Sam Farr

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support my good friend from California and his motion to instruct the conferees on the Farm Security Act, which would repeal the existing restrictions against private financing of agricultural sales to Cuba. Mr. Speaker, at issue here is whether we want to help American farmers, or leave in place restrictions that are costing them millions of dollars each year. Given that the national farm economy is depressed, it is important that we do what we can to help American farmers and their families. With one simple adjustment in our policy, we can help them recover billions of dollars in lost trade. According to a recent study, U.S. farmers are losing close to $1.26 billion in agricultural exports and about $3.6 billion in exports related to agriculture because of these restrictions. The U.S. Senate has taken the first step in easing agricultural trade restrictions, and the House of Representatives should follow. The Senate position has garnered wide support from a broad array of agricultural interests. The National Farm Bureau, the USA Rice Federation, the dairy industry, wine sellers, all support lifting the restrictions. The California Farm Bureau supports lifting restrictions because it knows that California agriculture stands to reap great benefits from trade with Cuba. Up to $98 million in agricultural products, and $287 million in related sales could be generated, simply by lifting the restriction on private financing. The Cubans are ready, willing, and able to purchase our goods. They have stated publicly that they would buy over a billion dollars' worth of agricultural goods if we would only lift restrictions, and help expedite licenses to allow them access to the same lending terms to which other countries have access. Let's help the American farmers. Let's trust them manage their own business and their own risks. Lifting the restrictions would give them this freedom. This is a simple vote, will we agree to instruct the House conferees to agree with the Senate--which has already realized the necessity of this change in policy--or do we continue with a failed policy, which helps no one and hurts American farmers? I urge my colleagues to support this move, and vote ``yes'' on the Dooley motion to instruction the conferees.

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I rise in favor of the motion to instruct conferees. I rise because I represent a lot of farmers in California, farmers who traveled with me to Cuba a month ago, people who want to sell what they grow to the Cuban Government, to the Cuban people. The irony is that it is not the Cuban Government that will not let them sell it to them, it is our government. That is why they are asking us to instruct these conferees to lift what they consider just un-American restrictions on their ability as businesspeople in this country who grow food for people, regardless of their political affiliation, and see that that food can be sold to Cuba. In fact, the rice farmers from California and the wine grape growers from California that were with us indicated that they had sold, the rice growers had sold rice to Cuba, were very pleased with the sale, had gotten paid in a timely fashion and President Castro asked them right across the table, ``I'll buy a billion dollars more of American product if you will get your licenses to sell.'' So that is what this is about. It is about getting the ability for American farmers to sell their crops. What does it mean to a place like California? We looked at what we could trade in Cuba. It comes out to about $98 million in lost trade of the products that we produce in California that we could be selling to Cuba. About $280 million would be to agricultural-related industries. Cuba is a market for rice, feed, grains, oilseeds, beans, wheat flour, animal products fertilizers, forest products, herbicides, pesticides and farm machinery. Many of these products are big business in California. Currently with restrictions, the U.S. has had $35 million in sales to Cuba in the last 3 months. So the interchange is happening, but it is a very difficult one. I would just ask, and there is a lot of emotion in here, but I cannot understand why people would care if President Castro gets credit for feeding hungry children. My God, our country can rise above that and start helping 11 million people eat.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, today across the country, thousands of students on our college campuses are silent. They are silent as a sign of solidarity of persons who, because of their sexual orientation and gender identification, cannot speak for themselves. They are silent as a form of protest against a society that silences persons who are different, persons who do not meet main street's definition of proper. They are silent, but we in Congress should not be. We should shout and raise our voices and call for an end to discrimination and prejudice against gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender persons. We should affirm loudly that by this day of silence, America has the capacity and the heart to say to all persons are just that, persons; and all persons are deserving of fair treatment. In closing, I would like to thank two gentlemen from my district, Bruce Carlson and Matt Friday, for their dedication to such causes, and recognize the instrumental role they play in creating a nation free of prejudice.