Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, although we sometimes disagree in the debate over broader immigration policy, we all agree on one thing--that we should recognize and honor the brave Border Patrol agents who risk their lives every day on our border.

Day in and day out, in often harsh conditions over unforgiving terrain, they seek to protect our borders, save from death those economic migrants lost in the desert, and protect our country. They often do battle with drug smugglers and human traffickers who have no respect for authority--or even life. Yet rarely are these agents recognized for their courage or their sacrifice.

Unfortunately, sometimes it takes a tragedy for us to publicly recognize the selfless contributions that these Americans make for their country on a daily basis.

In this case, that tragedy is the death of Luis Aguilar, a Senior Border Patrol agent who lost his life in the line of duty while trying to apprehend suspected drug smugglers near Yuma, Arizona on January 19, 2008.

Agent Aguilar leaves behind his loving wife, Erica; his two children, Luis and Arianna; his brother, Marco Antonio, also a Senior Border Patrol agent; his sister, Angie; and his parents, Luis Aguilar and Cecilia Silva. They have all paid a heavy price for the service Luis Aguilar gave to protect this great Nation.

Today we honor Agent Aguilar and all of the other Border Patrol agents who have made the ultimate sacrifice for their country. We extend our deepest condolences to his family, as well as the families of all those who have fallen.

This Nation owes a debt of gratitude to them and all of the other Border Patrol agents who devotedly and selflessly work to keep us safe.

Madam Speaker, I rise to acknowledge and honor the great contributions of Margaret Gregg and would like to recognize her exceptional and tireless service to the homeless in Santa Clara County.

Ms. Gregg, who was named Woman of the Year for the 23rd Assembly District of California, is formally retiring after seeing 8 years as Santa Clara County's Homeless Concerns Coordinator.

In 1992, Ms. Gregg was hired to become the Executive Director of the San Jose Family Shelter. She remained in that position until November 1999. In February 2000, Margaret Gregg became the Homeless Concerns Coordinator for the County.

Ms. Gregg has been responsible for facilitating the County's McKinney-Vento Grant, that brings about $8 million each year to more than 30 different homeless serving organizations. In 2006, she convinced the County to conduct a census of the homeless and followed that effort with a Task Force to create a 10-Year Plan to End Homelessness. Ms. Gregg also coordinates the Collaborative on Affordable Housing and Homelessness, an organization of 250 local non- profits and government agencies.

Ms. Gregg's contributions to the community are clearly demonstrated in her compassion for and understanding of the homeless. With her Catholic background and 30 years of teaching elementary and high school students and special education students, Ms. Gregg is a strong believer in the unifying powers of faith, tolerance and understanding.

I commend Ms. Gregg for her valuable service to our community and wish her the best in her future endeavors. We are very fortunate to have benefited from her compassion, expertise and commitment. She has left her mark in Santa Clara County.

Madam Speaker, I rise to acknowledge and honor Baha'i Community of San Jose's 50th anniversary. The Baha'i Faith, in just 150 years, has become an independent, second most widespread world religion whose five million followers are made up of more than 2,100 diverse ethnic, racial and tribal groups. The organization has more than 157,000 members in the United States.

The Baha'i Faith includes teachings that promote the principle of equal rights for men and women, advocate compulsory education, abolish extremes of poverty and wealth, honor work performed in the spirit of service to the rank of worship, recommend the adoption of an auxiliary international language, and provide the necessary agencies for the establishment and safeguarding of a permanent and universal peace. The Baha'i Communities of San Jose and of the United States operate more than one thousand grassroots social and economic development projects throughout the world.

This faith-based organization not only provides spiritual guidance for their members, but they also provide charitable work to the community at large. Some of their local civic activities include the membership in the Martin Luther King, Jr. Association, membership in the Network for a Hate Free Community, Juneteenth Festival, Second Harvest Food Collections, highway cleanup, and 22 years sponsorship of a service awards banquet recognizing notable individuals and organizations for their community service based on Baha'i principles. Baha'i Community of San Jose provides these valuable services at no cost to the Baha'i Communities of the South Bay and the Santa Clara Valley Community at large.

