Rubén Hinojosa

Mr. HINOJOSA

Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend, the gentleman from the great State of Texas (Mr. Rodriguez).

Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate having this opportunity to help carry the ball on these issues of such importance to our children's education. The work the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Roybal-Allard) is doing on behalf of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus is outstanding, and I congratulate her. Mr. Speaker, as a Member of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce and chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus' Education Task Force, it is my privilege to discuss the caucus' legislative priorities in the area of education for the 106th Congress. Let us start with the unacceptably high hispanic dropout rate. Simply put, this is an urgent problem that is not getting any better. Over the last 25 years the dropout for both white and African American young adults has declined by almost 40 percent. Hispanic youth, however, have only shared in part of this improvement. Far too many of our students fail to reach their academic potential. Nationwide the percentage of hispanic students dropping out of school is twice the rate of other ethnic groups. Over all, about 38 percent of hispanic young adults have dropped out of high school compared to only 17 percent of African American and only 8\1/2\ percent of our white young adults. These figures are simply unacceptable, Mr. Speaker. As we all know, our current economy, unlike 40 years ago, generates few meaningful jobs for people without a high school education. Because of the restructuring of our Nation's economy, not having a high school diploma or its equivalent poses a much stronger burden than it did decades ago when jobs with social and economic mobility were within reach of these with limited educational background and skills. In our present economy even high school graduation is not enough to pave the way to a middle class life. The good jobs are knowledge intensive. Throughout the past 2 years the Congressional Hispanic Caucus has focused particular attention on the hispanic dropout crisis, but there remains much work to be done. As a Member of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, I look forward to working with my colleagues in my Committee on Education and the Workforce and on both sides of the aisle of Congress to eradicate this educational crisis. On the subject of bilingual education I want to give credit where credit is due. I applaud the congressional leaders who are working to improve educational opportunities for hispanic students such as my good friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes) who recently, only 2 weeks ago, presented his ideas regarding excellence in education for limited English proficient students. Congressman Reyes has made some excellent points which I agree with and endorse on the complex issue of bilingual education. The Ysleta Independent School District in El Paso, Texas, is proof that bilingual education works. It is a place where two languages are used without apology and where becoming proficient in both is considered a significant intellectual accomplishment. We need to prepare our limited English proficient students to function, to excel, in a world economy where being bilingual is an asset and a resource. School districts such as Ysleta recognize and understand that bilingualism is an asset, an intellectual accomplishment, and I applaud Congressman Reyes and El Paso for their progressive thinking. Lastly, Mr. Speaker, I would like to address the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the largest elementary and secondary federal aid package targeted at low income and low achieving students. Funding for ESEA currently represents an annual $12 billion investment in our Nation's future. ESEA is a vital program to all of the Nation's children. It includes critical funding for many programs aimed at serving the hispanic student population. As President Clinton has stated, the 30 percent dropout rate of hispanic high school students is a national economic crisis of great urgency. Expansion of exemplary education programs is needed to increase the education attainment level in the hispanic community as well as school modernization, as well as after school programs, class size reduction in Grades K through 3, teacher training and expansion of gear-up programs at the middle schools. These significant issues must be considered in the reauthorization of the ESEA, and I certainly hope we are going to reauthorize ESEA in this Congress as an entire package, not piecemeal. Mr. Speaker, I now yield to my esteemed colleague from the great State of New York (Mrs. McCarthy).

Mr. HINOJOSA

Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, as we proceed with our work on Budget 2000, I want to take this occasion to pose the following question: Are we doing everything we need to do to support our American farmers? That is a question we all need to seriously think about. In 1998, the agriculture sector of the economy suffered through one of the worst years in American history. Drought and other weather conditions, coupled with extremely low prices, significantly affected many producers in my home State, Texas. Farm and ranch production values declined more than $2.4 billion from 1997 in Texas. The resulting loss in agribusiness income is an $8 billion blow to the State's overall economy, mostly to the small rural communities like I represent in the 15th Congressional District. Nationally, from 1996 to 1997, net farm income dropped 6.8 percent from $53.4 billion to $49.8 billion. Economists forecast a 15.7 percent drop from $197 billion to only $42 billion in 1998. To say the least, these declines are dramatic. While weather conditions will hopefully improve, the current price situation for crops and livestock remains bleak. Virtually every commodity has continuing low prices, with little prospect for improvement. When the Congress passed the 1996 Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act, certain other issues were to be addressed. Those included: Passage of fast track negotiating authority, relief of government regulatory burdens, and the repeal of capital gains taxes and death taxes. In the 3 years since the passage of the FAIR Act, those promises have not been kept. I mention all of this because I feel it is important to constantly be mindful of how vital agriculture is to our country. When disasters occur, yes, action is taken to respond to them, but what we saw last year was too little, too late. That is not a philosophy to which I subscribe. Mr. Speaker, much more needs to be done for America's farmers, and the time to do it is now, as we are now working on the budget. Let us help provide a safe and secure future for our farmers. Agriculture is a vital part of our economic fiber in our country, and the men and women who comprise America's farming community are important to our Nation's character. It is our responsibility to make sure that they survive and that they have an opportunity to prosper. Let us provide an environment in which they can. Mr. Speaker, I would like to close my remarks by tossing out two thoughts for consideration. They evidence why we absolutely need to do the right thing. In the next 30 years, the world's population will increase by 2.5 billion and the demand for food will double. Who is going to feed them? Everybody eats.

