Judy Chu

Ms. CHU

Ms. CHU. Mr. Chair, I offer an amendment.

Ms. CHU. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank).

Ms. CHU

Ms. CHU. In less than 2 weeks, on August 2, we must raise the debt limit or the American Government will go into financial default. If we don't, it will be a disaster for the economy, and real American families will pay the price. That's why for almost 95 years we have kept our promises and paid our bills. Congress has voted to avoid economic default nearly 100 times since 1917 because it was the right thing to do. The debt limit was raised 17 times under Ronald Reagan, four times under Bill Clinton and seven times under George W. Bush; but now Republicans are shying away from their duty, spreading misinformation about the serious threat we are facing, saying there will be no impact on the average American and that it will not hurt our economy. But that's not true. Let me tell you why. If we default on our bills, the interest on all our loans would skyrocket just as your interest rate would go up if you missed a credit card payment. This means disaster for all American families. The median 30-year home loan would increase by almost $20,000, or 10 percent. This would hurt an already struggling housing market, pushing home sale prices down and potentially leaving more borrowers underwater. If we default on our bills, the stock market could plunge, and Americans in their fifties would lose almost $9,000 immediately from the typical 401(k). The S&P 500 could lose 6.3 percent in value in just 3 short months. These losses would affect millions of Americans, who would have fewer savings for their retirements, their supposed golden years. If we default on our bills, prices for gas, electronics, clothes, and other imported goods could dramatically increase. A U.S. default would create economic chaos, forcing the value of our dollar to decrease, making many products we use every day more expensive at a time when our household dollars are already stretched thin. We cannot let this happen, but Republican leaders in Washington are playing political games with our economic security. With 2 weeks left and the clock ticking, the time for playing childish political games should be over. Republicans should come back to the table and work with Democrats on a compromise that will avert economic catastrophe, and they should work on a compromise that doesn't hurt the most vulnerable amongst us. Seniors earn an average of only $19,000 a year. Contrast that to millionaires, who, because of the Bush-era votes, are getting almost $140,000 in tax breaks from the government every year. There is no reason that our seniors and the neediest amongst us should struggle to pay their hospital and electric bills just so we can subsidize a millionaire's yacht. Yet Republicans want to gut the programs that benefit seniors most-- Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare--in exchange for their votes on the debt limit. They actually want to hold your senior years hostage just so they can make a political statement on the debt limit. We cannot balance the budget on the backs of seniors. For those who believe that the potential for default is not real, let me quote a famous President who said 25 years ago: ``Congress consistently brings the government on the edge of default before facing its responsibility. This brinkmanship threatens the holders of government bonds and those who rely on Social Security and veteran benefits. Interest rates would skyrocket; instability would incur in financial markets, and the Federal deficit would soar.'' That President was Ronald Reagan, making his plea to Congress. Today, the American people are calling again on this body to do what's right. I know that, if we can move past all the political posturing, we can reach a bipartisan agreement that protects Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare, that reduces the debt, and that saves our economy from the disaster of default. We must do it now.

Ms. CHU

Ms. CHU. Mr. Speaker, last week the Nation heard disheartening news: Unemployment is up to 9.2 percent. But the American people don't need reports to tell them what they already know, that job growth should be Congress' top priority. But the Republicans still aren't getting the message. It's been 27 weeks since they took control, and they have done nothing to create jobs. In fact, they haven't put a single jobs bill to a vote. Instead, they are threatening the loss of countless more American jobs by bringing the debt ceiling talks to the brink of economic catastrophe. They are holding America's economy and the American people hostage to their agenda of tax cuts for the rich and loopholes that help mega- corporations. We need House leaders looking out for the American people and creating jobs, not cutting them. We need strong House leaders who will protect the American people, not corporate interests.

