Xavier Becerra

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Jones), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to mention that the last time I looked the majority party is in control of both the House and the Senate and controls any spending bills that come out of this Congress. Of course, they first are sent over to us by the White House, meaning the President as well. So in terms of who controls the spending and who is splurging, the minority party would love to have control of both the House and White House, but at this stage that is in the hands of the majority party, so the gentleman should take his concerns directly to his leadership of his party. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Israel).

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

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the Democratic whip.

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee). (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Bishop).

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and pay tribute to the Sias International University of Zhengzhou, China, on the occasion of its fifth anniversary. Founded in 1998 by Dr. Shawn Chen, the Sias International University has been recognized as the first American-owned university in China. Sias International University has a mission to educate professionals and help them gain an in-depth understanding of international business theory and practice. Its unique blend of Western and Eastern culture creates a truly international learning environment to better prepare its students for today's global market. This dual-culture educational environment also fosters greater understanding between the United States and China. One of the fastest growing universities in China, Sias International University has a student population now exceeding 7,000 and offers over 30 different majors, including business, engineering, art, sciences, languages, and liberal studies. Its unique partnership with Fort Hays State University in Kansas enables Sias International University to offer dual degree programs in many majors. Through Fort Hays State University's virtual campus and online courses Chinese students learn first hand about American educational values. Dr. Chen's vision of international cooperation through academia has established Sias International University as a model for future education in China. As we speak, the partnership between Sias International University and Fort Hays State University is educating future leaders in government and industry from both the United States and China, all the while strengthening ties between our two nations. The establishment of an institution like Sias International University could not be timelier. At a time when countries are threatened by terrorism and the national reflex worldwide is to close borders, we must remember that our economies, our people, and thus our nations are intertwined in this world. We must continue to resist reactions of fear and isolation and work instead towards forging relations with our international neighbors. Mr. Speaker, as students, faculty, board members, university leaders, and the community gather to celebrate the accomplishments of Sias International University on the occasion of its fifth anniversary, I ask my colleagues to join me in extending congratulations and best wishes for continued growth and prosperity to this thriving institution.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, it is with utmost pleasure and privilege that I rise today to recognize and pay tribute to a great American and good friend, Antonia Hernandez, Former President and General Counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF). To me, Antonia is many things: a national leader on civil rights and public policy, a pioneer who has opened doors for countless underrepresented Americans in this country, and a wonderful friend and mentor who after 23 years with MALDEF, has embarked on another ambitious journey by leading one of this country's premiere charitable institutions, the California Community Foundation. Born on May 30, 1948, Antonia was raised in Torreon, Coahuila, Mexico. At the age of eight, her parents, Manuel and Nicolasa Hernandez, emigrated, family and all, to the United States and settled in the Boyle Heights neighborhood of East Los Angeles. Growing up in the housing projects of East Los Angeles, Antonia learned her strong work ethic and core values from her parents. As the eldest of seven children (Maria, Guadalupe, Lisa, Mary Ann, Peter, and Manuel), Antonia demonstrated an incredible entrepreneurial spirit at an early age, going door-to-door in her housing project selling tamales to help support the family. Antonia is a proud alumna of Garfield High School and East Los Angeles College. The first in her family to attend college, Antonia set her sights higher and went on to receive a Bachelor of Arts in history in 1970 and a Juris Doctorate in 1974 from the University of California, Los Angeles. On October 8, 1977, Antonia married Michael Stern, and together they have become an indivisible team, blessed with a true partnership, friendship and love. Family has always been the top priority for these proud parents of three: Benjamin, Marisa, and Michael. Antonia's illustrious career has taken her from the Los Angeles Center for Law and Justice to the Legal Aid Foundation, the United States Senate Judiciary Committee and of course MALDEF, where she quickly became an indispensable asset and emblematic of MALDEF's tenacity to prevail. Her collaborative style and incredible network of relationships have propelled MALDEF to the top of our nation's leading civil rights and public policy organizations. She served a remarkable and unprecedented 18 years as President and General Counsel of this preeminent organization. Under her guidance, MALDEF has gained long- term financial stability going from an organization that began in 1968 with a $2.2 million grant from the Ford Foundation to one that operates a $6.5 million annual budget and has offices in Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., Chicago, Houston, Atlanta, Sacramento and San Antonio. What mark has this human being left on America? She heroically led the fight defeating the anti-immigrant Proposition 187 