Mr. HINOJOSA

Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, yesterday when the House was taking rollcall vote No. 39, an amendment by Representative George Miller to the Education Flexibility Partnership Act, I was unavoidably detained and unfortunately missed the vote. Had I been present I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. HINOJOSA

Mr. HINOJOSA. I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Rodriguez) for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I have an important point I would like to make today. Our Nation must have a fair and accurate census in the year 2000. In my State of Texas, the 1990 census resulted in the second highest undercount of any State. Not only in 1990 but for a full 10 years after that, almost half a million Texans have been inadequately represented in their government and received only a fraction of the Federal funds that they were due. The undercount meant that the State of Texas alone was deprived of over $1 billion in Federal funds. As the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gonzalez) said earlier, an equally inaccurate census in the year 2000 could result in the loss of over $2 billion to our State. Nationwide, the Commerce Department estimates that several million people were overlooked. While these figures represent the disempowerment of a shocking 1.6 percent of the total American population, the figures for minorities are significantly worse. A full 5 percent of Hispanic Americans were simply overlooked, 4.4 percent of African Americans were never counted, 4.5 percent of Native Americans were ignored. These communities of minority Americans have been denied the representation that is their birthright. Representation in American government cannot be contingent on the affluence of your neighborhood, nor the color of your skin. This is a sanctioned disempowerment of American minorities and cannot be allowed to continue. We must have a census 2000 that not only attempts to count all Americans but one that makes people, all people, count. To allow our underserved populations to become third-class citizens without a voice in their own government is to deny the most basic principles of democracy. This is the only way in which they are going to be able to get the additional Federal funds to improve their schools, to modernize their schools, to be able to improve health programs, to be able to improve their infrastructure so that they too can have an interstate highway and be able to be connected to the rest of the country. This is the only way in which they are going to be able to improve the quality of life of their people. This must change. I stand here today, and I say, the year 2000 census must be fair. To be fair, it must be accurate.