Ms. CHU

Ms. CHU. Thank you, Congressman Tonko. Thank you for putting this hour together for us to talk about what is at stake with regard to Medicare. The economic recession is hurting our seniors. The programs they rely on to get by, like Nursicare and Meals on Wheels, are being slashed at the local, State and Federal level. Though prices have risen, they haven't seen a cost-of-living increase in their Social Security checks. Yet the Republicans have been in control of the House for over 6 months and have done nothing to help our struggling seniors. Instead, they have been waging a war on programs that keep them afloat. First, they pushed through a budget for next year that ends Medicare. It would deny seniors and those of us who are getting older what was a 50-year health care guarantee, one that we have been paying throughout our lives. Today, under Medicare you are guaranteed coverage the day you turn 65 and for the rest of your life. You can get free preventive care. You can get a 50 percent discount on brand-name prescriptions if you are in the doughnut hole. But now the Republicans are trying to take all that away. The GOP wants to replace Medicare with a voucher system where seniors, once they turn 67, go out into the private market to buy their own health insurance. That puts seniors at the mercy of insurance companies instead of in control of their own care. We've seen that private insurers will line their pockets rather than provide quality and secure health care. Insurance companies could limit benefits, raise copays, and change which doctors are in their network, none of which occur under Medicare today. The proposal, rather than tackling skyrocketing health care costs, simply shifts these costs onto the backs of seniors in Medicare. And because the amount of the Medicare voucher won't be tied to rising health care costs, seniors will be forced to shoulder the burden as health care costs increase. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, in just 10 short years, out-of-pocket health care expenses for a typical 65-year-old will double under the Republican budget. And in 2030, a new retiree will be paying over $20,000 out of pocket for medical expenses. Rather than fixing our fiscal problems, it just makes seniors pay the bill. Proponents voted to end Medicare for our seniors because they say we can't afford it. But they're openly pushing for even more budget- busting millionaire tax giveaways. In the same budget that ends Medicare as we know it and makes seniors pay double the health care costs, Big Oil gets tax subsidies, millionaires get tax breaks, and corporations have to pay less taxes. And now we're hearing that Republicans want to make massive cuts in Medicare as payment for their votes on the debt ceiling. Some have proposed requiring Medicare beneficiaries to pay even more for their Medicare benefits, either through higher copays or through higher premiums. The solution is fixing the real problem of increasing health care costs for all Americans, not shifting cost burdens on our seniors. That's not going to work for the 40 million seniors enrolled in the program who have Medicare for their health and economic security. But that's not all. Next week, Republicans are going to push through a constitutional amendment to the floor that will force the deepest cuts in Medicare yet. This so-called ``balanced budget amendment'' is just pulling the rug from under the seniors in the name of cutting spending. This amendment is designed to make it easier to reduce the deficit by slashing Medicare benefits rather than by closing tax loopholes for private jets. The way the bill is written, we'd have to privatize Medicare completely and raise its eligibility age to 67. By forcing Congress to keep spending at unheard of levels, we would inevitably shift the real economic burdens onto the backs of our Nation's most vulnerable, the elderly. It would make it virtually impossible to repeal special tax breaks for the wealthy or Big Oil and gas producers. But it would allow Congress to destroy Medicare with a simple voice vote. Well, I think that our Federal debt and budget is more than just about dollars and cents. The way we spend our money is a statement of our values and priorities. Republicans want us to believe that cutting benefits to seniors is the only way we can solve our debt crisis, but I say there are other ways. The debt must be addressed, but it should be done in a way that's fair to all. Today the average senior lives on $19,000 a year, just $19,000. We should not balance the budget on the backs of our Nation's seniors. We must protect and strengthen Medicare, not gut it. These talks are about priorities. And my priority is keeping seniors in their own homes, communities, and off the streets.

Ms. CHU

Ms. CHU. I am opposed to the underlying bill because it does not do enough to withdraw our troops from Afghanistan. Earlier this month, the President made an important announcement. He plans to withdraw 10,000 troops from Afghanistan in the next 6 months and another 20,000 by next summer. This is a step in the right direction, and I commend the President for following through with the drawdown plan. But the American people are crying for a significant and sizable drawdown, and we are still too far from that. Even after these troops come home, which won't be for another year and a half, we will still be exactly where we were in 2009. Seventy thousand American soldiers will still be serving in Afghanistan, and I can't help but wonder why. The ongoing financial and human costs of this war are now indefensible. We spend $2 billion a week on the war effort in Afghanistan. And what's worse is that our own money is working against us. Last year, I was outraged to learn that taxpayers are spending $2.16 billion on private contractors in Afghanistan. These contractors use part of the money to pay off local warlords, which then ends up in the Taliban's hand. So, in effect, we are funding both sides of the same war. This corruption and waste of hard-earned American dollars is the direct result of unreliable counsel and a lack of perspective, and it's costing us a whopping $100 billion a year. That's five times more than we spend on Pell grants every year, financial aid to put American kids through college. That's double what we spend on Medicaid that keeps all Americans healthy regardless of income. And $100 billion would completely pay for the Homeland Security Department, Commerce Department, Department of Science and the entire judicial branch combined. When money is tight and Congress is trying to slash Medicare and Social Security to keep this Nation afloat, it is irresponsible to keep writing blank checks for this war. But, sadly, that's not the largest toll of this war. Since 9/11, we've lost over 1,600 American lives. Over 11,000 troops have been wounded, and an untold number of Afghan civilians have lost their lives after a decade of war. And it is not getting any better. In fact, last year was the most deadly year on record for U.S. troops in Afghanistan. Al Qaeda is no longer in Afghanistan but scattered around the world. It did not take 100,000 troops to find Osama bin Laden, and it does not take a military occupation of Afghanistan to protect us from terrorist threats. By failing to significantly draw down the number of troops in Afghanistan, we continue to focus efforts away from the terrorists and needlessly put American soldiers in the line of fire. But this story is about more than just numbers and figures; it is about real people who sacrifice everything to keep us safe. On Sunday, April 3, of this year, a 21-year-old young marine named Harry Lew died while serving the country in Afghanistan. He was the son of Sandy and Allen Lew, the brother of Carmen Lew, and he was my nephew. Harry died while serving on watch duty in Helmand Province. His unit's goal was to provide security to locals and to promote development in the region. But 3 short months before he was set to return home, he was gone. Ending this war will save American lives. Ending it will let us focus on fighting terrorism around the globe. Ending the war will save money at a time when we need it the most. It is time to end the war in Afghanistan, bring our troops home, and begin seriously addressing our real security needs. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. CHU. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Ms. CHU

