Sam Farr

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. It is more difficult to trace than the Exxon Valdez, which was essentially one spot, a big contamination. These are subtle contaminations. But these contaminations are not just chemicals. We have a way of transporting nature. Certainly we have learned about that recently with the way to transport virus, with SARS originating in China ending up affecting us in Toronto and other cities around the world. The San Francisco Bay now has 175 nonnative marine species living in San Francisco Bay brought in by the ships that travel the oceans far and wide. Despite all these indicators that show that the marine ecosystems are unhealthy today, the question is, well, can we save them? Has it gone beyond repair? The gentleman and I know that we have certainly laws that govern our coastlines and oceans; but those laws, as the gentleman said, are outdated. It is time to focus anew. Fortunately, Congress has taken action to do that by creating a commission. With a bill that I authored with Senator Hollings in the Senate that President Clinton signed, and it went into effect when President Bush took office, President Bush appointed the commissioners. They are about to finish their work and give us a report sometime this fall. As the gentleman mentioned, there is a separate commission appointed by the Pew Charitable Trust, which my friend and predecessor here in Congress, Leon Panetta, has been chairing when Christy Todd Whitman, the former Chair, went to work for the Bush administration as head of EPA. So we have both of these commissions coming to Congress with really strong recommendations on how we need to update our Nation's marine policies. So the body of science, the body of politics, by the fact that the commissioners are from all walks of life that relate to the oceans, from the oil interests to the fishing interests to the museum and science interests, they have all been represented; and they all bring a constituency to the plate that is going to deliver these reports. June 4, on Wednesday, the privately funded Pew Commission will make its report available to the public. Then sometime later in the year the Commission on Ocean Policy will produce its report. I anticipate that both commissions will have recommendations that we as Members of Congress, recommendations that, as lawmakers, we can incorporate into legislation and change our ocean policy so that indeed we can have a sustainable ocean policy. I think the gentleman more than most Members, and probably more than anyone, really understands the proportionality of sustainability. I think that word is used so often as to sort of guarantee success, but it is really one of compromise. Essentially, we do not cut out the economic interests in fishing. We more balance them so they can be sustained over time. It is not just, take it all right now and leave nothing for our children or generations ahead. The whole idea of how we develop these balancing systems is very controversial, because we do have to regulate people that have never been regulated before, or we have to tell people they cannot fish in certain areas that they have been able to fish in without restrictions. So this is more what they call an ecosystem-based management. We understand a little bit about ecosystems on land. We do not call them that; we call them zoning. We call them master planning for our communities; essentially, where do we want people to live in houses, where do we want the industrial area to be, where do we want to keep it an open space, where we should not go building because of hazardous conditions such as floodplain zones or earthquake zones and so on. I think we are getting to a point, and I would love to hear the gentleman's reflection on it, that we really need to master-plan our oceans around these ecosystems and around avoiding conflicts of the sea. We have seen in California, and Maine as well, where we had, before regulation, people who would make their living setting out crab pots or lobster pots at the same place people were dragging for seismic information for oil companies. They would catch the lines of the lobster pots or crab pots and pull them up, and so destroy the income of one fisherperson for the advantage of someone else who was also interested in a resource from the ocean. That is what I call the conflicts of sea. We just need to make sure we understand what people want to do and how they want to use the ocean, and make the regulations so they can use it wisely. I would really respect the gentleman's thoughts on those issues, because I think the gentleman has been very involved with the city of Portland. As I remember as a young adult studying in Oregon in undergraduate studies and visiting Portland, it was then, to use a phrase we used at home, a city known by its smell. We used to say that about Monterey because of all the canneries. In Portland, you had all of the wood pulp industries and the Willamette River. We go to Portland today and it is certainly one of the most beautiful cities in America, and one of the best-managed from a transportation standpoint, from a livability standpoint. As far as aesthetics and trees, it is really an example of what we can do with leadership in providing a turnaround in an area. If we can do that for cities in America, we certainly can do it for oceans and nearby communities, near-shore communities under the sea.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Charles Hilger, a talented artist and dedicated historian, upon the occasion of his retirement as the Director of the Santa Cruz Museum of Art and History (MAH). For twenty years, Mr. Hilger has dedicated his time and energy into building a museum that has become a significant cultural anchor for the Santa Cruz community as well as a quality destination for tourists and visitors. Mr. Hilger's expertise and enthusiasm will be missed by associates and visitors alike. Mr. Hilger's participation in the art world has stretched to nearly all facets of the Santa Cruz community. Mr. Hilger's passion for art was evident when he was honored as the 1989 Santa Cruz ``Artist of the Year.'' Over the past twenty years, Mr. Hilger transformed a small exhibit of art featured at the public library into the museum we enjoy today, now located at the McPherson Center. He personally recruited a highly professional staff and a dedicated team of docents and volunteers to aid him in managing over 150 installations, representing many diverse expressions of artists from around the world. Despite earthquakes, economic hardships and various other calamities, Mr. Hilger never lost sight of his goal to provide an institution that could educate many generations about the beauty and mystery in the world of art. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the United States Congress, I would like to honor the accomplishments of Charles Hilger and express sincere gratitude for his commitment to the community. I wish Mr. Hilger and his family well as he enjoys his much-deserved retirement.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the rights of women around the world, including those of servicewomen who are stationed abroad. The Sanchez amendment is about restoring rights and healthcare access to our servicewomen abroad, and not about the ideological debate on abortion. This Congress has professed tremendous leadership in advocating on behalf of those who have selflessly chosen to serve in the military. However, the health, safety, and rights of our servicewomen do not seem to be a top priority. In no way should the healthcare options of any serviceman or woman be compromised. Unfortunately, the system currently in place makes servicewomen stationed abroad second-class citizens who are subject to different and inferior healthcare parameters than their male counterparts. In supporting our Armed Services we cannot allow the very rights and liberties that they are fighting for to be compromised by refusing to allow servicewomen to choose to have safe and timely medical procedures at military hospitals. It is unacceptable that a servicewomen would be forced to compromise her privacy and wait for space on a military transport, in order to obtain a time-sensitive procedure like an abortion. Our female soldiers should be cared for in a safe and timely manner by a military