Mr. HINOJOSA. I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr). I am very pleased that he mentioned California because California was the hardest hit in terms of the loss of resources. It was estimated by the GAO report that approximately $2.2 billion was the biggest loser on the fact that we did not utilize sampling during the 1990 census. The Census Bureau estimated that 835,000 people were not counted in California. Of those, it is also interesting to indicate that over half of those individuals not counted in California were Hispanics, and the population figures are used again. It is important to note that the population figures are used by 22 of the 25 biggest Federal grant programs. So if people are not counted, such as Medicaid, then they will not be able to receive those resources. If people are not counted such, we will not be able to use the resources for how reconstruction. So it is important for us to recognize that it is key and it is important that everyone. It is hard to think that if 5 percent of the Hispanic population is not utilized, that Hispanics are only worth 95 percent instead of a hundred percent, and we also recognize that there is an overcount, and we have a large number of individuals that are the rich that are being overcounted because they have several households. So we ask, as we move forward, that we get an accurate count. I wanted to just mention in terms of the GAO report that it was requested by the leaders of the House Subcommittee on Census and to determine how much each State would have received from these programs by using adjusted figures for the 1990 head count, and this GAO report is the one that I have been mentioning. The Supreme Court ruled in January the statistical methods known as sampling could be, and I read again, could not be used for determining population figures for allotting congressional seats. In response we recognize that it can be utilized for all the other areas, and that is what we are talking about. So, it becomes important that we recognize the importance of making sure that everyone gets counted. I was also very pleased, and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi) was here earlier, and she talked about the importance and had to submit some record for the Record because she recognized that California was the biggest loser, and in her comments she also addresses the importance that in California the statistics were alarming and had far-reaching consequences. Mr. Speaker, 2.7 percent of the people in California were missed in the 1990 census. There is much at stake in this process for California, for Texas and for the entire Nation to make sure that everyone gets counted. In the 1990 census it showed that 27 States and the District of Columbia lost $4.5 billion over the decade in Federal funds due to the failure of a corrected census in 1990. California was the State most harmed by these inaccuracies. One State would have received $2.2 billion more in Federal funds during that period, and that is $2,660 for a person that was missed. So for each one that is missed, in Texas we lose a little bit over $1,900; in California they lost over $2,600. So it is important for us to recognize that every effort needs to be made to assure that we get everyone counted. In the year 2000 census I also want to assure my colleagues that the Census Bureau is there to do an accurate count, and they are willing to move to make sure that the 2000 census is an accurate count. Scientific methods, and we got to remember that since the 1950s we have recognized that there has been a problem in terms of how people are counted, and since then and up to the present, even in the 1980 census, and 1990, there were attempts and there were utilized methods. They were recognized to best identify those people that are missing, and that does not mean that we will not be going house to house, that does not mean that we will not try and make sure that everyone gets counted. In fact, as we look at the scientific methods that have been used by the Bureau for decades, it is indicated that they have been extremely helpful to be able to get a more accurate count. The Census Bureau has used scientific methods to be more accurately measured and correct and to make sure that we get that undercount, because as my colleagues well recognize, there is also an overcount on the other side with the rich that have several households. In the year 2000 the Census Bureau will, No. 1, mail the census form to each household so that that effort will be there again and will continue to be there, and it will also go door to door to follow up on those homes that do not respond. So we are going to go out there to make sure that everyone, No. 1, gets some mail; No. 2, if they do not send it back, we are going to go out there to make sure and knock on their door to make sure that that mail and that census data comes back. Secondly, we are going, for the first time in history the Bureau will put on a national advertising campaign urging everyone to participate, and this effort is an effort to make sure that everyone recognize that they have a responsibility to be counted and an obligation. Thirdly, Mr. Speaker, they will use special outreach to contact and encourage everyone to return their census forms, including people who do not have a fixed address, and this is where the problem lies. There is a lot of individuals or families that live together, and we do not have a fixed address for them, and those are the individuals that get miscounted, and that is why, in order to carry that out, aside from all those things that we are going to be doing, we are going to be pushing on the utilization of sampling which will allow us to have a more accurate count. To carry out the accuracy coverage evaluation, which is called ACE, a quality check which completes the census by evaluating accuracy and correcting any undercount. Methods very similar used by ACE were used in the 1980 and 1990 census, and this will allow an opportunity to make sure everyone gets counted. When we look at Americans, I know that during the Civil War we counted African Americans less than. We do not want to do this at this time. We want to make sure that everyone gets counted. Again, if 5 percent of Hispanics are not counted, that means that I am only counted at 95 percent, while other people are counted at a hundred or even beyond if they are overcounted. So there is a need for us to look at that disparity that exists there and make every effort to make sure that everyone gets counted.

Mr. HINOJOSA

Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege for me to rise today to recognize an accomplished individual who is the deserving recipient of this year's Border Texan of the Year Award, Mr. Charles C. Butt, Chairman & CEO of the H.E.B. Grocery Company. This award is given to individuals whose efforts have improved the quality of life for residents in South Texas. Recipients of this award serve as role models for all Texans. They are an inspiration to others, and they exhibit character as well as display a high standard of ethics. Charles Butt has been selected by the BorderFest Border Texan of the Year Committee because his contributions to South Texas in the area of employment and economic development are unsurpassed. HEB today stands as one of the nation's largest independently owned food retailing companies. It is the largest private employer in the state of Texas with 45,000 employees, or ``partners,'' and operates 250 stores across Texas, Louisiana, and Mexico. HEB generated sales of approximately $7 billion in 1998. In 1971, Mr. Butt became HEB's Chairman and CEO. At that time 4,500 individuals were employed, and revenues were approximately $250 million. These facts and figures merit mention because they reflect the strengths of someone who is a true leader, someone whose vision and work ethic has made a successful company even more dynamic. Moreover, HEB has always had a practice of reaching out to the community. Never just a policy, but always a tradition, the practice of helping those in need has only become stronger under the leadership of Charles Butt. Time and time again, he has been there to help communities in need. When flood-waters ravaged the small city of Del Rio, Texas in August, HEB was there. Within hours of this tragedy, HEB tankers carrying 5,500 gallons of water were stationed at the Del Rio stores around the clock, and construction experts with the company were on site helping this city to rebuild. Charles Butt personally was on the scene to assist in whatever way he could. The spirit of HEB can be seen not only in times of crises, but in everyday programs that reflect the company's desire to feed the hungry. HEB has revolutionized the food banking efforts with its support of twenty food banks--eighteen in Texas and two in Mexico. Since 1983 HEB supported food banks have shared more than 150 million pounds of donated food and merchandise with some 6,000 organizations. The list of charitable works goes on and on. Again, I want to say how delighted I am that Charles C. Butt has been selected to receive this recognition. He is a man who represents the best in our country--a personal devotion to service, a professional commitment to excellence, and a visionary grasp of the opportunities open to all Americans. Thank you for all your contributions, and I am glad to have this opportunity to add my accolades to this well-deserved honor. Congratulations, Mr. Border Texan!