Ms. CHU. I rise today to announce the introduction of legislation that will finally provide protection to immigrant workers from exploitation, the Protect Our Workers from Exploitation and Retaliation Act, the POWER Act. Too often, unscrupulous employers threaten or retaliate against workers who complain about illegal working conditions. Today, employers can use a worker's immigration status and threaten them so that they will fear reporting them to the authorities. The abuse of these vulnerable workers undermines working conditions and wages for all U.S. workers. The POWER Act protects these workers. Under current law, the U visa provides temporary status for immigrants who are victims of crimes, including domestic violence and rape. The POWER Act ensures that this visa protection is also provided to these workers who risk everything by reporting to authorities the employers who break the law by committing serious labor violations. Today, such workers are silent out of fear, but silence can mean the difference between life and death. Take the case of Mr. Asuncion Valdivia, a farmworker who came from Mexico seeking a better life. One day, during the hot summer months, he picked grapes for 10 hours straight in 105 degree temperatures. Then he fell over, unconscious and ill. Instead of calling an ambulance, Giumarra Vineyards told his son to drive Mr. Valdivia home. On his way home, the father started foaming at the mouth and died of a heat stroke. A son had to witness his father die, a preventible death, at the age of 53. After hearing about this tragedy, I had to act. For 15 years, the farmworker advocates had petitioned Cal OSHA for minimal health protections for the workers who perished and died working in heat, but they were always ignored. So I carried a bill in the California legislature that required that farmworkers and all outdoor workers have basic protections from the heat: water, shade, and rest periods. It passed and became the first law of its kind in the Nation. A decade after that law, I am in Congress. And while some farms obey the heat protections, others are flagrantly violating it. The POWER Act will stop these violations. It would have let someone like Asuncion go to the authorities without fear of retaliation. It would have let him continue to work while he cooperated with Cal OSHA to take Giumarra to court and would have ensured that Giumarra treated all their workers fairly from then on. And I hope that because of the POWER Act, a son will never have to watch a father die in this way again. The POWER Act will bring abused workers out of the shadows. It will give employees the courage to stand up to the world's biggest and strongest companies. The POWER Act will fundamentally change the very structure of workers' rights in this country. It supports every honest, hardworking employees across the country, protecting them. It's time that exploited workers were able to come out of the shadows, leave cruel conditions, and find jobs where they are treated with the dignity and respect that every employee in America deserves. It's time for the POWER Act.

Ms. CHU

Ms. CHU. I rise today in strong opposition to the Secure Communities program. I am for the stated goals of the Secured Communities program. Anyone who is undocumented in this country and who has been convicted of a serious violent offense should be removed from this country, period. But I can't support the program because of the significant evidence that Secure Communities is failing to achieve its goal. When you look at the numbers, nearly half of the undocumented individuals from my home county of Los Angeles who have been taken into custody through this program have not committed or been convicted of a serious violent offense, and that is a problem. Take the story of Isaura Garcia, a 20-year-old who suffered three turbulent years of abuse and beatings at the hands of her boyfriend. In February, she finally found the courage to call 911 for help. Earlier that day, her boy friend, Ricardo, had thrown Isaura and their 1-year- old daughter out of their apartment. When she came back to the house to get her things, Ricardo showed up and it began again. He started throwing things at her, and when she tried to protect herself and her child she accidentally scratched his neck. After the 911 call, the police showed up and put her boyfriend in cuffs, but after they saw the scratches, they took them off of him and put them on Isaura. Shocked at what was happening, she fainted. At the hospital, doctors found bruises covering her body from the weeks and years of abuse. Despite being identified by a doctor as a victim of domestic violence, she had been arrested as the abuser. After the arrest, Isaura landed in the L.A. County jail, which was participating in the Secure Communities program. Because of this program, she was fingerprinted and found to be here in an undocumented way. It was too late. Before she knew it, she was sent to an immigration detention center in Santa Ana. It is stories like Isaura's that are causing the DHS inspector general to investigate the Secure Communities program. Washington State, Pennsylvania, and Washington, D.C., refused to join Secure Communities. New York, Illinois, and Massachusetts are suspending their participation in this program, and California is discussing this as well. But that is only a first step. The concerns about Secure Communities must be properly and permanently addressed. This is first and foremost about public safety. The people on the front lines of this program, our police officers, have expressed serious concerns about its implementation. LAPD Chief Beck has noted that the program is causing a breach of trust between the LAPD and our immigrant communities, hindering our officers' duties to protect and serve all of our residents. And the numerous reports of domestic violence victims being detained through this program are simply unacceptable. If a program is causing a victim of violence to fear reaching out for help, then that program is causing more harm than good. Secure Communities has undermined our police departments' mission of protecting the public, it has weakened protections against racial profiling, and it will have a chilling effect on immigrants' willingness to report crimes or provide useful information to the police. We must take a long, hard look at the negative effects of Secure Communities. We must allow States to opt out of the program. We must protect the safety and welfare of all our residents and truly ensure that we will have safer, more secure communities.

