Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I would like to rise today in recognition of Mr. Don Chalmers, an outstanding citizen in my district. In acknowledgment of the successful management of his business, Don Chalmers Ford in Rio Rancho, N.M., Mr Chalmers recently received the Zia Award, Quality New Mexico's highest performance excellence honor.

The New Mexico Quality Awards program is modeled after the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Awards, a program initiated in 1987 when President Ronald Reagan signed the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Improvement Act of 1987. Every year businesses that apply for New Mexico Quality Awards participate in training, education, and assessment programs. Throughout the year, performance levels are checked and commitment to quality business is assessed. Participants are then considered for three levels of recognition. The most outstanding of these is the Zia Award for performance excellence.

By participating in New Mexico Quality training and analysis programs, Mr. Chalmers dealership has become a benchmark for excellence in New Mexico. Mr. Chalmers demonstrated a commitment to improving his already very successful business by surpassing the needs and expectations of his employees and the residents of our New Mexico communities. Because of these accomplishments, Don Chalmers Ford received the most prestigious of performance awards, the Zia Award.

Beyond his business success, Mr. Chalmers has been an active and outstanding citizen of New Mexico over the last 10 years. Mr. Chalmers has participated in a number of community projects such as the Equal Access to Justice Campaign, the New Mexico Balloon Fiesta, and Women on the Move.

It is with pride an appreciation that I congratulate this outstanding citizen on his contributions to our great State and on receiving the one and only Zia Award granted by Quality New Mexico in 2005.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, millions of Iraqis turned out to vote, and the fledging democracy in Iraq took another step forward. I join all my colleagues in commending the Iraqi men and women for their action, and continue to thank the American men and women who are honorably serving abroad. Unfortunately, despite this important step, there still is a lack of leadership from the White House or from the Majority on the strategy that will bring our soldiers home victorious and bring them home soon.

And yet again, an opportunity for a meaningful debate on Iraq has failed to emerge. This debate must occur, and it must occur now. We see Iraqis voting, but we don't know when their governmental authority will take hold. We see the Iraqi army training, but we don't know when they will be ready to independently defend their nation. We see American troops serving and dying, but we don't know when they will return.

A strategy must be outlined, both to the American people and to the Iraqi people, which demonstrates a path to success. Rhetoric must be replaced with substance for such a strategy to develop. I believe that a concentrated effort will be necessary to urge the Iraqi people to take a lead in the war efforts and in the redevelopment efforts. Only by accelerating the transfer of responsibility to the Iraqis will they be ready to lead their nation toward a stronger democracy sooner rather than later.

Mr. Speaker, earlier this week the President finally admitted that this war was based on several false pretenses and was supported by claims and arguments that were wrong. The President and the Majority must admit that this continued lack of planning on their part is most importantly a disservice to our soldiers, a disservice to Congress, and a disservice to the American people. If we do not learn from this mistake it will be repeated--and the consequence will be more loss of American lives. I again join others in calling for a debate on Iraq, I call for a real strategy and a real plan for success, and I applaud the Iraqi people for their recent success in taking part in the democratic process.

I rise today in opposition to the PATRIOT Act reauthorization conference report. As a former Federal prosecutor and New Mexico's Attorney General, I am familiar with both the needs of law enforcement to pursue suspects and a strong supporter of law enforcement. I am also a strong supporter of civil liberties and believe that our Constitution must be guarded against encroachment even in the name of security.

On October 24, 2001, a justified sense of urgency resulted in an unjustifiably rushed vote on the PATRIOT Act.

Many of us had little time to study the bill which became law. A bipartisan bill was junked by the majority's Rules Committee in the middle of the night. Since this legislation was enacted, over 385 cities, towns, and counties in 43 States passed resolutions concerning the PATRIOT Act. In New Mexico alone, 10 cities and four counties have adopted resolutions calling for reform. I have received thousands of letters from Americans worried about excessive government power without judicial oversight.

I had hoped during the conference committee Senate provisions granting more congressional oversight and constitutional protections would have been kept in this bill. The Senate version contained greater restrictions on the government's power and required higher standards for record demands.

However, the conference report is more of the same. It extends for 4 years two of the most controversial provisions of the bill, including the section granting law enforcement authorities unprecedented powers to search library and bookstore records without probable cause or the need for search warrants.

This bill also makes permanent 14 provisions of the PATRIOT Act that were set to expire this year. This bill has serious problems.