hospital, whose very purpose is to provide healthcare for serviceman and women. Moreover, this amendment clearly states that these abortions would be paid for by private funds, and that no doctor or staff would be forced to participate in these procedures. In defense of women's reproductive freedoms, and our servicewomen stationed abroad, I support the Sanchez amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, earlier in the year, Department of Defense (DOD) approached Congress with a request to exempt itself from several fundamental environmental laws in order to strengthen military readiness. At the time this request shocked most of us, because the readiness of our military is the best in the world but that the state of some of our natural resources are not. Things went from bad to worse when the House Armed Services Committee reported out a bill that went way above and beyond what DOD had originally asked for. H.R. 1588, the fiscal year 2004 defense authorization bill, contains provisions that fundamentally change the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), two major pieces of legislation that directly affect my home district in California. There are many species listed under ESA in my home district. These include the California condor, which has been through an intense reestablishment program, the San Joaquin Kit Fox that lives on Fort Hunter Liggett, steelhead trout that breed in our rivers and streams, and the snowy plover which nests on our beaches. The continued existence of many of these species relies on the designation of ``critical habitat,'' which is basically the homes and breeding grounds that are necessary for their survival. For example, the Santa Cruz long-toed salamander has only six breeding ponds on which the whole species depends. Without the designation of these breeding ponds as critical habitat, the salamander would be left without a vehicle for bringing them back from the brink of extinction. This bill aims to make critical habitat designation only when it is ``necessary'' and not when its ``prudent and determinable'' as the law currently states. I ask you when would it be ``necessary'' to designate critical habitat? I'm not sure because ``necessary'' is not defined in the bill. So basically, the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce would be able to make a decision with no set criteria. The Bush Administration has clearly stated its belief that critical habitat provides no protection, and as such this provision could result in many species without homes and breeding areas such that the Santa Cruz long- toed salamander would have no ponds, the snowy plover would have no open beaches, and the marbled murrelet would have no trees. H.R. 1588 not only guts ESA, but it also puts whales and dolphins in jeopardy by changing the Marine Mammal Protection Act. The intent of the MMPA is to prohibit the ``harassment'' of marine mammals. The language in H.R. 1588 weakens the definition of ``harassment'' not just for DOD related activities but also for all people who use our oceans and coasts. The waters of Monterey Bay in my home district are home to sea otters, sea lions and harbor seals and serve as a migratory route for majestic humpback and blue whales. These animals are important economic resources because people visit my district to see them. Likewise, people travel to see the orcas in the waters of Puget Sound, Washington, the whales in the Gulf of Maine, and the manatees along the coast of Florida. Current MMPA language aims to protect these animals from being harassed, from being injured, and from being killed. But H.R. 1588 drastically weakens this protection and would allow an increasing number of harmful interactions such as: oil and gas exploration and high intensity sonar testing. Such increased harassment and harm to marine mammals would go largely unchecked by wildlife agencies and left unmonitored and unmitigated. Struggling sea otters are currently dying at record levels in the State of California. They are listed both under ESA and MMPA. Our sea otters need these laws to protect what's left of their population; without them they will go extinct in California. Consideration of fundamental changes to these laws should be taken up during re-authorization of ESA and MMPA when there is ample time for hearings and discussion, and not under the guise of national security.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning to talk about the fiscal year 2004 Defense authorization bill. Earlier this year, the Department of Defense approached Congress with a request to exempt itself from several of the fundamental environmental laws in order to strengthen our military readiness. At the time, this kind of shocked many of us because we saw that our readiness of our military was among, if not is, the best in the world, but that the state of some of our natural resources is certainly not the best in the world. Then things went from bad to worse. The Committee on Armed Services reported out a bill that went way beyond and way above what the Defense Department had originally asked for. H.R. 1588, the Defense authorization bill this year, contains provisions that fundamentally change the Environmental Protection Act and the Endangered Species Act and, most importantly, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, two major pieces of legislation that directly affect the coastal communities of the United States and particularly my District in California. There are many species listed under the ESA in my home District. There is the California condor. We have done a good job of trying to restore that condor into the wilderness. In fact, the Secretary of the Interior has been out to release those birds and has personally seen the effect of being able to reestablish a threatened species. There is the San Joaquin kit fox. There is the steelhead trout that are in our coastal streams, and the snowy plover, which is a shore bird that nests on our beaches. The continued existence of many of these species relies on the designation of what they call the critical habitat which is basically the homes and breeding grounds that are necessary for survival. For example, the Santa Cruz long-toed salamander only has six breeding ponds on which the whole species depends. Without the designation of these breeding ponds as critical habitat, the salamander would be left out without a vehicle for bringing it back from the brink of extinction. I might point out, many people thought the sea otter was extinct. In 1950 we saw a small group of sea otters, and today that population has grown to about 1,000. It is threatened, but on the other hand, what it has done is increased tourism because people come out and look for that creature. So this bill that the Defense Department is asking for aims to make critical habitat designation only when it is necessary and not when it is prudent and determinable as the law now currently requires. When would it be necessary to designate a critical habitat? I am not sure necessary is defined in the bill. So basically the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce will be able to make a decision with no set criteria. The Bush administration has clearly stated its belief that critical habitat provides no protection, and as such, this provision could result in more species without homes and breeding areas, and the list goes on and on. The Marine Mammal Protection Act not only guts that, but it puts whales and dolphins in jeopardy by changing the Marine Mammal Protection Act, and my colleagues have already heard from several Members who have spoken on it. The intent of the Act is to prevent the harassment of marine mammals. The language in this bill weakens the definition of harassment, not just for DOD-related activities but also for all the people who use our oceans and coasts. The waters of Monterey Bay in my home District have been designated by the Federal Government as a national marine sanctuary. It is the home to sea otters, sea lions and harbor seals and serves as a migratory route for the majestic humpback and blue whales. These animals are important for economic resources because people visit the coastline to see watchable wildlife. They go to see the sea birds, the sea lions, the whales and so on. Likewise, the people travel to see the orcas in the waters