Charlie Gonzalez

Mr. GONZALEZ

Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 483, 484, 486, 487, 488, 489, 490, 491, 492, 493, 494, 495, 496, 497, 498. Had I been present, I would have voted 483--yes, 484--yes, 485--yes, 486--yes, 487--no, 488--yes, 489--no, 490--yes, 491--yes, 492--yes, 493--yes, 494--yes, 495--yes, 496--yes, 497--yes, 498--yes.

Mr. GONZALEZ

Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, I would like to express my strong support for efforts to increase the depreciation deduction. In my view accelerated depreciation is one of the most efficient and effective ways for Congress to spur business investment in our country. Mr. Speaker, as you know this year has seen a dramatic drop off in business investment. Business investment was one of the foundations of the economic boom that our nation enjoyed during the Clinton Administration. It is therefore critical that Congress does what it can to restart the capital investment engine that has propelled our nation's economy to extraordinary heights over the last decade. Mr. Speaker, in addition to reductions in interest rates and balancing the budget, one of the most important things the Federal Government can do to increase business investment, in my view, is to accelerate the depreciation schedule for business purchases. Depreciation schedules reflect the Federal Government's own somewhat arbitrary calculation of what is the economic life of capital. Accelerating the depreciation allowance for new capital investments provides a direct and immediate incentive for businesses to build factories, purchase new equipment, and generally expand operations. This inevitably creates jobs and results in a long term improvement in the productivity rates of American industry. Additionally, unlike many other proposed tax incentives, accelerated depreciation is directly tied to business investment. A business-person can not enjoy this tax incentive unless he or she commits to a capital expenditure. Mr. Speaker, it is for these reasons, I firmly believe that the long term economic benefits of accelerated depreciation far outweigh the immediate revenue loss consequences of any such tax cut. It is my hope than in the 2002 session of the 107th Congress we will pass into law an acceleration of the depreciation allowance.

Mr. GONZALEZ

Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 476, had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.''

Mr. GONZALEZ

Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall no. 400, 401, 402, 403, 404, 405, 406, 407. Had I been present, I would have voted 400-no; 401-no; 402-yes; 403- yes; 404-no; 405-yes; 406-yes; 407-yes.

Mr. GONZALEZ

Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend the Texas Transplant Institute (TTI) in San Antonio, Texas for hosting a special All Star Transplant Reunion. This event will honor all transplant patients and living donors from every Transplant Institute Program in Texas. Guests will also be joined by Spurs basketball player and donor recipient, Sean Elliott. San Antonio's Texas Transplant Institute was created in 1999 by combining the solid organ transplant program at Methodist Speciality and Transplant Hospital with the bone marrow/stem cell transplant program at Methodist Hospital. Over the years, the Institute has expanded. In May 2001, a liver transplant program was added to the Institute. And in July, a pediatric kidney transplant program was added to complete the full range of services provided at the Texas Transplant Institute. Today, the Texas Transplant Institute is the only program in the United States that combines the resources and talents of both the bone marrow/stem cell program and the solid organ transplant program under one entity. Through its mission of ``Continuing the Legacy of Hope Through Patient Care, Research and Education,'' the Texas Transplant Institute is dedicated to serving patients who are in need of organ and bone marrow/stem cell transplants. Collectively, these programs have served over 2,500 patients. It has performed 1,684 kidney transplants, 631 bone marrow/stem cell transplants, 212 heart transplants, and 2 liver transplants to patients all over the United States. On October 13, 2001, hundreds of transplant recipients, patients on waiting lists, and living donors who are considered an inspiration to more than 80,000 men, women, and children will unite. Many will meet for the first time with their respective donors, as well as other individuals who will attend and are urgently awaiting for a transplant to replace a failing kidney, heart, liver, lung, or pancreas. Mr. Speaker, once again, I would like to commend the Texas Transplant Institute for hosting this special All Star Transplant Reunion. I especially want to thank the doctors and staff at TTI for their hard work and dedication and I wish them well as they continue their life- saving services to the community.

Mr. GONZALEZ

Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment. The first thought that comes to my mind, are we debating the same executive order? I have heard allegations and assertions made from the other side that truly are misrepresentative. What we are talking about with this executive order, and the whole basis of the executive order was accountability and responsibility of those who are providing services and receiving Federal dollars in providing those services to make sure that they effectively deliver those services. This is what it is all about. The other thing, the other matter that really stands out is where have we been. The census tells us much of what is going on in this country. While individuals are perfecting their ability to speak English, while we have these clustered groups of individuals from different countries, they still require services in a language that they would understand for their benefit. That is why we are providing it. Mr. Chairman, prior to this amendment we were arguing abstinence and how we teach it, how we promote it. If my colleagues had their way, they would basically be espousing abstinence in a language never understood by the individual that Members seek to assist. This is what is so crazy about this whole debate. There are other matters I think which have been misrepresented. The Sandoval case does not stand for the proposition that Americans do not have a legal right to have everything in a particular language. It simply states an individual citizen does not have a right to bring a cause of action, but that the Federal Government does. The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Rodriguez) and I met with the members and representatives of the American Medical Association who had certain concerns. Once we discussed it and they understood the intent of the executive order, it was something that was acceptable. It was something that was doable. We are making it impossible by scaring individuals out there that they will never be able to comply with the intent of this executive order. That is an unfair characterization. The executive order and the implementing guidance that follow it stress the importance of complying with title VI of the Civil Rights Act without unduly burdening the fundamental mission of the agency. That is the standard. This goes contrary to the whole motive behind it. Do not stand in the way now with misrepresentations. Face the facts. Face the reality of our society, and let us deliver those services in a meaningful way.

Mr. GONZALEZ

Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. The Committee on Small Business, Mr. Speaker, has always been recognized as a true model of bipartisanship. I commend the chairman of the committee today for continuing in that tradition. I want to commend both the chairman of the committee and the ranking member for being really the guiding light in this as in many other pieces of legislation that will expand that business universe to all the small business men and women in this Nation. H.R. 1860 today presents a greater opportunity than ever before. It is not only an expansion but it is a monitoring; and it really is an accountability model to make sure that the legislation that we pass when it gets down on the ground, in our communities, actually is doing what it is supposed to. Again, I commend the chairman and the ranking member for their fine work. I would ask that all my colleagues join us today in passage of this fine piece of legislation.

Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, today we stand and take the final step toward reauthorizing the Small Business Technology Transfer Program and upgrading it from its current pilot program status. We began this initiative in 1992 with a unique goal, to help the small business and research communities work together to bring innovative new technologies to the marketplace. It is impossible to overstate the impact that technological innovation has had on the economy and on our lives. Computer and telecommunications innovation, biotechnology and chemical engineering have fueled a boom and profoundly changed the way we work and live. Some technologies were exotic or even unheard of just 10 years ago. Today, they have become commonplace. Mr. Speaker, the Small Business Technology Transfer Program has helped to spur some of this remarkable creativity and growth. Between 1994 and 1998 alone, STTR awarded 864 Federal grants for research through 5 Federal departments and agencies. STTR has led to inventions emerging in highly evolved technologies, including advances in vaccine applications and biotechnology research. With the passage of today's legislation, we will continue to support small technology firms across this country by extending the life of STTR through the year 2009, while expanding the program from its previous pilot program status. In particular, we will expand the program's reach by increasing the percentage of Federal research grants reserved for small businesses from 0.15 to 0.30 percent, doubling the amount of research dollars going to small businesses. This will go a long way towards increasing the role small firms play in developing new technology. In addition to increasing the number of opportunities for new enterprises, we are increasing the amount of Phase II grants from $500,000 to $750,000 so that those already successful small businesses will have an even better chance of product commercialization. We are also directing the SBA to develop a streamlined model agreement so that small businesses can spend more time developing technology and less time on bureaucratic paperwork. But that is not enough. The Committee on Small Business recognizes that technology can be the great equalizer in underserved communities and has positioned STTR to play a far larger role. For example, of the 864 contracts awarded, only 1.5 percent of those went to women-owned small businesses, and only 2.8 percent were awarded to minority businesses. This defeats one of the core missions of STTR, to help small businesses that otherwise do not have access to the tools and advice they need to take their ideas from the laboratory drawing board to the marketplace. The committee has also directed the Small Business Administration to begin tracking awards to low-income communities. This will give a measurement of the level of support that STTR is providing to these areas. Finally, we are redirecting the Federal and State Technological Partnership to further emphasize the importance of outreach to low- income communities in spreading and increasing the benefits of technological innovation. We created this program last year to encourage technology development in areas that had limited growth and success in the past. An important component of this was supposed to be outreach to low- income communities. Unfortunately, the implementing regulation failed to focus on low-income communities. In consultation with the Senate, the committee changed the statutory language specifically to increase STTR and Small Business Innovation Research awards to low-income communities. With this bill, we expanded the language to focus awards on businesses owned by women and socially and economically disadvantaged individuals within each State, as well as small businesses in regions that have been previously overlooked by STTR and SBIR awards. I want to make it absolutely clear that outreach is a critical component to technology development. The enhancements included in this bill will begin to open access to technology for businesses located in low-income communities and other underserved regions, and we will measure the success of this outreach by tracking the number of those awards in those particular communities. During the past decade, we saw enormous growth in small business and technological innovation. The benefits are many, but the gap between communities who benefit from the economic strength of technological entrepreneurs and those who are left behind is too wide. STTR is instrumental in helping more researchers and small businesses build the next new thing while at the same time bridging the digital divide. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this measure. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Udall).

Mr. GONZALEZ

Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a great man, George Eichler. Regretfully, George Eichler passed away on Friday, August 17, 2001, but he leaves us with a myriad of memories and lessons derived from his history of service and a legacy of championing important issues. George was a life-long Democrat and a long-time labor leader in San Antonio. His tireless work n behalf of Democrats and in support of San Antonio working men and women is well recognized and respected within the Democratic Party. George's dedication to service and his commitment to family and to fatherhood is a shining example of the life we should all aspire to. His daughter, Vanessa Eichler, said of him ``He was the perfect father. Everyone knows him for what he did for labor and the Democratic Party, but he taught us to enjoy life.'' I believe that through his actions George taught us all a little bit about life and the need to help one another. George Eichler's involvement in the labor movement saw its beginnings in 1949, when George went to work as a bottle washer at the Pearl Brewery in San Antonio, Texas. Soon after beginning his work there, George joined the International Association of Brewery Workers, and quickly moved up the union leadership ranks to become the Associate Business Agent in 1960. In 1967, the International Association of Brewery Workers joined the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, and George continued his leadership efforts, holding various local, State, and national level positions within the Teamsters organization throughout his career. It was through his work as a labor leader that George also became well-known for his charitable contributions, selflessly dedicating his time and service to charitable organizations like Goodwill Industries and the United Way. From 1965 through 1974, George continued his commitment to service as Chair of the San Antonio AFL-CIO Council Pines Housing Trust, a program whose outstanding efforts in housing the handicapped was recognized by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. These local elderly and handicapped independent living programs are recognized as precursors to national handicapped housing initiatives. George's work over the years also benefitted the local Democratic Party and countless Democratic candidates, as he campaigned tirelessly during each campaign year. He also served as Democratic Precinct Chair, and as such attended many State and National Democratic Conventions. I am proud to count myself among those who have had the opportunity to know and learn from George Eichler. I know his family will receive some comfort in the knowledge that George's memory will endure among all those he touched throughout his life.

Mr. GONZALEZ

Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, as chairman of the Hispanic Caucus's Task Force on the Census and Civil Rights, I rise in favor and in support of the Maloney- Rangel amendment. Let me explain why, because I believe that I actually bring the truth of all perspectives, in light of the responsibility and duties that the Caucus has to the Hispanic community in the United States. The first thing to recognize is that the Hispanic community, in and of itself, reflects tremendous diversity. We are unlike any other community. Therein lies our strength but also some problems, and this is what we are attempting to address. Let me explain why. It is important to identify the different groups within the Latino and Hispanic communities. Did the census succeed in doing so? The answer is no. Was it intentional? Was it negligence? It does not matter. The result is that we do not have an accurate result. When we do not have an accurate result, we do not have usable information. The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Miller) knows exactly what I am talking about because I think we see eye to eye on 90 percent of the issues when it comes to the census. One of the issues is accuracy, but the other was the utilitarian part of it, and that is how we use this information. It is not just the United States Government and every level of government under the Federal Government that uses it, but it is the private sector, trying to identify the needs of certain communities within the big, all-encompassing Hispanic community in the United States. Therefore, it is important to make sure that the subcategories, the subgroups are identified, because the needs are truly different. No one understands that, when I try to tell individuals, we are not just Latinos. If you take someone of Mexican dissent, it is totally different than someone from Puerto Rico or the Dominican Republic or from Colombia. That is just the way it is. But this is America today, and that is the reality. So what does this amendment really seek to do? I do not believe, as has been characterized in the debate today, that it attempts to change any of the information. What we are asking is to take existing information and, from that, glean and analyze and come up with a better result. This is not a major overhaul, a wholesale overhaul of information, and no one should misinterpret it that way. The amendment requires the Bureau of the Census to report to Congress on possible adjustments to the data and a diagnosis of how many people may have been misclassified by the rewriting of the census form. With these reports, we can determine how best to use the data we have and how we can avoid such confusion in the future. What I am afraid of, and it has been mischaracterized and, again, I do not think intentionally, I think everyone questions everybody's motives when we come up and want to do something with this information. We are looking at accuracy. We are looking at the usefulness of the information. Otherwise, we may have the numbers, we may have succeeded in identifying more people and having more people respond to the census, but it will be of no use. We will not be able to use that information. We must identify those contributions that certain individuals can make within the Hispanic community but, more importantly, what are the needs of these individuals that reside in this great Nation of ours.

