Neil Abercrombie

Mr. ABERCROMBIE

Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, earlier today, I was unavoidably absent when recorded votes were taken on three matters. Had I been present, I would have voted as follows: House Res. 239, Rule for consideration of H.R. 1904, Healthy Forest Restoration Act, ``nay''; S. 330, Veterans' Memorial Preservation and Recognition Act of 2003, ``yea''; H.R. 1925, Runaway, Homeless and Missing Children's Protection Act, ``yea.''

Mr. ABERCROMBIE

Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that this House is marking Asian Pacific American Heritage month. For those of us from the State of Hawaii, there is something missing in this year's Heritage Month celebration--the dynamic presence of our colleague, Patsy Takemoto Mink. I would like to take this opportunity, therefore, to reprise the tribute to her that I delivered on this floor last October. We were devastated by the sudden loss of this irreplaceable woman. Patsy Mink was the first Asian American woman to serve in Congress. But she was much more than that. She was our friend and colleague. She was a true daughter of Hawaii. She was a person of enormous spirit and tenacity and inner strength. This House is much the poorer for her loss. We especially miss her wisdom, her energy, her readiness to fight for principle. As evidence of the high esteem in which she was held in Hawaii, she was elected over and over by the voters of Hawaii, and she was re- elected posthumously after she passed away just before the 2002 election. Patsy fought all her life for social and economic justice. Throughout nearly 50 years of public service, she championed America's most deeply held values: equality, fairness, and above all . . . honesty. Her courage, her willingness to speak out and champion causes that others might shun resulted in tremendous contributions in the fields of civil rights and education. She has earned an honored place in the history of the United States House of Representatives as the co-author of title IX, which guarantees equality for women in education programs. Every single woman in this Nation who today access to equal opportunity in education, and by extension in virtually every other field of endeavor, owes a debt to Patsy Mink. She was one of the pioneers who transformed Hawaii and transformed this Nation. Her legacy lives on in every campus in America and in the heart of every American woman who aspires to greatness. Most profoundly, it lives on in the spirit of hope, hope for the millions of lives that she touched. Patsy Mink knew first hand the power of hope, the power of perseverence, the power of dreams. She was turned down for medical school, discriminated against because she was female, because she was Japanese American, because she came from an unknown territory out in the Pacific. That is why she went to law school, fought her way into law school so that she could achieve a degree that would enable her to fight against the discrimination she had suffered. She was a champion then. We all recognized it. She was smart and she was tough and she was articulate and she would not quit. She was an inspiration then and now. Whenever any of us felt some sense of discouragement, whenever any of us felt some sense of despair or feeling that we could not succeed, it was only required for Patsy to come in the room to change the atmosphere. Patsy Mink had the capacity to make dead air move. Patsy Mink, this little lady from Hawaii, was a giant in her heart and in her commitment. With every breath that she took, she championed those who had no one to stand up and speak out for them. A little lady with a big heart, a lioness. We will not see her like again.

Mr. ABERCROMBIE

Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 5 minutes.

