Xavier Becerra

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, July 19, 2005, I was unable to cast my floor vote on rollcall Nos. 383 and 384. The votes I missed included ordering the previous question on the amendment and on agreeing to H. Res. 365, providing for consideration of H.R. 2601 to authorize appropriations for the Department of State for the fiscal years 2006 and 2007, and for other purposes. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no'' on both rollcall votes 383 and 384.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, on Friday, June 24, 2005, I was unable to cast my floor vote on rollcall numbers 308, 309, 310, 311, 312, 313, 314, 315, 316, 317, 318, 319, 320 and 321. Had I been present for the votes, I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall 308, ``aye'' on rollcall 309, ``aye'' on rollcall 310, ``aye'' on rollcall 311, ``aye'' on rollcall 312, ``no'' on rollcall 313, ``aye'' on rollcall 314, ``no'' on rollcall 315, ``aye'' on rollcall 316, ``no'' on rollcall 317, on rollcall 318, ``aye'' on rollcall 319, ``aye'' on rollcall 320 and ``no'' on rollcall 321.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, on Wednesday, June 22, 2005, I was unable to cast my floor vote on rollcall No. 293. The vote I missed was on agreeing to the Watt of North Carolina substitute amendment. Had I been present for the vote, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall number 293. Stated against:

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have my name removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 513.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I have always supported meaningful efforts to curtail the increasing influence of money in the political process, and I will continue to do so. As our existing campaign reform laws continue to evolve in the real world, I find myself with a growing discomfort that H.R. 513, the 527 Reform Act of 2005, though altruistic in principle, may actually limit voices too dramatically without offering other alternatives as it attempts to rein in the disproportionate effect of large contributions. Because of these misgivings, I am at this time removing my name as a co-sponsor of this legislation. I reserve a final decision on whether I would sponsor H.R. 513 in the future or eventually support its passage to a later date.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the 90th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide. April 24, 2005 marked the day 90 years ago that began a bloody eight-year period during which 1.5 million Armenians lost their lives as a result of this tragic event. We must take this opportunity to heal the wounds of those who survived this calamity, as well as the Armenian people as a whole. Let us officially acknowledge this regrettable moment in human history, as formal recognition is nearly four generations overdue. By finally closing this chapter, we would not only take positive steps towards normalizing relations between Turkey and Armenia, but also help to prevent future tragedies. I would also like to take this opportunity to commend Armenian Americans nationwide for their contributions to our country. Through the preservation of their heritage, faith and traditions, Armenian Americans join the multitude of immigrants from many different cultures who contribute to the rich diversity we celebrate together as a Nation. Mr. Speaker, woven deeply into the fabric of our culture, Americans stand for freedom and basic human rights for all. Let us further demonstrate our deep conviction for the ideals we hold dear in our resolute opposition to crimes against humanity and officially recognize the Armenian Genocide.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Chairman, while I will support the bill before the House today, I will do so with deep and serious reservations. In October of 2002, I cast an important vote to deny the President authorization to send American troops into Iraq to strike unilaterally. I thought then, and I know now, that his actions were not the best course for our nation. One year later in October of 2003, I made yet another testing decision to oppose legislation, which on the one hand allocated $87 billion to support American operations in Iraq but on the other hand lacked accountability for these taxpayer dollars and placed the mounting cost of rebuilding Iraq and Afghanistan squarely on the shoulders of our children and grandchildren. The apprehensions I had then about sending America's sons and daughters into harm's way in Iraq and about signing a blank check for this military adventure, have now materialized. Congress is now attempting to address the glaring consequences of an ill-advised, preemptive and unilateral military action through this third emergency supplemental appropriation of $81.4 billion. To date--and I say ``to date'' because there is no end in sight--President Bush has directed over $275 billion of taxpayers' monies away from schools, healthcare, Social Security, and the like to pay for his decision to go to war in Iraq. Today we know that President Bush's premise for commencing a war against Iraq--the alleged weapons of mass destruction possessed by Saddam Hussein--was not true. The Bush Administration's confident prediction of a quick and easy victory followed by a quick return home for our troops has become a nightmare. And now the Administration refuses to commit to a time-table for the withdrawal of our troops from Iraq. The Bush Administration's estimate that reconstruction in Iraq would cost between $1 and $2 billion and could be financed by Iraqi oil revenues has now turned into a reconstruction quagmire. We hear more about military contractor Halliburton's billing excesses and contract abuses than about any re-built school or hospital. In terms of accountability, the Inspector General has reported that almost $9 billion in funds designated for reconstruction efforts have been mishandled and remain unaccounted for. The FY 2005 Defense Appropriations Act passed in July of 2004 instructed the Department of Defense to submit two accountability reports to Congress, one by October 31, 2004 and the other by January 1, 2005. In these reports, the Pentagon must provide a comprehensive review of all military operations, including