National security letters are out of control, with no meaningful oversight. It has been reported that 30,000 national security letters are issued every year. These letters allow the government to collect almost limitless sensitive, personal information without judicial approval. We should target this government power against terrorists, not against innocent Americans.

I will vote against this bill today, not because I oppose the PATRIOT Act in its entirety but because I believe that the needs of law enforcement can be met without eroding our liberties.

The World Meets to Solve Global Warming. U.S. on Sidelines. U.S. Won't Join in Binding Climate Talks.

These are news flashes from the Montreal Conference this weekend on global warming. Countries from around the world met in Montreal to address the issue of global warming. Where was the United States and the Bush administration? On the sidelines, out of commission, not willing to forward a plan or proposal on the far-reaching challenge of our time.

The Bush administration has its head in the sand. For most of its time in office, this administration has refused to recognize there is even a problem. Recently they acknowledged that man's burning of fossil fuels is warming the Earth but refused to take concrete action. When President Clinton was invited to speak to the conference, the U.S. team threatened to boycott.

President Bush, wake up. The countries of the world are leaving you behind. President Bush, our country needs a leader who will protect our children's future.

Since 1990, we have seen the 10 warmest years in history. Before our eyes, ice caps are melting, glaciers are shrinking, oceans are warming, and sea levels are rising. Scientists tell us we can expect more extreme storms, higher intensity hurricanes, more severe droughts, and other dramatic climate changes. We must act now to protect our children. We must act now to leave our children a better world.

Carbon dioxide emissions must be brought under control. We know how to do this. We have specific ways to act now. We have the technology. One hundred fifty-seven countries are already imposing mandatory limits on CO2 while the Bush administration stonewalls any mandatory scheme. We can take steps now to reduce greenhouse gas emissions but we must do so in a way that would minimize the impact to our economy. We must implement an economy-wide, upstream, all greenhouse gas cap-and-trade emissions reduction program that provides some flexibility and a measure of certainty to those industries and businesses affected.

The National Commission on Energy Policy, a bipartisan group of top experts, recommends such an approach. One of the key components of their proposal is the concept of a safety valve for the cap-and-trade program. The safety valve essentially puts a price on carbon but provides for an unlimited number of allowances to be sold by the government. Since no one would pay more than what the government charges for allowances, this mechanism effectively controls the price of allowances. When set at the right price, the safety valve would start the country down the path of slowing the growth of greenhouse gas emissions without causing serious economic disruption.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time of the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Emanuel).

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to stress how important it is for the United States to take a bold new approach to our energy supplies. Our economy and way of life depend on cheap oil. In many ways, cheap oil is responsible for our prosperity. Since oil provides about 40 percent of the world's energy, a peak in global oil production will be a great turning point in human history. Oil and natural gas literally transport, heat, and feed our country. Therefore, we must summon the political will to act immediately, diversify our energy supplies, and mitigate the negative changes that will undoubtedly accompany the world peak in oil and natural gas production.

Peak oil is a fact, not a theory. Oil production has now peaked in 33 of the world's largest 48 oil-producing nations.

A recent Energy and Air Quality Subcommittee hearing showed that a growing number of energy experts agree that a peak in world oil production is either imminent or likely to occur by 2015. The United States demand for oil continues to increase by about 2 percent per annum. As global demand has increased faster than production, the once substantial cushion between world oil production and demand has decreased. This phenomenon has increased the price of oil. Consequently, huge amounts of American money, up to $25 million per hour, go abroad to pay for foreign oil. Middle eastern countries, flush in oil dollars, help fuel the terrorism we are fighting. Some say market forces will solve the peak oil problem. They argue that as we approach or pass the peak of production, oil prices will increase and alternatives will become more competitive.

However, no alternative currently available will make it more competitive. However, there is no alternative available anywhere near ready to replace oil in the volumes we use it today. What is more, even today's oil prices do not accurately reflect the full social costs of oil consumption. Currently, Federal and State taxes add up to about $0.40 per gallon of gasoline. A World Resources Institute analysis found that fuel related costs not covered by drivers are at least twice that much. Oil prices do not include the full cost attributed to road maintenance, the financial risk of global warming or threats to national security from importing oil. Without these externalities in the market, significant private investment in alternative technologies will not occur.

Over the past hundred years, fueled by cheap oil, the United States has led

a revolution in the way the world operates. Replacing this resource in a relatively short time is an incredible challenge, an imperative to the survival of our way of life. The United States has faced such challenges in the past. In response to great challenges and inevitable threats, we pooled our resources and ingenuity to build an atomic bomb in just a few years and put a man on the moon in a decade. We can and must do this again. We must commit to a bold new initiative.

