.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I just wanted to mention to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that it is concern for our allies in the region, it is concern for our friends there that we have chosen and speak to escalating our diplomatic efforts in the area that this resolution comes forward.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Perlmutter).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Cuellar).

Mr. Speaker, I am now very happy to yield 5\1/4\ minutes to my colleague from Maine, Mr. Michaud.

Mr. Speaker, I am now pleased to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski).

Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Schwartz).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Arizona (Ms. Giffords).

Mr. Speaker, I am now happy to yield 5 minutes to the gentlelady from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum).

Mr. Speaker, I am now happy to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek).

(Mr. MEEK of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz).

Yes. Mr. Speaker, we have one additional speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to inquire of our remaining time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan).

Mr. Speaker, I now recognize Mr. Chris Murphy of Connecticut for 5 minutes. He will be our last speaker, and, as we all know, he is a veteran of the Iraq war.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague on the other side of the aisle, because in many ways he has really made the case for us. The argument on his side has been that we can't just use our military, the tools that they bring us, the great treasure that we have in them. We cannot solely look to them. And I think our great consternation over this war has been that we have not used our political, our economic and our diplomatic tools to represent the great Nation that we are.

I have to tell my colleague that I was really saddened when the veterans of my community asked me, and I have asked our generals and I have asked the President, are we in fact a military at war and not a Nation at war? The generals told me that we are a military at war. I think the President disagreed with that. But the reality is that we have not brought our Nation to this effort in the way that I think is appropriate to have done. And so when we talk about the strategic risks that are there, when we talk about the fact that we need to understand those risks, we are doing it in a context that we know that when we went to this war, we didn't properly assess those risks.

We failed to do that, and we can't fail to do that any longer.

So what we bring to the table and what we bring to this discussion and this debate, and I think it has been a good debate, Mr. Speaker, is I think it is important, as a lot of my colleagues have said on both sides of the aisle, that we represent the people of our community.

I often go into schools and talk to students about what representation means and tell them that it would be really impossible to take their entire class to Washington and have everybody there to speak on the floor of the House. Well, we are honored, and I know that my colleague is too, to be in the House, to be able to make those presentations, and we do it for people who actually sometimes disagree with us as well as agree with us. But it is important that we do that.

I think what we bring to this debate is to try and understand what these strategic risks are today. You made my case, and I appreciate that, because there are many conflicts, and we need to understand them. That is why only focusing on a troop escalation, which isn't 20,000 troops, Mr. Speaker, we know there are probably another 15,000 in support troops, and those 15,000 troops, which are there for support of combat troops, sometimes get in the way. We know that, and we know we have had many deaths from our support troops as well. So we need to think about this as a much larger troop escalation.

But the reality is we need to utilize all of our other tools, and we want to put the pressure on our country, on this administration, on the Iraqi people and its government and all of our friends around the world to help us and step up to the plate; not to just rely on our military, not to just rely on our treasure. We believe that is essential to make the statement.

So I want to close, Mr. Speaker, by saying that this has been a good debate. It will continue. It will continue into tomorrow. Then Members will have an opportunity to vote and to let their constituents know how and why they chose to do that.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for that, I thank the entire body, and I thank you.

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

Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 1 o'clock and 13 minutes a.m.), under its previous order, the House adjourned until today, Friday, February 16, 2007, at 8 a.m.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of our extraordinary troops and oppose sending over 20,000 additional U.S. forces into the middle of Iraq's violent sectarian conflict. I oppose the President's plan because it will not end the insurgency, halt military activity, or accelerate our departure from Iraq. The plan is not a strategic change.

Rather, it is the continuation of a failed policy. When Congress voted to authorize the use of military force, I voted ``no.'' I felt at that time that we had not exhausted all diplomatic avenues and that unilateral action would have a grave effect on our strategic position in the world. More significantly, it could undercut the broader long- term war against Islamic extremism. Sadly, Mr. Speaker, many of these predictions have come through. We now find ourselves in a position where only grim choices remain.

The war in Iraq has indeed strained our military, drained taxpayer dollars and damaged our credibility in the international community. As a member of the House Armed Services Committee, I have heard from a number of administration officials and academic experts on the way forward in Iraq. And many of these experts have warned against increasing the number of troops.