Mr. HINOJOSA

Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, this is a sad day in our Nation's history. I say this because the stage has been set today to impeach our President against the will of the American people. This action is partisan, this action is wrong, this action is unconscionable. How can we say this is a political democracy when an overwhelming majority of the American people have clearly stated they want our President to remain in office? How can we say this is a political democracy when an overwhelming majority of the American people have said they want to see us negotiate a compromise? How can we undo the last two presidential elections and say to the American people, your votes do not matter? Are we a democracy or are we not? I do not intend to stand by idly and be a party to what I will again say is quite obviously an unfair process. I was elected to this Congress to represent the people, and that is precisely what I intend to by casting my vote against impeachment. Compromise! Conscience! Censure! That is what must be the order of the day. It is the only fair way the American people can be represented. Formal censure by the entire Congress is the only way to express the disdain of the American people for the President's actions. It is a fitting and constitutionally valid punishment, and one, I should add, that polls show a majority of the public prefers. Those who claim otherwise rely on the argument that the Constitution does not mention censure. There are those who say it's ``impeachment or nothing,'' when, in fact, a score of Constitutional experts called as witnesses by both Republicans and Democrats on the Judiciary Committee agreed in writing--by a margin of almost 4 to 1--that the Constitution does not prohibit censure. The Framers of the Constitution, anticipating the political vulnerability of the Presidency to opposing factions in Congress, established a threshold for impeachment which is very high--``treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.'' This high threshold should be maintained, and as I have said before, the President's actions have never compromised the security of this nation; so what we're left talking about is private activity which reflects on moral character. That is not what our Founding Fathers intended to be impeachable offenses--unforgivable perhaps, but not impeachable. The conduct which is the basis for the Judiciary Committee's recommendation of impeachment--perjury, and related actions regarding personal sexual misconduct--is not of the same legal magnitude as the crimes set forth in the Constitution. There is no credible evidence that the President's actions undermined the integrity of our Democratic institutions, cast doubt on his loyalty to the country, or prevented his ability to execute his duties as President. Again, while his offenses are real, they are not impeachable. To impeach the President for the offenses charged by the Judiciary Committee would be to lower the threshold for impeachment for all future Presidents, and lowering the threshold in this way would pose a threat to the system of checks and balances and separation of powers that form the foundation of our system of Democratic governance. This would indeed be grave. I said at the onset of this investigation that I would base my actions on the evidence of record. Based on the evidence, a Congressional action short of impeachment--such as censure for unacceptable conduct--seems to strike the right balance and to best serve the interests of our nation and its people. To not allow a vote on a censure resolution amounts to only one thing--a decision by the Republican leadership to ignore the will of the American people. That is wrong. It is an example of the tyranny our forefathers sought to escape when they founded this great nation. I will vote my conscience today. I will vote to reflect the will of the people. I will vote against partisanship and against impeachment. I will cast my vote for Democracy.