Mr. GONZALEZ

Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from California and join everyone that preceded me in praise of her efforts and the leadership that she has demonstrated in making sure that this committee meets its charge. Mr. Speaker, if one thinks in terms of the greatest and most precious right that any American citizen would have, and that is the right to vote, it is the great equalizer. One vote counts just as much as any other. The vote of the President of the United States is no more important and is given no more weight than the vote of someone who is 18 years old and happens to be a senior in high school and casting their vote for the first time. It empowers us. It empowers the people of the greatest democracy known in all of history, and therein lies our problem, and that is the exercise of that right. Now, we all know that we have laws at the State and Federal level that protect the right to vote. It guarantees the right to vote. We have the Constitution of the United States, the Supreme Court of the land, that, again, will guarantee us the right to vote. But it is only guaranteeing the right to vote. What thwarts, what frustrates, what impedes the citizen's right to vote, regardless of the constitutional guarantee or the laws that we have on the books? Well, believe it or not, it is something as simple as a machine that malfunctions, something a little more complicated by not keeping an accurate voter list. In the past though, and this is so important, and I think we are forgetting the lessons that history should have taught us, when I was growing up in the State of Texas the greatest evil to the right to vote was the poll tax. It kept people from being able to exercise that precious right. The poll tax at one time was about $1. It went up to about $2. My father, who served in this Chamber for 37 years, the first bill he introduced upon being sworn in was to abolish the poll tax, and eventually it was. But then there was something else, literacy tests. Anything that could keep the citizens of the United States from exercising their right to vote. Well, we have made great progress. We do not have literacy tests any more, we do not have the poll tax any more. But what comes in its place today? Either through intention or through neglect, other things are now posing as great a risk to the disenfranchisement of the citizens as in the past, where once, because of gender or color, people were denied the right to vote, and once, because they did not have the amount of dollars to pay for the poll tax or could not pass some made up literacy test, were denied the right to vote. That was a travesty, as I said, and we corrected it. But we are back there. That is the tragedy of what was demonstrated in Florida, is that we may still be there. It is more subtle. Like I said, maybe it is by some intentional act, or it could be simply by negligence. What do I mean by that? Well, today we have voting equipment that simply does not work. I mean, it simply does not work. It does not do its intended job. We have inaccurate voter lists, so that when people go to vote, they are not on the list and they are denied the right to vote, even though they truly are registered. Because of some mistake, lack of funds, technology, they are just not on the list. Confusing ballot design. There are many. I will tell you right now, if you look at certain ballots, you will be confused. I know that when I go to vote, I assume it is going to be somewhat of a simple ballot. I hate to admit, but in a recent City Council election in San Antonio, when I went to vote earlier, I looked at that thing and I was too embarrassed to ask for instructions. A lot of people feel that way. I think I was more embarrassed than the average citizen, because I am a Member of Congress. But the point is, if I felt somewhat intimidated, if I was confused, think of the average citizen going to the polling place. In Texas, we do have provisional ballots in voting. If your name is not on the list, you might be able to swear, if you have an educated, trained, skilled poll worker that knows the law. However, that is denied many voters, because we do not have trained and educated poll workers. They are not paid enough, they are not trained, they are not educated in the election law, that which they are there to administer. It sounds outrageous, but there is no one right now that can hear my voice, no matter where you live, that is not experiencing this problem. You just do not know about it. You have not looked into it. That is what this committee is doing. We are going throughout the United States and holding hearings in different locations, Philadelphia, San Antonio; it will be Chicago next. And what are we learning? We are learning quite a bit. I will tell you what I learned in San Antonio, my own backyard. We have the problems as Florida. We have overvotes. We never knew that they were invalidating individuals' votes until we looked at it in the context of the Florida experience. And then I have got my election officials saying, well, Congressman, this is nothing new. We always have these votes. We just toss them out. They do not count. See, you have to ask yourself, why do we have these? It might be ballot design or the equipment itself, improper instruction, the lack of voter education. Again, the polling worker in San Antonio, I found out in a city where you have more than 60 percent Hispanic population that we did not have bilingual poll workers in many of those parts of the community, where it is not 60 percent Hispanic, it is 85 and 90 percent Hispanic. So it is my own backyard. And I am willing to admit to it, that out of ignorance, I never got involved. Out of ignorance, I never did anything. The tragedy of Florida is not what happened in Florida. In and of itself, it is a tragedy. The real tragedy is if we do not learn a lesson and do something. So this committee is going to do something. We are going to identify the problems. We are going to make recommendations. We will come up with legislation that will address many of these problems. But do not get us wrong. Part of our job is to be a clearinghouse for not just the problems, but for the ideas and the solutions and the remedies. And we will look to the States and the local authorities to come up with their own solutions, those that custom fit their particular problem. We want to give the States and the localities that opportunity, because that is what we do here in Congress. We do not want a Federal fix for every problem. However, if action is not taken that addresses the inequities and the injustices of people not being able to vote, then it is our duty, as Federal officials, to step in and not only give direction, but basically do it on our own. I do not think it will come to that. I think we will make certain suggestions. Many States and localities are already incorporating and enacting laws. If there is a shortcoming, we will say, how can we help? You have already heard one of my colleagues. We have legislation, it has already been introduced, about assisting localities in the purchase of the latest technology, which is really important. But they will make the decision on what best suits their situation. But we are there to help. It is so important. I guess there is no way to explain it. How can we guarantee the right to vote to the citizen? How can we teach the children in our classrooms how great our country is, and then we say, voter participation is decreasing. Get out there and vote. Every year, every election, I am out there with some sort of public service announcement, begging my constituents to please get out there, to register and vote. Now they are going to take me up on that. They go and attempt to exercise that right, and they are not able to. Therein lies the real problem. I do not think the problem is that we do not have enough laws guaranteeing the right, we just do not have the mechanism to translate the right into reality, and that is our charge. Madam Chairman, I think I am going to end where I started. I am going to thank you for the leadership you provided us. It is a great honor to serve on this committee, and I think many, many people are going to be quite impressed with the end product. We have heard that this is not an issue that is way at the top of the list as far as the American public or the United States Congress is concerned, and that is wrong, because then what we have done is we have compounded the tragedy of Florida. We did not learn a lesson, we did not make a situation better, we did not cure a problem. Should we fail to do that, I think we have failed in our duty and responsibility; but more importantly, we have failed the American people. They have a right to vote, but they also have a right to make sure that that vote is counted. What good is a right if one cannot exercise it. Again, I thank the gentlewoman very much.

Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, I think our colleague, the gentleman from Maryland, said it, that it really is almost a sacred duty because it is a sacred trust. Nothing rises to the level of the importance of this issue. People sometimes think we are given to hyperbole and exaggeration, but we really are talking about the fundamentals of a democracy, the absolute right of the public to be masters of their own destiny. It is the right to vote. Again, this is not a Republican or a Democratic issue. That is the beauty of it, too. It transcends party lines, philosophies, everything; station in left. This is basically the common thread, more or less, that our citizenry really holds in common. So I agree with the gentlewoman, I do not think there is going to be anything more important that I will ever work on. I am the lucky one. I have only been here 3 years. I am lucky to have this opportunity. But truly in relation to all the wonderful leaders who have preceded us, and we are thinking about the Civil Rights Act and so on, what we are talking about is really giving life to those laws, and life and meaning to the Constitution. So we are privileged, but by the same token, I think it is a tremendous responsibility. We cannot fail.

Mr. GONZALEZ

Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the founders of San Antonio, Texas, the city I represent here in the United States Congress. Friday, March 9, 2001 marked the 270th anniversary of the founding of La Villa de San Fernando, the settlement which would later become known as the City of San Antonio. On March 9, 1731, the Spanish Government founded the first permanent civic settlement in what is now the State of Texas. On this day, under the stewardship of Spanish King, Philip V, sixteen Canary Island families arrived in the territory then known as Tejas to establish La Villa de San Fernando. It would become the first civic government in Texas. In honor of the sacrifices and contributions of the founding families of the City of San Antonio, and on behalf of the Canary Islands Descendants Association of San Antonio, Texas, I hereby recognize the role of the Canary Islanders in the founding of the Villa De San Fernando in 1731--later named San Antonio, Texas. The founding of the city of San Antonio was achieved formally under the law of the Council of the Indies which was the Spanish law governing Nueva Espana in 1731; With the arrival of the Canary Islanders, having the required number of ten families, the number required by the Laws of the Indies, to establish a town, the settlers were thus entitled to organize their own civil government, to receive lands for the construction of their homes and the sowing and raising of crops, to have a church and town hall, and to build a town with a public square and regularly planned streets; After reaching their destination, following untold hardships, the exhausted travelers were received by Captain Juan Antonio de Almazan of the Presidio of Bejar; on the following day they were lodged in the best houses of the soldiers; Following the detailed instructions of Viceroy Juan de Acuna, Marquez de Casafuerte the survey and distribution of the lands for the establishment of a new settlement was made; On March 12, 1731 Captain Almazan took the heads of families to the Arroyo (now called San Pedro Creek) and divided the lands among them for a later time when they might divide the lands with more care. He urged them to plant crops before June 30; By July 2, 1731 the settlers gave their efforts to the establishment of the proposed town, the church, and the public square; On the following day July 3, 1731 lots were distributed to the families to build their homes adjoining the church and Casa Real. Then a large cross was formed at the main entrance of the Church as the center. By completing each of the four squares of the four sides of the cross a perfect larger square two thousand one hundred eighty-six varas on each side was delineated. The corners were identified by four long rocks as markers. A deep furrow was plowed from corner to corner to indicate the boundary in accordance with the instructions of the Viceroy; On July 20, 1731 the first civil government was established when Captain Almazan appointed the members of the city council and other officers. The Canary Islanders who were sent by King Philip V to establish the Villa de San Fernando did accomplish and played an important role in the beginning of the development of the magnificent City of San Antonio, in the region first known as Tejas, which developed into the great State of Texas.

Mr. GONZALEZ

Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to insert into the Record material prepared by one of my employees, Susana Benavidez, in support of H. Con. Res. 445 regarding my father, former Chairman Henry B. Gonzalez. In Honor of the Late Henry B. or Henry B. Gonzalez (By Susana Benavidez, former employee of the late Chairman Henry B. Gonzalez, Current Caseworker and Service Academies Coordinator for his son, Representative Charlie Gonzalez) Americans are joined by people from other countries in remembering the many contributions that Congressman Henry B. Gonzalez made in improving the human conditions in this country. In the late 1960s Anglo-Saxons in South Texas were saying that history would prove that one of the greatest American statesmen would be a Texan by the name of Henry B. Gonzalez. Henry B. Gonzalez will always be remembered for his intelligence, wisdom, strength, honesty, integrity and dignity. Never forgotten will be his ability to treat every human being with respect. He had the talent of taking the time to remember the name of each and every person whom he met, it did not matter if that person was a child, a janitor, or waiter/waitress. One of his many gifts was the ability to see the ``holiness'' in just about every individual whom he ever met. Long remembered will be his compassionate and caring manner. Congressman Gonzalez was a great man perhaps born way ahead of his time. He gave far more genuine love than what he may have received. I first met Congressman Gonzalez in 1976 while I was working for his colleague the late Congressman Abraham (Chick) Kazen. It was my honor and privilege to have worked for the honorable Henry B. Gonzalez from 1993-1998. He was an exemplary human being. Congressman Gonzalez definitely left the world a better place not only for people like me but for all Americans. He will always be remembered with abundant love, admiration and respect.