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, The first day of school is a memorable day for parents. The image of our daughters and sons, small packs on their backs, lunchboxes at their sides, leading us through the doors of their new classrooms is one not forgotten by any parents. The image reflects our hope for them as they embrace a new role in their communities and their nation. The compact between a nation and a child is simple. The nation prepares the child to accept the mantle of its stewardship. The nation educates a child, providing the tools that the child will later use to further the progress of the nation. The nation that does not honor this compact is a nation disgraced. The nation that establishes, expands, or renews this compact deserves recognition. This is what I seek to do today as I rise in tribute to the events of March 23, the first day of school for many of the girls of Afghanistan. I offer my deep appreciation to all those who made this day possible. Their unwavering conviction that this compact would one day be honored in Afghanistan was realized March 23. These parents, teachers, and international aid workers labored tirelessly to provide books and supplies for schools in communities across Afghanistan. Through their education, the children of Afghanistan will gain a greater understanding of the people within their nation's border and knowledge of the world beyond them. On March 23, parents in Afghanistan heard the sound of doors swinging open and their children walking determinedly through them. Echoed in this, I can hear my daughter walking through the door of her elementary school many years ago. I join with parents around the world who share the joy and pride and overwhelming hope of the parents of Afghanistan to honor of this great occasion: their children's first day of school.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the 90th anniversary of Girl Scouts USA. For ninety years, Girl Scouts has had a proven track record of empowering girls to become leaders, helping adults be positive role models and mentors for children and helping build solid communities. When founder Juliette Gordon Low assembled 18 girls ninety years ago she started what would become the largest organization of girls in the world. It was because of her vision, that girls now have access to a forum to develop mentally, spiritually, and physically. Girl Scouts promotes the ideas of fun, friendship and power of girls together. Through experiences such as cultural exchanges, outdoor experiences and community service projects girls learn life skills. They acquire self- confidence and expertise, take on responsibility, are encouraged to think creatively and act with integrity--qualities essential in good citizens and great leaders. The Girl Scout Mission is ``to help all girls grow strong.'' I hope we can follow the examples set by the Girl Scouts and remember the great importance of coming together to give back to our communities.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, International Women's Day began in our Nation. It was not a gift from Members of Congress, nor from the well-clothed captains of industry, but rather a victory achieved by the women who sewed the suits they wore. It was these women, garment workers, who went on strike March 8, 1857, demanding the bread of economic security and the roses of a better life. At an international conference held fifty-three years later, German socialist Clara Zetkin asked for an international women's day to mark the strike of the garment workers in the United States. Her request was met with unanimous support, and International Women's Day was born. More than 11,000 babies will be born in our Nation today. These children will eventually inherit many of the problems the Federal Government strives to solve. To prepare them to assume responsibility for progressive government leadership, we must ensure their health, give them adequate nutrition, educate them, allow them equal opportunities, and inspire them with knowledge of the accomplishments which generations of women have contributed to the world. And so, as we celebrate International Women's Day this Saturday, we must recommit ourselves to the betterment of the lives of and equal opportunities for our daughters, our wives, our sisters, and our mothers. We do this to honor all women, and especially those on strike during the early spring of 1857, who remind us of our capacity to improve our lives and the lives of those around us.