off the Puget Sound in Washington or the whales off the gulf of Maine or the manatees along the coast of Florida, and we all know as Members from those Districts we do everything we can to protect those. Currently, the Marine Mammal Protection Act language aims to protect these animals from being harassed, being injured and even from being killed, but the bill drastically weakens this protection and would allow an increasing number of harmful interaction, such as oil and gas exploration, high intensity sonar testing, and such increase in harassment and harm to marine mammals would go largely unchecked by wildlife agencies and left unmonitored and unmitigated. Struggling sea otters are currently dying at record levels in the State of California. We do not know the exact cause, but we are going to be looking for that and hopefully trying to remedy it. This bill does not help us with those remedies. We ought to take pride in the fact that the military has led in a lot of our environmental areas. The navy has been the first and most remarkable agency at recycling at sea, of taking all their garbage on ship and treating that. The navy painted their ships with safe paint. So the military has been a good environmental steward. There is no need to change that position with the passage of this legislation.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Mr. Ralph W. Thompson III for his ongoing contributions to the Monterey Peninsula in my Central California district. On May 19th, 2003, the Monterey County Bar Association will honor Mr. Thompson with the Chief Justice Phil Gibson award. The award is named in honor of the late California Supreme Court Chief Justice and Carmel neighbor of my parents, Phil Gibson. Chief Justice Gibson served from 1939 to 1964 and was know for his comprehensive reorganization of the California court system and for his lonely stance against the internment of Japanese-American citizens during WWII. The award recognizes service in the legal profession that follows in the tradition of integrity and innovation set by Chief Justice Gibson. Mr. Thompson has practiced law in Monterey, California, for many years. He is a graduate of Loma Linda University and California Western School of Law. He also holds a California teaching credential. His professional career has included stints with the U.S. Treasury Department, the Monterey County District Attorney's Office, and various teaching positions with Monterey Peninsula College, Golden Gate University, and the University of California. But the bedrock of Mr. Thompson's career has been his stellar legal practice helping the people of Monterey County. Mr. Thompson enjoys the very highest reputation amongst his peers. He is known for his high ethical standards, fair client representation, and universal courtesy. He is also an innovator in his field, having founded one of the leading mediation and arbitration practices in Central California. He has served in numerous professional leadership positions, including president of the Monterey County Trial Lawyers Association, the Monterey County Bar Association, and a member of the Consumer Attorneys of California Board of Governors. Beyond the professional achievements, Mr. Thompson has been a leader in the community. He has served in leadership roles with Legal Services for Seniors, the American Cancer Society of Monterey, the Monterey Bay Center for the Arts, Rotary, and the Pacific Grove Unified School District. The totality of this service, both professional and public, warrants the recognition of the Gibson award as well as this House.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate Asian Pacific American Heritage Month, which honors Asian Pacific Americans throughout our history. From the early reaches of our Nation's history to the present day, Asian Pacific Americans have played a crucial role in the development of the United States. Asian Pacific Americans have contributed to explorations of places as far away as the depths of outer space, and places as near as the inner vessels of the human body. They have served as generals in our military, builders of our great transcontinental railroads, and athletes without peer. But I rise today not to merely tout the accomplishments of this storied group of people, but to speak specifically about the uplifting account of two amazing families, one Asian Pacific American and one Caucasian. I want to relate to my colleagues the amazing and unique friendship that developed between the Tanimura and Antle families over impossible odds. George Tanimura, a second-generation Japanese American, grew up spending his weekends working on his father's lettuce farm in Castroville, California, in my congressional district. Both of George's parents died before he completed high school, so George, the oldest of 12 siblings, along with his brother Charlie, managed the farm. The family business was kept afloat during the troubled times of the Great Depression, only to be devastated by the forced internment of more than 120,000 Japanese Americans after the attack on Pearl Harbor. While brothers Charlie and John joined the U.S. Army, George and his other siblings were inhumanely forced into internment camps. By the time the Tanimura family was released after World War II, it had lost all its previous land holdings. Slowly and painstakingly the Tanimuras regained their agricultural footing, farming onions and lettuce on 20 acres of land. The Antle family migrated west from the Oklahoma Dust Bowl in the late 1800s, arriving in Salinas, California, to find work in the iceberg lettuce industry. Bud Antle joined his father Lester as a lettuce packer in Salinas. In 1942, after years of hard work, Bud and Lester created their own lettuce-packing company, Bud Antle, Inc. The company grew quite rapidly, starting with 60 workers and quickly increasing to 300 workers. The Tanimura family soon began growing lettuce only for Bud Antle, Inc. It was a natural marriage of lettuce growers and lettuce packers, and the Tanimuras and Antles soon became close friends. The Antles treated the Tanimura family as equals in a time rife with discrimination. In turn, Bud's son Bob worked closely with the Tanimura family and quickly learned the industry. In 1982, after years of trusted friendship, these two families formed Tanimura & Antle, one of the largest lettuce producers in the world. The story of the Tanimuras and the Antles is one of uplift beyond all possible odds. Both families built their companies from the ground up, and with an understanding of and appreciation for human rights when such a concept was in short supply. I commend these two families for serving as a heartening reminder of all that is good about America. I can think of no finer time to recognize their mutual achievements than during this special Asian Pacific American Heritage Month.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the public service and personal commitment of Nancy Lukenbill to the Monterey County government of the State of California. She joined the Monterey County workforce on October 6, 1969 as staff clerk in the Office of the Monterey County Clerk where she began a career of service that lasted 34 years. She has provided the County with dedicated and reliable work, characteristics in line with the quality of her person. Her poise and helpfulness moved her quickly up the ranks and she became the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors of Monterey County in January of 1976, a position she has held until her recent retirement. Nancy's attention to detail and extraordinary intelligence make her a treasure trove of Monterey County stories over the last 34 years. She starred in my County Supervisor TV commercial, displaying her on-camera hair-dos that attest to her stylish and tremendous personality. Her office was a place of comfort for Supervisors and county employees, and never letting her personal politics intrude, Nancy's discretion around politicians made her stand out as the resource for impartial information. She was the pulse, the heartbeat of the Monterey County Board of Supervisors because supervisors would come and go, including yours truly, but for 27 years, Nancy was the rock. She was the go-to person if you needed something done. Everybody knows she makes the County function, and the County has been fortunate to have her for so long. Instrumental in bringing the 21st Century and the Internet to the Board's office, Nancy constantly appealed to her wholehearted conviction that local citizens have the untouchable right to access the business of their County electeds. However, with all of the technological advancement, she never lost touch with the County scribe's necessary skills from when she first signed up for the job. She always took shorthand notes of County meetings despite the presence of videotapes and tape-recorders. This makes her one for the ages. The County has enjoyed her loyalty and her impeccable work for almost 34 years, and she will be sorely missed. On behalf of this House, I want to commend Nancy Lukenbill on her commitment to the people of Monterey County and her commitment to public's right to access their government. Monterey County is a far better government because of her service. I join all the Supervisors she served under in wishing her husband Larry, her son Lance and her grandchildren a great new life together and thanking her for making the job of Clerk of the Board an exemplary one.