In their 50 years of dedication and hard work. Baha'i Community of San Jose has assisted thousands of people. Baha'i Community of San Jose serves people of all beliefs, cultures, ethnicities and ages and serves a diverse population from various ethnic backgrounds.

It is indeed an honor and a privilege to have a warm, welcoming, and nurturing organization in my district that appreciates and honors the diversity that makes America, and specifically San Jose, California a most desirable place to live, work and raise a family.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Hrant Dink. He was a Turkish-Armenian journalist and a defender of the freedom of the press. His belief in this freedom never wavered despite his prosecution and conviction under Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code, which makes it a crime to discuss the Armenian Genocide. Sadly, Mr. Dink's life was taken one year ago on January 19, 2007.

I am proud to cosponsor H. Res. 102, which condemns the assassination of Hrant Dink. This bill urges the Turkish government to continue to investigate and prosecute those responsible for Mr. Dink's murder and to protect the freedom of speech in Turkey by repealing Article 301. The repeal of this Article will ensure that Hrant Dink's legacy will live on and that his death will not have been in vain.

Madam Speaker, due to an inoperable beeper, I unfortunately missed recorded votes No. 1142 and No. 1143 on Tuesday, December 11, 2007. Had I been present to vote, I would have voted ``aye'' on rollcall vote No. 1142 and ``aye'' on rollcall vote No. 1143.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3079 would apply the Nation's immigration laws to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI). For too long, the CNMI has managed its own immigration system outside of the constraints and protections of Federal law. The result has been a massive influx of exploited workers and victims of human trafficking, with concomitant increases in sex slavery and other abusive labor practices.

Recent investigations and prosecutions have uncovered terrible stories of enslavement and forced labor. Thousands of young women and girls lured to the CNMI with promises of good jobs with good pay only to be enslaved and forced into prostitution. Others forced to toil in harsh conditions and for little money in garment sweatshops, made profitable by their ability to exploit cheap labor yet still use the ``Made in the USA'' label.

And to understand the depth of the problem, one only has to look at the statistics. For years, foreign workers have actually outnumbered the indigenous population. It is like the United States bringing in over 300 million foreign workers to the mainland, without giving them any rights or protections.

We have known about these problems since the 1990s, but we have done nothing about them. It is time to change that. H.R. 3079 would extend the protections of the country's immigration laws to the CNMI, using a balanced approach that takes into account the CNMI's vulnerable economy as well as past abuses. It would reign in the islands' lax immigration policies while appropriately considering the labor needs of legitimate businesses. It would also provide for a regional visa waiver program along with Guam, which would provide both increased security and the tourists needed to help sustain the economies of both territories.

This bill is strongly needed to break from the abuses of the past. It is backed by the Administration, and it has bipartisan support in the House and Senate.

I want to thank Chairman Rahall of the Natural Resources Committee and Chairwoman Christensen of the Subcommittee on Insular Affairs for caring deeply about this issue and shepherding this bill through Congress. I also want to thank Chairman Conyers for his leadership, as well as Mr. Lamar Smith, the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, for working with us in a bipartisan fashion to improve the bill. I urge its passage.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of my former law school classmate Munir Malik, who has been detained by the Pakistani government for his support for the rule of law. I have contacted the State Department and the Embassy of Pakistan urging his immediate release and an end to martial law in Pakistan.

His brother, Saeed Malik, lives in San Jose, my home town. With unanimous consent, I'd like to submit into the record his Thursday op- ed in the San Jose Mercury News about his brother, Munir Malik, and the crisis in Pakistan.

Madam Speaker, I would like to enter into the Record this article by Saeed Malik entitled, ``U.S. Can't Support Both Musharraf and Ideal of Liberty.''