Mr. GONZALEZ

Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Ganske) for his accomodation, and to everyone that has participated today in this special order, something that was so dear to dad. This is obviously a very bitter sweet experience for a Member to be able to come up and address the House and talk about one's parent. It has been a difficult time for many reasons, many of you could understand, but to pay tribute to dad today here on the floor of the House, he would accept that only if we were paying tribute to all of those who served here before him, with him and after him. He truly believed this was the greatest institution on the face of the Earth, and I am convinced that he was right. When a Member dies or a former Member dies, I truly believe that all of us show up that next morning, and we all have questions. We do not share these questions with one another for whatever reason, but I think that we question our own mortality to begin with. Then the next thing is we question our investment in our sacrifice as public servants. Though we all recognize what a great privilege and honor it is to serve, we know the costs, not just to ourselves but to our families. All of you hearing me now happen to be a Member or a former Member know exactly what I am talking about. You start questioning whether you made a difference. You start questioning whether public service was worth it. I like to think that my dad's life, that even especially in his death, it validates that it is a worthy and honorable sacrifice and that we are recognized and that we do make a difference in our own way not just Dad but everyone else. Dad would be disappointed because I cannot exactly remember the quotation, but I believe it is from Julius Caesar by Shakespeare and that the good that men do is often interred with their bones. I think that is everyone's greatest fear but probably more so ours than anyone else because there is so much sacrifice. There is so much hard work, to get here, to remain here, to do that which our constituents have sent us to do in representing their interests. I want to tell you that at Dad's funeral, there was so much evidence that it does not have to be interred with our bones. That Dad's legacy lives every day in the lives of those that he served. At the funeral home, at the viewing, at the church, at the vigil at the funeral service, at the cemetery, I cannot begin to tell you how many people came up and told us their individual stories, and for each of the Members here today and those that served before Dad, there are countless thousands of people out there that you have helped that you do not even realize, that they may not be thanking you today and it may be their children or grandchildren that will thank you tomorrow. But it is there for all of us. That is why I say I think Dad's life and even in death, it validates that public service is the noblest of all callings; that is what my father taught me. Of course, he said that was second only to the priesthood. For the families of the Members, because I have the distinction of actually having been a child of a public servant who dedicated nearly half a century to public service, as well as the Member of Congress, what it does to our families. When we were at the cemetery and we were in the family car and we were coming out to go to the plot, there was probably a 90-year-old woman who handed us a little note, and it was just scribbled. And it was to my mother and to all of us in that car, and what it said was, thank you for sharing your husband, your father, your grandfather, and your great grandfather with all of us here in this city. So I know there will be times for all of us when we wonder, but truly even the public understands the sacrifice. They may not tell you. But they love the fact that our families are willing to share us, because it is that kind of devotion and commitment that it takes. So do not ever question public service. I can tell you if you are truly committed, dedicated and a humble public servant, as my father was, there are rewards way beyond the immediate. Many times you will not hear about it. My father may have heard of some of it, but he surely did not after November 28th when he passed on. But that is when we have the greatest outpouring. Again, to everyone that has ever served here, and especially to their staffs and to their families, from the Gonzalez family, thank you so much for making my father's life so complete and making his dream of public service a reality. Mr. Speaker, I wish to submit a tribute for my father by his former Chief of Staff and Press Secretary, Gail Beagle. Tribute to the Late Henry B. Gonzalez, U.S. Representative From Texas (By Gail Beagle) In 1958 then Texas State Senator Henry B. Gonzalez ran for Governor of Texas. I had just graduated with a degree in journalism from Texas Woman's University at Denton, and with $100 I had borrowed from my life insurance policy I left from my hometown of Nederland for Austin to job-hunt. In Austin I learned of a fundraiser for Sen. Gonzalez being held at a restaurant called Spanish Village. I took $10 of my $100, got a ride with a University of Texas student with whom I had interned the summer before on the San Antonio Light newspaper, paid my money at the door, and told Sen. Gonzalez of my interest in campaigning for him for Governor in Jefferson County. ``I will be at my parents' home until I get a job in Austin,'' I said. ``I anticipate I will be there through the Democratic Primary on July 26. Who is your Jefferson County campaign manager?,'' I asked. ``No one,'' he replied. ``You can be the campaign manager there!'' As an active member of the civil rights movement in the 1950's, I very much knew who State Sen. Henry B. Gonzalez of San Antonio was. He was the Senator who delivered in Austin an intelligent, impassioned filibuster against a package of bills promoting and facilitating segregation in Texas. He was a breath of fresh air on the Texas political horizon, a bright and shining star, and a public official unlike any I had ever seen before. It was my thought that I would never see another one like him again. Subsequently I worked for him in the Texas State Senate during two legislative sessions (1959 and 1961), and served as his volunteer press aide in early 1961 in his bid to replace Lyndon Johnson as a U.S. Senator from Texas, after LBJ was elected both as Vice President and as a returning U.S. Senator. It was a wild and crazy special election with more than 70 fellow Texans battling it out, and with Gonzalez once again going primarily by stationwagon to the 254 counties across Texas. However, just a few months late in the Fall of 1961, Sen. Gonzalez's great opportunity came with the appointment to the Court of Military Appeals of San Antonio's and Bexar County's long time Congressman, Paul Kilday. A special election was called and after a hard fought battle which brought former President Dwight Eisenhower to San Antonio to campaign for the opposition, Henry B., as he was affectionately called, was elected on November 5, 1961 to serve in Congress. I had moved to San Antonio from Austin to campaign, and it was from San Antonio that I first left for Washington to serve newly elected Congressman Gonzalez. HBG was active on many legislative fronts so it was easy to have something to report to the press, and it was easy to get together a good staff because there were so many enthusiastic and well qualified people who wanted to work for him. The congressional work with the Congressman was fulfilling inasmuch as there was much to be accomplished with an office holder who with great gusto gave everything to his job as a public servant. We worked the first six years creating a world's fair (HemisFair) for San Antonio with several pieces of legislation the Congressman succeeded in getting passed in both the House and the Senate and signed by the President into law. The Congressman also sent U.S. Department of Commerce officials to help local leaders make plans for getting the fair underway. At the same time we were helping the Congressman look out for the interests of our military bases in San Antonio, protect San Antonio's primary source of water, write housing and other legislation, and make it possible for constituents to have fair consumer banking practices, as well as many other equitable benefits under federal law. While we were active in legislative participation, Congressman Gonzalez made sure that his offices in both Washington and San Antonio looked out for the interests of the poor and went to bat for constituents needing help with either the Veterans Administration, Social Security, immigration and naturalization, workmen's compensation, civil service (active or retired), the Armed Services, and other matters relative to federal agencies and departments. Among other efforts, we also promoted interest among inter- city youth in getting a free college education and becoming military officers through nomination to one of the U.S. military service academies. I recall with great pleasure the breakfast or luncheon meetings at the House Restaurant at the U.S. Capitol with newspaper reporters, members of the Administration in power, heads of various federal and Texas agencies, an airline safety consultant (who was also a good friend), and countless other friends and constituents (most of whom had their picture taken on the steps of the Capitol with the Congressman!). While the hours could be long and arduous, especially for Kelsay Meek, who headed the Congressman's (the Chairman's!) Committee on Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs, and me, we were committed to the level of service that we knew Henry B. wanted to achieve. The 150 or so former staff members, who served in varying lengths of time with me over a period of more than 30 years either on the personal staff in Washington or in San Antonio, as well as those who served on the Subcommittee (Housing and Community Development) and full Banking Committee, counted it as an honor and a privilege to serve the people's interests with Henry G. Gonzalez. He lives eternally in our minds and hearts. He now lives with the angels, but we will see him again.