To eliminate our dependence on foreign oil and develop a new economy based on renewable, non polluting energy, we need a massive, long-term investment in research for both basic and applied science. We must produce effective policies that create a new generation of scientists devoted to changing the way we produce energy. Additionally, we must commit to decreasing our demand for oil. We can start by increasing efficiency. Transportation in the United States accounts for 16.5 percent of the world's oil consumption. Transporting goods and people by rail is at least five times as efficient as automobiles. We must revive and reinvest in our passenger and freight rail system. Looking at our automobile fleet, modest increases in fuel efficiency, using existing technology will decrease our oil usage by about 1 billion barrels per year. However, the turnover rate for the automobile fleet is 10 to 15 years, therefore, we must start immediately.

The buildings in which we work and live are terribly inefficient. We could easily reduce their energy consumption by one-half. We must immediately weatherize and make more energy-efficient tens of millions of buildings. Our bold new initiative must instill these ideas into the American consciousness. The sooner we start, the smaller our sacrifices will be.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from Colorado yielding.

I rise today in support of the Valles Caldera Preservation Act of 2005. The original Valles Caldera Preservation Act was enacted in the 106th Congress and was signed into law on July 25, 2000.

This act directed the Forest Service to acquire the private Baca Ranch in northern New Mexico, which comprises nearly 95,000 acres. The United States acquired the entire surface estate and an undivided 87\1/ 2\ percent of the mineral estate. Third parties currently hold the outstanding 12\1/2\ percent of the mineral interest.

The original act directed the Forest Service to negotiate with the outstanding mineral interest owners for the acquisition of their interests. Unfortunately, there is a sizeable difference in what the Forest Service and the mineral rights owners believe to be the fair market value of the outstanding mineral interests; and for the past 5 years, there has been no significant effort to resolve the problem.

I believe that Senate bill 212, sponsored by Senators Domenici and Bingaman, and passed by the other Chamber on July 26, 2005, provides a reasonable method for resolving the differences in a timely fashion through a condemnation process. The outstanding mineral interest owners have advised each of us that they are in full support of the Senate bill.

The Senate bill, in addition to addressing the outstanding mineral interests, also addresses several issues that have been raised with respect to the administration of the trust. It is my belief that the bill appropriately provides for concerns of the Valles Caldera trust and the administration of the Baca Ranch in furthering the purposes for which these lands were acquired 4 years ago.

I urge my colleagues to support Senate bill 212, the Valles Caldera Preservation Act of 2005.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of Senate bill 279, legislation that amends the Indian Pueblo Land Act of June 7, 1924, to provide for the exercise of criminal jurisdiction within the exterior boundaries of Pueblo lands. Earlier this session, I introduced a companion to this bill on behalf of myself and cosponsors Heather Wilson and Stevan Pearce.

This legislation addresses confusion over criminal jurisdiction on Pueblo lands in New Mexico that arose out of the holding in United States v. Jose Gutierrez, an unreported decision of a Federal district court judge in the district of New Mexico that overturned prior precedent regarding the jurisdictional status of the lands within the exterior boundaries of Pueblo grants.

The Gutierrez decision created uncertainty and the potential for a void in criminal jurisdiction on Pueblo lands. Some call these prosecution-free zones. Because of the risk to public safety and law enforcement arising out of this uncertainty, it is important that we clarify the scope of criminal jurisdiction on Pueblo lands.

Nothing in this legislative clarification is intended to diminish the scope of Pueblo civil jurisdiction within the exterior boundaries of Pueblo grants, which is defined by Federal and tribal laws and court decisions.

This legislation also does not, in any way, diminish the exterior boundaries of these grants. The All-Indian Pueblo Council of the 19 Pueblo Governors has agreed to the language included in this legislation. The governors recognize the urgency of this matter and have come to Congress asking that we do everything in our power to avoid the unfathomable situation of creating places in New Mexico where someone could literally get away with murder. We here in Congress must also recognize the urgency of this situation and take action to address it.

By closing the criminal jurisdictional loophole, we have opened the doors to justice for victims and their families. The Pueblo members and victims who fought for this legislation have demonstrated an unrelenting dedication to change the system for the better, and in doing so, they have ensured that others will never face the same scary situation.

I want to thank all the New Mexicans who fought for this legislation. I also sincerely appreciate the work of my colleagues Representatives Heather Wilson and Stevan Pearce in the House and Senators Domenici and Bingaman.