reconstruction and military readiness, and provide detailed cost estimates for these operations. Congress has yet to receive either report or any concrete information about the future costs of this war. I still do not believe that our troops should have been in Iraq under these conditions, facing these obstacles virtually alone, fighting battles for which the Pentagon did not properly plan or prepare. But with over 150,000 of America's brave men and women still in Iraq, it would be difficult to cast a vote against providing the much-needed funds that this supplemental provides to them. Far too many of our soldiers have died and remain in harm's way because of their superiors' miscalculations. As long as our troops remain in harm's way, it is our duty to provide them all of the equipment, tools, vehicles, weapons, and benefits that they need and deserve to protect themselves and give democracy a chance in Iraq. Democrats have fought hard to include accountability measures in this legislation, to extract from it extraneous and unnecessary projects, and to focus America's precious taxpayer dollars on resources for our nation's veterans and troops. This bill, unlike previous Bush Administration requests, allocates the dollars for armor and equipment that our troops on the ground need if they must patrol the streets and roads of Iraq. Democrats also fought hard to cure deficiencies in the bill which put at risk increased death benefits and life insurance for the families of our fallen soldiers. Unfortunately, despite $9 billion of unaccounted funds, an amendment by Mr. Tierney of Massachusetts that would have provided $5 million to establish a select committee to investigate reconstruction efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan was defeated by my Republican colleagues. The Bush Administration, it seems, will continue to spend money without adequate oversight and accountability. Additionally, the bill includes funding for extraneous non-emergency projects that would more properly be addressed through the regular appropriations process. While some of these projects were removed on the House floor through the amendment process, funding for unrelated military construction and $4.6 billion for an Army ``transformation'' plan remain. Most blatant of all the extraneous provisions are those of H.R. 418, the REAL ID Act, which the Republican procedural rule has allowed to be attached to this supplemental following its passage. The immigration policies of our nation deserve a proper and thorough debate, and legislation that provides emergency funding for our troops, for humanitarian aid, and for foreign assistance is not the appropriate vehicle to enact the sweeping, controversial immigration policy embodied in HR 418. I will support H.R. 1268 because of the critical funds and resources that it provides to our troops and their families. However, as this bill moves forward I will work with my colleagues to ensure that my concerns are addressed in the final version of the bill that comes back for final approval after joint House and Senate consideration. I do not foreclose the possibility of voting against the final version of this legislation should it come back in a form departing further from its core purpose of focusing on our men and women in uniform. These are the tough decisions, and they must be made in the best interest of the American people.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, on Monday, March 21, 2005, I did not cast my Floor vote on roll call number 90 on the motion to suspend the rules and pass S. 686, a private bill for the relief of the parents of Theresa Marie Schiavo. Had I been present, I would have voted nay. My personal beliefs on religious morality belong to me, in my home and in my church, with my family and with my God. The Schiavos deserved this same level of privacy and respect. The good people of the 31st Congressional District did not elect me to impose my religious mores upon them or the American people through legislative acts in Congress. Members of Congress should never have legislated on this very personal family matter--the Schiavos told us this and so even did the courts. The mere fact that we took up this legislation sets a dangerous precedent where if the Congress dislikes a court's decision we pursue a law to overturn our own constitutional system of checks and balances. In passing S. 686, this Congress complicated what has already been a long and difficult journey for the Schiavos these past 15 years. May Theresa Schiavo now rest in peace.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, on Monday, March 14, 2005, I was unable to cast my floor vote on rollcall Nos. 66, 67, and 68. The votes I missed include rollcall No. 66 on motion to suspend the rules and agree to H. Res. 135, providing for the establishment of a commission in the House of Representatives to assist parliaments in emerging democracies; rollcall No. 67 on the motion to suspend the rules and agree to H. Res. 101, urging the European Union to add Hezbollah to the European Union's wide-ranging list of terrorist organizations; and on the motion to suspend the rules and agree to S. 384, to extend the existence of the Nazi War Crimes and Japanese Imperial Government Records Interagency Working Group for two years. Had I been present for the votes, I would have voted ``aye'' on rollcall votes 66, 67, and 68.