in the California courts in the 1990's. She courageously worked on the 1995 Edgewood case which held that the Texas legislature had the authority to require wealthier districts to share that wealth with less fortunate districts. Today, while still a work in progress, we are moving towards an educational system that provides a fair opportunity to all Texan children. And Latino families are forever indebted to Antonia for her instrumental role in pursuing accurate census counts in 1990 and 2000. Under her leadership, MALDEF took the lead in conducting nationwide census outreach campaigns and kept a vigilant watch over the complicated redistricting process so that Latinos would, for the first time, have a strong political voice throughout the country. Antonia's years of demonstrated leadership led the California Community Foundation to name her as its new Chief Executive Officer and President. With this new position comes the opportunity to forge new paths and serve Californians in new ways. Antonia's legal career has always embodied her passion for helping the Latino and other disenfranchised communities to ``make sure that everyone has a place at the table.'' One of her former colleagues best characterized Antonia as someone who can interact respectfully with the most modest, humble immigrants and then translate their needs into action. As Antonia closes one chapter of her distinguished career and begins another, I would like to say ``thank you'' on behalf of the countless people whose lives she has changed by opening doors, leading by example and always holding firm to her convictions. Her innumerable contributions will be felt and appreciated for generations to come. Mr. Speaker, as family, friends, and colleagues gather to pay tribute to Antonia, it is with great admiration and pride that I ask my colleagues to join me today in saluting this truly remarkable example of the American dream. Fortunately for all of us Antonia has much vigor and fight reserved for her new calling at the helm of the California Community Foundation. Antonia, you have earned the luck that will be with you.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, it is with the utmost pleasure and privilege that I rise today to recognize, pay tribute to, and celebrate the retirement of Sergeant Lavern Johnson-Reynolds. Joining the United States Capitol Police on February 12th, 1979, Sergeant Reynolds served our country honorably for over 25 years. During these 25 years of dedicated service, her duties entailed a variety of assignments, which included the United States Capitol Police's Senate Division, Communications Division, Capitol Division and Criminal Investigations Division. Additionally, Sergeant Lavern Johnson-Reynolds served as an instructor in the Training Academy for 10 years. She earned her promotion to Sergeant in December of 1995. On a personal note, Laverne married Dr. Gary Reynolds and gave birth to their daughter Destiny Johnson-Reynolds during her tenure on the force. Mr. Speaker, as family, friends and colleagues gather to celebrate Sergeant Lavern Johnson-Reynolds' many accomplishments, it is with great admiration and pride that I ask my colleagues to join me today in saluting this exceptional officer whose dedicated service will be sorely missed. She served our country proudly with the United States Capitol Police for over 25 years, training future officers, and protecting this institution, Members of Congress, and staff. Mr. Speaker, I ask that the House of Representatives join me in conveying our appreciation for Sergeant Lavern Johnson-Reynolds' dedicated service, and reciprocate the honor she has illustrated through her dedication, loyalty, and service to our country.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, on Monday, March 29, 2004, I was unable to cast my floor vote on rollcall Nos. 94 and 95. The votes I missed include rollcall vote 94 on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree to the Senate Amendments to H.R. 2584, to Provide for the Conveyance to the Utrok Atoll Local Government of a Decommissioned National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Ship; and rollcall vote 95 on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 3723, the Vaughn Gross Post Office Designation. Had I been present for the votes, I would have voted ``aye'' on rollcall votes 94 and 95.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, today I am proud to introduce companion legislation to S. 685, a bill sponsored by Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) and Senator Daniel Akaka (D-HI) 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 2004 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 53 percent of EITC recipients who went to a paid tax preparer ended up with a RAL. According to a report prepared by the Consumer Federation of America and the National Consumer Law Center and entitled ``All Drain, No Gain,'' 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. Mr. Speaker, let me take a moment to break down these estimates from the cumulative to the individual using an analysis found in ``All Drain, No Gain.'' 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 APR on this RAL would be 182 percent. 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 VITA sites; (2) lack of bank accounts for 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. This bill takes a two-pronged approach aimed at curtailing the drain on the EITC program by first regulating income tax preparers and refund anticipation loan providers and, secondly, creating IRS-administered grant programs for free tax preparation for low-income taxpayers 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, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. First and foremost, let us all begin by thanking and saluting each and every American soldier, more than 500 of whom have died, thousands who have been injured, and several hundred thousand who are on active duty today, for their service and continued service doing what they are commanded to do every day. But under the shield of commending our troops, the sponsors of this measure are trying to run through what I believe is a resolution that does really nothing to, one, equip our soldiers with the body armor they still need and the extra protection for the armored vehicles that they use in Iraq, does nothing to restore veterans benefits that President Bush's budget proposes to cut for health care for our veterans, does nothing to bring in meaningful assistance from our so-called coalition partners or the international community to help patrol the streets of Iraq and rebuild the nation and the billions of dollars it will cost. And this resolution does nothing to lay out the exit strategy this Nation will need to tell our troops when they will be able to come home and when we will be able to stop spending the billions of dollars every day abroad. Mr. Speaker, this is a resolution which can commend our troops, and should; but it does nothing to move the ball forward.