Today, Pakistan is gripped by an existential crisis. This

crisis comes just when Pakistanis were beginning to feel

optimistic. An independent judiciary was taking root and the

fourth estate of the press was in ascendancy. Accountability,

long overdue, had finally arrived, or so the people of

Pakistan thought.

The optimism was cut short this month when the U.S. ally-

in-chief, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, fearing invalidation of his

recent election by the Supreme Court, dissolved the court,

closed the media and jailed dissidents by the thousands.

The measured and somewhat muted reaction of the Bush

administration to this barbarity is not only morally

bankrupt, it is downright dangerous. The fundamentalists on

one side of this war on terror cannot defeat the

fundamentalists on the other. Fundamentalism in any society

will only be defeated and sidelined by moderates from within.

By supporting Musharraf, albeit tacitly, the United States is

sidelining the very moderates who must win this war.

Musharraf's occasional delivery of a wanted terrorist cannot

justify suppression of the fundamental freedoms of Pakistani

civil society. A society thrives when its constituents take a

stake in its well-being and its decision-making process.

It has been said that terrorists hate us because of our

liberty and one must be either on the side of terrorists or

the side of liberty. If today we do not support the

Pakistanis who seek liberty, what will they think of us? Will

our government deliver on this slogan when liberty is at

stake in a Muslim country? Our goals are advanced by

demanding restoration of the Supreme Court. We must also

demand the immediate release of all judicial activists jailed

after the so-called emergency. Pakistanis must realize that

America stands for the rule of law and the liberty of all

people. A golden opportunity to win the hearts and minds of

the Pakistani masses beckons us. Sticking to support for an

increasingly unpopular dictator in Pakistan will only

solidify President Bush's 9 percent favorable opinion rating

in Pakistan.

Although it has been generations since the CIA deposed

Iranian Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadeq and installed the

Shah, and decades since our government tried to forestall the

Iranian revolution, Iranians have not forgotten these

travesties. International relations must be based, first, on

democratic principles. Propping up Musharraf negates these

principles, fueling antagonism among Pakistanis.

I have a personal stake in this sad saga. My 57-year-old

brother, Muneer Malik, a Santa Clara University law school

graduate, has been ``detained'' under ``preventive measures''

in Pakistan's version of Guantanamo Bay. He is reportedly

critically sick and without outside contact. Muneer's crime

is that as president of the Supreme Court Bar Association, he

was in the forefront of the movement to assert the

independence of the Pakistani judiciary. Thousands of heroic

lawyers have met a similar fate. Rejecting the recent purge

of the Supreme Court, 13 of the 17 judges refused to

take extraconstitutional oaths under a draconian

``Provisional Order.'' Predictably, they were summarily

dismissed and locked up. The few opportunists who obliged now

preside over empty courts boycotted by an overwhelming

majority of lawyers. If this takes hold, the judicial purge

would amount to retaining the weeds while killing the

flowers.

Pakistani citizens view the emergency proclamation as

Musharraf's desperate attempt to hold on. Democratic

stability requires an orderly, defined and predictable means

of transferring power. Musharraf, like others in the dust-bin

of Third World history, is trying to break this mandate,

subjugating national interest to personal power. Does the

self-professed ``enlightened-moderate'' appreciate the

difference between Robert Mugabe and Nelson Mandela? Why,

then, does he walk in Mugabe's footsteps?

Muneer, who is supported by Santa Clara's and Yale's law

schools, along with the American Bar Association, said while

free, ``No army can stop the march of an idea whose time has

come.'' I urge our government to be on the side of an

advancing idea and on the right side of history. This is also

the moral side and the right tactic in the war on terror.

Mr. Speaker, I would note that the motion to recommit itself leads to a nonsense sentence, adding ``United States, a State sponsor of terrorism,'' to section 18. It's inexplicable nonsense. It also guts the bill.

On August 2, I rushed to the floor to say that we were passing a bill that was a terrible offense to the Constitution. It gutted the fourth amendment. This bill does not. Mr. Speaker, I urge its passage.