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, I encourage you to read the Time Magazine article entitled ``Hunting Made Easy'' which describes the ``slaughter'' of ``captive animals to mount their heads on a wall.'' It is a very disturbing article which also raises the question, ``Should Congress step in?'' The answer is a resounding yes. You can step in by cosponsoring H.R. 3464, the ``Captive Exotic Animal Protection Act of 2001'', a bill to combat the unfair and inhumane practice of ``canned hunting.'' Even hunters are objecting to this gruesome practice. Hunting Made Easy (By Jeffrey Kluger) The exotic Corsican ram trotting about the 100-yard-long pen in central Pennsylvania paid little mind to the men approaching across the field. People were always walking in and out of the pen, as often as not with food for the flock. So the ram didn't resist when the men drove all the animals toward one end of the enclosure. It was only when the first arrow--fired from just yards away--struck it in the haunch that it realized something was up. The ram hobbled off and was struck by a second arrow, then a third. It stood for a moment staring beyond the fence line and then settled onto its haunches, bleeding. A gunshot to the abdomen finished it off--preserving its head as a trophy. It has never been easy being an animal at the business end of a hunt, but these days it's hard being the hunter too. Dwindling ranges and herds make the ancient business of stalking prey an increasingly difficult proposition. The answer for many Americans is to shift their shooting grounds from the wild to one of the country's growing number of hunting preserves. By almost any measure, hunting preserves are enjoying a boom. Up to 2,000 may exist in the U.S., with 500 in Texas alone. Many advertise on the Internet and in hunting magazines, and all offer the same thing: the chance to bag a trophy, with none of the uncertainty of hunting in the wild. ``No kill, no pay'' is the promise many make. Of course, making good on that guarantee requires bending the prey-and-predator rules. Animals at some preserves are so accustomed to humans that they wander into range at the sound of a rattling feed bucket. Elsewhere they're confined to small patches of woods where they can't elude hunters for long. At others they may never even make it out of their cages before being shot. Most troubling, it's not just prolific-as-rabbits deer and other common prey that are being killed in such canned hunts, as they're sometimes called; it's rarer creatures too. All manner of exotics--including the Arabian oryx, the Nubian ibex, yaks, impalas and even the odd rhino, zebra or tiger-- are being conscripted into the canned-hunt game and offered to sportsmen for ``trophy fees'' of up to $20,000. Not surprisingly, these hunts have their critics. A handful of states ban or restrict the practice, and a pair of bills are pending in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives to prohibit the interstate sale of exotic animals for hunts. Supporters of the hunts object, arguing that exotics are bred in sufficient numbers to support the industry and that many surplus zoo animals could not survive in the wild anyway. Even to some outdoorsmen, however, canned hunts are beginning to look like no hunt at all. ``I started hunting when I was 7 and didn't kill my first deer until I was 16,'' says Perry Arnold, 52, of Lake City, Fla. ``What they got going on now, that ain't hunting. That's a slaughter.'' A slaughter is precisely the way canned-hunt foes frame the practice, and the killing of the Corsican ram is not the only horror they point to. The Humane Society of the United States tells stories of its own: the declawed black leopard that was released from a crate, chased by dogs and shot as it hid under a truck; the domesticated tiger that lounged under a tree and watched a hunter approach, only to be shot as it sat. ``Canned hunts are an embarrassment,'' says California Representative Sam Farr, sponsor of the House bill. What makes the problem hard to police is the sheer number of exotic animals for sale. There are about 2,500 licensed animal exhibitors in the U.S., and only 200 of them belong to the American Zoo and Aquarium Association, which condemns the sale of exotics to hunting ranches. Even unaffiliated zoos might be reluctant to wade into the canned-hunt market, but many do so unknowingly, selling overflow animals--often products of too successful captive-breeding programs--to middlemen, who pass them into less legitimate hands. The crowding that can result on the ranches leads to animals' being killed not just by hunters but also by diseases that occur in dense populations. If zoos have trouble keeping track of exotic animals, Washington doesn't even try. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service can intervene only if animals are federally protected or if the hunt violates a state law and interstate commerce is involved. Since many cases don't meet those criteria, the animals are essentially orphaned by the feds. Still, not all hunts on preserves provoke an outcry. Many ranch owners keep exotic animals out of their collections or conduct hunts on grounds that give prey a sporting chance. The Selah Ranch in Austin, Texas, is a 5,500-acre spread covered by Spanish dagger and prickly pear, often with no sign of the elusive animals that live there. ``There are a lot of exotic animals on this place that die of old age,'' says Mike Gardner, owner of San Miguel Hunting Ranches, which runs Selah. Here too, however, the odds can be stacked in the hunters' favor. Deer are often lured to feeding