Mr. ABERCROMBIE

Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Madam Speaker, I would like to join my colleagues in urging the House to increase the amounts we will include in the supplemental appropriations bill later this week for homeland security. Last Friday I held a meeting in Honolulu of first responders to discuss preparedness, planning and coordination among agencies and funding needs. It became very apparent during the meeting that funding being received is clearly inadequate to undertake the job we are asking of our emergency law enforcement agencies and personnel. For example, the Honolulu Police Department has apprised me of the need for some $65.5 million for several projects that are necessary if the Island of Oahu is to be protected to the extent necessary. There are several important military installations for which Honolulu police have major responsibilities, such as Pearl Harbor Naval Base, Hickam Air Force Base, and Schofield Barracks. The Department has the responsibility for the safety of military personnel and their family who live off base, and to some extent on base. Specifically, communication and operability between civilian law enforcement and the military is essential. Additional personnel protective equipment has been identified as a need as well as emergency vehicles in a centralized equipment and maintenance facility. The cost for effective homeland security management is a huge, unfunded mandate the Federal Government has imposed on State and local governments. The Honolulu Police Department is establishing an Emergency Management Command and an antiterrorism unit. It is undertaking extensive specialized training in areas such as chemical, biological, and explosive handling. Joint exercises with the military have been conducted so that in the event of an emergency, roles are recognized and responsibilities are familiar. Our state of affairs and level of protection afforded to our citizens changed greatly after September 11, and has been heightened by our military engagement in Iraq. Our citizens expect and deserve such elevated security. But it also serves to remind us that protection is not cheap, and we in Congress should stand up to our responsibilities to properly fund the protections our citizens need. I would like to join my colleagues in urging the House to increase the amounts we will include in the supplemental appropriation bill later in this week for homeland security. Last Friday, I held a meeting in Honolulu of first responders, to discuss preparedness, planning and coordination among agencies, and funding needs. It became very apparent during the meeting that funding being received is clearly inadequate to undertake the job we are asking of our emergency and law enforcement agencies and personnel. For example, the Honolulu Police Department has apprised me of the need for $65.5 million for several projects that are necessary if the island of Oahu is to be protected to the extent necessary. There are several important military installations for which the Honolulu police have major responsibilities, such as Pearl Harbor Naval Base, Hickam Air Force Base and Schofield Barracks. The Department has responsibility for the safety of military personnel and their families who live off base, and to some extent, on base. Specifically, communication interoperability between civilian law enforcement and the military is essential. Additional personal protective equipment has been identified as a need as well as emergency vehicles and a centralized vehicle and equipment maintenance facility. The cost for effective homeland security management is a huge, unfunded mandate the Federal government has imposed on state and local governments. The Honolulu Police Department is establishing an Emergency Management Command and an anti-terrorism unit. It is undertaking extensive specialized training in areas such as chemical, biological and explosives handling. Joint exercises with the military have been conducted so that in the event of an emergency, roles are recognized and responsibilities are familiar. There are other imbedded homeland security costs with which state and local officials are struggling. When the Nation moves to a Code Red Alert posture, the Honolulu police incur costs of over $1.5 million a day, about two-thirds of it for the protection of critical infrastructure for military installations. The Oahu Civil Defense Agency has identified numerous critical projects which total $18.1 million. Essential projects include warning siren upgrades, security cameras, computer software, as well as equipment and personnel training. These statistics are for but two of numerous first responder agencies. This does not include the fire department, nor the burdens placed on hospitals and emergency rooms. And the Hawaii State Government has separate and additional mandates and responsibilities. I'm not speaking today to point fingers of blame at anyone for the situation we face, but to articulate the need to provide adequate funding in the supplemental appropriations bill. Our state of affairs and level of protection afforded to our citizens changed greatly after September 11 and has been heightened by our military engagement in Iraq. Our citizens expect and deserve such elevated security. But it also serves to remind us that protection is not cheap, and we in Congress should stand up to our responsibility to properly fund the protection our citizens need. Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Loretta Sanchez).

Mr. ABERCROMBIE

Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce a bill to clarify the political relationship between Native Hawaiians and the United States. This bill is identical to a bill being simultaneously introduced in the Senate by Senator Daniel Akaka and Senator Daniel Inouye. Representative Ed Case, from the Second District of Hawaii, is joining me as an original cosponsor on the introduction of this measure. For years, Congress has legislated on behalf of Native Hawaiians as the aboriginal, indigenous, native peoples of Hawaii. This measure clarifies that political relationship and provides a process for Native Hawaiians to form a governing body to engage in a government-to- government relationship with the United States. The United States has declared a special responsibility for the welfare of the Native peoples of the United States, including Native Hawaiians. This relationship has been acknowledged by the United States since the inception of Hawaii's status as a territory. This relationship was most explicitly affirmed by the enactment of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act of 1920, which set aside 200,000 acres of land in Hawaii for homesteading by Native Hawaiians. Legislative history clearly shows that in addressing this situation, Congress based this action and subsequent legislation on the constitutional precedent in programs enacted for the benefit of American Indians. Since Hawaii's admission into the Union, Congress has continued to legislate on behalf of Native Hawaiians as indigenous peoples. Native Hawaiians have been included as Native Americans in a number of federal statutes which have addressed the conditions of Native Hawaiians. Public Law 103-150, the Apology Resolution, extended an apology on behalf of the United States to the Native people of Hawaii for the United States' role in the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii. The Apology Resolution also expressed the commitment of Congress and the President to acknowledge the ramifications of the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii and to support reconciliation efforts between the United States and Native Hawaiians. It is important to note that this measure has strong support from indigenous peoples within the United States. The National Congress of American Indians and Alaska Federation of Natives have both passed resolutions in support of a government-to-government relationship between Native Hawaiians and the United States. Similar resolutions have been passed by the Japanese American Citizens League and the National Education Association. The measure is also supported by the Hawaii State Legislature, which passed a number of resolutions supporting a federally recognized government-to-govenunent relationship. The legislation being introduced today is important not only to Native Hawaiians, but to all the people of Hawaii. This measure provides the process to begin resolving many longstanding issues facing Hawaii's indigenous peoples and the State of Hawaii. In addressing these issues, we have begun a process of healing, a process of reconciliation not only with the United States but within the State of Hawaii. The essence of Hawaii is characterized not only by the beauty of its islands, but by the beauty of its people. The State of Hawaii has recognized, acknowledged and acted upon the need to preserve the culture, tradition, language and heritage of Hawaii's indigenous peoples. This measure furthers these actions.