Mr. Speaker, Thirty years ago, I was in law school studying, among other things, the Constitution and deepening my passion for freedom under law. With me at Santa Clara Law School was Munir Malik. That small Jesuit institution instilled in me a sense of duty to stand for principle that led me to this House. That same sense of duty led Malik to leave behind a lucrative career as a CPA and lawyer to return to Pakistan. Last year, he was named president of Pakistan's Supreme Court Bar Association. This May, he was the target of an assassination attempt. And, this month, he was arrested by our ally. Our ally? President Musharraf. His crime? Standing up for the rule of law.

Musharraf is liberating al Qaeda members in the western territories while arresting judges and lawyers who believe in law. Pakistan is using our money to do it.

It's time for Pakistan to tell us where Malik and the other lawyers are. Time for Pakistan to set them free. Time for Pakistan to stop being a dictatorship.

I include for the Record a letter from the faculty at Santa Clara Law

School asking for a return to the rule of law and the release of their former student.

Statement by Members of the Faculty of Santa Clara University School of

Law on General Musharraf's Abrogation of Rule of Law

We are deeply concerned about the abrogation of the Rule of

Law in Pakistan. General Musharraf, in a brazen attempt to

perpetuate his own rule, has used his state apparatus to

disband the highest courts of the country. Thousands of

lawyers, journalists, judges, human rights activists have

been jailed. in many cases families have no idea of the

whereabouts of the detainees.

Our own concern is particularly sparked by the arrest and

detention of one of our graduates, Muneer Malik, the

Immediate Past President of the Pakistani Supreme Court Bar

Association. His fate is, of course, merely a small part of

the overall tragedy taking place but as we know him to be a

conscientious, industrious lawyer dedicated to the welfare of

his country, and not in the least a threat to law and order;

he symbolizes the injustice being practiced.

We, in fact, are not an organized political group. We have

never before joined in a statement of this sort with each

other. What brings us together in this plea is the fact that

we are all professors of law who teach in the law school

which graduated Mr. Malik and who share a respect for the

rule of law. We deplore what has happened. We assume that

many more people like him have been swept from public view.

The Supreme and High Court judges have been locked in their

own homes. Police have stormed into bar-association

gatherings and have manhandled lawyers, some of them women,

some of them septuagenarian! TV stations have been blacked

out and police vans are carting off telecommunication

equipment from private TV stations.

The U.S. must use all its influence and in no uncertain

terms demand the restoration of the Supreme Court status quo

ante Nov 2nd 2007. It must demand the immediate release of

and accounting for all persons who have been jailed after the

promulgation of the so-called emergency. It should be

recalled that President Musharraf removed the Chief Justice

once before, a short while ago, and that he was forced to

rescind his order because of the pressure of world opinion.

The embattled civil society in Pakistan must realize that

America stands for the rule of Law and the liberty of all

peoples.

Signed by:

George Alexander, Dean and Professor of Law Emeritus.

Patricia Cain, Inez Mabie Professor of Law.

Colleen Chien, Assistant Professor of Law.

Rev. Paul Goda, S.J., Professor of Law.

Allen Hammond, Phil and Bobbie San Filippo Professor of

Law.

Ellen Kreitzberg Professor of Law.

Philip Jimenez Professor of Law.

Jean Love Elizabeth H. and John A. Sutro Professor of Law.

Gary Neustadter Professor of Law.

Michelle Oberman Professor of Law.

Robert Peterson Professor of Law.

Mack Player Professor of Law and Director, Center for

Global Law and Policy.

Margaret Russell Professor of Law.

Catherine Sandoval Assistant Professor of Law.

Jiri Toman Professor of Law.

Gerald Uelman Professor of Law and Director, California

Commission for the Fair Administration of Justice.

Stephanie Wildman Professor of Law and Director, Center for

Social Justice and Public Service.

Nancy Wright Professor of Law.

Eric Wright Professor of Law.

David Yosifon Assistant Professor of Law.