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, March 16, 2004, I was unable to cast my floor vote on rollcall numbers 58, 59, and 60. The votes I missed include rollcall vote 58 on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree to H. Res. 551, Thanking C-SPAN for its service to the House of Representatives; rollcall vote 59 on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 3733, the Myron V. George Post Office Designation; and rollcall vote 60 on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree to H. Res. 433, Honoring the life and legacy of Luis A. Ferre. Had I been present for the votes, I would have voted ``aye'' on rollcall votes 58, 59, and 60.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, it is with utmost pleasure and privilege that Mr. Honda and I rise today to recognize and pay tribute to Reverend Pandurang Shastri Athavale and the Devotional Associates of Yogeshwar (DAY) in California. On Saturday, March 13, 2004, the Devotional Associates of Yogeshwar paid homage to a spiritual leader, and friend to all, Reverend Pandurang Shastri Athavale, better known as Dadaji. Reverend Dadaji passed away on October 25, 2003, leaving behind a message that has changed the lives of millions of people around the globe. Reverend Dadaji spent 50 years giving new meaning to Bhakti, or devotion, by emphasizing the concept of an ``Indwelling God.'' Reverend Dadaji believed that having an awareness of the nearness of God and a reverence for that power, created reverence for self, others, nature, and a reverence for all of creation. He believed that devotion, as an expression of gratitude to God, could become a powerful social force that could transform all aspects of human life at all levels of society and ultimately solve all the problems of mankind. The Swadhyaya Process, the way of living taught by Reverend Dadaji, is inclusive of all religions, and does not define a Deity, but allows the choice of a Deity to be defined by the worshipers. According to the Swadhyaya Process, this way of living creates a sense of family and belonging within the community, where no one person is more or less important than the other, and all members work in efficiency and coordination. In 1997, Reverend Dadaji was the recipient of the Templeton Prize for Progress in Religion for his innovative and influential religious teachings. The Templeton Prize for Progress in Religion is one of the largest financial annual awards in the world, and is awarded only to living individuals who, through outstanding originality, have advanced the world's understanding of God or spirituality. The work of Reverend Dadaji in rural India exemplifies these qualities. The teachings of Swadhyaya have transformed 100,000 villages of rural India prompting the United Nations to name this movement as one of the most significant developments in the world. Through principles taught by Reverend Dadaji, the villagers dedicate a few days of labor per year as demonstrations of their devotion to God. Through joint efforts by the villagers, people from all religions, castes, and economic strata build temples, community farms, orchards, and centers. The products of their efforts are then given to the needy and to the community as a whole, thereby creating a society where no one is marginalized or forgotten. Worldwide the Swadhyaya Process has millions of followers, including approximately 15,000 in the United States alone. Mr. Speaker, in light of the Devotional Associates of Yogeshwar's recent gathering to pay tribute to Reverend Pandurang Shastri Athavale and his many accomplishments, it is with great admiration and pride that we ask our colleagues to join us today in saluting this exceptional leader.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask my colleagues to reflect on our past as we pave the way to a brighter future. The Japanese-American community recognizes a National Day of Remembrance each year to educate the public about the lessons learned from the internment camp experience during World War II to ensure that it never happens again. The Day of Remembrance commemorates February 19, 1942, the day on which President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066, which eliminated the civil liberties of 120,000 people of Japanese descent and sent our country down a shameful path of race- based discrimination, veiled by the fog of war. I ask for my colleagues' support for House Resolution 56 (H. Res. 56); and I commend my friend from California, Congressman Mike Honda, for offering it and for his leadership in championing awareness of the Japanese-American internment. H. Res. 56 recognizes the historical significance of February 19 and expresses congressional support for the Japanese- American, German-American, and Italian-American communities in their goals to raise public awareness of Day of Remembrance events. 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 Theatre. 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, 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 history shows that the Japanese-American soldiers of the 442nd 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 for whom it was denied. I am proud that our Nation did the right thing. But 16 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. I introduced bipartisan legislation, the Wartime Parity and Justice Act of 2003 (H.R. 779) 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 I introduced H.R. 779, to finally turn the last page in this chapter of our Nation's history, so that we not only remember that our country took away civil rights from innocent people from other countries, but that we now have recognized the wrong of our actions and have taken steps to provide equitable redress. 