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, this week our Nation will celebrate the 20th Anniversary of America's leading industry--the industry you all use-- but never consider as an industry. It's called the Travel and Tourism Industry. The Travel and Tourism Industry is present in every Congressional district in the US. It's our restaurants, our museums, rental car companies, hotels, sports arenas, ski shops, and beaches. Travel and Tourism brings in over $1.5 billion to the economy of my district alone. There are 18 million Americans employed directly or indirectly by the tourism industry, and it is one of the few industries that creates a multi-billion dollar trade surplus. As Co-chair of the Congressional Travel and Tourism Caucus, I've worked with my colleague Mark Foley of Florida to educate this body on the importance of tourism to this Nation's economy and to our districts' local economies. The Travel and Tourism Industry has suffered many setbacks over the last two years including 9/11, the War in Iraq, SARS, and our struggling economy. All this hurt an industry which requires people to have confidence. So I encourage all Americans to take this opportunity to get out there. Take a trip, go to dinner, or visit a park or museum. Enjoy this great country of ours and share it with others. Let's honor the 20th Anniversary of National Travel and Tourism Week.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 870, a bill to amend the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act to extend the availability of funds to carry out the fruit and vegetable pilot program. We hear a great deal about the importance of teaching our children good nutrition as well as about the epidemic of obesity and poor eating habits among American children. This morning's USA Today even had several articles about nutrition and obesity throughout the paper, this is a very important issue and one that is near and dear to my heart and that of my district. However, for all the press, talk and concern, we do far too little about it. THe first year of the Fruit and Vegetable Pilot Program is nearing its end, but remaining funds need to be used to extend the program until the end of the 2003-2004 school year so we can get the necessary information as we begin to debate child nutrition reauthorization later this year. The 2002 Farm Bill authorized funds for a pilot project to test the feasibility of offering free fruits and vegetables to students during the school day. One hundred six schools implemented the project this school year in Indiana, Iowa, Ohio, Michigan and the Zuni Tribal Organization in New Mexico. The program sought to determine the best practices for increasing both fresh and dried fruit and fresh vegetable consumption in elementary and secondary schools. Schools reported tremendous successes and the final USDA report on the project concluded that 80 percent of students in participating schools were very interested in the program, and 100 of the schools participating believe that it is feasible to continue the pilot if funding is made available. I feel it is incumbent upon Congress to continue this pilot. Consumption of fruits and vegetables increased, while anecdotal evidence showed a decline in soda sales from vending machines in schools. Making existing funding available for pilot schools to use this upcoming school year will extend the success of the project. Again, Mr. Speaker, I urge your support for this legislation today, and ask you again to support additional consumption opportunities as we debate child nutrition reauthorization in the upcoming Session. We must do more to encourage their purchase in our schools and to promote their consumption on an individual level.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 160, a bill to remove the economic sanctions against Iraq. For too long, the sanctions have drained the Iraqi society and its vital economic energy. In their wake, we find a country whose standard of living has declined significantly, its middle class has all but disappeared, and its infrastructure is in total disrepair. Now that dictator Saddam Hussein, the inspiration for the sanctions regime, has been defeated, there no longer remains any justification for its continuation. I hope that the lifting of the sanctions will lead to a prosperous Iraq economy which will benefit the people and bring them back into the world of free and open commerce. I think that this bill, which signals the commitment of the United States to reconstruction in Iraq, is a good step in the right direction. I trust that the United Nations will respond positively to this initiative. The removal of sanctions, however, will not alone bring prosperity to Iraq. Before there is prosperity, there must first be security. It is my firm belief that the United States, by intervening militarily in Iraq, has assumed the responsibility for the safety and the security of the Iraqi people. I applaud the gentleman from Michigan's initiative on the economic front. We must also pay attention to the security front. As we continue to assist Iraq in its reconstruction, I think we need to establish here in Congress an institutional framework for postconflict resolutions and for postconflict operations. Part of that institutional framework would be to strengthen the U.S. Government's ability to respond to authority gaps left by failed or otherwise collapsed states. I propose to draft legislation for the creation of an integrated security component in NATO, which would train and equip special units which would provide for the security of the civilian population serving as an interim police force. I urge my colleagues today to support H. Con. Res. 160, and I look forward to working with the sponsor and other interested Members of Congress to develop this postconflict legislation to close the security and justice gaps so that Iraq and countries emerging from conflict can achieve the economic prosperity to which they, and we, aspire.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Paula J. Peterson, the Monterey District Park Superintendent for California Department of Parks and Recreation. She is retiring after more than 30 years of dedicated service with the State of California, and in recognition thereof, she is deserving of special public recognition and the highest commendations. Paula attended Chico State University where she received her Bachelor of Arts degree in Recreation Administration in 1971, and a Master of Arts degree with distinction in Recreation Administration in 1977. She then embarked on her distinguished state service career with the California Department of Parks and Recreation in 1972 as the first full-time, female civil service State Park Ranger in the history of California at Big Basin State Park in the Santa Cruz Mountains. Based on her experience and performance, she continued to receive be promoted through ranks, ultimately attaining her current position. Paula Peterson has played a lead role in interpreting and protecting the cultural and natural resources of California. Her outstanding leadership and organizational skills have touched the entire state park system. Paula was responsible for the first publication of the ``Defensive Tactics for Instructors'' handbook in 1980. She coordinated the first Hispanic Heritage Week observance in Monterey in 1990. She received the 1996 Monterey District Safety Award after leading and maintaining an excellent District safety program. She was the recipient of the Department's 1999 Olmsted Award for Leadership and Vision based on her ability to motivate and inspire others to positive action; and her long-term commitment to park ideals and values. Paula blazed the trail for other woman in the peace officer ranks within the State Park System and has been a positive and strong role model. She is commended for her extraordinary commitment and dedication and represents the highest ideals of the State Park professional. Mr. Speaker, in the course of their careers, few people are fortunate to be associated with an individual whose personal and professional accomplishments have been an inspiration to so many. Because of Paula Peterson, I can count myself among the fortunate.