Mr. Speaker, I join in the recognition of San Jose State on its 150th anniversary. I am proud that San Jose State is located in the 16th Congressional District which I represent in San Jose, California, as has been mentioned. It is the Silicon Valley university. More than 300,000 graduates of San Jose State have gone into Silicon Valley, and it is the largest source of engineering talent, of computer science and business graduates, for Silicon Valley.

San Jose State is ranked eighth among the top ten colleges and universities offering bachelor's and master's degrees in the western region, with its 134 programs. It is also known for its innovative partnerships, including a first-ever, I think in the country, partnership with the City of San Jose to have a joint university-city public library, a joint venture with the National Hispanic University for joint degrees, and most recently a joint venture with a historically black college in Mississippi for joint issuance of Ph.D.'s in engineering.

I am proud to represent San Jose State. We had to decide who would introduce this resolution. And although the university is in the 16th District, the author, my friend, Congressman Mike Honda, is an alumni of the university, so we deferred to him to take the lead on this introduction. I want to thank him for doing so. This is an important event for those of us in Silicon Valley, and especially the 16th District.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1119) to amend title 36, United States Code, to revise the congressional charter of the Military Order of the Purple Heart of the United States of America, Incorporated, to authorize associate membership in the corporation for the spouse of a recipient of the Purple Heart medal, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

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

H.R. 1119, the Purple Heart Family Equity Act of 2007, provides an excellent opportunity for us to recognize and honor the brave women as well as brave men who served our Nation in the armed services.

As many of you know, the Purple Heart is awarded to Armed Forces members who are wounded by an instrument of war in the hands of the enemy, and posthumously to the next of kin for those who are killed in action or who die of wounds received in action. It is specifically a combat decoration first conceived in 1782 by General George Washington.

Seventy-five years ago, an organization now known as the Military Order of the Purple Heart was formed for the purposes of protecting the mutual interests of all those who have received the decoration. Composed exclusively of Purple Heart recipients, it is the only veterans service organization comprised strictly of combat veterans.

When the order was federally chartered in 1958, however, very few women had received the Purple Heart. And to this day, women recipients of the Purple Heart do not have the same benefits as their male counterparts.

Under the current law, male members can invite their wives to join the Ladies Auxiliary of the Purple Heart, but there is no place in the order for husbands of Purple Heart recipients. The order has identified at least 97 female purple heart recipients who have joined and who are not enjoying the full benefits of membership that they deserve.

H.R. 1119 seeks to fully honor the women of the Armed Forces who have been awarded the Purple Heart defending our Nation. Specifically, the bill amends the order's Federal charter to allow members to invite their spouses to join as associate members, both for male and female recipients of the Purple Heart. With this minor revision to the Federal charter, the husbands of female members could join the organization.

This bill also allows members to invite their siblings to join as associate members so that they too can take part in the full honor of their brothers and sisters who fought so bravely for our country and received a Purple Heart. It is only right that we allow the members to include their siblings in this honor.

This bipartisan legislation is endorsed by the Military Order of the Purple Heart. It recognizes the important role women have played in defending our Nation in times of war.

We owe this long overdue recognition to these women and their families. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 4 minutes to the author of the bill, my colleague from California, Congresswoman Davis.

Mr. Speaker, I urge support for this bipartisan bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2884) to assist members of the Armed Forces in obtaining United States citizenship, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

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

H.R. 2884, the Kendell Frederick Citizenship Assistance Act, pays tribute to the memory of 21-year-old Army Reserve Specialist Kendell K. Frederick, who was killed in Iraq while attempting to become an American citizen.

Specialist Frederick was born in Trinidad and immigrated to the United States when he was 15 to join his mother, stepfather, and two sisters. He attended Randallstown Senior High in Baltimore County, Maryland, where he joined the school's ROTC program. Specialist Frederick enlisted in the Army Reserve in his senior year and was deployed to Iraq in December of 2004. As he was serving our country, Specialist Frederick sought to apply for U.S. citizenship; yet one bureaucratic hurdle after another delayed his application.

First, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service failed to route his application to the unit that processed naturalization applications for members of the military. That agency then rejected his application for failure to pay an application filing fee, despite the fact that active military personnel applying for U.S. citizenship do not need to pay a filing fee.

Thereafter, this agency directed Specialist Frederick to get his fingerprints taken in Maryland, despite the obvious fact that he was deployed in Iraq at the time. Also, he had recently had his fingerprints taken and undergone a background check when he enlisted in the Army Reserve. When his mother called the agency's ``help line,'' she was told that there was nothing that could be done.

After trying for more than a year to become a U.S. citizen and having his application rejected and delayed as a result of various bureaucratic failings, Specialist Frederick was forced to travel on a convoy to a base where he could get his fingerprints taken for his naturalization application. Tragically, he was killed en route by a roadside bomb. Specialist Frederick was posthumously granted U.S. citizenship a week after his death.

H.R. 2884 would remove unnecessary procedural hurdles like the one Specialist Frederick faced for naturalization applicants who are serving or who have recently served in the military. It would require the Department of Homeland Security to use the fingerprints provided by military naturalization applicants at the time of their enlistment in the Armed Forces if the applicants were fingerprinted in accordance with DOD requirements, if the naturalization applications are filed within 24 months of enlistment, and if the fingerprints are deemed sufficient by the Department of Homeland Security for naturalization purposes.

The bill would require DHS to inform a member of the armed services applying for naturalization when submitting new fingerprints would result in a more timely and effective adjudication of the naturalization application along with the description of how to submit the new fingerprints.

It would also ensure that the DOD complies with the requirements of this bill so that fingerprints they hold are sent to DHS. It would clarify the time frame in which DHS is required to publicize changes in regulations and forms regarding the naturalization of members of the Armed Forces. And, finally, it would promote accountability by requiring the GAO to report on the naturalization process for Armed Forces members.

Approximately 35,000 lawful permanent residents are currently serving in our Armed Forces. More than 13,000 noncitizen members of the military have applied for U.S. citizenship since 2002.

This is an excellent bill that will help ensure that from now on, American soldiers do not face the kinds of unnecessary and unreasonable hurdles to American citizenship that cost Specialist Frederick his life.

I urge my colleagues to support the bill and would note that this was passed unanimously out of the House Judiciary Committee. I urge my colleagues, again, to support the bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize the author of this bill, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings), for 5 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I would just close by noting that the mishandling of this application is just infuriating to read through what happened and to have lost this young man who volunteered for our service in such a way is so distressful. But I think we can take a stand by supporting this bill named in Kendell Frederick's honor to make sure this does not happen to another serviceman or servicewoman and also that his family can know that in addition to serving in Iraq, he served as a model for a change in the law and that they may take some comfort with that.

So I urge passage of the bill.

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

Madam Speaker, our immigration law has long recognized that children born outside our country to an American father and a foreign national mother are U.S. citizens.

Unfortunately, there remains a group of forgotten sons and daughters who, despite being born to American fathers, have been unfairly denied U.S. citizenship. These are the offspring of American servicemen and Asian women during the Vietnam and Korean Wars whose fathers did not personally take the steps of acknowledging paternity necessary to make their offspring citizens. But, the American government did that for them by acknowledging that their fathers were American citizens.

Many of these individuals have lived through devastation during war, have been mistreated by their governments because of their mixed race, and many now live in the United States, but only as legal permanent residents.

There is no doubt that Amerasians are the sons and daughters of American fathers. Our American government already made that determination when we admitted them to the United States as legal permanent residents.

To correct this unfair inequality in our law, I am introducing the Amerasian Paternity Recognition Act, along with bipartisan cosponsors, to ensure that Amerasians are accorded U.S. citizenship just like the offspring of other American fathers are.

It is time for us to finally close a chapter in our history that has too long denied Amerasians the opportunity to become citizens and be recognized as the Americans that they are.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of