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 2003 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. Recently, in Los Angeles I was fortunate to join with about 300 individuals to commemorate the Day of Remembrance in Los Angeles at the historic Japanese American National Museum. Included in the Los Angeles Day of Remembrance program was the screening of a film, ``Stand Up for Justice,'' which tells the story of Ralph Lazo, a Mexican-Irish American student at Belmont High School in downtown Los Angeles. Even in 1941, the school had an ethnically diverse population, and the film depicts Ralph's anger at the pain suffered by his Japanese American friend, Jimmy Matsuoka. Jimmy and his family are forced to sell their belongings and ``evacuate'' to a remote concentration camp. At the age of 16 Ralph voluntarily accompanied his Japanese American friends to Manzanar Internment Camp, where he spent 2\1/2\ years. Ralph remained a dear friend to the Japanese community and his loss was sorely felt in 1992 when friends mourned the death of their loyal friend. He had stood by Japanese Americans during the difficult times at Manzanar and throughout the campaign for redress, and he demonstrated that you don't have to be Japanese American to stand up for what is right. At the forefront of this fight for justice, there are Members of Congress, the community and individuals like Ralph Lazo, giving a voice to those who were wronged in the past. Let us all remember, that the fight for justice for Japanese internees is one that is being fought by the entire community regardless of their ethnicity. We must all ``Stand Up for Justice.'' 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, we must pass H. Res. 56, in support of Japanese-American, German-American, and Italian American communities in their recognizing of this historical day. I also look forward to working with my colleagues to pass the Wartime Parity and Justice Act of 2003.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, let me begin by thanking the gentleman from Wisconsin (Chairman Sensenbrenner), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler) and certainly the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda) for their work in bringing this resolution to the floor. H. Res. 56 deserves the support not just of the Members of this House, but every single American who believes in democracy and freedom. We must remember, because the final chapter on those events back during World War II has not yet closed. That chapter has yet to be fully written, and before we are able to say we can turn the last page and put that book up on the shelf we have to make sure that we remember that there still are Japanese Americans as a result of technicalities who have not received any redress from the 1988 Civil Liberties Act. We still have many communities, the German American community, the Italian American community, that have not yet had a chance to have their contributions to this country fully appreciated. So I think we have to all come together to agree that it was time for this resolution to come before us and to pass. I also believe that at some point soon this Congress will be benevolent and the American people will understand that there are Japanese Latin Americans who deserve to be fully recognized and be conveyed some kind of apology, along with redress, to make sure all those who suffered have an opportunity to have redress fully fulfilled. I thank the gentleman for yielding me time, and I appreciate the resolution that has come before us this evening.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I am here tonight to discuss the end of a long strike; in fact, the longest major strike in the history of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, and the largest and longest strike in the history of the supermarket industry, a strike that saw the United Food and Commercial Workers hold the line in southern California. The dispute, which involved some 60,000 UFCW members employed at 852 Safeway-owned Vons and Pavillions stores, Kroger-owned Ralphs and Albertsons stores, began back in October 11, 2003. Officials for the grocery store chain said their workers had a Cadillac health plan that the stores could not maintain in a market with nonunion competitors such as Wal-Mart. I am not sure I would call the plan in question a Cadillac plan, but the proposal to replace it was clearly a Yugo. Supermarket workers in southern California average about $12 to $14 an hour, and most work less than 40 hours a week, not by choice. Under the employer's proposal, after 3 years an average worker would earn about $12.30 an hour, that is $369 a week before taxes are taken out, or about $19,000 a year. That is a salary that can keep a single mom and her children just above the poverty line; but cut her health care benefits or shift several thousand dollars worth of health care costs from the company on to her and a self-supporting working family can be reduced to near poverty. In fact, many workers will drop coverage because it will be too expensive and move over to Medi-Cal, which is California's Medicaid program for the elderly, poor, and disabled, as well as to other State and Federal programs for low-income workers. In my mind, this is safety net exploitation by employers. This marks a shift from the employer's books to the ledgers of the American taxpayer. Thankfully, for 5 months the picket line remained strong, members remained united, and customers honored the workers' picket lines. This is a testament to the rank-and-file UFCW workers and to the leadership of UFCW local leaders. To people like Rick Icaza, President, and Rod Diamond, Secretary-Treasurer of UFCW Local 770; to Connie Leyva, President of UFCW Local 1428; Michael Straeter, President of UFCW Local 1442; to George Hartwell, President of Local 1036, Greg Conger, President of Local 324; Bill Lathrop, President of Local 1167; and Mickey Kasparian, President of Local 135 of the UFCW, we say thank you to you, and we hope that you will express our sincerest congratulations and thanks to all of your men and