Mr. ABERCROMBIE

Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to extend my heartfelt aloha and congratulations to Colonel Frank Steer, United States Army, retired. Colonel Steer, 102 years young, is a member of the United States Military Academy Class of 1925 and holds the distinction of being the oldest living graduate of West Point. Frank Steer has a long record of outstanding service to the United States. He enlisted in the Army in World War 1, attained a commission after the war, and served as Provost Marshal of the Army's Hawaiian Department during World War II. Having responsibility for enforcing martial law in Hawaii, he is widely credited with a human touch and sense of fairness during that difficult time. Having been commissioned an honorary major general in the Association of Washington Generals, Frank Steer is eminently qualified for honorary promotion to provost marshal of the United States Army and United States Air Force, and I am delighted to extend such recognition to him. Frank Steer is one of Hawaii's living treasures. He is part of our island history and played a major role in making our state a unique and special place. I join Frank Steer's legion of friends and admirers in congratulating him on a life well lived and for his unparalleled service to our nation.

Mr. ABERCROMBIE

Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak against this resolution. We all recognize that Suddam Hussein is a tyrant and that he is a dangerous enemy. The question is whether this resolution is the right way to address the threats presented by his regime. The Administration says that Iraq presents an imminent threat to the United States, that unless we give the President carte blanche to launch a unilateral, preemptive attack, we will be subject to attack by weapons of mass destruction. No one needs to convince us of the horror of weapons of mass destruction or the evil intentions of Saddam Hussein. But does that justify the blank check this resolution gives the President? We have listened to the testimony, read the briefs, and weighed the arguments presented by the Administration. In my view, they have yet to prove their case. They have presented no credible evidence that the United States faces imminent attack. They have presented no credible evidence that Iraq was involved in the September 11th terrorist attacks or that it is giving material aid to those involved in those attacks. Are we setting the bar too high? I don't think so. The evidence of imminent threat should be credible, conclusive and irrefutable if we are talking about the United States unleashing the dogs of war. Striking the first blow is unprecedented in American history. It has always been a point of honor that the United States does not start wars. If we are going to depart from a fundamental principle that has guided U.S. foreign policy for more than 200 years, the evidence of necessity must be iron clad. This is much more than a point of pride. It is not an abstract argument. Through this action, the world's only remaining superpower is asserting a principle that the nations of the world--including the United States--have struggled to consign to the past. We have rejected the old idea that any nation which claims to feel threatened or aggrieved can unilaterally and preemptively attack another without the sanction of the international community. The power to initiate war is no longer untrammeled and absolute. Think for a moment of the precedent we are setting, of the pandora's box we are opening. What if, tomorrow, India or Pakistan says the other constitutes an unacceptable threat? Would this justify one of these nuclear-armed countries attacking the other? What about China and Taiwan? What about any number of other countries whose relations with a neighbor are beset with tension, suspicion, threats, and insecurity? More immediately, what about our relations with our allies, the nations on which we depend to help us keep the peace and bear the burden of protecting our interests? We should be careful not to initiate a new age of American unilateralism that leaves us without allies. The Administration thinks they are dispensable in the case of Iraq. Maybe they are. But if our alliances fray and disintegrate, it is certain that there will come a time when we do need them. Will they be there for us? Maybe, maybe not. But one thing we can be sure of: it is foolhardy in the extreme to ignore our allies' importance to the system of international relations and the maintenance of America's prosperity and national security interests. I have every confidence that our troops will display the bravery and professionalism we have come to expect from them. But the consequences of a U.S. victory are liable to be a huge burden for the United States. We will have taken on the responsibly for peace and order, for feeding and sustaining an entire population, and guaranteeing the territorial integrity of Iraq. All this in the context of a population which may or may not be receptive to the presence of our armed forces. We will have to counter the centrifugal dynamics that drive the Kurds in the north and the Shiites in the south away from the Iraqi state. We will be responsible for defending Iraq's long border with Iran against incursions. We are talking about committing tens of thousands of troops, perhaps hundreds of billions of dollars, for many years, maybe decades. And what will be the impact of an invasion in the rest of the Muslim world? The reaction will not be an outpouring of support for the United States. It will feed the flames of fanaticism. It could well destabilize Egypt, Jordan and other friendly nations. Are we prepared to commit more troops, more money, more prestige to shoring up these governments? Finally, let me offer some observations as a member of the Armed Services Committee. Implications of a war against Iraq will reverberate at every level of the Department of Defense. Problematic issues the military faces today--global international commitments, increased personnel tempo, and over-reliance on the Reserves and National Guard-- will only be exacerbated when military requirements for Iraq are thrown in the mix. Of foremost concern is the inevitable enormous strain on military manpower. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld testified before the Armed Services Committee that no increase in troop end strength is necessary to carry out an invasion and peacekeeping activities in Iraq. No one else whom our Committee spoke to held this opinion. In fact, retired flag officers and distinguished military analysts all agreed that increased end strength was imperative for the ultimate success of our reconstruction of Iraq. And the personnel problem extends far beyond the full time, active duty forces. Since the Persian Gulf war, our reliance on the Reserves and National Guard has grown to the point where it would be impossible for DoD to meet its worldwide commitments without the presence of these units. Reservists and Guardsmen no longer talk about the rare mobilization in support of a national emergency; rather, some units routinely deploy overseas alongside their active duty counterparts. How long can we continue to call upon these volunteers to shoulder more than their fair share? How long can we ask civilian employers and families of our Guard and Reserve to carry on without them? I sincerely hope that one of the first orders of business in the 108th Congress is a comprehensive overhaul of our military personnel system in order to ease the stress on our citizen soldiers. Otherwise, our Reservists and Guardsmen are sure to vote with their feet. These considerations do not exhaust the questions raised by the prospect of an attack on Iraq. Serious as they are, the most serious questions of all are the ones none of us can anticipate. War has a way of creating new dynamics and unleashing new forces in the world. All too frequently, those consequences are inimical to the interests of established powers. Those who see the dawn of a new era of peace, stability and democracy in the Middle East as a result of a strike against Iraq would do well to think again.