Ms. CHU

Ms. CHU. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 420, the DeLauro amendment to increase funding for the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition by $1 million, had I been present I would have voted ``aye.'' This amendment would have improved food safety and protect the American people from E. coli bacterial outbreaks. (By unanimous consent, Mr. Long was allowed to speak out of order.) honoring missouri tornado victims

Ms. CHU

Ms. CHU. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to the underlying bill where the House GOP guts critical food assistance programs that help America's low-income and less fortunate families at a time when they need it the most. This is yet another chapter in the Republican attack on working families to give handouts to special interests. First they came after seniors who rely on Medicare, and now they're coming after our young children and their mothers. Millions of Americans are now struggling to get through the worst economy since the Great Depression, and America's food assistance programs are proving to be an essential safety net for the jobless and low-income families of America. At a time when the need is greater than it's been in generations, Congress should be reaffirming our commitment to helping these needy families, not pulling the rug out from under them. But alarmingly, that's just what the Republican Agriculture appropriations bill does. This bill slashes funding for the nutrition program for Women, Infants, and Children by $686 million. WIC is a program that provides low-income pregnant women, new mothers, infants, and children with nutritious foods and improved access to health care. This funding is critical to ensuring America's new mothers, babies, and young children are fed right and grow up to be healthy, happy kids. But these slash- and-burn cuts completely end food assistance for up to 350,000 low- income women and children nationwide. Republicans, take the target off these kids. Now let's distinguish between wasteful spending and investments that help the less fortunate get back on their feet. How can anyone say that WIC is wasteful when it serves nearly 10 million people each year for less than $100 per person? To some, these dollars may not sound like much, but they mean all the difference for mothers like Amanda. Amanda was blessed with three children after she was told she couldn't even have one. But working in the food industry simply wasn't enough to support a family and certainly not one with as many needs as Amanda's. She has one son with disabilities, another that was born prematurely, and a third that requires special formula. All these demands quickly stretched her finances and her time. She couldn't afford the basics for her baby, like cereal, peanut butter, milk, and juice, much less the special formula that kept her son healthy. She was struggling to get by. But with WIC's help, she was able to make ends meet and even found time to get her bachelor's and master's through online classes while raising her kids. Now she is a registered nurse working on her Ph.D. And it was taking that first step to join WIC that helped keep her children healthy and helped her make a better life for her family. We should be investing in Amanda and her children, the future of our country, not leaving them to fend for themselves. But instead of helping build a stronger American workforce for our future, the Republicans are providing more breaks so Big Oil can line their pockets. This same bill blocks efforts to rein in oil speculators that are manipulating the energy markets at the expense of American families at the pump. And, in fact, in April, Goldman Sachs found that this type of unregulated speculation adds over 20 percent to the price of oil, and that's why our gasoline prices are going sky high. So what was the Republican reaction to this? They slashed $30 million in funding from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission which would stop this illegal speculation in the oil markets. So, as they gut funding from struggling mothers and tiny babies like this, Republicans are keeping gas prices high and pouring more profit into Big Oil's coffers. We cannot balance the Nation's budget on the backs of everyday Americans just so that Big Oil can make big profits. Stop these cruel cuts to women, children, and infants.

Ms. CHU. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Ms. CHU

Ms. CHU. Mr. Speaker, House Republicans are trying to sell America's seniors a false bill of goods. Republicans claim that seniors won't be impacted by their plan to end Medicare. That simply isn't true. What's true is that insurance bureaucrats will be placed in between seniors and their doctors. What's true is that a senior in my State of California will be forced to pay $6,000 extra in out-of-pocket expenses; then, once the Republican plan to end Medicare takes full effect, those out-of-pocket expenses will double. Imagine our seniors being turned away at the pharmacy. Imagine seniors having to reach deeper into their wallet after a doctor's visit. The GOP plan to end Medicare is unacceptable. We must keep our promises to our seniors.