stations, where they are serenely unaware of the men in the stilt-mounted tin shack 75 yards away. Such lying in wait--or ``shooting over bait''--is legal in Texas and defended by hunters. ``It promotes a clean kill,'' says Gardner. Other sportsmen are troubled by the practice. Stan Rauch of the Montana Bowhunters Association believes that fed animals are tame animals and should thus be off limits. ``Animals become habituated to people when they depend on us for food,'' he says. Even preserves with no baited killings and lots of room to roam may be less of a square deal than they seem. ``If a ranch advertises itself as having 3,500 acres, you need to know if that space is open or broken down into pens and whether there's protective cover or the ground is clear,'' says Richard Farinato, director of the Humane Society's captive-wildlife protection program. Concerns such as these are promoting governments to act. More states are being pressed to ban or restrict hunting in enclosures. The House bill, which parallels one introduced in the Senate by Delaware's Joseph Biden, would not drop the hammer on the hunts but would give Washington a way to control the animal traffic. But the new laws could come at a price. In Texas alone, the hunt industry brings in $1 billion a year; a crackdown could hurt both good ranches and bad. ``Cattle prices have stayed the same for 40 years,'' says Gardner. ``To hold on to acreage, you've got to have other sources of income.'' Safari Club International is worried that since hunting areas are so different, it may be impossible to pass a law that covers them all. ``There's no standard to say what is and what isn't fair,'' says club spokesman Jim Brown. ``You know it when you see it.'' But there may be a deeper standard than that. If the hunting impulse is as old as humanity, so is the sense of what it truly means to chase and bag an animal. Nature may have intended humans to hunt, but whether it meant to toss ranches, pens and feeding stations into the mix is a question hunters must ask themselves.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring to your attention that tomorrow, Friday, March 1, 2002, is Peace Corps Day. Tomorrow throughout the country, former volunteers will bring their experiences to work, school, places of worship and recreation. They will share with their colleagues, friends and community members the story of their years as volunteers and how it changed and shaped their lives. Since 1961, more than 163,000 volunteers have served in 135 countries and, in so doing, have served their country and the cause of peace and friendship across the globe. This year, former volunteers will also be carrying with them the message of the President of the United States--that the Peace Corps is more important and relevant in the world today than it has ever been. I applaud the President's initiative to double the number of Peace Corps volunteers to 14,000 by the year 2007, and to bring Americans to parts of the globe where volunteers have yet to serve--parts of the globe that Americans need to know more about, and which need to know more about Americans. Of course, Mr. Speaker, every day is Peace Corps day for me. My experience as a volunteer in Colombia is one that I draw upon and share with everyone I meet. Tomorrow will be no different. I urge all Members of Congress, whether they were volunteers or not, to honor the Peace Corps tomorrow, and to share the spirit of volunteerism and international peace with everyone they come in contact with that day.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to address the House regarding the centennial of the birth of one of our greatest American writers, John Steinbeck. John Steinbeck brought honor to the United States as a distinguished writer and endured criticism and suspicion for his progressive ideas and the themes of his novels, short stories, and essays. His work reflects deeply the compassionate view of America and Americans. John Steinbeck promoted a greater understanding of the lives of people who experienced difficult economic times, war, the fulfillment of scientific study, the value of hard labor, the difficulties and joys of the bonds within families and between friends. People from around the world are attracted to the central coast of California to visit the rich fields of the Salinas Valley and the bountiful Monterey Bay described in Steinbeck's books. I believe the life and work of John Steinbeck deserves congressional recognition. I encourage my colleagues to support the bill I am introducing today to offer our appreciation and deep respect for the writings of a great American, John Steinbeck.