Mr. Speaker, for over 2 years, the Bush administration has failed to offer the American people a truthful and meaningful dialogue on the war in Iraq. We have lost thousands of troops and we have spent billions of dollars, and yet the President refuses to offer a credible strategy for success. The President has misled the public and he refuses to acknowledge the truth of the reality in Iraq.

Hundreds of Members of Congress and millions of Americans have voiced very serious and very real concerns with the decisions being made by the White House. Although I voted against the war, once the President took us to war, I have supported the men and women in uniform who are serving our Nation. However, I continue to believe that unless we have a clear strategy, we will continue to see the loss of American lives in Iraq with no end in sight.

Unfortunately, today, instead of having a legitimate debate about strategy and consequences, the majority has chosen to waste the time of this body and the American people by bringing forth a blatantly political resolution that is difficult to take seriously. My colleague from Pennsylvania, a Vietnam veteran decorated with two Purple Hearts and a Member of the House for three decades, Mr. Murtha, yesterday offered a well thought out, principled resolution calling for the redeployment of the forces in Iraq at the ``earliest practicable date.'' In addition, despite what some in the majority have characterized during today's debate as cutting and running, Mr. Murtha's resolution calls for a continued military presence in the region through the deployment of a quick-reaction force and an over- the-horizon presence of U.S. Marines. Also, the resolution states that the U.S. shall continue to pursue security and stability in Iraq through diplomatic means.

It is important to note that the word ``immediate'' does not appear anywhere in Mr. Murtha's resolution. Yet we find ourselves today debating a resolution introduced by the chair of the House Armed Services Committee that calls for the ``immediate withdrawal'' of American troops. The fact that this was introduced by the House Armed Services Committee and the fact that he along with colleagues in the majority will be voting against his own resolution demonstrates not only the lack of clear ideas from their side of the aisle but also a lack of willingness to have a true debate.

Today, the majority once again shunned their responsibility in having an open debate on the war in Iraq, and instead they and the President continue to attack those who disagree with them by questioning their patriotism. Rather than engaging in an open dialogue to debate the issue, the majority chose to engage in personal destruction and politicized the issue by voicing empty rhetoric. They chose to question the patriotism of those who have served in uniform and who have honorably served their country. And they chose to continue to hide from the American public the facts of this war.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the memory of R.C. Gorman, a close family friend and a legendary Navajo artist known as ``the Picasso of American painters.''

R.C. grew up using the earth as his canvas. His pallet was the desert of the Southwest and his tools were the rocks and sands around him. After years of mastering his craft, he found a home in Taos, New Mexico, and began to carve out a voice in the world of Native American art.

For four decades, R.C. was a pioneer. He opened the first Native American-owned art

gallery. He helped lead Native American artwork into the mainstream conversations and consciousness of all Americans. And he explored the world around him, from artwork to cooking, from history to politics, all the while staying true to his roots.

R.C. was very close to my family. I knew him since I was a young boy, and he was a dear friend to both my mother and father. During a drawn out legal battle over health concerns being suffered by Navajo uranium miners, the legal team was being burdened by mounting costs. R.C., in his typical selfless style, donated two pieces of artwork to assist the cause. Both pieces were auctioned off and the proceeds were used to help pay down the legal fees. It was characteristic of him to provide anything and everything to help others and to do so without fanfare and without self-congratulations, but rather with humility and respect. And it is that personal side of R.C. that will be forever ingrained in our memories.

We will always be grateful for the way in which he used the canvas with grace and the way in which he helped us see so much beauty in places we once overlooked. R.C. will be greatly missed, but his spirit will live on.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to an exceptional New Mexican and journalist, Monica Armenta. She will be leaving KOB-TV Channel 4 to become the new executive director of the Albuquerque Public Schools Foundation.

Ms. Armenta has worked at KOB-TV for over 20 years, beginning as a 19-year-old intern and She has been the morning news show anchor there for the past 15 years. She has always held herself and her colleagues to a higher standard and this has resulted in the exceptional quality of her news coverage.

She has been recognized by numerous awards throughout her career in broadcast journalism. She is the recipient of the Rocky Mountain Emmy Award 1986-87 for her spot coverage of the Global Hilton hot air balloon crash and she was also given the UNM Professional Achievement Award. Ms. Armenta has been selected as one of New Mexico's 40 top influential people under 40 by New Mexico Business Weekly as well as a YWCA Woman on the Move. Ms. Armenta has also been a notable speaker at conferences, awards dinners and schools.