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with great sadness to express my grief for the deaths of Guillermo Gaviria Correa and Gilberto Echeverri Mejia. For their deaths, and the loss of eight other hostages that died with them, I wish to give my sincerest condolences to their families, to the people of Antioquia whom they served, and to the whole of Colombia. Dr. Gaviria Correa, the governor of the Department of Antioquia, and his Peace Commissioner, Gilberto Echeverri Mejia, were killed by the guerilla group known as the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC) on May 5, 2003. They had been held captive by the FARC since April 21, 2003, the day their group was kidnapped while marching for peace to the town of Caicedo. Guillermo Gaviria was a leader in the non-violent movement in Colombia. At a time when Colombia is being ripped apart by violence, when many Colombians are motivated by rough justice and revenge, he proposed a different approach--non-violence. Inspired by basic Christian teachings, Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr., Guillermo Gaviria set out to change the way Colombians address the problems that face them. He did not just seek to change the nature of the debate, he put his ideas into action. As governor of Antioquia he established the ``Peace Congruent Plan'', a plan which would: Face the causes of the armed conflict and the social violence through solutions reached among representatives from different communities ideologies and beliefs, and build social culture and a government based on participation. Shortly after becoming governor, Guillermo Gaviria initiated a series of popular marches and demonstrations against the war. Each carried a motto, such as ``Break the silence, the mothers, wives and daughters of the kidnapped are doing it''. He organized ``solidarity caravans'' and peace demonstrations in every corner of the Department. He challenged the FARC to stop attacking civilians. He challenged the paramilitaries to stop looting. He challenged both to leave civilians out of the conflict--``we won't be part of the war, but part of the peace.'' At every point, he remained faithful to his non-violent and religious creed: ``Let us hate the sin but not the sinner''. Governor Gaviria was a light to his people. It is a tragedy for all of us that this light was extinguished. He was a unique figure in Colombia, a figure of hope, a figure of a brighter future. Colombia desperately needs people with great vision and great courage. Guillermo Gaviria was one of these people. How many more like him are there? How many have been killed in the incessant violence that plagues this beautiful country? It pains me in particular to see the passing of Guillermo Gaviria and Gilberto Echeverri, two great hopes of the Colombian people. Antioquia is my second home. I lived and worked there as a Peace Corps Volunteer. The course my life has taken is closely tied to my time in and around the barrios of Medellin. I saw first-hand the extent of the challenges that the people of Medellin have to face. I also saw how industrious and dedicated they are. Guillermo Gaviria was a tribute to this ``paisa'' spirit. Antioquia has lost a dear native son. In the wake of this tragedy, all Colombians must dedicate themselves to honoring the memory and vision of Guillermo Gaviria and Gilberto Echeverri. President Uribe, himself a ``paisa'' and former governor of Antioquia, can take the lead by continuing support for Governor Gavina's vision of a non-violent Colombia. I look forward to working with the President in promoting this vision, one that Colombians, after so many years of violence, desperately deserve. Promoting and advancing non-violence is the best way to honor the memory of Governor Gaviria, and the best way to bring peace to a terribly troubled nation.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this bill. I rise in opposition because the author of this bill is from the great State of California. This bill cuts $850 million out of the State budget, a budget that is already bankrupt. That bankruptcy affects every school district in California, every city and county in California, every hospital in California, every police force and fire department in California. How can Members say at a time when these States are in such financial need we are going to help them by pulling the rug out from underneath them? This tax cut is the worse thing that could happen to the State of California, and it is shameful that a Republican from California is offering it. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to read some headlines from my state of California. These are just from the last few days, but they are illustrative of the kinds of headlines that we have been seeing across our state during the past year: ``Parents scramble to save popular school programs'', the San Francisco Chronicle, May 8th; ``San Jose faces service cuts, fee increases: Budget plan calls for loss of 231 jobs'', San Jose Mercury, May 3rd; ``Budget anxiety--California's teachers worry about layoff'', Los Angeles Times, May 6th; ``Financial crunch hits extra hard'', Monterey Herald, May 4th; and ``Proposed Section 8 changes feared'', Santa Cruz Sentinel, May 2nd. Across the state of California, both statewide government agencies and local municipalities are feeling the crush of the approximately $35 billion budget shortfall. The state is looking for help. We are asking, much like New York City did in 1975, for help from our national leaders. And, much like Ford did in that day, the President and Republican leaders here in Congress are sending a message to California: G.O.P. to California: Drop dead. The so-called ``stimulus package'' proposed by Representative Thomas calls for--depending on who you listen to--somewhere between $300 and $500 billion in tax cuts. Included in this package is legislation that would do away with taxes on dividends. What the President and the Republicans, and even Representative Thomas, a California, have not told you is that this elimination of taxes on dividends will not just affected the amount of revenue coming into the federal government, it will also affect the amount of money collected by the states. The Legislative Analysis office of the State of California has calculated the State will lose approximately $850 million in income tax revenues if dividends are no longer counted as taxable income. $850 million. This will only serve to increase the budget gap that already exists. I am fairly certain the returns to individual California as a result proposed will not be as great as the losses the entire state. Unlike the Senate proposal. Thomas' proposal does not include any direct assistance to the states. In fact, the President is seeking to cut funding entirely to programs that have been beneficial to California. The COPs program has been a wildly successful program in the state of California, which provided 437 more police officers on the streets in California last year. What does Bush do? He eliminates the funding from his proposed budget. The State Criminal Alien Assistance Program assists California in jailing alien criminals. What does Bush do? He eliminates the funding in his proposed budget. Section 8 housing funds for low-income citizens, administered by the HUD, has provided millions of families into housing across the nation. Sure, it's not a perfect program, but the President would like to see the states administrater the program instead. He claims this will save the Federal government money--but it he at all concerned with the costs, administrative and otherwise, but will be passed onto the states as a result? There is not one penny in this legislation to assist the states. There is not one shred of hope for the state of California, or the nearly 250,000 people who are unemployed, in this bill. How can anyone in the California delegation allow our state to suffer? How can you present them with this kind of legislation and not offer them any kind of assistance? I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill and allow the Democratic substitute to be debated--which includes $40 billion in direct assistance to the states. Otherwise, I can see the headlines now: ``State Falls Deeper into Debt''; ``More jobs eliminated''; and ``Schools closing across California.'' Let's change the headlines. Let's do it now, vote down the Thomas bill and consider the democratic alternative immediately.