Mr. ABERCROMBIE

Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join in paying tribute to a great American. Former Congressman Augustus Hawkins was not only a pioneer in breaking a race barrier of the House of Representatives, he was also a pioneer in economic and unemployment reform. Congressman Hawkins was well respected by both sides of the aisle for his sincerity, dedication hard work, and commitment to helping those less fortunate. He sponsored numerous laws that created jobs and insured civil rights. He was a forceful advocate of Federal support of education. During his years in Congress, Mr. Hawkins' most notable accomplishments included the establishment of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Full Employment and Balanced Growth Act of 1978. Mr. Speaker, I join with my colleagues in wishing Congressman Hawkins a happy 95th birthday, which he celebrated earlier this year. it is fitting that we name a postal facility after Congressman Hawkins so that Californians and Americans can long remember his legacy. Let us not only look back at his accomplishments and his patriotism, let us look forward and wish him many more healthy and happy years.

Mr. ABERCROMBIE

Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my strong support for this resolution and to thank the leadership of the House for moving so expeditiously to bring it to the floor. I have had the honor to share the responsibility of representing Hawaii in the U.S. House of Representatives with Patsy Mink for the last 12 years. However, my first memories of her go back 40 years when I was a student at the University of Hawaii involved in one of her early campaigns. I admired her then and I hope through this resolution to secure for her an honored place in the history of this institution and this country. Throughout nearly 50 years of public service, Patsy Mink championed America's most deeply held values: equality, fairness, and above all honesty. Her courage, her willingness to speak out and champion causes that others might shun resulted in tremendous contributions in the fields of civil rights and education. Every single woman in this Nation who today has been given an equal opportunity in education, and by extension in virtually every other field of endeavor, owes the impetus to that in modern times to Patsy Mink. She was one of the pioneers who transformed Hawaii and transformed this Nation. Her legacy will live on in every campus in America and in the heart of every American woman who aspires to greatness. Most profoundly, it lives on in my estimation in hope; hope for the millions of lives that she touched. Someone will take Patsy Mink's place here in the House, that is the way of it in our democracy, but no one will replace her in the hearts of the people of Hawaii. No one will replace her in the role that she played in this House of Representatives. With the renaming of title IX as the Patsy T. Mink Equal Opportunity in Education Act, Congress secures her memory as a heroic, visionary, and tireless leader of this great Nation.