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. First, I must comment on the gentleman's remarks that if things were so good, then why is it that we have parents of children with special needs decrying these budgets? Why is it that we have firefighters coming to us decrying this budget? Why are we seeing so many people saying that we have our priorities in the wrong place? Certainly we should look at this budget resolution because it should be defeated. Even though Social Security privatization is the President's number one priority, this Republican budget resolution hides the cost of the harmful effects of Social Security privatization. It refuses to include any details on the President's privatization plan and it further continues to spend every single cent of the Social Security surplus reserve on things other than Social Security. That means over the next 10 years under this budget that we have before us, $2.6 trillion of worker contributions that are supposed to be dedicated to Social Security will be spent on something other than Social Security. Like what? To pay for these tax cuts that are going principally to the wealthiest Americans in this country. Even with that being done, using all the Social Security surplus moneys, we still have deficits never seen before in this country. This year alone we will have the biggest deficit this country has ever seen, more than $400 billion. That is more than $1,000 on the head of each and every man and woman in this country. They are gleeful. They believe that that is what we should do. Mr. Speaker, many of us believe that we should have a plan as the Salazar legislation would propose that we save every single cent of the Social Security surplus which this year alone the surplus in Social Security contributions that will not be needed to spend for benefits to Social Security recipients will equal $169 billion. We can start by saying that $169 billion of Social Security moneys will not be spent, because this budget spends every single cent of the $169 billion coming in this year for Social Security on something other than Social Security. That is why so many Americans are so insecure about Social Security and insecure about what the President proposes to do about Social Security. Not more than 2 hours ago, one of the President's Cabinet secretaries, Secretary Elaine Chao of the Department of Labor, said before the committee, Social Security is not guaranteed. I asked the Secretary, ``Can you clarify? Do you mean in the future perhaps if we don't do something to make it stronger, it won't be guaranteed?'' She just continued to say, ``It is not guaranteed.'' That is why people today feel so insecure about what the President is proposing, especially with privatization, because he will not tell us what it will cost. We know it could end up costing some 46 percent in benefit cuts if we privatize. We also know that it would require massive government borrowing, some $5 trillion over the next 20 years, if you try to privatize the system. Where does all that money come from? Mr. Speaker, the reason people are so insecure about Social Security is not because the system is not there for them, it is because we have leaders talking about changing it without giving us the facts. Mr. Speaker, it is time for us in our budget documents to speak to the people, to give them the facts. This budget resolution does not do it. We should defeat it.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate April 15--no, not Tax Day--but that memorable day in 1947 when Jackie Robinson officially broke the color barrier of Major League Baseball by donning a Brooklyn Dodgers uniform. In the face of great adversity and knowing that the hopes of African- American athletes in all sports rested on his shoulders, Jackie Robinson provided inspiration to all of America in his courageous pursuit of racial equality. By simply putting on his spikes, wearing his Dodgers uniform, and taking the field on that great day, Jackie Robinson forever changed the landscape of the American sports scene; indeed, he fueled a change in the hearts and minds of our great Nation. Jackie Robinson stared bitter opposition and oppressive racism in the face, all while achieving unparalleled success. He was named the National League Rookie of the Year in 1947 and earned National League Most Valuable Player honors in 1949. In 1962, Jackie became the first African-American to be inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame. Known for his gifted batting, blinding speed around the bases, and strong but steady temperament, Jackie Robinson won the respect of teammates and opponents alike. He led the Dodgers to six pennants and their first World Championship as a member of the famed ``Boys of Summer'' in 1955. Although he played in New York, Jackie Robinson was actually a southern California local. He grew up in Pasadena, CA, and was a star athlete while attending the University of California at Los Angeles. Jackie's long-standing commitment to Dodgers heritage and his strong Southern California roots make us proud and endear him to Dodgers fans from Brooklyn to Los Angeles and everywhere in between. Jackie Robinson's sacrifice on and off the field has had a lasting impact on our nation. An athlete, businessman, and civic leader, Jackie helped blaze a trail for the civil rights movement in the years after his career as a player had ended. He conquered countless steep barriers with faith, dignity and grace, and he stands as a noble symbol of change in creating a more just American society for all. Jackie Robinson's spirit is still with us today. Jackie's life and principles are the basis for the Jackie Robinson Foundation, which keeps his memory alive by providing children of low-income families with leadership and educational opportunities. Perhaps Jackie Robinson himself said it best: ``A life is not important, except in the impact it has on other lives.'' To honor Jackie for his countless and valuable contributions, Major League Baseball declared in 2003 that on April 15 each year, all Major League clubs will recognize this remarkable athlete and man. That same year my colleagues and I passed legislation honoring Jackie Robinson with a National Day of Recognition and awarding him the Congressional Gold Medal, the highest honor bestowed by Congress. Almost 58 years after Jackie Robinson trotted out to first base in a Brooklyn Dodgers uniform, the President today will present the Congressional Gold Medal to Jackie's wife Rachel, daughter Sharon and son David, along with other members of the Robinson family. I can think of no better tribute than to proclaim April 15 ``Jackie Robinson Day.'' Jackie's contributions and sacrifices not only changed a sport, but touched a nation. No athlete may have had a greater long- term impact on his sport or society than Mr. Robinson. Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pride and honor to ask my colleagues to join me today in saluting Mr. Jackie Robinson as the recipient of the Congressional Gold Medal and as a great American most deserving of his National Day of Recognition. Jackie Robinson's contributions have truly helped to make America ``one nation.''