women in your locals who fought and stood tall throughout this entire 5-month long process. Every day support for the fight for affordable health care grew stronger. Community and religious leaders joined the cause. The southern California supermarket strike became a national cause as well. There were rallies, picket lines, and hand billing across America. The men and women on the picket lines are genuine heroes. Their sacrifice for affordable family health care has motivated and activated workers across the Nation. To the Webb family in Los Angeles I send a special message of esteem and pride. Andre and Dee, you, like many of your brothers and sisters, persevered. Christmas was tough this past December, but you weathered these difficult times in a way that makes all of us who are parents so very, very proud. And Andre, your daughter A.J. wrote you a letter for Valentine's Day, which many of us had a chance to read during the father-daughter dance at school, which you will never forget. She understood your fight and offered the best reason to stand firm. At 8 years of age, A.J. is already giving us a glimpse of the next generation of leaders for America. The labor struggle in southern California is one manifestation of a very large national debate on health care. Lack of access to quality health care and escalating health care costs are issues of concern to all Americans, particularly to communities that are minority and very poor, that suffer the highest rates of uninsured Americans, and are also among those that are least well covered because of disproportionate and disparate health care received by these communities. The lack of insurance is devastating to millions of families across America. We must make every effort to find ways to extend coverage and to work to end the erosion of employment-based health care coverage due to rising out-of-pocket health care costs that make insurance unaffordable for many workers. If the supermarket giants, profitable, growing corporations, can launch an attack on health care benefits, then every employer is sure to follow. They have sounded the alarm that the American health care system is under siege. I say to all Americans who are working: Take note of what the United Food and Commercial Workers did over the last 5 months. They stood tall. Let us defend health care coverage for all Americans and we will fight to make sure our next generation also has it.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, it is with the utmost pleasure and privilege that I rise today to recognize and pay tribute to a friend and an educator, Mr. Raul Vargas. For more than 32 years Raul has guided young men and women along the path of academic excellence and future leadership success. Through his years of effort, more than 5,600 college undergraduate and graduate students from across the country have received scholarships totaling $10.3 million during their time at the University of Southern California (USC) in Los Angeles. How fitting that on the evening of February 27, 2004, the USC Mexican American Alumni Association (MAAA), of which he is a founding member, will honor Raul Vargas for his lifetime commitment to education and inspirational leadership at USC. The son of Felipe Vargas and Helena Sotelo, Raul Vargas was born on May 21, 1939, in Lordsburg, New Mexico. Raul lost his father at the tender age of four and when his mother married Alfredo Mejia, the family moved to Miami, Arizona. Growing up in this small mining town, Raul and his siblings Felipa, Alfredo, Alfonso, Elvia, and Elisa learned a strong work ethic and core values from their parents. Raul is a proud alumnus of Miami High School and Arizona State University, where he earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Business Administration in 1961. That same year, Raul enlisted in the United States Army where he served until 1964. Raul's service to his country evolved into a lifetime of service in the classroom. After completing his teaching credential at Arizona State University in 1966, Raul went on to teach Spanish in the Ontario School District in California. After five years of teaching, he resumed his studies at California State University, Los Angeles as a student in the Master's in Administration program. From there he continued his doctoral work in public policy at the University of Southern California. In January 1972, Raul joined the USC family as Executive Director of the Office for Mexican American Programs at the University of Southern California. Raul has always been a hard worker and driven to succeed. Fortunately, he had the good sense to pause for a moment and recognize that the best thing in his life stood before him: Marcia Wyse. Raul and Marcia married in December of 1966. Together they have become an indivisible and indispensable team, blessed with a true partnership, friendship and love. Raul and Marcia are now the proud parents of two children, Tracie and Cesar, and one grandchild, Alexandra. And Marcia, in her own right, is one of our country's preeminent and forceful voices advocating for America's English-language learners and the value of bilingual education. Raul's career has always combined his passion for students with his commitment to innovation as an administrator. So it was that in 1974, Raul and eight USC alumni founded the USC Mexican American Alumni Association with a bold, but untested vision to build a mighty anchor and support for Latino college enrollment at the University. Their success has surpassed all expectations. Raul and the MAAA recently completed the association's Endowment Fund Campaign which increased its endowment to $2.1 million to assist future generations of Latino college students. Marcia will tell you that Raul takes great pride and honor in making a prestigious university like USC more accessible to Latino students. Mr. Speaker, as family, friends and colleagues gather to celebrate Raul's many accomplishments, it is with great admiration and pride that I ask my colleagues to join me today in saluting this exceptional man and brother to many. America, the University of Southern California, and America's future leaders have certainly gotten the better end of the bargain when the doors of education and public service opened to Raul Vargas. Fight on, my friend!