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Fred Levy, an extremely gifted educator who dedicated much of his life to expanding horizons for his students. Mr. Levy, an instructor at Cabrillo College for over 30 years, passed away April 9, 2003, at the age of 69. A valued teacher, husband and father, all who knew him respected Fred for his passion and sincerity. Mr. Levy is survived by his wife, Robley Levy; three children Rebecca, Barnaby, and Elizabeth; and six grandchildren. Mr. Levy was born in 1934 in Cairo, Egypt, where his father was working as a correspondent for the New York Times. At the age of 7, Sadie Miller, a family friend took him under her wing and fled Egypt to escape impeding Nazi troops. They went to great lengths to avoid the Nazis and eventually traveled up the coast of South America and the United States until they reached New York. Fred's parents arrived shortly thereafter, and the family remained in the city until Fred graduated from Amherst College in 1955. Mr. Levy went on to serve in the United States Army, retiring only to pursue a master's degree in poetry at Stanford University. Mr. Levy was appointed to the Cabrillo College faculty in 1963 as an instructor in both English and speech. Immediately deemed an integral part of the staff, Fred became a much loved teacher that students would seek out for advice and support. Fred was a proactive educator and successfully introduced new academic programs to Cabrillo with the intentions of increasing the variety of subject matter presented in the classroom. Colleagues marveled at his ability to turn shy first-year students into confident university bound scholars through these programs along with his engaging lectures. Not only was Fred passionate about teaching, he also enjoyed acting and directing in Cabrillo College's theater production company. Those who knew Fred best noted that he was also a Shakespeare zealot and frequently organized trips to Oregon for the Shakespeare Festival. Fred retired after a long and successful career in 1995. Mr. Speaker, I wish to express my condolences to Robley and the Levy family during these difficult times. His legacy as a devoted teacher and scholar will blossom as his students apply the lessons taught in his classroom to succeed in life. Those who had the pleasure of sharing Fred's company have and will continue to benefit from his sincere appreciation of life and education.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment. California is the most diversified, the biggest user of energy. Why did we get there? Because we said no to the oil companies, we said no to offshore drilling, we said no to more drilling, because we said yes to developing alternative energy. We developed alternative energy in wind and solar, in geothermal and biomass. Guess what, we have private venture capital. We attracted America's brightest to develop alternative energy. The only way we are going to solve our energy problems is to get off our addiction to oil. With the thinking on ANWR, they would drill right here in the Capitol if there was oil under this building.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to give voice to those who are silent: the many youth in our high schools who are afraid to speak of their place in our society because they are gay or lesbian, bisexual or transgender. Today marks the National Day of Silence in which we celebrate the diversity of our population, but mourn the population's ignorance and intolerance toward that diversity. I commend my colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel), for introducing H. Con. Res. 86, which memorializes the National Day of Silence. This resolution encourages each State and local jurisdiction to adopt laws to prohibit discrimination and harassment against persons of alternative sexual orientation or gender identity. This is a goal I applaud and support. It is hard to believe that in a country dedicated to the principles of freedom and individual liberty that some persons still experience out-and-out harassment because they are not heterosexual. This is especially true of gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender youth who literally fear for their safety at school and on the street, where they are subjected to violence, hatred and taunts. The National Day of Silence is a way to raise awareness of this issue and to work for the justice of those most vulnerable among us: our youth. I ask you all to support H. Con. Res. 86 and to support the National Day of Silence.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to offer my strong support for H. Res. 179. The recent crackdown by the Cuban government on political dissidents is without reason or measure. The Cuban government must recognize that if it wants to become a full member of the family of democratic nations, and re-establish ties with the United States, it must abide by the fundamental rules of a democracy. At the very top of that list is freedom of expression. I believe that the United States can assist Cuba in its move towards greater freedom and openness. The American Congress and the Administration can lead by example, by lifting the travel ban, and lifting the trade embargo. How can we advocate for greater freedom when we prevent American companies and consumers from benefiting from trade with Cuba? How can we call for greater openness when we do not let American citizens exercise their constitutional right to travel freely, to Cuba if they so desire. America can also lead by example by avoiding needless antagonization of Cuba. Wherever they are, our diplomatic community must always act diplomatically. Current U.S. policy towards Cuba has proved a failure. It makes no sense to continue down the path of isolation. The recent actions by the Cuban government, while reprehensible, do not change that central fact. U.S. policy should be based on U.S. national interests, not a system of rewards and punishments for good or bad behavior. In this instance, the Cuban government has behaved badly and they should be properly sanctioned for it, in America and in the world community. This resolution is an appropriate measure. I do not think, however, that it should affect policy. This should not lead to greater restrictions. To the contrary, the response should be greater exchange between the U.S. and Cuba. Greater freedom and openness will lead to a more free and open Cuban society. As we call on Cuba now to change its policy, we must also ask ourselves what we can do to have a more free and open policy. Lifting the travel and trade ban on Cuba would be a good start.