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of my constituents to commemorate the Day of Remembrance. As we know, on February 19, 1942, then President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066 that led to the internment of 120,000 Americans of Japanese descent. With the stroke of a pen, innocent men, women, and children became prisoners and were branded disloyal to the nation they called home. Lives were disrupted and homes were broken as these Americans were uprooted from their communities and locked behind barbed wire fences. The force of wartime hysteria darkened the light of justice and reasonable people suddenly embarked on an unreasonable course. Indeed, America was engaged in a monumental struggle as our soldiers engaged the enemy in the European and Pacific theatres. Here in the United States, many citizens had faces that looked like that of the enemy. Without any evidence, fear was mounting, and the patriotism of these Japanese Americans was questioned. Some worried that they were intent on doing harm against the very flag they saluted. Decades later, history vindicated these loyal Americans as not even a single documented case of sabotage or espionage was committed by an American of Japanese ancestry during that time. What our nation found through the disinfectant of time was what those who endured internment knew all along. Surrounded by armed guards behind a prison fence, mothers thought of their sons who fought for the freedom of the nation that denied them of their own liberty. Indeed today the annuls of military history show that the Japanese American soldiers of the 442nd and combat regiment fought honorably and bravely for ideals they knew our nation had not yet afforded to their own families back home. Still, they were worth fighting for. And this regiment would become the most decorated group of soldiers in American history as they proved their devotion to our nation fighting in both the European and Pacific theatres. It took more than 50 years, but finally in 2000, President Bill Clinton awarded 22 of these heroes with the Medal of Honor. In 1983, a Presidential Commission concluded that the internment was the result of both racism and wartime hysteria. Five years later, then President Ronald Reagan signed the Civil Liberties Act into law that provided an official apology and redress to most of those confined in U.S. internment camps during World War II. This was the culmination of half a century of struggle to bring justice to those to whom it was denied. I am proud that our nation did the right thing. But seventeen years after the passage of the CLA, we still have unfinished work to be done to rectify and close this regrettable chapter in our nation's history. That is why I am re-introducing legislation to finish the remaining work of redress. While most Americans are aware of the internment of Japanese Americans, few know about our government's activities in other countries resulting from prejudice held against people of Japanese ancestry. Recorded thoroughly in government files, the U.S. government involved itself in the expulsion and internment of an estimated 2,000 people of Japanese descent who lived in various Latin American countries. Uprooted from their homes and forced into the United States, these civilians were robbed of their freedom as they were kidnapped from nations not even directly involved in World War II. These individuals are still waiting for equitable redress, and justice cries out for them to receive it. That is why today I will introduce the Wartime Parity and Justice Act of 2005 to finally turn the last page in this chapter of our nation's history. This bill provides redress to every Japanese Latin American individual forcibly removed and interned in the United States. These people paid a tremendous price during one of our nation's most trying times. Indeed, America accomplished much during that great struggle. As we celebrate our great achievements as a nation, let us also recognize our errors and join together as a nation to correct those mistakes. My legislation is the right thing to do to affirm our commitment to democracy and the rule of law. In addition, the Wartime Parity and Justice Act of 2005 provides relief to Japanese Americans confined in this country but who never received redress under the Civil Liberties Act of 1988 given technicalities in the original law. Our laws must always establish justice. They should never deny it. That is why these provisions ensure that every American who suffered the same injustices will receive the same justice. Finally, my legislation will reauthorize the educational mandate in the 1988 Act which was never fulfilled. This will etch this chapter of our nation's history into our national conscience for generations to come as a reminder never to repeat it again. At the forefront of this continuous fight for justice, there are Members of Congress and individuals of the community. This Saturday, I will have the privilege of joining with citizens in Los Angeles at the Japanese American National Museum to commemorate the Day of Remembrance. In addition, on April 8th and 9th of this year, there will be a public testimonial event called ``The Assembly on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians'' at Hastings College of Law in San Francisco, California. At this historic event, former internees of Japanese descent as well as those of Italian and German ancestry will testify about their experiences under oath. This testimonial event will provide historical information, personal testimonies and community opinions to the public and Members of Congress. Campaign For Justice has been a leading driving force behind this event with Japanese American Citizens League, which has reaffirmed its support for the ongoing redress efforts. Mr. Speaker, let us renew our resolve to build a better future for our community as we dedicate ourselves to remembering how we compromised liberty in the past. Doing so will help us to guard it more closely in the future. As we commemorate the Day of Remembrance, I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass the Wartime Parity and Justice Act of 2005.