Mr. GONZALEZ

Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, as we near the end of this session, one of the country's largest companies is asking Congress for special treatment. According to numerous media reports, AT&T is asking Congress to attach an amendment to an appropriations bill to allow them to violate conditions they agreed to when their merger with MediaOne was approved by the FCC. This amendment would allow AT&T to violate the caps on cable ownership, caps that are designed to promote competition and protect consumers from price-gouging. No Member of either this House or the other body has introduced a bill to give AT&T this break, nor has a single hearing been held on the issue. To even consider this bill to enter legislation would not at this time be wise for the simple fact that we do not have enough proper information to make an informed decision concerning this break for AT&T. Mr. Speaker, we should ask that AT&T keep their word. As well we should reject any last minute legislation that has not been fully reviewed by the Congress.

Mr. GONZALEZ

Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, on October 24, 2000, S. 1438, a bill to establish a National Law Enforcement Museum in the District of Columbia was passed in the House. H.R. 2710 and its companion legislation, S. 1438, would establish a National Law Enforcement Museum next to the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial in the District of Columbia. I believe that this museum will be a fitting tribute to those who serve and protect our communities and nation on a daily basis. Currently, there are about 74,000 federal, state and law enforcement officers who risk their lives to ensure that citizens are safe and protected. In fact, members of my own family have served and I feel especially proud to be a cosponsor and ardent supporter of this museum. The museum will help to educate the public about the law enforcement profession and the great personal risks many officers encounter daily. An integral part of the success of law enforcement is public support; support that will grow as the public gains a better understanding of the law enforcement profession through information provided at the museum. The museum will have an accompanying research facility that will be instrumental in creating a safer and more stable environment for all, as research conducted there will be utilized by policy makers as well as officers themselves to improve both the effectiveness of legislation and law enforcement techniques.

Mr. GONZALEZ

Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to thank and pay tribute to a true San Antonio legend, Brother Martin McMurtrey. After 56 years of service as an educator in the Society of Mary Catholic schools, 49 of those years being spent at Central Catholic High School in San Antonio, TX, Brother McMurtrey has announced his retirement. Having received a bachelor of arts degree in English from the University of Dayton in 1942, and a master of education degree from St. Louis University in 1949, Brother McMurtrey first entered a classroom as a teacher in 1944. Shortly after, in 1951, Brother McMurtrey moved to San Antonio and began teaching at Central Catholic. During his years at Central Catholic, Brother McMurtrey taught courses in English and drafting, coached football, authored two books, and dedicated countless hours to working with the disadvantaged in San Antonio parishes. I know that even though he is retiring, Brother McMurtrey will continue teaching all of us. As a matter of fact, I am sure that he will check the spelling and grammar of this entry in the Congressional Record of the U.S. House of Representatives. In addition, Brother McMurtrey established a scholarship fund to assist students who could otherwise not afford to attend Catholic schools. He also spent 22 years volunteering after school as a Confraternity of Christian Doctrine teacher and as a worker with the Presentation Nuns. He also organized the Guardian Angels at Central Catholic, an organization that guided student collections of food, toys, and clothing during holiday seasons. It is estimated that during his half-century of service, Brother McMurtrey touched the lives of some 6,000 students. Those students have gone on to careers in education, medicine, law, public service, and countless other fields. Indeed the impact that Brother McMurtrey has had on the lives of his students and on the San Antonio community is immeasurable. Upon hearing Brother McMurtrey's announcement, several former Central Catholic students joined together to plan a retirement celebration aptly titled ``The Last English Class.'' Mr. Speaker, today I join those students in thanking Brother McMurtrey for enriching the lives of all who had the privilege of his mentorship.

Mr. GONZALEZ

Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, on July 27, I introduced the American Home Buyers Protection Act, H.R. 5033. This bill will make much needed reforms in the practice of including mandatory arbitration clauses in homebuilding purchase contracts. Mr. Speaker as you may know, mandatory arbitration clauses are now ubiquitous in consumer contracts. These clauses deny consumers the opportunity to go to court to seek redress for damage or harm from a product or service. Many of these clauses typically name a private arbitration service. This creates a potential conflict of interest for a private arbitrator that both must neutrally assess the merits of a case while simultaneously profiting from the continual referral of cases from a particular industry. This is a situation that I believe demands immediate redress by Congress. Mr. Speaker, I do not believe arbitration clauses are per se bad. As a former state district judge, I took the lead in bringing alternative dispute resolution mechanisms to the civil courtrooms of my hometown of San Antonio. But, I do believe that it is wrong to insert these clauses without the knowledge and prior approval of consumers. I strongly believe that alternative dispute resolution clauses must be mutually agreed to and contain plain language descriptions of their effects. In addition, I do not believe that these clauses should be imposed on consumers as a condition precedent for entering into a commercial contract, and that the naming of arbitrator must be mutually agreed to by both parties. The homebuilding industry in particular, I believe, has used mandatory arbitration clauses in an excessive and harmful manner. For most families, a purchase of a home is the largest single investment they will make. It is frequently the largest asset they will ever own. Mandatory arbitration agreements which allow homebuilders to avoid court analysis of their building practices has allowed numerous homebuilders to escape the consequences of shoddy workmanship and construction. I have personally seen several homes in San Antonio that were negligently and poorly constructed, inflicting serious financial harm on the families that purchased these homes. My bill the American Home Buyers Protection Act, will make the following reforms to the mandatory arbitration process as it regards homebuilding purchase contracts: 1. It will make it illegal for homebuilders to require agreement to a mandatory arbitration agreement as a condition precedent to entering into a contract for the purchase of a new house. 2. It will require mandatory arbitration agreements to be contained on a separate document from the underlying contract and to possess the following plain language statement: ``By Agreeing to Binding Arbitration You Are Giving Up Your Right To Go To Court.'' 3. It will require mandatory arbitration agreements to contain a procedure that adequately guarantees the purchaser an opportunity to participate in the selection of an arbitrator, and shall require that the selection of the arbitrator may only occur after a dispute regarding the homebuilding contract has arisen. Mr. Speaker I believe the reforms in The American Home Buyers Protection Act are a good first step towards alleviating the abuse of alternative dispute resolution procedures by homebuilders. I believe that it is time that Congress take action now to protect American families from arbitration procedures that will deny them adequate protection of their most important purchase, their home.