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor George Faul, a dedicated and exceptional educator and military serviceman who served the Monterey Peninsula for over four decades. George, who was always known as Bob to his friends and family, passed away March 29, 2003 at the age of 84. Bob and I have been neighbors and friends for years. Anyone who has lived in the close-knit community of Carmel, CA, where I was raised and still live today, can speak to the feeling of community that exists there. Through his work, many advances have been made towards providing students from all backgrounds with quality education throughout Monterey County. Bob began his educational service shortly after World War II, traveling to community colleges to help them gain accreditation. At that time, the California community college system was growing fast to meet the demands of our returned soldiers, sailors and marines, and Bob saw a chance to make a difference. It was during his time as a guidance counselor at the College of the Sequoias in Visalia that he met his wife Pat, who has also been an active community member. Pat served for many years on the board of the Monterey Airport, and was always involved in the daily life of the students and faculty at Monterey Peninsula College. As the longest-serving president of Monterey Peninsula College, Bob immediately saw a need for greater outreach to students from underserved populations and set about creating those networks. His service in the military during World War II helped instill that sense of public service, a feeling that he carried with him his entire life. Besides being president and a member of the board of trustees for the college, Bob served on the boards of many local organizations such as the Community Foundation for Monterey County, the Monterey Museum of Art, the Monterey Jazz Festival, the Carmel Bach Festival, Circle Theater and the American Civil Liberties Union. Mr. Speaker, Bob Faul was an exceptional person, and I am proud to be able to honor him in this way. He and his wonderful wife Pat have been outspoken and energetic community members, and I wish to express my condolences to her and their son Robert on Bob's passing.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to this Supplemental Appropriations bill. I must admit that I opposed the war that this bill is funding. This war is the result of failed diplomacy. This war cost us valuable allies, and now it is costing us our lives. It will also cost us--the American taxpayer--billions of dollars. In the last Persian Gulf war, we relied on our allies. The war cost the U.S. about $61 billion, but almost all of it was reimbursed. The amount of money in this one Supplemental--larger than the entire cost of the first Persian Gulf war--is the largest Supplemental in history. At about $75 billion, this Supplemental is larger than the entire budget of the State of California. My opposition to the war, however, is not the principal reason for my opposition to this bill today. I oppose the bill for two reasons: First, because it leaves our first responders at home--our ``troops'' on the homefront--without complete protection. Second, I don't believe this bill addresses another emergency--repairing U.S. relations with the international community and its representative organizations, such as the United Nations and NATO. The Emergency that this bill supposedly addresses is American security. While we must remain concerned with the impact of international affairs on American security, first and foremost, American security begins at home. Our attention as Congress, must therefore be focused on protecting the territory of the United States from attack. That was the danger we faced on September 11th. That is the apparent reason that we intervened in Afghanistan and now Iraq, and in other countries across the globe. This bill inadequately addresses the security needs of the United States. We are spending $62.5 billion for military activities in this bill, and only $4.25 billion for ``Homeland Security''. Our troops overseas should be secure in the knowledge that their loved ones here are safe from any form of domestic terrorism. An amendment offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin would have addressed some of these needs, but the Republican leadership did not allow the amendment to be debated on the floor of the House. This bill also purportedly addresses the future of rebuilding Iraq. It provides $2.4 billion for ``Relief and Reconstruction''. The sum is woefully inadequate to meet the needs of the Iraqi people. We, the United States, are in the process of bombing their country, destroying their infrastructure. And when the war is over (which I hope will be soon), we will ask them to rebuild and form their country into a democracy. This bill provides more money for another airline bail-out than it does to provide the foundations of an Iraqi democracy. Moreover, the money for reconstruction in Iraq--which is supposed to cover a huge range of activities including health, education, transportation, rule of law, agriculture--comes with no apparent structure or oversight. The post-conflict reconstruction of Iraq can provide the U.S. an opportunity to rebuild its frayed alliances with the international community, an opportunity to work with the United Nations and to strengthen its credibility, credibility that was undermined by the unilateralist approach the Administration has taken previously towards Iraq. This bill shows no vision of an international civilian administration in post-conflict Iraq, one that will be crucial to winning the peace. This task, as has been demonstrated in Afghanistan, could be far more difficult than a successful war campaign. My vote today is in no way a vote against American troops in the field. Their safety is foremost in my thoughts; I hope that they will return quickly to safety of their homes. My vote, rather, is a vote against the priorities of this Administration and the Republican majority, priorities that place an offensive war abroad above defensive protection at home. Priorities to place short-term, unilateral quick- fixes over international solutions which are sustainable in the longer- term. This vote is about current U.S. foreign policy and about what direction we are heading in. I think that we are supporting the wrong priorities and are heading in the wrong direction, and that is why I am voting against this bill.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the League of United and Latin American Citizens (LULAC) and in particular the local Monterey County LULAC Council 2055 LULAC is the largest and oldest Hispanic community organization in the United States. LULAC Council 2055 reflects that tradition and has enjoyed a distinguished 25-year history of community service. LULAC Council 2055 has worked cooperatively and collaboratively with a wide array of people, organizations, and businesses to promote and advance the economic, educational, political and civil rights of the Latino population of my Central California district. Mr. Speaker, as many people from my district and in this body are aware, I am a firm believer in the power of collaboration to achieve great ends. I believe that LULAC Council 2055's continuous activism and partnership with other neighboring organizations is one example of the power of teamwork. For the past 5 years LULAC Council 2055 has raised more than $100,000 in scholarship money for deserving high school students. In November 2002, the League worked to pass several important local school bond measures that will bring $30 million to middle schools in Salinas, California. In the upcoming years, middle students will learn in new, renovated, and modernized classrooms. This will mean great progress in relieving student overcrowding. Along the same lines, LULAC Council 2055 helped pass a bond measure to renovate Hartnell Community College, which serves the people of the Salinas Valley. LULAC Council 2055 continues to work with various civil rights organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Rights Coalition; Coalition of Minority Organizations; National Association for the Advancement of Colored People; Women's International League for Peace and Freedom; Salinas Action League; and the United Farm Workers of America to achieve equality, justice and peace for all people. Furthermore, LULAC embraces diversity by organizing social and cultural events for the Latino community such as the Orgullo Latino Dance, Cinco de Mayo, 16-de septiembre, and Teatro Campesino night. I applaud the efforts of LULAC and those who support their mission to advance and maintain the rights of the Latino community as well as others. Mr. Speaker, I hope that all my colleagues will join me today in applauding the 25 years of public service that LULAC Council 2055 has brought to the community.