Mr. HINOJOSA

Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I stand here today to say I wholeheartedly support the decision of our President and Commander in Chief to launch a series of air strikes against Iraq and that I support 100 percent the resolution we will be voting on shortly. While it is a sad day, this action was necessary. It is an action that is justified. Every avenue has been exhausted to prevent this, but ultimately, it is action prompted by Saddam Hussein and his contempt for complying with the international rule of law. Now the consequences for that disdain must be realized. In a closed door session in this House last night, all Members, Republicans and Democrats, met with Defense Secretary Cohen. I think any reservations with regard to timing were put to rest at that time. But if further questions linger, I should point out that important congressional and Senatorial voices of support are strongly behind the President's actions. These voices include House Committee on International Relations member, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), incoming Senate Committee on Armed Services chairman, John Warner, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations chairman, Jesse Helms, Senator Daschle and Senator Richard Lugar, who said the attack came at exactly the right time, that any other decision would have severely damaged the credibility of our United States. I wish to conclude by saying to our men and women in uniform, you have our undivided support. You represent our Nation's finest. You defend not only our freedom but also the ideals of democracy across the globe. Our thoughts and prayers are with you.

Mr. HINOJOSA

Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, it is a great honor to stand before you to pay homage to a man who has made such a difference in his community. Mr. R. David Guerra, President and Director of the International Bank of Commerce in McAllen, Texas, has been awarded the Cultural Leader of the Year Award by the South Texas Symphony Association. Mr. Guerra, a graduate of the Stonier Graduate School of Banking at Rutgers University, soon began a prestigious career with the U.S. Treasury Department. He was commissioned in 1977 as a National Bank Examiner, Comptroller of the Currency. During this period, David received numerous achievement awards and participated in various special projects throughout the United States. In 1981, David became Executive Vice-President and Director of the International Bank of Commerce in Laredo, Texas, including the title of Vice President of International Bankshares, Inc. Adept in banking and management, David earned the title of President in 1990, and continues to lead seventeen International Bank of Commerce branches in South Texas in a successful banking enterprise. Though his accomplishments within the banking industry are quite impressive, David has worked to extend his success to his community. David is active in numerous civic, political and professional organizations. In addition to his career accomplishments, he offers his business knowledge as Director of the Independent Bankers Association of Texas, and has served as President and Director of the Laredo Development Foundation, Director of the Laredo Chamber of Commerce, and the Corporation Director and Vice Chairman of the McAllen Economic Development Corp. Presently serving as Director of the Texas Higher Education Board and Director of The University of Texas-Pan American Foundation, David firmly believes in supporting students seeking further education. As a past Director and current Pace Setter Chairman of United Way of Hidalgo County, he is making a difference in the lives of the children who are the future of our community. Also the Director of McAllen Performing Arts, Inc., and past Director of the Hidalgo County Historical Museum, David promotes his cultural environment so often neglected by others. R. David Guerra's commitment to education, enrichment, and achievement has made him a catalyst for accomplishment in his community. His ambition and commitment serves as standards for all leaders to admire. He has gained my admiration as a businessman, and my respect as a community leader. It is my pleasure to see him named the 1998-1999 Cultural Leader of the Year. I wish for David, his wife, and his two children all the blessings that are mine to give. I look forward to your future works, and thank you for being a model for your community.

Mr. HINOJOSA

Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to participate in today's tribute to the Honorable Henry B. Gonzalez. A maverick, a pioneer, a man of conviction--there aren't too many people I would use these words to describe. The deal of our delegation, however, is one such individual. Our distinguished dean came to the House of Representatives in 1961, before any other Hispanics were elected from the State of Texas. He laid the foundation for those of us who have since followed. For all you have done--for your constituents--for the Hispanic community--for the underprivileged--for all Americans--I want to say thank you. In the brief time I have been in Congress, I unfortunately have not had the good fortune to be able to work closely with you. But I am well acquainted with your remarkable achievements. It is because of the commitment you have always demonstrated that I know why it is so important to work tirelessly for the causes and issues we believe in. You have taught us why we must be dedicated to the pursuit of excellence. You have shown how goals are, indeed, attainable, but not always easy to achieve. More importantly, you have shown that within each and every one of us there is the potential to make a real difference in the world we live in, but that to make such a difference, one must be involved. Chairman Gonzalez, you have made Congress a better place--you have made Texas a better place--and you have made America a better place. I began my remarks by saying you were a maverick, a pioneer, a man of conviction. I want to close them by saying it would be more accurate to say you are indeed a legend.

Mr. HINOJOSA

Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall vote No. 495 on the Journal I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. HINOJOSA

Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, yesterday in my Congressional District I was hosting a jobs fair. Due to returning to Washington later than I had anticipated I missed three Suspension votes on the following bills: H.R. 4614, Conveyance of Federal Land in New Hampshire; H.R. 1154, Indian Federal Recognition Administrative Procedures Act of 1997; and H.R. 4655, Establishing a Program to Support a Transition to Democracy in Iraq. Had I been present I would have voted ``nay'' on H.R. 4614, ``yea'' on H.R. 1154, and ``yea'' on H.R. 4655.