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, today I am proud to introduce legislation to assist low-income taxpayers in preparing and filing their tax returns and to protect taxpayers from unscrupulous refund anticipation loan providers. In particular, the provisions of this legislation will benefit taxpayers eligible for the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) who must fill out dauntingly complex forms--the EITC instructions run 53 pages alone--and, because of the dearth of free tax preparation services to help navigate the process, are heavy users of commercial tax preparers. The problems addressed by the Low-Income Taxpayer Protection Act of 2005 have been ignored for too long. The National Taxpayer Advocate's FY2002 Annual Report to Congress notes that in 2000, only 1 percent of filers with incomes below the EITC income limit received free tax preparation assistance from either the IRS Taxpayer Assistance Centers or volunteer sites affiliated with the IRS. The remaining low-income filers who had their forms filed for them used a commercial preparer. While many commercial preparers provide a very valuable, necessary service, the work of these men and women is too often overshadowed by those who peddle refund anticipation loans (RALs)--usurious short-term loans secured by the taxpayer's tax refund, including the EITC. In fact, it is estimated that 43 percent of EITC recipients who went to a paid tax preparer in 2001 ended up with a RAL. The IRS tells us that 12 million taxpayers got RALs in 2003. These loans took an estimated $1.4 billion out of the refunds earned by American workers. Nearly 80 percent of taxpayers taking out RALs are earning less than $35,000 per year. More than half of those who get RALs receive the EITC. EITC recipients are disproportionately represented in the ranks of those who get RALs, since these taxpayers make up just 17 percent of the taxpayer population. A new Children's Defense Fund survey of eight states and the District of Columbia found that almost $960 million were siphoned away from EITC recipients because of the cost of these loans and commercial tax- preparers who offer them. California taxpayers of modest-incomes paid nearly $237 million to these businesses. The Consumer Federation of America and the National Consumer Law Center found that refund anticipation loan fees cost consumers about $1.14 billion in 2002, up almost $200 million from the year before. Additional fees for electronic filing, ``document preparation,'' and ``applications'' added another $406 million to the total. Our constituents who can afford it the least are suffering a $1.5 billion drain on their tax refunds. Taxpayers who take out RALs are often told that the loan is the only way they can get assistance with filling their tax returns. The fees for preparation services are taken out of the loan proceeds first. Then the interest rates are applied to the loans, and low-income taxpayers are often unaware at the impact this has on the total amount of their refund. Mr. Speaker, let me take a moment to break down these estimates from the cumulative to the individual using an analysis found in the consumer groups' report. Based upon the prices for RALs in 2004, a consumer might pay the following in order to get a $2,100 RAL--the average refund--from a commercial tax preparation chain this year: (1) A loan fee of $99.95, which includes a $24.95 fee supposedly for the ``dummy'' bank account used to receive the consumer's tax refund from the IRS to repay the RAL; and (2) a system administration fee that averages $32 per loan. Combine that with tax preparation fees, which average about $120, and the total is about $250. The effective annual percent rate (APR) on this RAL would be 182 percent. Mr. Speaker, the funds unnecessarily paid into usurious refund anticipation loans is hard-earned money taken out of the pockets of hard-working Americans who are already just barely getting by; it is food taken from their tables, it is school supplies taken from their children. The Office of the Taxpayer Advocate acknowledges that there are several factors that drive low-income taxpayers to pay for tax preparation, including: (1) Inconvenient location or hours of Volunteer Income Tax Assistance (VITA) sites for low-income taxpayers; (2) lack of bank accounts for quicker direct deposit of refunds; (3) need or desire for immediate cash; and (4) inability to prepare one's own taxes due to limited language, literacy, or computer skills. The VITA program can be a great resource to low-income taxpayers, providing assistance that will help them avoid unscrupulous commercial tax-preparers that profit unduly from RALs, VITA is available to taxpayers earning less than $36,000 a year. In 2004, only 1.8 million returns were filed using VITA assistance, although 21 million taxpayers claimed the EITC that year. VITA can better help taxpayers get the full refund from EITC they have earned. In the city of Los Angeles alone, EITC returned over $585 million in 2003. Mr. Speaker, VITA is vital to the economic health of our hardest-working communities and should be promoted as a means of avoiding the use of RALs by low-income taxpayers. This bill takes a two-pronged approach aimed at curtailing the drain on our low-income taxpayers by first regulating income tax preparers and refund anticipation loan providers and, secondly, creating IRS- administered grant programs to provide free tax preparation for low- income taxpayers such as provided by VITA clinics and to help individuals establish a bank account for the first time. I encourage all of my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, it is with utmost pleasure and privilege that I rise today to recognize and pay tribute to the National Audubon Society on the occasion of its centennial year. Founded in 1905 to protect birds from adorning ladies hats, the Audubon Society has come a long way and has grown into a nationally-recognized environmental organization. Audubon's current mission is not only to conserve endangered bird species, but also to preserve their natural habitats and ecosystems. Through a network of bird sanctuaries and community- based nature centers across the nation, Audubon is cultivating a spirit of environmental preservation in our communities. The recent inauguration of the Audubon Center at Ernest E. Debs Park in the City of Los Angeles, and within my congressional district, is