Ms. CHU

Ms. CHU. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to announce an action to address an injustice carried out on this very floor that Congress has never atoned for, the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. A century ago, the Chinese came here in search of a better life; but they faced harsh conditions, particularly in the Halls of Congress. Congress passed numerous laws to restrict Chinese Americans, starting from the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act, to stop the Chinese from immigrating, from becoming naturalized citizens, and from ever having the right to vote. These were the only such laws to target a specific ethnic group. The Chinese were the only residents that had to carry papers on them at all times. They were often harassed and detained. If they couldn't produce the proper documents, authorities threw them into prison or out of the country, regardless of their citizenship status. Political cartoons and hateful banners like these were hung in towns and cities and printed in papers. At that time of this hateful law, the Chinese were called racial slurs, were spat upon in the streets, and even brutally murdered. Only after China became an ally of the U.S. in World War II was this law repealed in 1943, 60 years after its passage. It has never been formally acknowledged by Congress as incompatible with America's founding principles. That is why, as the first Chinese American woman elected to Congress, and whose grandfather was a victim of this law, I stand on the very floor where the Chinese Exclusion Act was passed and announce that I have introduced a resolution calling for a formal acknowledgment and expression of regret for the Chinese exclusion laws. When the exclusion laws were first introduced, there was a great deal of debate in Congress over their merits. The U.S. had just abolished slavery. The 14th and 15th Amendments had recently been ratified. Slavery had been defeated, and freedom seemed more certain. The national atmosphere led many in Congress to stand up against the discriminatory anti-Chinese laws. But over the years, those standing for justice almost all disappeared. By the time 1882 came around, Members of Congress were fighting over who deserved the most credit for getting the most discriminatory laws passed and standing against the ``Mongolian horde.'' Representative Albert Shelby Willis from Kentucky pushed relentlessly for the exclusion laws, lambasting the Chinese. Standing in the same spot where I am now, he said the Chinese were ``an invading race'' and called them ``alien with sordid and un-republican habits.'' He declared the ``U.S. was cursed with the evils of Chinese immigration'' and that they disturbed the ``peace and order of society.'' But there were a brave few, a small minority who fought hard against prejudice and principles of freedom. One such man was Senator George Frisbie Hoar, whose statue now stands proudly in the Capitol. He stood up to all of the Chinese exclusion laws and voted against each. He said in 1904 when the laws were made permanent, ``I cannot agree with the principle that this legislation or any legislation on the subject rests. All races, all colors, all nationalities contain persons entitled to be recognized everywhere as equals of other men. I am bound to record my protest, if I stand alone.'' And stand alone he did. The final vote against the Chinese in the Senate was 76-1. What Senator Hoar stood up for is what I am asking Congress to stand up for today: that all people, no matter the color of their skin, or the nation of origin, are the equals of every other man or woman. America came to be what it is today through immigrants who came from all corners of the world. Chinese immigrants were amongst them. They sought a place to live that was founded upon liberty and equality. They came in search of the American Dream--that if you worked hard, you could build a good life. It is why my grandfather came to the United States. But when the Chinese Exclusion Act was passed, the truths that this Nation holds as self-evident--that all are endowed with the inalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness--were discounted by the very ones elected to uphold them. And so for a generation of our ancestors, like my grandfather, who were told for six decades by the U.S. Government that the land of the free wasn't open to them, it is long past time that Congress officially and formally acknowledges these ugly laws that targeted Chinese immigrants, and express sincere regret for these actions. With my resolution, Congress will acknowledge the injustice of the Chinese Exclusion Act, express regret for the lives it destroyed, and make sure that the prejudice that stained our Nation is never repeated again. And it will demonstrate that today is a different day and that today we stand side by side for a stronger America.