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, on Monday, November 17, 2003, I was unable to cast my floor vote on rollcall numbers 620, 621, 622, and 623. The votes I missed include rollcall vote 620 on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass S.J. Res. 22, Recognizing the Agricultural Research Service; rollcall vote 621 on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass S.J. Res. 18, Commending the Inspectors General; roll call vote 622 on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree to H. Con. Res. 299, Honoring Sargent Shriver; and rollcall vote 623, on the Hour of Meeting. Had I been present for the votes, I would have voted ``aye'' on roll call votes 620, 621, 622, and 623.

Mr. BECERRA

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, there is a lot of what the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Ryan) just said that I agree with, and I just say that he is one of those Members that I think does a very good job of crystallizing many of the issues. But I have to say we part company in a couple of areas. First, there was a bill that was proposed in this House by the Republican majority to address the $3.5 billion exclusion of those 6\1/ 2\ million families that earn between $10,500 and $26,625. That is very true. But to get that $3.5 billion fix, what my friend from Wisconsin forgot to mention is we had to swallow an additional $79 billion in tax cuts that went unpaid for, that went principally to wealthy individuals. That I think is what makes it tough.

Mr. BECERRA. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

Mr. BECERRA. Reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman for that point of clarification; but again, there was more to the bill than just that. It was not just an expansion of the types of tax cuts that would sound very appealing to America. There were tax cuts, again, unpaid for that went to folks that would benefit to the exclusion of the vast majority of Americans because they went principally to wealthy folks or to large corporations or to businesses that were not necessarily American-owned businesses. As a result, it was very difficult for many Members, including Republicans, to swallow a tax cut of $82 billion unpaid for to try to correct the problem of $3.5 billion. At the time we were being told that the budget deficit might reach more than $400 billion. That is why the Senate did not take up the House version that would cost $82 billion and instead did the right thing, did what the President asked, passed a bill that provided tax relief to the folks, the 6\1/2\ million families that were excluded in the May tax bill, $350 billion tax bill that passed. So do not put apples with oranges. It does not take $82 billion to correct the injustice, the injustice to the 6\1/2\ million families that were excluded from the expanded child tax credit. It takes only $3.5 billion, which is quite a bit of money when you are running deficits. It is true, there is better news. The budget deficit is $80 billion less than we expected a few months back. So today we are being told the budget deficit for fiscal year 2002 was only $370 billion, the largest deficit this country has ever had. And that is good because we were lucky. It was supposed to be $450 billion. Next year we are told it is going to be about 500 billion. Whoopee, we should be really happy, I guess, that it is not $450 billion. So on top of the $350 billion that we have confirmed, that we have in budget deficit for the fiscal year, we should add another $82 billion to correct a $3.5 billion problem for folks that make $10,500 to $26,500, giving most of the benefits of the $82 billion in tax cuts to not those 6\1/2\ million families, because it only costs $3.5 billion to fix it for these 6\1/2\ million families. That is not the kind of math that my 8-year-old is learning, and I hope she never learns that kind of math. Now, the sunsetting of the $1,000 tax credit that my friend from Wisconsin mentioned, that is true. Our bill did sunset it because it was your bill that sunset it first. In fact, it was the Republican bill that became law that sunsets the child tax credit at $1,000 after 2 years. That was not our doing. That was what the Republican majority chose to do. It was the decision of the majority to make it sunset, to close out, to be yanked away as the gentleman said after 2 years. If we could find a way to pay for it, we are willing to extend it, but we are not going to continue to give someone today a child tax credit of $1,000 who makes over $150,000 and then put the burden of the deficit in the budget over the years and years to come on the shoulders of the people who did not get anything who are earning $20,000. That is unfair. It is, again, giving to Peter the rich at the expense of Paul of the modest income. That is not fair. Military family tax relief, just about every one of us today, just as the gentleman mentioned, voted for that tax relief bill for our military families, but why did it not include this provision that we are debating right now on the child tax credit? It did a lot of good things. That is why a lot of us voted for it, and we have been waiting for months for that to get through because the military families have been waiting for some of those benefits that are in that bill that passed, but why did it exclude this provision which could have put money in the pockets of the spouses who are today waiting for their spouses to come back from combat in Iraq or Afghanistan? Probably no more than $600, $500 for families making $20,000 or less. Why could we not have put that in the bill? That again was excluded