a unique example of how Audubon effectively connects people to nature. The Audubon Center is in the heart of one of the densest urban areas of Los Angeles, with 25,000 people per square mile, nearly four times the city average. Despite this challenge, Audubon has constructed a first- class facility focused on sustainable features such as renewable energy sources, water conservation, recycled building materials, and native landscaping. In the fall of 2003, the Audubon Center at Debs Park was awarded the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Platinum Rating by the U.S. Green Building Council, recognizing it as the most environmentally friendly building in the United States, and the second greenest building in the world. This notable achievement, however, is not the only reason the Audubon Center is special to Los Angeles. Even more substantial is that the Audubon Center at Debs Park is a safe haven for 282 acres of wilderness, 200 species of birds and animals, and for the tens of thousands of young children and families of Los Angeles. True to its vision of educating the public on conservation issues, the Audubon Society worked for over 10 years to establish a center that would bring nature to the City of Los Angeles. Thanks to the collaboration of public and private funding, Angelenos can today appreciate a unique nature experience in their own backyard at the Audubon Center at Debs Park. Working families, who often do not have the time or the means for nature trips, now have the option of utilizing the educational and family programs offered by the Center. The site is prime ground for exploring and observing nature through its 282 acres of native walnut-oak woodland, grassland, and coastal sage scrub. The 5,023 square foot facility on site, which houses the children's programming and the administrative offices, also offers a unique opportunity to learn about conservation through its sustainable features. The building is supported by a 100 percent solar electrical system completely independent of the electrical power grid serving the Los Angeles area. Recycled materials, including melted down handguns and scrap metal, were used in the facility's construction wherever possible. Sustainable building materials were also used for the interior; furniture and cabinets were made from organic wheat board and organic sunflower board, both rapidly renewable materials and alternatives to wood. By remaining faithful to its founding mission, the National Audubon Society has accomplished another historic milestone as it celebrates its first century of existence. The Audubon Society has achieved an innovative and unique form of recreation, conservation, and education through the Audubon Center at Debs Park by maximizing nature, technology, and community support. Audubon plans to build similar centers nationwide to continue fostering the spirit of preservation that has inspired the over 12,000 visitors that have walked through the gates of the Audubon Center at Debs Park since its opening. Mr. Speaker, as advocates, supporters, and friends begin centennial festivities nationwide, it is with great admiration and pride that I ask my colleagues to join me today in saluting the National Audubon Society for its visionary mission of engaging millions of people of all ages and inspiring them to celebrate and protect birds, nature, and life. At 100 years young, the National Audubon Society has much vigor and many ideas to share with all of us. We look forward to the next many years of fruitful endeavors with this great American Institution.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague and friend for yielding me this time. To Doris Matsui, Brian, Amy and Anna, we grieve with you; but more, we celebrate the life of a wonderful human being, as I know you will have an opportunity to do over the coming months and years as we all remember Bob Matsui. I would like to talk to you, Anna, because right now it is perhaps difficult for you to grasp all that is being said about your grandfather, given that you are just a little over a year old. But in time, with the wonders of technology and the beauty of a democracy in the people's House where every word that we speak in the well of this body is recorded for time immortal, perhaps you will have an opportunity to take a glimpse at what so many people thought of your grandfather. I will tell you he was a wonderful human being, a superb legislator and public servant and, perhaps most of all, a great American. I will tell you also that he graduated from a great high school 17 years before I did, at C.K. McClatchy High School in Sacramento, California. He cared a great deal about the people he represented. He was a fighter and a champion. He knew when to fight, he knew how to fight, and he knew for whom he was fighting all the time. If you ever had an opportunity to converse with Bob Matsui, you knew that his deepest conversations were spoken with his eyes. He had these eyes that somehow could convey what oftentimes words cannot, and you knew that when he spoke with his eyes he was speaking to you from conviction, with determination, focus, and experience. And if it were not his words, for sure his eyes would convince you of a direction to take, of what he was trying to say, of where to go, of how to do it right. A handshake from Bob Matsui was as sure a bet as the sun rising in the morning. If you knew Bob Matsui, you knew that he cared deeply about family, about this country, and about what would happen to the next generation. We are going to miss him in this fight to create a better America, to preserve Social Security for our seniors and for the next generations to come. We are going to miss him when we talk about our relations with all of our friends around the world in trade. But we will carry on that fight, because he is a champion to us now as he was before he passed on. Anna, I say to you as you grow and have an opportunity to speak to your grandmother and your parents more about your grandfather, and as you read more about his many accomplishments, I hope that you will look back at some of the words that were spoken by people who respected him so dearly and considered him friend, mentor, confidant, that this is a man who left so much for you to glean, to learn from, and this is a man from whom you will have an opportunity to say we can admire an American and certainly America can say that we can appreciate this American. So, Doris, with all due respect to you and to Brian and to Amy, I think it is most appropriate for me to address myself to Anna because I believe the greatest gift that Bob Matsui left us was the fact that he thought about the future; and, Anna, I suspect that he was thinking about you as much as anyone else. So with you Anna, Godspeed as you learn from a great man, Bob Matsui.