Mr. HINOJOSA

Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, it is indeed a privilege for me to be able to participate in today's special order recognizing the service of my distinguished colleague, the gentleman from California (Mr. Torres). As a freshman, I have unfortunately not had the honor of serving with the gentleman from California (Mr. Torres) for very long. What I do know, though, from my brief association is that we are saluting a great individual, someone who has committed himself to improving the quality of life for all Americans and particularly America's Hispanic community. Since being elected to Congress in 1982, the gentleman from California (Mr. Torres) has represented his constituents and community passionately, demonstrating in his work both a fierce dedication and a keen understanding of the legislative procedures. He has worked tirelessly to improve the American economy and to help create jobs. He has been an indispensable friend to consumers. He has successfully championed affordable housing for low and moderate income families. His environmental efforts have met with equal success, as has his work to crack down on gang crime. The list goes on and on and on. But above all, above all, I think this is how I will remember him most, the gentleman from California (Mr. Torres) is someone who has displayed perseverance for the people, exemplifying what voters want from their leaders in politics, and especially in Washington. That is indeed a legacy of which to be quite proud, and the gentleman from California (Mr. Torres) is indeed someone I am glad to call my friend. Very shortly the gentleman from California (Mr. Torres) will be saying farewell to this chamber. For those of us who remain behind, your good-bye will be bitter sweet, but I know how nice it will be for you to call your time your very own. I want to join with everyone here today and wish for the gentleman that the years to come bring him good health, happiness, and time to enjoy his family. All of my best.

Mr. HINOJOSA

Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my strong support for H.R. 6, the Higher Education Amendments of 1998 conference report. As a member of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, and Chair of the Education Task Force of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, I can say without reservation that this is one of the single most important pieces of legislation Congress will vote on for students and families this year. Simply put, H.R. 6 will go a long way towards strengthening higher education for the next century. This bill will expand postsecondary education opportunities for low-income individuals and increase the affordability of postsecondary education for middle income families. Included in the reauthorization conference report are provisions of my own bill, H.R. 2495, the Higher Education for the 21st Century Act. One of the reasons I came to Congress was to effect the very type change this bill will accomplish for a deserving segment of the population that has been overlooked for far too long. I am proud to say that through the combined efforts of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling), the ranking member, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Bill Clay), Secretary of Education Dick Riley, the gentleman from California (Mr. Buck McKeon), and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dale Kildee), the bill we have before us today will create a new and separate title for Hispanic-serving institutions, well over 100 colleges and universities across the country with an undergraduate enrollment at least 25 percent Hispanic. It will increase the authorization level for HSIs to $62.5 million, funds that can be used for construction of new classrooms, laboratories, libraries, the purchase of books and periodicals, technological improvements and, most importantly, improving and expanding graduate and professional opportunities for Hispanic students. And, yes, H.R. 6 will also improve teacher quality, preparation and improvement. Mr. Speaker, I ask for the support of all my colleagues to pass the bill on behalf of every American who wants to pursue a higher education.

Mr. HINOJOSA

Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, when this issue last came before the House in May, I said it was a wrongheaded measure. My sentiments have not changed, not one iota in the intervening months. As I said when I spoke at that time, all of our budgets are tight. I certainly have been trying to find precious dollars for items that I deem of much higher priority than this, items such as funding higher education, programs which are badly needed throughout the country. As a member of the Committee on Education and the Workforce, I can vouch for that. Now, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) is proposing asking us to fork over tens of millions of dollars for a program that is not only costly but unnecessary. Putting troops on our borders is simply a bad use of government resources and taxpayer dollars. These funds could better be used for training our armed forces for military readiness, not performing the jobs of Border Patrol agents. This country already benefits from the work of highly qualified, highly trained Border Patrol agents who courageously and skillfully enforce our Nation's laws and protect our borders on a daily basis. I have said it before and I will say it again, to replace these INS agents with military troops is simply a bad idea. For that reason, Mr. Chairman, I urge all my colleagues to vote against the Traficant amendment today. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes).