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the recipients of the First Annual Children and Families Heroes Award from Santa Cruz County. These men and women have all invested time and energy in numerous endeavors designed to improve the welfare of children. Along with the Children & Families Commission, I would like to recognize them for their commitment and service to our community. The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors established this commission in 1998 to determine the best practices to promote the welfare of children. The commission has strived ``to ensure that family-friendly services and education are available so that each child reaches the fifth year of life healthy, ready and able to learn, and emotionally well developed.'' Through promoting the ideas healthy and school ready children, as well as strong families in combination with facilitating community discussions, task forces, surveys and data analysis, the commission continues to preserve the future viability of the nation. I applaud the commission for its work and for its recognition of individuals in the community who promote the welfare of children. In honoring these individuals we realize that the goals of the commission could not be met without the support and leadership of countless members of the Santa Cruz County community. I join the Children and Families Commission in congratulating the following recipients for their commitment to improving the lives of children in Santa Cruz County: Dr. Salem Margarian, Laurie Hester, Mountain Community Resources, Terry Jimenez, The Beck Family, Sara Wood Smith, Maria Cristina Negrete, Special Parents Information Network, Rita Mori, Marcia Meyer, Una Baer, Ana Granados, Catherine and Martin Newman, Julie Olsen Edwards, and Luis Villacreces. These individuals and organizations demonstrate the ongoing need to promote child welfare programs.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to offer a tribute to Megan Wells and all the others who have contributed to the Flinders University Internship Program. The effects of the terrorist attacks on September 11th have resonated in the hearts and minds of every American from Maine to California. Half-way around the world in Adelaide, the capital of South Australia, five of Australia's best and brightest young people were faced with a difficult decision. The question in Adelaide was simple enough. Would a group of five university students continue on with their plans to travel to Washington, DC to work in four congressional offices and a news organization as part of their American Studies degree? Fortunately for us all, the students answered with a resounding yes. Three years ago, the Flinders University of Australia inaugurated a Washington, DC internship program for top students within its American Studies Department. Most of the interns work in congressional offices-- making this program unique certainly for Australian universities and quite possibly for any university system not based in the United States. The program is directed in Washington, DC on volunteer basis by former congressional staffer, Eric Federing. Mr. Federing's work reflects the understanding that it is in our national interest for the future leaders of the world to understand how our Congress operates. This program is based on the idea of creating lasting bonds by ``putting good people with good people in good places'' for serious, intensive internships. And, as the Australians would say, to help bridge the ``tyranny of distance.'' Since the beginning of January, I've had the pleasure to host Megan, who is completing her degree in International Studies. She has exhibited an excellent comprehension of travel and tourism issues and has played an active role in maintaining a link between the United States and Australia. She boosted our morale long before she arrived simply by wanting to venture half-a-world away. I am extremely grateful to her parents, Kerry and Peter Haysman, who have been willing to share their daughter Megan with the people of the 17th District of California. The Flinders University internship program hits upon a modest formula for successful international exchanges in large part due to the active support of both American and Australian governments. I have not been the only member so fortunate to have participated in this program. Toula Skiladas of Broken Hill in New South Wales has worked in the office of Senator Christopher Dodd; Miranda Ramsay of Unley, South Australia has assisted Representative Louise Slaughter and her staff; Rachel Mules of Penola, South Australia has joined my California colleague Loretta Sanchez; and Patrick Armitage of North Adelaide has helped explain Washington, DC to the school-aged audiences of Channel One News. Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank everyone involved in creating and shepherding this internship program from its initial concept to the thriving institution it has become. They have done this nation and the Australian people numerous proud acts of public service, which I hope will continue for many years to come.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the remaining time. Everybody here has been elected under the law that allows a $1,000 limit. We had no problem getting elected. Many of us have been elected many, many times. There is nothing broke out there that needs fixing. The law is a good law, and let us keep that good law so that we can have good, meaningful campaign finance reform tonight. Do not do it by throwing away the message by doubling the amount of contributions that one can take if this amendment is passed. This is a bad amendment. Defeat it. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Baldacci).