Mr. GONZALEZ

Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pride, honor and happiness that I rise to recognize the upcoming 50th wedding anniversary of David and Armida Murguia of San Antonio,Texas. David and Amy were married November 8, 1950 at Our Lady of Perpetual Hope Catholic Church in San Antonio and honeymooned in Allende, Mexico. Immediately after their honeymoon, David was inducted into the U.S. Army and transferred to Ft. Lee, Virginia, where Amy was able to join him after a short separation. After his military service, the Murguia's returned to San Antonio where they have lived ever since. The Murguia's are members of St. Ann's Catholic Church. David graduated from St. Gerard's High School and attended St. Mary's University, where he obtained a law degree. He worked at Kelly Air Force Base before starting his own law practice. Amy graduated from Ursuline Academy in San Antonio, and after raising their children, went to work as David's legal assistant. Both retired in 1998 after a long, productive, and well respected legal career. As a result of their marriage, David and Amy are the proud parents of eight children, Michael David, Vincent John, Philip Andrew, David III, Theresa Armida, Catherine Ann, Mark Anthony, and Matthew. They have 13 grandchildren, and several great grandchildren. As do all couples, David and Amy have had their joyous occasion and rough times, but through it all, they have stuck by each other, and in a rare occasion in America today, will soon celebrate their 50th wedding anniversary. On behalf of all citizens of San Antonio, I want to wish them a wonderful anniversary and I hope that they are able to celebrate many, many more. May their love and dedication to each other inspire each of us to work even harder on our own relationships so that we too may someday celebrate as the Murguia's are doing now.

Mr. GONZALEZ

Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, today H.R. 4868 will, in part, designate San Antonio's International Airport as a point of entry. Later today in this Chamber we will congratulate Mexico on its recent democratic elections, making this airport designation a timely one due to the City of San Antonio's close cultural and business relationship with Mexico. This airport designation is important to my city so that it can further develop its business ties with Mexico that have already expanded since the approval of NAFTA. However, significant barriers exist for the private aircraft operator that result in extra time and cost due to interim stops that must be made for Customs processing before coming to San Antonio. Both business and trade leaders have indicated that business will be helped if San Antonio could receive noncommercial aircraft from Mexico on short notice. Several of San Antonio's large corporations have expanded business trade with Mexico and fly private aircraft into Mexico on a regular basis. Finally, San Antonio is well equipped to handle a point-of-entry flight, as U.S. Customs has a significant presence at the San Antonio International Airport. In closing, I want to express special thanks to all members of the Committee on Ways and Means for making this a reality for San Antonio and their assistance.

Mr. GONZALEZ

Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, a special thanks, of course, to everyone that is here to speak to this issue and to this resolution. I especially appreciate the words from the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), looking forward to even a better relationship with Mexico and what this election represents. A special thanks to the gentleman from California (Mr. Gallegly) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) and their staffs for the privilege they have provided me to work with them on this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to congratulate our neighbor, Mexico, for its peaceful, transparent federal election that took place on July 2, 2000. The Mexican citizens, through their participation and dedication to electoral reform in numbers that exceed those by our own voters in our elections, must be credited for assuring that this election was in fact transparent, fair, open, and in the final analysis a democratic success. The United States and Mexico, joined by a common border, share mutual interests and concerns that make the fate of one country dependent on the other. The City of San Antonio, my city, with its proximity to Mexico, has always had a unique bond with Mexico due to its shared history. The mutual responsibilities of Mexico and the United States make this a historic election important to our economies and national security. Today, with this election, Mexico will enter a new era that will have consequences for its international relationship, not only with the United States but with the rest of the world. Mr. Speaker, I know that with President-elect Fox's leadership, as demonstrated during his campaign for office, he will reach out and embrace the different factions in Mexico, joining the country in its united cause to ensure that Mexico's dedication to democracy will not be compromised. Finally, I would like to congratulate President Zedillo and President-elect Vicente Fox for their commitment to a peaceful transition of power. In closing, I would hope what this election represents is a fruition of great effort by many of the greatest leaders in Mexico. Mr. Speaker, on reflection, when my grandparents came over in 1908 seeking a certain dream that they felt they could only achieve under the system in the United States, that after this election and what it brings that it will mean that individuals in Mexico will achieve the same dream that my grandparents sought in the United States, but rather than within their own borders of Mexico.