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in ``shock and awe.'' I am in shock and awe of the courage and bravery that our military women and men have shown overseas in the fight to liberate Iraq. They fight our fight, and they do it without question because their Commander-in-Chief asked them to. I rise today also in ``shock and awe'' of the actions this past Thursday on the House floor. Late in the night, the budget resolution passed by the skin of its teeth, but those teeth still cut deep. They cut deep to the tune of $14.6 billion in unspecified cuts to mandatory veterans' benefits programs with $463 million of that coming in the next year. Ninety percent of those cuts come from cash payments to service-disabled veterans, low income wartime veterans and their survivors. Montgomery G.I. Bill education benefits, vocational rehabilitation and independent living programs for service-disabled veterans, and subsidies for VA home loans also face cuts at the very time when troops fight through sandstorms and fierce enemy resistance. While at war, their benefits are stripped down to avoid ``waste, fraud and abuse.'' Do government programs helping low-income veterans or service-disabled veterans fall under ``waste, fraud and abuse?'' According to the Republican Leadership in the House, they do. Along with mandatory spending, VA discretionary spending takes a tremendous cut as well: $14.2 billion over the next ten years, and 96 percent of discretionary spending is veterans' health care. Priority 8 veterans have already been declared ineligible, and co-payments will increase for pharmaceutical drugs and primary care. In reducing discretionary spending, the Republican budget prevents more veterans from receiving health care and makes room for its tax cuts benefiting the wealthiest Americans, Americans who probably don't have children in fatigues. During wartime, this is shameful and disrespectful to the military women and men who make secure the very freedom that we enjoy. The ``shock and awe'' campaign apparently is not limited to military conflict in Iraq. It has engaged the budgetary process and threatens the ability of the U.S. government to care for its own. If we all support our troops and wish the swift return home of American daughters and sons, how can we find it in ourselves to cut funding to programs that extend a hand to the soldiers that said, ``No, you stay here. I'll go?'' There is no justice in it, and no pair of night-vision goggles will see justice in the budget passed last Thursday night.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor an invaluable public servant, Mrs. Rita Bowling. Mrs. Bowling recently retired from her post as a member of the Board of Supervisors for San Benito County, which is located in my Central California District. Mrs. Bowling has been a beacon of public service who sought to make San Benito County a better place by tirelessly advocating for the principles of the county residents whom she served. Mrs. Bowling was born in Rouyn, Quebec, Canada. She moved to Hollister, California, with her family in 1946. She has lived in San Benito County continuously since then and attended local schools. In 1964, she married Mr. Linden Bowling. For 30 years, Mrs. Bowling began working in the insurance business, and eventually owned her own agency, reminding this community that the American dream is possible through hard work and integrity. Mrs. Bowling not only set an example for the residents of this county, but opened doors for future generations of women when she was the first woman to serve as the Foreperson of the San Benito County Grand Jury. She sprung those doors open again when she became the first woman elected to the San Benito County Board of Supervisors in 1987. Mrs. Bowling represented San Benito County's 3rd District on the Board from 1987 to January 2003, a 16-year record of public service. Mrs. Bowling served as Chairperson to the Board of Supervisors in 1991, 1995, 1998, and again in 2002. She presided over that body with great skill and with an immense sense of responsibility to the people of San Benito County. Her decision not to seek election to a 5th term means a gain for her family, but a loss to the community. She leaves a legacy of achievement that we all can admire. In addition to her service on the board, Mrs. Bowling participated with the San Benito County of Governments (COG) where she diligently worked to improve San Benito County's transportation infrastructure. Mrs. Bowling also served on the Veterans Memorial park Commission for nearly 14 years during which time she was instrumental in obtaining funding and community support for improvements to the park, including, ball fields and restrooms benefiting the community. Widely respected for her uncommon common sense, for speaking with candor and clarity and for her principled stands on the issues, Mrs. Bowling never withdrew from an opportunity to speak directly to the Issues at hand. San Benito County will miss her ``Ritaisms''. All those who worked with Mrs. Bowling, share my admiration for the unmatched dignity and professionalism that she brought to her four terms on the board. Through her enormous sense of decency, fairness, generosity, and commitment to the residents of San Benito County, Mrs. Rita Bowling has made it a better place for all residents. Mr. Speaker, it is truly an honor to recognize Rita Bowling.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, through all the debate over attacking Iraq, it is important to remember how the threat of the United States attack on Iraq affects our youngest constituents. Here is a letter that I just received from one such concerned constituent in my district, 7-year-old Nathaniel Smith from Capitola, California. Dear Congressman Farr, My name is Nathaniel and I am 7 years old. I just want to say that I do not think the war is a very good idea. War is not a good way to solve problems, and it is a bad thing to happen in the world. It might destroy other people's property like houses and schools. People that are not in the war can die because soldiers might miss. War is dangerous for nature. The money for war can go to schools. My school, Capitola Elementary, might close because my school does not have enough money. Please do not have a war. Sincerely, Nathaniel Smith. This youthful expression of concern eloquently captures the sentiment of so many Americans, young and old. I would like to add my voice to that of Nathaniel Smith in urging the Commander in Chief who ordered this war to cancel it.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor one of my youngest and bravest constituents, Angel Gonzalez. Angel is California's Ambassador to Foresters Champions Across America and the Children's Miracle Network program that honors remarkable children who have triumphed despite severe medical challenges. Today, Angel enjoys the fun and games of most five-year olds, but it wasn't long ago that would have seemed impossible. Angel was standing with his Grandmother outside the oil change shop where his Mom works in Salinas, California, when a car in one of the service bays suddenly accelerated and crashed through the closed door of the shop. Angel was hit by the car and suffered severe head trauma and internal injuries. After emergency surgery and 10 days in a coma, there were no doubts that Angel was truly a fighter. He pulled through not only because of the good work of his surgeons and nurses, but because of determination and will power. His courage and determination has been crucial in his progress on the long and difficult road of rehabilitation. Over the months, Angel has made remarkable progress, gradually regaining his speech and motor skills. Through the continuing and laborious physical therapy, Angel has maintained his positive attitude and brought a playful approach to the challenges of his continuing recovery. Angel's recovery is a remarkable testament to his strength and perseverance and the wonderful treatment he received at Salinas Valley Memorial Hospital. As California's Ambassador, Angel has traveled to Washington, DC to bring hope to other children who are fighting for their health, and to recognize the important role that children's hospitals play in providing specialized care for kids. I would like to congratulate Angel on his amazing recovery and his position as an inspiring role model to all people who face adversity. I am honored to be able to recognize the resolve and support of Angel, his family, and their community.