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute to speak in opposition to this bill. Mr. Chairman, this is a bad amendment; but let me put it first in perspective. Ten years ago President Bush vetoed a campaign finance reform bill, a tougher bill than any of the votes we have taken tonight. That bill that was on the President's desk banned soft money, it limited PAC contributions, it put a limit on individual contributions, it eliminated the issue-advocacy ads, it tightened the coordinated expenses and independent expenditures, it put stricter lowest-unit rate rules on broadcasters, and it allowed some public financing. That bill was vetoed. We had campaign finance reform in America, and it was vetoed by the President. We hope that this President will not veto this bill, but he should with this amendment in it. I will tell you why. This is a bad amendment. More than 300 Members in this House twice have voted against this amendment. The last two times that this amendment was on the floor, overwhelmingly they defeated it. I urge those Members to do the same tonight. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio). Mr. DeFazio. Mr. Chairman, in response to the gentleman before me, hard money was outraised by incumbents 3.2 to 1. That is a totally BS argument, to say, hey, this is going to help challengers. It is going to help incumbents. Lobbyists give 92 percent of their money in hard contributions. They say oh, this limit is too low, $1,000. Yes, less than 1 percent of the people in America contribute $1,000, so for 99 percent of the people, this a moot argument. Yes, but for those fat cats, those people who can afford the $1,000, this is an argument. Come on, guys, let us get real. You say oh, the Senate, the Senate is doing $2,000; $2,000 every 6 years. You are talking about $2,000 every 2 years. That means every 6-year Senate cycle they raise $2,000, you raise $6,000. So the arguments that are being drug before us are false arguments. Many reformers back in 1974 argued for $100. Apply the inflation rate to $100. It would be far less than the $1,000 of today. True reform, get the money out, stick with the lower limits.

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett).

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Tierney).

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Udall).

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Rivers).

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, we have been down this road before. In 1998, the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Whitfield) had this amendment. It was debated in the same sense it was debated tonight, and it was soundly rejected. Mr. Chairman, 315 Members of this body voted no. We are on the recorded record on that. In 1999 the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Whitfield) again offered this amendment, the same debate, and 300 of us voted against it. Why? Because there is no reform in campaign reform if we are doubling the amount of money that we are putting into the bill. This is not reform. We are trying to do history tonight. We are trying to pass campaign finance reform. We cannot have reform out there with a message that says, well, we did reform, but we just doubled the amount of money that we can get from individual rich contributors. There is only one way to have campaign finance reform, and that is to defeat this amendment with the same 300 votes that voted against it in 1998 and 1999. You are on the record, do not flip flop.

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to also pay tribute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi). Forty years ago in this city a beautiful young woman graduated from Trinity College. Today she becomes the highest ranking woman in the United States House of Representatives. The gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), now a San Francisco Congresswoman, is the pride of our great State. Born in Baltimore to a family of public servants, her father has been mentioned, Thomas D'Alesandro, served as mayor of Baltimore for 12 years after representing the city in this House of Representatives for five terms where he, like the gentlewoman, served on the Committee on Appropriations. Her brother, Thomas D'Alesandro, III, served as mayor of Baltimore. She met her husband Paul here in Washington, D.C., in Georgetown where he was a student at Georgetown University. They moved to California, and I think at that time Paul Pelosi changed the definition of the State slogan which is printed on our State library in Sacramento. That slogan reads, ``Bring us men to match our mountains.'' Paul Pelosi brought us women to match our mountains. The gentlewoman gave birth to five children, Nancy Corinne, Christine, Jacqueline, Paul, and Alexandra. While raising her five children, she got involved in San Francisco Democratic politics, became northern chair of the State party, and chair of the 1984 Democratic National Convention Host Committee when that convention was held in San Francisco. The gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi) became known as a national committeewoman from California and served in that position for 20 years. She is a champion of the people's issues. She is a respected mother, a San Francisco socialite, a Congresswoman, and now Democratic whip of the House of Representatives. As a native of California, fifth generation, this is one of the proudest moments I have had in public life, to see one of our own public servants rise to this position, and I now serve along with the gentlewoman as chair of the Democratic delegation from California. That is no small issue. We have 32 members of the 52-member delegation that are Democrats. Of those 32 members, 16 are women, 16 are men. It has the highest number of African Americans, Hispanics, Asians, and, as I like to say, return Peace Corps volunteers in that delegation. Every one of the Members in that delegation and the history it is making as a delegation of parity and a delegation of broad representation pays tribute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi) for getting them elected to Congress. Mr. Speaker, we gather on this floor of this great institution to pay tribute to a woman who has already made history, but in the years ahead will make even more.