Mr. ABERCROMBIE

Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that at the end of the allotted time, the House rise for a moment of silence out of respect for the Honorable Patsy T. Mink.

Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Just before I go on, Mr. Speaker, I most deeply want to thank everyone who has spoken so far. There are many more people to come, as we can see, Mr. Speaker, but the depth and the breadth of what Patsy accomplished I think is now going on the Record here in the 107th Congress. It will be there for all to see and view, and I know it will be an inspiration. I am very, very grateful, as are the people of Hawaii, to all who have appeared so far and are yet to come for letting everyone know of Patsy's legacy. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Indiana (Ms. Carson).

Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, I offer a privileged resolution (H. Res. 566) and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).

Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Meek).

Mr. ABERCROMBIE. As we draw the discussion for the passage of this resolution to a conclusion, I would ask, Mr. Speaker, that at the appropriate time if you could indicate to the House that perhaps we could rise and observe a moment of silence in honor of Patsy Mink with the passage of the resolution, I would be very appreciative, and I think it is the appropriate way to finish our commemoration. Let me conclude my remarks, then, Mr. Speaker. I had not intended to speak much further because of the eloquent, articulate, certainly comprehensive manner in which the Members tonight have discussed the great contributions of Patsy to this body and to the Nation. But all through this evening, Mr. Speaker, I have been unable to avoid looking at the picture that has been down by the podium on the floor. That picture of Patsy really captures the essence of this tiny giant. You can see her steadfastness, her sense of perseverance, the stalwart person that she was on behalf of all those who had no hope. Mr. Speaker, it never occurred to me in my youth that I would have the honor and privilege of serving in the people's house, the House of Representatives. I look around the floor at my colleagues here. I see my dear friend Dana Rohrabacher and others here on the floor; Nancy Pelosi, who has just finished speaking of her friendship and love for Patsy, and I understand what it was that I knew intellectually so many years ago when I worked on Patsy's first campaign as a college student at the University of Hawaii when she first came here to the House of Representatives. I understood intellectually what it was to serve in the House of Representatives. But I am sure, Mr. Speaker, you know, as all of our colleagues do here in the people's house, that those of us who have sworn an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution in this house of freedom know what it means to have had the presence of someone like Patsy Mink. Surely, Mr. Speaker, there is no other people so fortunate as we, free men and women, in the freest country on the face of the Earth, in the history of the planet. No one has embodied more the spirit of this House than this gentlewoman from Hawaii, a true daughter of Hawaii who celebrated in herself and in her service the true spirit and meaning of aloha. Aloha means that our diversity defines us rather than divides us. In this world of adversity and pain and terror and cruelty and horror, Patsy Mink was able to stand for those who could not speak for themselves and was the living embodiment of what aloha meant not just for our Rainbow State, not just for our multicultural, multiethnic, multiracial people, but it gave the message of aloha to this House, to this Nation and to this world. Aloha, Patsy. Mr. Speaker, I believe that the time is appropriate to call for an expression of assent to the resolution before us, and if I could ask for that to be in the form of Members rising, Members and those present to rise with a moment of silence not only in commemoration of Patsy Mink, but to constitute passage of the resolution.

Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\3/4\ minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews). (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).

Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott).

Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr). (Mr. FARR of California asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Millender-McDonald).

Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica), who was Representative Mink's chairman in the 107th Congress.

Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Matsui).

Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman). (Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. ABERCROMBIE

Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Speaker, it is very difficult for me to grasp that I would be standing here this evening to announce to the House, with the most profound regret, that our dear friend and colleague Patsy Mink has passed away. I know there are many Members who wish to express their respects to John Mink and Wendy Mink, Patsy's husband and daughter, and to share with other Members and perhaps those who are observing our proceedings the measure of their feelings for Patsy and about her. So at the proper time, Mr. Speaker, which I believe is after the votes which will be called, I will call up a resolution expressing the sorrow of the House of Representatives upon her death and offer the opportunity for such Members as would like to speak to indicate to the House their feelings on this most sad, profoundly sad, occasion.