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, on Wednesday, October 6, 2004, I was unavoidably detained, and therefore unable to cast my floor vote on roll call number 497, on passage of H.R. 5107, the Justice for All Act. Had I been present for the vote, I would have voted ``aye'' on roll call vote 497.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, on Monday, October 4, 2004, I was unable to cast my floor vote on rollcall Nos. 487, 488, and 489. The votes I missed include rollcall vote No. 487 on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree to S. Con. Res.76, recognizing that November 2, 2003, shall be dedicated to A Tribute to Survivors at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum; rollcall vote No. 488 on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass S. 1814, to transfer Federal lands between the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior; and rollcall vote No. 489, on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree to H. Res. 567, Congratulating the American Dental Association for sponsoring the second annual Give Kids a Smile program. Had I been present for the votes, I would have voted ``aye'' on rollcall vote Nos. 487, 488, and 489.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Show me the store that sells American products, and I will buy them. Show me the store that sells American products for my home, and I will buy them.

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time, and I want to apologize to the chairman for trying to have him yield me some time. I just want to make the case I am willing to stay on this floor if the gentleman can name me an American product from my home that I can purchase, I will look to buy it, but I have looked. Whether it is an electronic product, whether it is dishes, whether it is curtains, tell me, and I will look to buy it. There is no reason why we cannot try to give incentives to American companies to be able to produce here at home. If it is a little bit more expensive, I guarantee my colleagues the American consumer would say, if I have to pay a little bit more for that product, but it is made by American hands, I will do so. The difficulty is that we have no right using taxpayer dollars to help companies ship jobs abroad. That is my point. When we have an administration that has actually had a net job loss of the last 3 or 4 years of close to a million jobs; and by the way, if we did not include the government-sector jobs that have been created under a Republican administration, that would actually rise to over 1.5 million jobs that have been lost. Almost 3 million of those jobs that have been lost have been in the manufacturing sector. So if it were not for government jobs created, we would have a massive job loss. We do not even create today the number of jobs we need just to keep pace with the new people who are entering into the system. So it becomes very difficult when we are trying to do something to see that we are spending $60 billion which will, for the most part, help companies who may be American companies, who may have some of their operations here, but are still sending jobs abroad. Again, they have got to remain competitive. That is not a battle we want to fight. What we want to fight, though, is to give incentives to companies who are willing to commit to Americans here.

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I just want to mention that I have no choice, Americans do not have a choice. We cannot buy American products for our home.

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, what we are talking about in this motion to instruct is what we should do: send to President Bush a bill to try to help American companies create jobs. Secondly, we want to help American companies create jobs, some of us at least do, in America, not overseas. What we are seeing today is a wholesale shipping-out of American jobs so that today, when you buy a product, if you look at your home and take a look underneath that dish or if you take a look at that chair, if you take a look at the curtains and find out what that label says about where it was made, chances are it will not say ``made in America.'' It used to be that toys were manufactured here. It used to be that your furniture was manufactured here. It used to be that just about everything in your home was made in America. Today, virtually nothing that you have in your home is made in America. Not only is it the case that what was manufactured is no longer made in America, but today, we are talking about all sorts of things from data entry, word processing, transcription, phoning services, product design, architecture, movie production. X-rays are being analyzed overseas for Americans who go to see a doctor to find out whether or not there is a particular condition or illness they are suffering from. X-rays are being exported for analysis today. That is where we are. Is it bad? It sure is. Every hour America loses 127 manufacturing jobs overseas. That means that there are 3,200 jobs that will be lost today as we speak. At the end of the year, 1.2 million American jobs will have left. My colleague, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady), said this is an effort to scare America. My God, if those figures and those facts do not scare America, then we are in trouble, because we have to wake up, wake up to the fact that we are losing jobs to others overseas, and we are giving incentives as a government for us to see American companies send those jobs overseas. Now, every company has a right, and we should try to help every company make a profit; otherwise, they will not be around. But my God, if we have an opportunity to use the government to help incent companies to keep those jobs in America or create new