Ms. CHU

Ms. CHU. I stand in strong support of this amendment, which strikes language prohibiting direct appropriations funding for immigration integration grants. Integrating immigrants into our society makes us a stronger Nation and a more united Nation. Having Federal policies in place to quickly integrate new citizens into our national fabric is and should remain an important priority for our government. This should not be a solely Republican or Democratic priority. This is not a partisan issue. In fact, it has had strong support from leaders on both sides of the aisle. President George Bush created the Office of Citizenship during his Presidency because he recognized the importance of helping new citizens embrace their new home. The Office of Citizenship plays a key role in immigration integration by leading initiatives to promote citizenship awareness; providing grants to national and community-based organizations that prepare immigrants for citizenship; preparing educational materials for citizens and trying to expand integration and citizenship resources in communities. And President Obama has picked up the torch from his predecessor, committing direct appropriations to an integration grant program that helps green card holders, who are all legal immigrants, get ready to become active participants in our democracy. These grants help legal residents navigate through the naturalization process, teach them about our Nation's history and government, and teach them English. These programs benefit real people, immigrants who came to America for a better life. Immigrants like Phyllis, a 74-year-old grandmother who took a citizenship class in Maryland. Once a week for 8 weeks, she and her classmates, 20 of them, in fact, spent 2 hours learning the basics of American history and government and interview skills for a naturalization test. Phyllis moved to the U.S. from Sri Lanka to take care of her three grandsons. Being a citizen, knowing our laws, and speaking English will help her ensure those young boys grow up to be strong Americans themselves. Immigrants who integrate into U.S. society go on to become informed voters, active community members, innovators, entrepreneurs, and future job creators. Whether they come on family or employment visas, through the asylum or refugee program, or through other smaller legal immigration programs, legal permanent residents come to this country with the dream of becoming U.S. citizens and giving back to their adopted home. In the last 2 fiscal years, Congress has directly appropriated $11 million for integration grants. But this bill doesn't provide direct appropriations. Instead, it pulls the funds out of the examination fees account. And it goes a step further, expressly prohibiting direct funding for immigration integration grants. But I think we should provide direct appropriations for these grants because immigration assimilation should be a national priority. Both sides agree that legal immigrants that want to become part of society and learn our laws and our language should be able to become citizens, and that's exactly what these funds do. I urge all my colleagues to support this amendment to help our Nation and all its citizens, no matter where they were born, so that we can boost human potential and make this a stronger Nation. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. CHU. Mr. Chair, I move to strike the last word.

Ms. CHU

Ms. CHU. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the board and staff of the Asian & Pacific Islander American Health Forum on the 25th anniversary of their founding. They are guided by a mission to influence policy, mobilize communities, and strengthen programs and organizations to improve the health of Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders. As the largest national Asian American, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander advocacy organization in the country, they maintain strategic relationships to move sound policy forward that benefit our communities. Founded in 1986, the organization came together in response to the federal government's first groundbreaking report on minority health. ``The Secretary's Report on Black and Minority Health'' erroneously concluded that Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders were healthier than other minorities despite the ``paucity of data.'' Community leaders, advocates and medical providers who served Asian American populations came together to challenge this ``model minority'' myth and formed the Asian American Health Forum, solidifying the visionary idea of a national organization that would grow into the Asian & Pacific Islander American Health Forum. Working out of a basement of the old Chinese Hospital in San Francisco Chinatown with few staff, the organization has now grown to be a national organization with over 30 staff headquartered in San Francisco, an office in Washington, DC, and a national network comprised of more than 15 groups. Over the years the Asian & Pacific Islander American Health Forum has reached several milestones. In the early '90s, the organization received funding from the Department of Health and Human Services to implement innovative outreach programs targeting chronic disease issues in the Asian American and Pacific Islander communities, like HIV/AIDS and Hepatitis B. As the number of API individuals in the U.S. increased, the organization continued to grow to do work to improve the health of the community by developing tobacco cessation programs, cancer education and outreach programs and reducing domestic violence. In 2006, the Asian & Pacific Islander American Health Forum received the largest ever philanthropic investment in Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander communities through a $16.5 million grant by the W.K. Kellogg Foundation which has helped build capacity across the country through the Health Through Action Program. Today the organization continues to advocate on behalf of our communities as the Affordable Care Act is implemented. As the Chairwoman of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, I have had the privilege of working with the Asian & Pacific Islander American Health Forum to eliminate health disparities in this country. Their analysis and research have informed the work of policymakers for many years at the local, state and national level. The work produced by its programs and divisions are valuable resources for community groups, legislators, agencies and researchers in understanding the unique health issues that affect Asian American, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander populations. On behalf of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, I would like to once again congratulate the Asian & Pacific Islander American Health Forum on their 25th anniversary and wish them the best in their work to achieve health justice over the next 25 years and beyond.

Ms. CHU

Ms. CHU. Madam Speaker, I rise today in celebration of the 60th anniversary of the 1951 Convention related to the Status of Refugees. The Convention was historic in spelling out a set of basic human rights that should be afforded a refugee. It was initially directed toward European refugees in the aftermath of World War II, but was expanded in 1967 to include refugees from all around the world. The U.N. Convention defines who a refugee is, and outlines assistance that refugees should receive. It stipulates that refugees should not be returned to a country where they fear persecution. My district in the San Gabriel Valley of California is home to a large and diverse refugee population who fled persecution from countries such as Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos. In Los Angeles County they come from places as far as Iran to El Salvador. Since arriving on our shores, many of the refugees have established themselves as civic leaders, small business owners and hardworking Americans. Some are working with resettlement agencies to help new refugee populations integrate, settle their families, and restart their lives. The open arms with which our Nation welcomes refugees from around the world reaffirms America's commitment to human rights. And on this 60th anniversary, I look forward to continuing the U.S. commitment to human rights through strengthening of our refugee resettlement program.