Last November, General Abizaid told Congress that an increase in U.S. troop levels would only delay the ability of Iraqis to take the lead. Mr. Speaker, what changed between November and today? Even the most ardent proponents of the troop increase acknowledge that to work all pieces must come together.

First, the military must be able to quell sectarian and insurgent violence. And then if the violence subsides long enough for a window of opportunity to open, the economic and political components must be executed flawlessly.

Even if our forces are successful in reducing violence in the short term, assurances cannot be given that other parts of the government will be able to address the economic and political components of the President's plan.

Well, the track record of the administration and the Maliki government make it hard to believe that such a plan will bring real results. One of the most egregious errors of our entire experience in Iraq has been the failure to put trained experts in critical civilian positions.

To accomplish this new mission, civilian agencies have been asked to send several hundred experts to Iraq to carry out the plan. However, the military has reported that because of hiring delays, DOD will have to assign their own personnel because U.S. civilian agencies are unable to fill the much needed positions.

Mr. Speaker, it should not be the role of the military to rebuild nations on their own. We should have been leveraging our talented and experienced Federal workforce all along. Many of my colleagues have already discussed key issues such as readiness and equipment levels, but two of the greatest concerns I have with the President's plan are the effect on our volunteer force and the strategic risk that is created by putting more military assets into Iraq.

By adding more troops, the administration leaves our Nation with fewer resources to deal with Afghanistan and future contingencies. Will we be able to respond if our military is needed elsewhere? With more of our troops bogged down, will our allies around the world continue to have faith in our ability to respond to extremist and military threats around the globe?

We must answer these questions. But I have not heard satisfactory responses from the President or military officials. Mr. Speaker, I also oppose the surge because the present administration has not sufficiently answered questions about the impact on military personnel. For those in the military, this war hits close to home every day.

While we have asked few Americans to sacrifice during this conflict, servicemembers and their families continue to face the uncertainty of repeated deployments, injury and in some cases the death of a loved one. They deserve better.

Mr. Speaker, I told President Bush that veterans in my district have said, ``We are a military at war, not a Nation at war.'' And military leaders agree. Mr. Speaker, if we truly want to create a situation where we can withdraw our troops, we need to escalate our diplomatic efforts and call on Iraq's neighbors to help the Iraqi Government make the tough political decisions needed to reduce the violence.

We must not give in to the President's diversion, but develop a multipronged strategic plan the American and the Iraqi people deserve

Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce a resolution urging President Bush to send a special envoy to the Middle East to focus on solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

In my view, we have not committed enough resources to encourage peace in the region.

Maintaining the security of the State of Israel will always remain a priority of Congress and the United States of America.

This resolution does not change our policy for a secure and safe Israel, but acknowledges that we need to play a more constructive role in the region.

I was encouraged to see Secretary Condoleezza Rice make a trip to the region last month.

I was also pleased to see the Quartet recently meet to reaffirm their commitment to the peace process.

These are important steps, but I worry that they will have the same result as similar efforts and we will not see the type of sustained diplomacy required to solve such a complex issue.

I am calling on all my colleagues to help me send a message that we need a new approach. We need a special envoy with the authority to bring all responsible parties to the table.

This role was critical in the 1990s and is necessary today.

This envoy would work with the Secretary of State to ensure a constant, high-level American presence and provide our country with the ability to capitalize on every opportunity for progress.

The United States, Israel and the entire international community cannot afford to miss an opportunity to broker a lasting peace.

A special envoy, with the sanctioned mission of securing a lasting peace through negotiation, must be dispatched to the region.

Madam Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to introduce this resolution today.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 99) commending the University of Nebraska-Lincoln volleyball team for winning the NCAA Division I Women's Volleyball Championship, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that Members may have 5 legislative days to insert material relevant to House Resolution 99 into the Record.

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

(Mrs. DAVIS of California asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the University of Nebraska-Lincoln for winning the NCAA Division I Women's Volleyball Championship.

On December 16, 2006, the University of Nebraska-Lincoln Huskers volleyball team won the 2006 NCAA Division I Championship by defeating the Stanford University Cardinals at the Qwest Center in Omaha, Nebraska.

I want to extend my congratulations to head coach John Cook, head assistant coach Lee Meas, assistant coach Charlene Johnson-Tagaloa, and the director of volleyball operations Lindsay Wischmeier. Also supporting the team was athletic director Steve Pederson and the University of Nebraska-Lincoln chancellor Harvey Perlman.