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, today California says goodbye to Assembly Speaker Robert Hertzberg and says hello to incoming Speaker Herb Wesson. Speaker Hertzberg served in this position with abundant personal energy and unbridled enthusiasm. He clearly loved this job and worked hard for the people of California. Hertzberg is affectionately known as ``Speaker Hugsberg'' for his propensity to enthusiastically embrace friends, foes, and strangers. Indeed these famous hugs have spread beyond California to many of us on Capitol Hill and most recently to members of the Hazardous Materials team charged with decontaminating the Hart Senate Office building. These hugs will never end, but Hertzberg's term-limited position as Speaker ends today. Speaker Hertzberg will also leave the Assembly seat he has represented in the Legislature since 1996 at the end of the year. Speaker Hertzberg's presence in the institution will far outlast his two years as Speaker and he leaves a permanent mark on the State Capitol. Hertzberg instituted some groundbreaking changes during his brief tenure. He opened an on-site childcare center and upgraded technology throughout the Assembly. He founded the Capitol Institute, which now bears his name, to establish innovative training courses for freshman Members and legislative staff. California is the world's fifth largest economy and Speaker Hertzberg opened the Speaker's Office of International Relations. He injected a humorous touch of his heritage into the Capitol's culture by publishing a guide on Yiddish, so everyone in the Legislature and Capitol Press Corps could translate the colorful phrases he so frequently uttered during floor sessions. Hertzberg understood working together means just that and maintained a continuous presence in Washington, D.C. through an Office of Federal Relations. He was quick to point out that what happens in Washington, D.C. matters in California. He frequently led delegations of legislators to D.C. to discuss state issues with federal officials. Hertzberg was determined to work with all of us in Washington, D.C. to maximize California's share of federal dollars. Hertzberg is a gifted and tireless legislator, who worked to enact long-needed reforms of California's foster care system, significantly expand access to low-cost health insurance for working families, and help pass the two largest park bonds in state history. He was also the lead negotiator during extended discussions that led to the passage of the largest school construction bond in state history. After September 11, he moved quickly to establish a statewide task force to assess the impact of terrorism on California's economy and to recommend steps to improve public safety and restore public confidence. He visited Washington to meet with federal officials and coordinate terrorism preparedness and response activities. In December, he led a delegation to Taiwan and Japan, to address post-September 11 tourism and to promote trade with California. As we celebrate Speaker Hertzberg's achievements, I wish him all the best in his next endeavor. I know he will be extremely successful. All the best for the bright future to Speaker Robert Hertzberg, his wife Dr. Cynthia Telles-Hertzberg, and sons Daniel, David, and Raymond.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Ken Shultz, 54, a journalist who lived on the Central Coast of California for many years. He died recently while vacationing in Redding. Mr. Schultz's career in journalism spanned more than 30 years, including a stint with Stars and Stripes during which he covered the Vietnam war. I first became acquainted with Ken when I served on the Monterey County Board of Supervisors. He moved to Salinas in the early 1970s, after he earned a Bronze Star for valor during his term of duty in Vietnam. Ken had been wounded himself while carrying a wounded New York Times correspondent from a battle at Quang Tri. Ken worked first as a reporter at the Salinas Californian and later as a reporter, editor and bureau chief at the Monterey County Herald. I remember him fondly as an affable, kind-hearted, enthusiastic soul; a man with great integrity who always made time to take interest in the welfare of others. While he lived on the Central Coast, Ken covered a wide range of issues and topics, including city and county politics. He covered appearances and speeches by nearly every U.S. president since Gerald Ford and interviewed numerous celebrities, including Ansel Adams and Elaine Steinbeek, the third wife of author John Steinbeck. Born in Denver in 1947, Ken grew up in Southern California and worked as a part-time sports editor while attending San Fernando Valley State College. He was an avid baseball fan, railroad enthusiast and history buff. He and his wife of 31 years, Diane, had three children, Jennifer, Paul and Sarah. Ken left the Monterey County Herald in 1997, opting for a new career in teaching. After earning a teaching certificate from Chapman University in Salinas, he moved to Lancaster and began teaching fourth graders at Mesquite Elementary School in Palmdale. I know those young students were fortunate that Ken touched their lives. They no doubt benefitted--as did we all on the Central Coast for so many years--from Ken's kindness, and the enthusiasm he brought to the world around him.