not by our choice. I agree, small businessmen and -women do not typically go out on a yacht and sip champagne, and I would be willing to join with my colleague right now and say that all of those small businessmen and - women who do not have yachts and sip champagne on those yachts deserve to get some tax relief, absolutely, but that is not who we are talking about, because the tax relief that was given in the $350 billion tax bill of May of this year gives some of those millionaires enough to put a good down payment on a yacht. When a person gets $93,500 in tax cuts that is enough to put probably, I do not know, I am not sure how much a yacht costs, but it is probably enough for a sizeable down payment on a yacht. Job numbers. Great to see that the economy may be getting better, may be getting better, but I hope this is not one of those economic recoveries without jobs. A jobless recovery will not do anyone any good. We have lost more than 3 million jobs in the last 3 years, and we have seen too many American workers lose all of their money through Enron-type scandals with their pension funds, and it is time for us to do something differently. Mr. Speaker, with more than 146,000 jobs in the last quarter gone in our payrolls, it is hard for anyone to believe that America is today now turning the corner, and when we look at our States, whether it is my State of California, which has 880,000 families who were excluded from the child tax credit relief by this legislation, by the acts of the House majority leadership, or whether it was Wisconsin, which has 74,000 families that were excluded from relief, among those 143,000 Wisconsin children, about 11 percent of the families with children under 17 in Wisconsin excluded from child tax credit relief as a result of the inaction in the House to match the Senate. We are seeing families continue to suffer. When we talk about 3 million people who have already lost their job in the last 3 years, and here we have 6\1/2\ million families that are willing to work rather than give it up, and say I am going to go on welfare, I can probably make just as much on welfare than the $10,500 I make on a yearly basis at this job, instead of trying to give them a reward, an incentive to continue that, we are saying no to them. Yes, to the guys that make over $150,000 to get a child tax credit expansion. Yes, to millionaires who get more than $93,500 in tax relief out of the $350 billion tax cut bill that went mostly to the wealthy, but no, to these 6\1/2\ million families. It just does not make sense. Mr. Speaker, I could give my colleagues numbers for every one of the 50 States in America that has several hundreds of thousands of families who will not benefit, who did not benefit from the passage of the tax bill that excluded relief in the expansion of the child tax credit, for these working, tax paying and, in many cases, military families, but I would be repeating what has been said at least 24 other times. I believe it is time, Mr. Speaker, that we move and match the Senate, and by the same numbers that the Senate did it, by a 98 percent margin vote in favor of giving a child tax credit to those 6\1/2\ million families, so those 12 million children know they are as wanted in America as the other children in America who did qualify for the child tax credit expansion, and we can do it without breaking the budget and do it in a way that relieves this economy of its doldrums and gets us back to work. With that, Mr. Speaker, I would hope that we could reach across the aisle, work together, pass a bill that would cost only $3.5 billion, not $80 billion, match the Senate, get it passed, let the President sign what he said he wanted to sign, and then give those families what they deserve for a long time. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let me give my colleagues a few numbers and see if we can find the connection in these numbers: 25, 161, 6.5 million, zero, and 93,500. If it does not seem readily apparent, let me connect the dots for my colleagues. Twenty-five represents the number of times that this motion that we are about to debate has come before this House of Representatives in an effort to try to do what the Senate did months ago, which is to try to do what the President said he supported, which was to try to give a number of working, tax-paying families, many of them military families, the same type of child tax benefit that we gave to many other American families, those families having already received checks in the mail for that child tax credit. Twenty-five times. This is the twenty-fifth time we are trying to get the House to do what the Senate did on a vote of 98 to 2. The number 161, that is how many days we have left out all of these American families with children from being able to benefit from the child tax credit that other American families, neighbors, in fact, of many of them, many of them right now, fathers and mothers in our military in Afghanistan and Iraq, 161 days they have gone without the benefit through the law that was passed 161 days ago, that many of their fellow Americans received in the mail. Mr. Speaker, 6,500,000? That is the number of families in America that have been excluded. 