The Huskers, Mr. Speaker, had an exceptional record of 33-1 and had four All-Americans on their team. Junior Sarah Pavan also won the 2006- 2007 Honda Sports Award. This award is given to the Nation's top collegiate female volleyball player. Pavan was also named the ESPN Magazine Academic All-American of the Year.

And I also want to extend my congratulations to the Stanford University Cardinals. The Cardinals had a record of 30-4. The Cardinals were the PAC-10 Conference champions and were honored by four women receiving All-American honors.

Student athletes, as we know, balance a rigorous school workload with the many practices and games in which they compete.

So I am proud of all the student athletes for their dedication to their school work and their sport. The NCAA promotes its 380,000 student athletes to work with numerous service organizations, including the American Red Cross, Habitat for Humanity and the American Cancer Society.

Winning the national championship and finishing the season with a 33- 1 record has brought positive national recognition and attention to the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, and I know that the fans of the university will cherish this moment as they look forward to the 2007 season.

Mr. Speaker, once again, I congratulate the University of Nebraska- Lincoln for their success.

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I am just going to close on this resolution and thank my colleagues for bringing it to the floor. This is House Resolution 99, which commends the University of Nebraska- Lincoln volleyball team for winning the NCAA Division I women's volleyball championship. It has been fun for me to listen to my colleagues as they commend this spectacular team. And even though I am a Californian, I still want to let them know that this is a wonderful accomplishment, and particularly, I applaud the women athletes that were part of this contest.

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 120) recognizing the African American spiritual as a national treasure.

Mr. Speaker, I request 5 legislative days during which Members may insert material relevant to H. Res. 120 into the Record.

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

(Mrs. DAVIS of California asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the African American spiritual as a national treasure. From 1619 to 1865, enslaved African Americans created their own unique form of expression known today as spirituals. As African Americans were not allowed to speak their native languages or play African musical instruments, spirituals were incorporated into the English language and the Christian religious faith. These spirituals were the strong African oral tradition of songs, stories, proverbs and historical accounts. Spirituals have been a part of American culture from times of slavery to today, and their legacy is clear in today's gospel music.

Spirituals were also sung during the civil rights movement in the 1960s. Songs that we are familiar with, such as ``We Shall Overcome'' and ``Marching 'Round Selma,'' were heard in the South to unite African Americans in the struggle for civil rights.

Some of the more commonly known songs, including ``Swing Low Sweet Chariot'' and ``The Gospel Train,'' used language which described religious activities but had a second meaning relating to the Underground Railroad.

Calvin Earl, a noted performer and educator of African American spirituals, stated that the lyrics used in spirituals became a metaphor for freedom from slavery, and they were a secret way for slaves to communicate with each other, teach their young, record their history and heal their pain.

Frederick Douglass, a fugitive slave who became one of the United States' leading abolitionists, stated that spirituals ``told a tale of woe which was then altogether beyond my feeble comprehension'' and that ``every tone was a testimony against slavery and a prayer to God for deliverance from chains.''

This resolution is endorsed by the NAACP and the National Council of Negro Women, and I want to add my voice to theirs in support of helping to preserve a treasured, a really treasured piece of American history.

I urge my colleagues to resoundingly pass this resolution.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to recognize the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) for 5 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to recognize the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Sires) for 2 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to recognize the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis) for 2 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to recognize the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cooper) for 2 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, we have no further speakers.

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to close on House Resolution 120.

I want to thank my colleagues for their eloquence in speaking to this resolution. Truly, the African American spiritual is a national treasure. It must be embraced as such, enjoyed and enhanced, always in our thoughts and in our history because it has played such a critical part to so many thousands and thousands and thousands of people. And so I thank everyone for being here today and for presenting that to us.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor a great man who stood

up for justice and fair treatment for all Americans.

During his life, Cesar E. Chavez was committed to providing fair wages, better working conditions, decent housing, and quality education for all.

Mr. Chavez also served the United States proudly in the Navy during World War II.

His spirit and his vision are still alive today and I am determined to celebrate what he stood for and his great accomplishments.

Madam Speaker, today, I introduce legislation to rename the post office located at 2777 Logan Avenue in the Barrio Logan section of San Diego as the ``Cesar E. Chavez Post Office.'' This is the least we can do to honor such a great but humble man dedicated to justice. Please join me in giving Mr. Chavez his rightful place in American history.