Mr. HINOJOSA

Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, as we wrap up our work on the fiscal year 1999 agriculture appropriations conference report, I want to reiterate the importance of emergency-designated funding to assist farmers, ranchers, and producers. During my August break, I met with over 450 farmers and ranchers in my congressional district, together with FSA administrator Keith Kelly, and we heard about the emergency crisis that they are facing. I am particularly concerned about the agriculture sector in drought-stricken regions such as my home State of Texas. There is no question that more funds are needed. At the minimum, the amount contained in the Senate-passed version of this bill is what needs to be adopted. This $500 million is to be but a starting point. Personally, I feel this amount should be increased to $2.5 billion. Under the emergency situations that we face, that is what we should be looking at to help them out. My concern is that no matter what action is taken today, it may be too little too late. There are a large number of farm products producers; yes, hard-working agricultural producers who meet our Nation's food needs. We have to make their concerns our top priority, and I respectfully request that my colleagues join me in supporting this motion today.

Mr. HINOJOSA

Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, I believe it was Charles Dickens who, in his novel, A Tale of Two Cities, said, ``It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.'' That is a fairly accurate assessment of where we are right now here in this Chamber. Yes, I took the oath of office to defend our Constitution, and I will defend the rule of law and not the rule of man, which leads to tyranny. Later today we will be voting on the referral and release of the Starr report. As we proceed, I think all of us who are here will keep in mind how important it is to remain objective, and above all, fair. The decisions we will make will have a far-reaching and long-lasting impact on our country and on every American, young and old. Yes, let us release the report, but let us give our President the 2 days that he may be able to respond as requested. Let us be fair. There is nobody in this Chamber whom I believe can tell me that our President is not 100 percent committed to doing the best job he can for our Nation. His record on the job as President has proven that.

Mr. HINOJOSA

Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my strong opposition to H.R. 3892, the English Language Fluency Act. Pure and simple, this bill is riddled with problems and does little in the way of promoting English fluency. In my home State of Texas, there are almost half a million limited- English proficient children. Across the country, there are close to 3.5 million LEP students. What H.R. 3892 will do is severely hurt these millions of children who are well on their way to learning English. Let me tell my colleagues why. Under the pretext of parental choice and flexibility, the gentleman from California (Mr. Riggs) introduced H.R. 3892 on April 1, 1998 and scheduled a hearing on the bill 1 month later. Oddly enough, and I am a member of that committee, the panel of invited witnesses included only one individual who opposed the Riggs bill; a school superintendent from my own home State of Texas. The other eight witnesses the gentleman invited to testify included English-only proponents such as English First and the Center for Equal Opportunity. After the hearing, the gentleman from California, my friend, substituted his initial bill for another H.R. 3892 which contains numerous flaws. Let me count them for my colleagues. Problem number one: H.R. 3892 effectively eliminates Federal support to prepare, recruit and train qualified teachers to teach language- minority students. Problem number two: This bill lowers standards and expectations for our limited-English proficient students. H.R. 3892 emphasizes mastering English as quickly as possible at the expense of academic and analytical skills. Under the gentleman's bill, schools would be required to focus solely on teaching LEP students to learn English. What about the essentials of the art of learning? Problem number 3: H.R. 3892 repeals the Immigrant Education Act and replaces it with a loosely structured block grant to States based on the number of LEP immigrant children in their State. Under this proposal, needy school districts will receive even less money, as the bill does not require States to distribute funds in accordance with need nor merit. Problem number 4: The bill violates the civil rights of language- minority children. Under this bill, Congress would void all past and current voluntary compliance agreements regarding bilingual education entered into by local schools, parents, children, and the Department of Education without even contacting the parties involved or reviewing individual agreements. Problem number 5: This bill infringes on the ability of local schools to make critical decisions on appropriate curriculum and assessments. Mr. Speaker, there are many more problems with this bill. For purposes of time, I will not elaborate. In conclusion, I strongly urge all my colleagues to vote against this hastily drafted bill. Let us wait until next year when we do the reauthorization of K-12, and let us do it through the due process so we can bring in experts from throughout the country, that we can have field hearings and really do what is best for children. Because children can learn the art of learning in any language, be it English, German, Polish, Italian, whatever the language. But they need to hear it in a language that they can understand the teacher. We want the process to be followed and that the reauthorization be given this legislation.