jobs here in America for American workers, then let us do it. So why are we here? The bill that stands before us would actually give $60 billion worth of incentives to companies who ship those jobs from America to overseas. Let us change that. This motion to instruct simply says, you will get a tax break, you will get that incentive from the government, from the people, the 280 million Americans who pay taxes, if you create that job not in some other country, but here. That is pretty simple. And by the way, this also says, this motion to instruct also says, let us do this in a way that does not increase the size of the Federal deficit. We have a $440 billion deficit, the largest this country has ever known; and this is going to spend money to give incentives to companies, this bill will give money to companies through incentives to send jobs overseas. That is crazy at a time when we do not have money to begin with, and we are losing jobs by the hour. If we are going to continue hemorrhaging jobs in America then, by God, we should be scared about what is going on. We should not hide the facts. We should not try to deceive Americans. We should do everything in our power to help the private sector create the jobs that we need. The Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Bush administration Bureau of Labor Statistics recently revised its prediction on the growth of the number of high-tech jobs, white-collar jobs here in America that we would have, somewhere between 2002 to about 2012, over that 10-year period. They have revised that figure. Not up; they are not saying they are going to create more jobs; they are saying 70 percent fewer jobs. This is not some left-wing think tank saying we are going to lose jobs; this is the Bush administration's Bureau of Labor Statistics saying, folks, we made a mistake. When we told you a few years ago that we thought we would be expanding the number of high-tech, white-collar, good-paying, for the most part, $70,000-and-above-paying jobs, we were wrong. Today, guess what? We have to revise that figure down by about 70 percent. Other analyses recently have told us that America is in jeopardy of losing a total of about 14 billion jobs into the future if we do not stop the hemorrhaging now. Between 300,000 and 500,000 jobs were lost in the U.S. since 2001, having gone overseas. That figure, by the way, did not come from another left-wing think tank; that came from none other than Goldman Sachs. You can go to Wall Street in New York and talk to them there, because those are the folks that told us that between 300,000 and 500,000 jobs have been lost, simply since 2001 overseas. It is a crisis. Let us deal with it. It is not a scare tactic; it is real. Let us pass this motion to instruct.

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield on that point?

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, yesterday, September 22, during the final series of votes, I did not record a floor vote on rollcall No. 462, the Olver amendment to H.R. 5025, the Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2005. Mr. Speaker, had I recorded a vote on the Olver amendment, I would have unequivocally voted aye on rollcall vote No. 462, and wish to be recorded as such.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. As we come here to debate this, I think we should make it clear, Mr. Speaker, to everyone in this Chamber and everyone throughout America who might be watching that most of us want to see an expansion of the 10 percent tax bracket credit for all of our families because that is a tax cut that would go to all families including our lowest- or modest- income earning families. We would like to see an extension of the $1,000 family credit for those with children. There are other tax proposals here that offer relief to American families which we support. That is not the issue. The issue is that today in America, America's families face a $7.384 trillion debt; and it grows by a billion a day in interest payments that we make. And so the difficulty here is that we are on a crash course to abomination. We are not being fiscally prudent in what we propose, even though it sounds very good. I am going to borrow some information that our colleague, someone who is a fiscal hawk and someone who has been watching this for some time has said and that is the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor). The debt is about $7.8 trillion. That debt increased $568 billion in the last 11 months of fiscal year 2004. It has increased $1.7 trillion in the 40 months since Congress passed President Bush's first budget plan on May 9, 2001. The President's own budget expects the debt to pass $8 trillion in 2005. The debt will surpass $9 trillion in 2007. It will surpass $10 trillion in 2009. That will have to be paid by the 280 million Americans who live in this country. Our Nation owes close to $2 trillion of that debt to foreigners including more than $680 billion owed to Japan, more than $217 billion owed to China and Hong Kong; and the government borrowed $427 billion dollars from foreign governments and investors in just the past 12 months. All of this is actually worse than what it sounds because what I have not mentioned is every year for the last several years the Social Security system has been collecting more money than it has had to pay out to those who are beneficiaries in retirement. And that is what we consider all or know all as the Social Security trust fund surplus. Unfortunately, every single cent of the Social Security trust fund surplus has been expended, not for Social Security, not to be prepared in the future for Social Security, but for other matters. So, Mr. Speaker, I say to my colleagues and to all Americans who might be watching, while we all wish to continue to reduce the tax burden on Americans, it should not be done at the expense of increasing the tax burden of our American families and children into the future.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Chairman, earlier today my floor vote was not recorded on rollcall No. 462, the Olver amendment to H.R. 5025, the Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations for FY 2005. Mr. Chairman, had I voted on the Olver amendment, I would have unequivocally voted ``aye'' on rollcall vote No. 462