Aside from being a famous and reliable TV anchor that thousands of New Mexicans welcome into their home every morning, Ms. Armenta has shown herself to be a vital leader in New Mexico and her new job with the Albuquerque Public Schools Foundation is a testament of her continued commitment to enhancing her community.

Ms. Armenta has shown her dedication to bettering education and was a former journalism teacher at West Mesa High School. I commend her for embracing her roots in New Mexico and working to improve the educational system that has been such a part of her life. Ms. Armenta told a reporter in July, ``I'm a product of APS and I feel it's time for me to give back.''

I have enjoyed appearing with Monica on her program ``Eye on New Mexico'' and have consistently found her news coverage to be smart, informative and reliable. I admire her exceptional ability to balance her roles as a mother, a wife, a journalist and an activist.

Although she will be greatly missed as a journalist, I am certain that she will be a wonderful addition to the APS community. Her energy, intelligence and enthusiasm have always translated into success and I anticipate that her career in the education community will not only be rewarding for her as an individual, but will provide the Albuquerque Public Schools Foundation with a wonderful new voice of leadership. Although the state of New Mexico is losing a valued journalist we are gaining a vocal and significant advocate for the school system.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me in wishing Monica and her family luck as they embark on this new chapter in their life. Thank you Monica, for your service and contribution to New Mexico.

Mr. Speaker, I was not present for two votes on November 1, 2005. Had I been present, I would have voted as follows:

Rollcall No. 557: H.R. 3548--Heinz Ahlmeyer, Jr. Post Office Building Designation Act--I would have voted ``yes.''

Rollcall No. 558: H.R. 3989--Albert Harold Quie Post Office Designation Act--I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the memory of Representative Ed Roybal, a towering figure whose tireless work on behalf of civil rights and health care were the hallmarks of his distinguished career, For three, decades, Representative Roybal served with distinction and honor in the House, and it is with sadness that we now recognize his passing.

Born in Albuquerque only 4 years after New Mexico gained statehood, Ed Roybal's childhood was spent in the Land of Enchantment. His family had resided in the Southwest for several generations, its family lineage stretching to the founding of Santa Fe, the oldest capital in the Nation. When he was 6, Ed Roybal's father became unemployed during a railroad strike, and in 1922 they moved to Los Angeles, California.

Over the next two decades, Ed Roybal became passionate on issues of discrimination, minority rights, health care, and senior citizens. After forming an organization to combat against housing and education discrimination against minorities, and after serving on the Los Angeles City Council, Ed Roybal in 1963 became the first Mexican-American from California elected to serve in the U.S. House of Representatives. During his three decades in this role, he became a national leader and outspoken advocate for health care and minority rights, while at the same time being revered by his constituents for his never-ending attention to their needs.

Representative Roybal can also be credited with creating the National Association of Latino Elected Officials (NALEO), one of the leading Hispanic political organizations in the Nation. Several locally elected officials throughout my district often visit me while in Washington for NALEO conferences, and each and every one of them extol the virtues of the organization and its successes in promoting Hispanic action and service in the political field. I have no doubt that it is because of Representative Roybal's ceaseless and caring service that so many Hispanics serve today. I know for certain that one member of our own body was front and center for Representative Roybal's wonderful lessons in civics and public service. Representative Lucille Roybal-Allard, who now represents the district her father once represented, has continued her father's advocacy for the poor, for the voiceless, and for the disenfranchised. She, like so many of us, was able to learn from his exemplary service, and he was extremely proud of her.

Mr. Speaker, Representative Ed Roybal added immensely to this distinguished body during his three decades of service. He is to be remembered for his hard work and his dedication and leadership on so many noble causes. I extend my sympathies to my colleague and to the rest of her family on this loss. We share their sadness on this occasion.

I rise today to introduce an important piece of legislation designed to strengthen our existing laws regarding lead in consumer products.

Currently, we have laws that pertain to lead-containing paint and its many applications. The laws are explicit and focus mainly on the paint used in public housing around the United States. In the last three decades we have seen the rate of lead poisoning plummet and than plateau. These laws, though effective, are specific only to paint. We must do more to protect our consumers.

That is why I am introducing the Lead Labeling Act of 2005 today, to direct the Consumer Products Safety Commission to establish regulations to require the labeling of dishware products sold in the United States that may contain hazardous amount of lead within them. Labeling these products will help consumers identify products that are potentially hazardous to their children through a simple labeling process.