Mr. HINOJOSA

Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to extend a proud salute to the members of the American GI Forum who have gathered to celebrate the 50th Anniversary of the founding of this organization by the late D. Hecter P. Garcia. Dr. Garcia was an inspiration to all of us and his legacy continues through the work the members do in his name and in the name of the organization he founded. The American GI Forum, a family-oriented Hispanic veterans group, was conceived in Corpus Christi, Texas in the spring of 1948 after veterans raised concerns about their benefits and treatment. Dr. Garcia began fighting for the civil rights of many Americans--long before others joined the cause. He fought for civil, human and individual rights. His ideas were firmly planted in south Texas and in the Hispanic community--nationwide. His efforts produced many of today's Hispanic leaders and provided the foundation for tomorrow's generation of leaders. Today, this organization has more than 100,000 members and 500 chapters in 32 states and Puerto Rico. More than 1,000,000 Hispanic veterans have proudly served their country and earned recognition for their service. The GI Forum continues to champion issues which impact the community including: access to health care for veterans, affirmative action, a fair and accurate census count, juvenile crime prevention, adolescent pregnancy prevention, and improving conditions in colonias. Dr. Garcia's legacy continues to be felt today as the organization looks into the future. He believed that education was the foundation for future generations. To this end, the American GI Forum is making a concentrated effort to educate and provide leadership development opportunities for young people. The American GI Forum celebrates 50 glorious years and many accomplishments, but the best years are yet to come. The future years will result in the fulfillment of Dr. Garcia's dream for a better tomorrow for all Americans.

Mr. HINOJOSA

Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, on Wednesday, July 29, due to a death in my family, I was unavoidably absent for rollcall votes on the Texas Radioactive Waste Disposal Act. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall vote 343, and I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall vote 344.

Mr. HINOJOSA

Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, it is a great honor to stand before my colleagues today to pay homage to a man who has benefitted us all. Mr. Robert Langford, the senior vice president of production operations of Owens' Country Sausage has retired after 35 years of service. Robert, a graduate of both Texas A&M University and Southern Methodist University was hired by Jerry Owens in 1963. Mr. Owens recognized Robert's talents and quickly promoted him to manager of engineering. In 1972, he became the general manager and was continually advanced through the ranks until he reached his present position, the senior vice president of production operations. Due in large part to his work and innovations, Robert led the Owens Corporation to gain the number one market share position in the Southwest, which it still enjoys to this day. These accomplishments are quite impressive, yet they are only one aspect of Robert F. Langford's life. Robert also worked extensively with the Southwest Meat Association. He was the president of SMA from 1978 to 1980 and composed its bylaws and mission statement. But Robert was not content to merely serve the SMA. He wanted to serve his community as well. To realize this goal, Robert became one of the three founders of the Southwest Meat Association's Education Foundation as well as its chairman from 1982 to 1998. The Education Foundation provides scholarships to deserving students who display an interest and aptitude for a career in the meat industry. He believes education is a must. Robert's commitment to promoting education in the community is shared by his wife Kathy, who dedicated 35 years of her life to teaching her young children. Kathy has zealously supported Robert every step of the way and she shares in all his numerous triumphs. Robert F. Langford served his country in the United States Air Force as a fighter pilot for five years. He has served his community as the Chairman of the Fellowship of Deacons for Park Cities Baptist Church, and he has served us all by improving our quality of life through his work. He has earned my admiration as a talented businessman and inventor. He has gained my respect as a dedicated family man and community leader. And he has won my friendship as a kindhearted and generous person. I wish for Robert, his wife Kathy, and their children and grandchildren, all the blessings that are mine to give. From the bottom of my heart.

Mr. HINOJOSA

Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall vote No. 336, The Dingell Substitute to H.R. 4250, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. HINOJOSA

Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall vote No. 310, and rollcall No. 311, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no'' on 310 and ``no'' on 311.

Mr. HINOJOSA

Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, yesterday when we voted on the rule under which we are currently considering this legislation, the VA-HUD Appropriations Act, and specifically the Leach amendment, I voted against it. The process has been circumvented and I do not agree with that. This is about more than process, however. It is ultimately, and more importantly, about people in need being abandoned--whether we help those who are disadvantaged, or whether we turn our backs on them. (The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities says the number of poor families receiving assistance each year will be reduced by up to 69%.) I cannot and I will not be a party to such a blatant wrong aimed directly at those who are most in need--low income families and individuals, including the elderly and persons with disabilities. You'll get no argument from me that resources are scarce, and it is for precisely that reason I stand here today and say: Do in your heart what you know is right--do not jeopardize public housing assistance for poor and low-income working families. It is unfair. It is unjust. It is unconscionably wrong.