Ms. CHU

Ms. CHU. In my home county of Los Angeles, hardworking, middle class families are struggling every day to put gas in their cars so that they can get to work and take their children to school. But I did a double take recently when I saw that a gas station in my district had the highest price per gallon in the country--almost $5 a gallon. What is the Republican response? They just released their budget. It gives more tax breaks to Big Oil. They don't want to reward you for working hard. They want to reward ExxonMobil which made $34 billion last year in pure profits, more money than any other company in the world. You are stuck paying over $4 a gallon for gas and the Republicans also want you to pay $4 billion in tax breaks for Big Oil? Stop the $4 billion Republican giveaway. Let's make smart investments that will lower gas prices and put Americans back to work. It is time to say ``no'' to the GOP, the Grand Oil Party.

Ms. CHU

Ms. CHU. Imagine what life would be like for women under H.R. 3. Imagine you are pregnant and then diagnosed with breast cancer. Your doctor says that chemotherapy could save your life, but will permanently harm the baby. The diagnosis is devastating. But to add to your grief, because of H.R. 3, an abortion will not be covered by your private health insurance. You must pay out of pocket, even though it is necessary to save your life. Imagine IRS agents as abortion cops. You see, under H.R. 3 you couldn't deduct an abortion as a medical expense unless it were the result of rape or incest, even though you are using your own money and even though you can deduct every other medical procedure. Imagine the IRS knocking at your door demanding receipts and grilling you about your rape. This bill forces women to live their lives as if America was Orwell's 1984, where big brother Washington bureaucrats dictate the personal and private health decisions of American families. Stop these attacks on women. Oppose H.R. 3.

Ms. CHU

Ms. CHU. I rise to support the people's budget. It will create millions of jobs and turn the deficit into a surplus in 10 years. Republicans have unveiled their 2012 Road to Ruin budget, but instead of focusing on creating jobs, Republicans are ripping the bandage off our economy before the scar has even healed. The people's budget focuses on real solutions. Instead of billion- dollar handouts to Big Oil, we're investing in job creation and loans for higher education. Instead of ending Medicare as we know it, we keep our promise of secure health care for seniors. Instead of giving more tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires, we're committed to tax relief for the middle class. We must eliminate the deficit, but we must do it responsibly, and that means taking the Republican target off the backs of working families.

Ms. CHU

Ms. CHU. Today I want to honor a man, Ramon Cortines, for his many years serving students in our public school system. Ramon recently announced he was retiring as superintendent of the Los Angeles Unified School District. During his distinguished 55-year career in education, he has served as superintendent of schools in Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Jose, Pasadena, and New York City. I had the great privilege to work with Ramon last year when the Los Angeles Unified School District passed a resolution calling for immediate passage of the DREAM Act. But Ramon was not only a superintendent and advocate, he was a teacher in Aptos and Covina, which is in my district, and senior adviser to the U.S. Secretary of Education under President Clinton. A lifelong educator, Ramon has taught at every level in the public school system--elementary, middle, and senior high school--and has shaped education policy as a consultant to every entity from Stanford University to the University of California. Ramon came to the Los Angeles Unified School District at a time of great challenge; yet he was able to improve school safety, increase attendance, and reduce the dropout rate. Ramon Cortines has had an extraordinary record of service, and he changed the lives of thousands of children. Although he will be greatly missed, we must all continue the mission he strived for during his 55-year career, and that is to ensure that every child receives a quality education.