Mr. GONZALEZ

Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, recently, I introduced H.R. 4603, the ``Deposit Insurance Increase Feasibility Act of 2000.'' I decided to introduce this bill after being contacted by various representatives of the financial services community who are interested in researching the feasibility of increasing the current deposit insurance coverage limit, which has been set at $100,000 since the early 1980s. Several different proposals crossed my desk, but I decided to take the more moderate and prudent approach for the time being. My bill, H.R. 4603, the ``Deposit Insurance Increase Feasibility Act of 2000,'' would, I believe, take the proper approach to this question at this time. As introduced, H.R. 4603 will require two different studies and reports on the feasibility and potential impact of increasing the maximum amount of deposit insurance under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act and the Federal Credit Union Act from $100,000 to $200,000 per depositor and require the noted U.S. financial services regulatory agencies to recommend an appropriate deposit insurance level for both banks and credit unions but through two separate but equal studies. The bill would also require two separate but equal reports to be submitted to Congress six months after the date of enactment of the legislation. Congress has often been accused of jumping the gun and failing to thoroughly research an issue prior to acting. Congress has also been accused in the past of failing to move in a timely manner on numerous issues. Case in point is the decades Congress spent reviewing the potential reform of the Glass-Steagall Act before finally enacting financial services reform legislation last year in the form of S. 900, which I supported. For these reasons, I decided to introduce this bill in the form of a study instead of an immediate increase in deposit insurance coverage. The study will hopefully acknowledge that deposit insurance has become an indispensable part of the financial services landscape while promoting consumer trust and confidence in all U.S. financial institutions. More importantly, the two studies will provide Congress with the recommendations it will need by both the banks and credit union regulatory agencies to thoroughly assess all possible ramifications of any change in the level of insurance coverage. In this way, few will attempt and virtually none will be able to say that Congress acted imprudently. The fact that the studies and reports are to be completed and submitted within six months of the date of enactment of my bill provides enough time for a thorough review of the issue while also permitting Congress to access the studies and reports in a timely manner, and hopefully move on the recommendations sooner rather than later. Such studies and reports should serve to permit those regulatory agencies which have recently expressed concern about increasing the deposit insurance limit to $200,000 to participate in the review of the coverage limit and to provide a specific coverage limit recommendation to Congress. I should stress that this bill does not mandate an increase. It calls for two studies and two reports on the subject. It provides for parity by including all the financial institutions regulatory agencies in the deliberations. I have received a letter of strong support for H.R. 4603 from America's Community Bankers, which represents the nation's community banks of all charter types and sizes, and a letter strongly supporting the bill on behalf of the Credit Union National Association and the 78 million credit union members nationwide. I would ask that both letters be inserted in the Congressional Record immediately following this statement. I look forward to the bill's enactment and to receiving the dual reports in Congress sometime in the near future. Credit Union National Association, Inc., Madison, WI, June 9, 2000. Hon. Charles Gonzalez, Cannon House Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Congressman Gonzalez: On behalf of the Credit Union National Association (CUNA) and the 78 million credit union members nationwide, I am writing to express our support for the legislation you introduced yesterday, H.R. 4603. CUNA and its member credit unions believe deposit insurance has become an indispensable part of the financial services landscape and has contributed significantly to consumer trust and confidence in all depository institutions. Because of this important role, CUNA strongly urges Congress to thoroughly assess all possible ramifications of any change in the level of insurance coverage, and we are encouraged by your proposed studies. CUNA also favors the feature of the legislation that calls for a separate study of the National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund (NCUSIF). Operationally and structurally, the NCUSIF is unique among federal insurance funds and merits an appraisal that considers and evaluates its distinctions. We commend you for the prudent and sound approach you have taken to this important and complex issue. CUNA looks forward to playing a helpful role in the enactment of H.R. 4603, and I encourage you to contact me if I can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Daniel A. Mica, President and CEO.

Mr. GONZALEZ

Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton), as well as members of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure's Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, Hazardous Materials and Pipeline Transportation, and the entire Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure for the action on this legislation. This bill, which I introduced in May of last year, would designate the Federal Judicial Training Center located at 643 East Durango Boulevard in San Antonio, Texas, as the Adrian A. Spears Judicial Training Center. Judge Spears was the epitome of an outstanding and truly dedicated United States district judge. As Chief Judge of the Western District of Texas, Judge Spears' career was highlighted by a commitment to ensuring fairness and justice in the courtrooms under his jurisdiction. To many of those who practiced in his courtroom, Judge Spears will forever be remembered for his desire to maintain a standard of professionalism second to none. He taught all of us that demanding our best effort in behalf of our individual client was the surest way of assuring justice for all, and he led by example. He felt he needed to take the extra steps to ensure that he was being fair, not only to the Government, but also to the defendant. To that extent, he was meticulous about his preparation; and he paid particular attention to detail. In fact, I have heard that Judge Spears' secretary would often bring three or four briefcases filled with pretrial work for the next day's caseload for Judge Spears to review. Judge Spears would go through each document in the file, reading everything, including probation reports, so that he would not have to rely solely on the attorneys' oral reports in open court. Adrian Anthony Spears was born on July 8, 1910, in Darlington, South Carolina. After graduating from the University of North Carolina in 1929 and South Carolina Law School in 1934, he practiced law in Darlington until 1936. In 1937, Adrian Spears moved to San Antonio where he continued in private practice until President John F. Kennedy appointed him United States District Judge in 1961. It was an opportunity which came as the result of a 1961 congressional act creating a third judgeship for the Western District of Texas. Judge Spears became Chief Judge of the Western District in 1962 and served in that capacity until 1979, a record 17 years. In addition to serving as U.S. District Judge for a total of 22 years, Judge Spears was also a member of the Board of Directors of the Federal Judicial Center, the temporary Emergency Court of Appeals, the Judicial Conference of the United States Mission on the Administration of Criminal Law, the Committee to Consider Standards for Admission to Practice in Federal Courts, and a member of the faculty of the Seminar for Newly Appointed Judges. From 1959 to 1960, Judge Spears also served as president of the San Antonio Bar Association. Upon his retirement from Federal judicial service on December 31, 1982, Judge Spears joined the oil company Tetco as the vice president and served there in that capacity until his death on May 9, 1991. While his judicial accomplishments alone are noteworthy, it is also his tireless efforts and commitment to improving and expanding the facilities of the Federal court system in San Antonio that merits this proper and long overdue recognition of Judge Spears' contributions to San Antonio. In fact, it was Judge Spears' guidance that the United States Pavilion, now the John H. Wood, Jr. United States Courthouse, was acquired and made part of the Federal Judicial Complex in San Antonio after Hemisfair in 1968. Mr. Speaker, this is truly a fitting honor to bestow upon Judge Adrian Anthony Spears. Finally, I want to take this opportunity to recognize his family, particularly his sons Monroe and Jimmy and his daughters, Sally and Carol. Without great elaboration I do need to tell my colleagues that two of his children are lawyers, one of his granddaughters is presently in law school, but many of his nephews and great nephews have distinguished themselves both as lawyers in the community and as jurists. Mr. Speaker, I urge Congress to pass H.R. 1959, and I would like to offer special thanks to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sandlin), my fellow Texan, for his assistance and that of his staff.