Mr. Speaker, there are many products imported every year and these imports are a vital part of our economy, but because they are manufactured outside the United States, they are not subject to the same stringent regulations that our products must meet. This is a concern, because many of the products that we eat out of, drink out of, and cook with are made of materials that contain levels of lead that we do not normally ingest. These products can release these leads into our foods and our water and the affects can be very damaging, especially to the development of our children.

According to the National Institute of Health, lead, even in very low levels, can have damaging effects on our children. The Center for Disease Control states that approximately 310,000 U.S. children aged 1- 5 years have blood lead levels greater than the CDC recommended level of 10 micrograms of lead per deciliter of blood. Also, lead can affect every system in our bodies. It has been linked to learning disabilities, behavioral problems, and, when our bodies are exposed to very high levels, lead causes seizures, coma, and even death.

Lead in our products is a concern in our households. Labeling products containing lead will help ease these concerns and allow consumers to make more informed decisions. I urge my colleagues in the House to support this legislation for the health of American consumers.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the gentleman from Illinois for introducing this resolution. I will be voting today in favor of H.J. Res. 65 because I believe the BRAC Commission's recommendations should be overturned. I commend the commission for their thorough and diligent work. They certainly had a very difficult job.

However, I believe that now is not the time to implement a BRAC round, considering the number of operations our armed services are currently engaged in around the world. I have great concern about the Pentagon's ability to adequately assess our needs and assets while there are so many soldiers abroad and while the Pentagon awaits the results of the Quadrennial Review.

I am also concerned about the Commission's recommendation to place Cannon Air Force Base in enclave status. This decision places Cannon in enclave status until 2009, or until a new mission can be identified for the base. I do view this recommendation as a partial victory for New Mexico since the Department of Defense initially slated Cannon for closure, but I firmly believe that Cannon should simply have been removed from the list altogether.

Cannon offers the Air Force and its pilots unrestricted airspace and training ranges just off its runways. This is a rarity in today's Air Force, as more bases experience increasing encroachment. This unparalleled airspace is in the process of being expanded, making the base even more valuable. When approved, the New Mexico Training Range Initiative would make Cannon's airspace wider and taller and allow for training at supersonic air speed.

I strongly believe we will be able to identify appropriate missions for Cannon Air Force Base to minimize the amount of time during which the base will remain in enclave status. Nevertheless, Cannon is too important to our national defense for it to be placed in enclave status.

I urge passage of H.J. Res. 65.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 25th anniversary of the Intel Corporation facility in Rio Rancho, in my home state of New Mexico. Intel Corporation came to New Mexico in 1980 with just 25 employees and a tremendous vision for the future; today Intel is the largest employer in Rio Rancho, an area now known as the Silicon Mesa. Intel Corporation is a vital part of the local economy and a major contributor to civic and educational programs in Rio Rancho and the surrounding area.

Intel has been instrumental in the growth and economic development of Rio Rancho throughout the years; as plant operations expanded so did the number of employees and support services utilized by this technology giant. Intel expansion has resulted in numerous improvements in Rio Rancho; in 1997, the corporation donated $30 million dollars for the construction of a much-needed high school.

Intel currently employs over seven thousand workers and subcontractors in New Mexico who benefit from wages that are well above the state average. Area businesses also flourish as Intel continually bolsters the local economy by purchasing goods and services in Rio Rancho. The city of Rio Rancho has grown, and continues to grow, around the presence of Intel Corporation.

Intel's involvement in Rio Rancho extends far beyond economic consideration, and commitment to community is evident by the corporation's participation in numerous philanthropic programs. Intel employees regularly volunteer time on many local art, education and cultural projects which are then matched by corporate funding. Intel also awards monetary grants to local organizations seeking to better the community and the state of New Mexico.

The Intel Corporation plays a key role in technology education in New Mexico. Intel partners with higher learning institutions in the state to create programs and curriculum that prepare students for employment at the Rio Rancho facility. Additionally, Intel provides access to technology in the Computer Clubhouse program and donates funding and equipment to local schools.

Mr. Speaker, please join me in congratulating Intel Corporation on 25 successful years of business in Rio Rancho. Intel's presence in Rio Rancho has resulted in abundant resources for both employees and the surrounding community. Intel is an integral component in the growth of Rio Rancho and a stabilizing factor in the local economy. I thank the Intel Corporation for their consistent participation and lasting contributions to Rio Rancho and the state of New Mexico.