Ms. CHU

Ms. CHU. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the memory of Harry Lew. Harry Lew was a marine serving the mission of Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan. Freedom, however, does not come without a price. Harry Lew died in Afghanistan on Sunday, April 3, 2011. He was 21 years old. He was the son of Sandy and Allen Lew, the brother of Carmen Lew, and he was my nephew. Lance Corporal Harry Lew died while serving on watch duty in Helmand province. He had joined the Marines in August 2009 and reported to his unit in February 2010. He was based in Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii, with the 2nd Battalion, 3rd Marine Regiment, 3rd Marine Division, III Marine Expeditionary Force. His unit was deployed to the Middle East in November, where they joined a Marine combat team for counterinsurgency work with the Afghan National Security Forces. Their goal was to provide security to locals and to promote development in the regime. He was set to return home in July 2011, 3 months before his death. Harry was a popular and outgoing student, both at Santa Clara High School, where he graduated in June 2008, and at Mission College, where he took classes for a year. He was known for joking, smiling, and for wanting to keep the mood light. One of his teachers said he brought ``life and laughter to his classroom.'' He loved physical sports, especially ``tricking,'' a form of breakdancing involving kicks, flips and twists. It combines wushu, Chinese martial arts and gymnastics. He was so accomplished in this sport that as a member of the club called the Sidestep Breakdance Club, he performed several times in front of the high school. His friends said his best trick was the butterfly twist, where one spins 360 degrees in a horizontal flip. Upon his death, his friends honored him with a tricking session at his high school. Harry's best friend, Travis Trotter said, ``Everyone here has been influenced by him in some way or another, whether it be through his dancing, his artistic talents, his tricking or just being the person he was, friendly with everyone.'' Of his service, his superior in the Marines said: ``Only a small portion of our society volunteers to serve their country. Lance Corporal Lew was one of those volunteers. Within the 2nd Battalion, 3rd Marines, he was well liked by his fellow marines and was known for getting along with everyone because of his easy-going nature. ``He took his job seriously and performed his duties with enthusiasm. In Afghanistan, he volunteered for the difficult missions and demonstrated uncommon endurance on 4- to 8-hour foot patrols. Lance Corporal Lew also demonstrated his commitment and courage on two separate occasions when his unit came under enemy fire. One of those events is captured in the following: ``At approximately 7:30 p.m. on March 21, 2011, 3rd Squad of 3rd Platoon, Golf Company, 2nd Battalion, 3rd Marines, was engaged by enemy small arms fire while defending a position in Gawraggi village, Nawa-e- Barazkai district, Helmand province, Afghanistan. The enemy engaged with several bursts of automatic weapons fire. At that time of contact, the majority of the squad was in a small hole in the ground, taking cover to eat evening chow. Lance Corporal Lew immediately identified the enemy position approximately 200 meters to the southeast and engaged the enemy position initially with an M203 grenade launcher located at his post. He then picked up his M240 squad automatic weapon and engaged the enemy with an estimated 200 rounds until they had had enough and broke contact. His squad then continued with their mission. ``This is an example of Lance Corporal Lew's service. It serves as a reminder of all those who today serve in harm's way. Like Lance Corporal Lew, they serve to protect our country, our freedom, and our way of life. I am grateful for the courage and sacrifice of Lance Corporal Lew.'' Harry Lew was a good son and brother, a friend to many, a great performer and a dedicated soldier. His ready smile and warm attitude will be remembered by all who knew him. His sacrifice for his country will never be forgotten. For his service, Harry Lew will be honored with the National Defense Service Medal, the Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, and the Afghanistan Campaign Medal.

Ms. CHU

Ms. CHU. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a great loss to our community, Mr. Joe Ying Chiu, who passed away on March 24, 2011 at the age of 76. My heart goes out to his wife, Marilyn; sons Steven and Edward; daughter Carolyn; his four grandchildren; and the rest of his family and friends. Mr. Chiu was an extraordinary citizen, a role model for community activism and a powerful advocate for the Chinese American community. He was the living embodiment of the American Dream, having been born in China in 1934 and then emigrating to the United States as a ``paper son'' when he was just a teenager, first arriving in the San Francisco Bay area. Like most immigrant children, he learned the values of hard work and perseverance at an early age. After meeting his wife Marilyn and marrying her in 1961, he went to work at his father-in-law's meat market in Pasadena, Southern California. It was there that his strong work ethic began paying off, and where he first honed his incredible business acumen. With the help and support of his father-in-law, he eventually opened his own grocery store in Long Beach in 1967. That store, Hanson's Market, went on to become a fixture in the community and served the neighborhood for 25 years. It was the beginning of a long career in the grocery business for Joe, who became a successful businessman and eventually owned and operated several different establishments. After his retirement from the grocery business, Joe was able to focus his energy on a cause that had long been dear to his heart: advocating for the Chinese American community in Los Angeles' Chinatown. With his wife Marilyn, Joe became an active member of the Lung Kong Association, serving in several political offices in the organization. He went on to become an avid and generous supporter of numerous civic, political and philanthropic events and charities that greatly benefited the Chinese community throughout the United States, China and Taiwan. I urge all my House colleagues to join me in honoring our community hero, Mr. Joe Ying Chiu, for his remarkable service and contributions to our country.

Ms. CHU

Ms. CHU. Mr. Speaker, today the Republicans want to shut down government. Tomorrow they want to dismantle Medicare. If the shutdown weren't enough, the Republican Party just released next year's road-to- ruin budget. And, unbelievably, the people they have chosen to target are America's seniors. This budget ends the Medicare guarantee as we know it. It turns Medicare into a voucher system where you would have to put your fate back into the hands of private insurance companies. It results in seniors paying more for Medicare. This plan shifts costs onto seniors and cuts Medicare at a time when seniors need health care the most. We must take the target off the backs of our seniors and off of Medicare, a guarantee that seniors have earned through a lifetime of hard work.