6\1/2\ million. Among those 6\1/2\ million families you have 12 million children. So we are not talking about trying to help one or two of America's families because they were left out. When Congress passed and the President signed a tax cut bill that cost $350 billion, that excluded the 6\1/2\ million families and their 12 million children. We are talking about quite a few American families throughout this country. Among those families, more than 262,000 of the people that I am talking about are children of our military personnel who were left out. And I should mention of our 200,000 or so men and women in uniform who are in Afghanistan and Iraq and throughout this world in combat zones, the result of not having extended the child tax credit expansion to them means that many of these men and women in uniform with kids are actually going to see a tax increase as a result of the action taken by this House in not moving forward to match the Senate on a 98 to 2 vote to provide the expanded child tax credit to these 6\1/2\ million families. The number zero? I have already mentioned it. That is how much money the 6\1/2\ million families are getting at the same time that their neighbors and friends were receiving an average of about $600, $615 in a child tax credit. Zero. The final number I mentioned, $93,500, that is the amount that this year many of America's millionaires will receive in reduced taxes as a result of the tax cut bill that passed in late May, 161 days ago, in tax breaks. Zero for 6\1/2\ million working families. And, by the way, these working families are not rich working families. We are talking about families that have incomes somewhere between $10,500, let me say that again, $10,500 annual salary to about $26,625 annual salary. We are not talking about wealthy families, but we are talking about working and tax paying and military families that are among those who earn between $10,500 and $26,625. 6\1/2\ million families. 12 million children within those 6\1/2\ million families. The tax bill did give to millionaires in America an average tax cut this year of $93,500. In this child tax credit expansion provision, it gave zero to those 6\1/2\ million families. What many of us have been trying to say in the 24 other times, including this, the 25th time we put this motion before the House is let us do what the President said we should, let us do what the Senate already did, in voting 98 to 2, and let us do what most American families thought we had done, until they realized that they did not get a check in the mail as well, including our military families. Mr. Speaker, let us be just. They work, they pay taxes, and certainly for the several hundred thousand of our men and women in uniform who have kids, it is the right thing to do. Now, it would not be so difficult to talk about this if it were not for the fact that within that tax cut bill and within additional legislation that has come before this House there have been measures to actually expand the scope of the child tax credit to more families. In fact, in this House my friends in the majority were willing to expand the number of families who could qualify for the tax credit by increasing the income limits, so that families with well over $150,000 could qualify for the child tax credit. Yet, in the same legislation, we cannot see how we can just do what we need to do for those families that are making somewhere between $10,500 and $26,500. It goes on and on and on in terms of the irony that we see here. I look back at some of the Tax Code and I think to myself are we doing something that is unfair, something that these folks do not deserve? Some will say, well, they do not pay that much in income taxes. They are getting off and we should not give them money. Well, they pay taxes. They do not pay that much income taxes probably due to the fact that they do not earn very much income, but they pay payroll taxes, they pay sales taxes, they pay property taxes, they pay excise taxes. You name it, they pay it. And, fortunately, we have a progressive tax structure that says in terms of income taxes if you are making $10,500 in a year, in a year, not in a month, because some of my colleagues may have misunderstood me, in a year, then, by God, I hope we are doing something to make sure that the $10,500 does not go to just pay taxes. But to deny them, then, the expansion of the child tax credit simply because they do not pay enough of a certain type of tax I think is un- American. But that is where we are. Then I thought to myself, well, do we do some things that give others some kind of tax break? Then I realized, wait a minute, my father worked for about 40 years in road construction, he worked canning tomatoes at Campbells Soups, he worked cleaning the hulls of ships, and every day he worked, he ate lunch when he had time. As far as I know, he ate lunch with his colleagues, his coworkers. Well, today if there is someone out in America in the business world who decides to go have lunch, and then follow that up with a nice dinner, and take out a business associate, and really try to cater to that business associate to try to, perhaps, gain some new business, and chauffeurs that business associate around in a limousine, and has a martini, then takes the associate to a nightclub to enjoy the evening and says, you know, we had a really rough night, maybe we should just stay at this hotel, all of that can be deducted to the tune of 50 percent. But somehow we could not find it in our powers within a $350 billion tax cut bill to give 6\1/2\ million Americans who work and earn about $10,500 to $26,500 a tax credit for their kids. The cost of doing that? $3\1/2\ billion. $350 billion tax cuts that went mostly to wealthy folks. $3\1/2\ billion, 1/100th of the cost of that tax bill would have corrected this problem for those 6\1/2\ million families. Could not do it. We still can. We have not finished the section. That is why we are here today. I am hoping the 25th time is the charm and we will get to it. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.