Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1642, the ``Homeless Veterans Housing at Sepulveda Ambulatory Care Center Promotion Act.'' America's veterans have risked their lives for their country. They deserve the best treatment and support that we can offer them. Despite this, homelessness remains a pervasive problem among veterans, with many homeless veterans also fighting substance abuse problems. It is our responsibility, as our Nation's leaders, to work to ensure they receive the assistance they need. This bill is an important step toward that goal. The Sepulveda Ambulatory Care Center, located in Los Angeles' San Fernando Valley, exists to provide care to veterans. It is currently the major outpatient facility for the 1.4 million veterans living in northern Los Angeles. The Center falls under the purview of the Department of Veterans Affairs, and includes education and research facilities, in addition to comprehensive ambulatory care. This facility serves a vital role for the region's veterans. This bill would direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to maintain a homeless housing project at the Sepulveda Center as a sober living facility for veterans only. H.R. 1642 also requires that this housing project be provided with adequate staffing and security. This legislation is a necessary step in ensuring that our veterans receive the support that they need. I strongly support this resolution, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 124, which authorizes the use of the Capitol grounds for the National Peace Officers' Memorial Service. Peace officers, the sworn, public-sector officers entrusted with law enforcement authority and the power of arrest, risk their lives daily to protect our nation. These individuals, who are responsible for safeguarding the rights and freedoms we enjoy as Americans, are true heroes. Peace Officers Memorial Day honors those who have made the ultimate sacrifice for the safety and security of their communities and our nation. Created by Public Law 87-726, signed by President Kennedy in 1962, this day gives us the opportunity to acknowledge and pay our respects to those who, through their courageous deeds, have fallen in the line of duty. Mr. Speaker, on Sunday, May 13, 2007, 382 names will be added to the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial during the 19th Annual Candlelight Vigil. These 382 names include 145 officers who died in 2006, plus 237 from earlier years who had previously been lost to history. Of these 382 names, 55 represent Texas law officers who lost their lives in the line of duty, nine of them in 2006. Mr. Speaker, one of the names of the fallen heroes to be added to the list is Officer Rodney J. Johnson of the Houston Police Department. Officer Johnson, a 12 year veteran of the Houston Police Department, was killed September 21, 2006, while taking a suspect in custody during a traffic stop. He leaves to honor his memory his beloved wife, Houston Police Department Officer Joslyn Johnson, and five teen-age children; three daughters and two sons, ages 14 to 19. Officer Rodney Johnson was born in Houston and served in the U.S. Army as a military police officer until being honorably discharged in 1990. He then went to work as a corrections officer for the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and then as a jail attendant. He graduated from the Houston police academy in 1994. As a member of the department's Southeast Gang Task Force, Officer Rodney Johnson earned two Lifesaving Awards and one Medal of Valor from the state of Texas. In January 1998, Officer Rodney Johnson rescued a physically challenged driver trapped in rising floodwaters in January 1998 and later that year he rescued mentally challenged people trapped inside of a burning house. Officer Rodney Johnson, who stood 6 feet 5 inches tall and weighed nearly 300 pounds, served on his union's board of directors. As Hans Marticiuc, the president of Officer Johnson's union stated, ``he was big and he was intimidating-looking, but he was as gentle as a baby bear.'' Mr. Speaker, the number of officers killed in the line of duty last year declined nearly 8 percent from 2005, when there were 157 officer deaths. The 2006 figure was the lowest annual total since 1999, when 143 officers were lost. Although the number of officers killed in the line of duty has declined in recent years, the fact that one officer is killed every two-and-a-half days in our country is a sober reminder that protecting our communities and safeguarding our democracy come at a heavy price. Including this year's officers, there are now 17,917 names engraved on the Memorial, representing officers from all 50 states, the District of Columbia, U.S. territories, and federal law enforcement and military police agencies. This resolution permits the Grand Lodge of the Fraternal Order of Police and its auxiliary to sponsor a free public event, the 26th Annual National Peace Officers' Memorial Service, on the Capitol grounds on May 15, 2007. This service will honor the law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty during 2006 who have died in the line of duty, as well as the 800,000 officers who continue to serve in federal, state and local law enforcement agencies nationwide. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important resolution. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to Donald W. Haynes, of Houston, Texas, on his retirement from the Houston Fire Department after 32 years of dedicated service. Donald Haynes' roots were planted in the deep, strong foundation of family. Donald was born in Beaumont, Texas to Mr. and Mrs. Elwin and Evelyn Haynes. He is the oldest of their four children. Because Donald's father was in the U.S. Navy, the Haynes family relocated to different military assignments approximately every 3 years. As such, Donald has been privileged to travel to many places across the country and the world. He has lived in Providence, Rhode Island; Morocco, North Africa; Norfolk, Virginia; Alameda, California; Middletown, Rhode Island; and San Juan, Puerto Rico. Madam Speaker, though he traveled and relocated to many domestic and foreign places in his young life, Donald worked diligently to finish his educational studies. Donald graduated from Antilles High School in San Juan, Puerto Rico in 1970, the same year his father retired from the U.S. Navy. When his family returned to Beaumont, Texas Donald attended Lamar University his freshman year. In the summer of 1971 the Haynes family moved to Houston, Texas. Donald transferred to the University of Houston and graduated from there in December 1974 with a B.S. in Psychology. Mr. Haynes received an M.S. Degree in Criminal Justice Administration from Sam Houston State University in 1988 and an A.S. Degree in Fire Technology in 1992 from Houston Community College. He is also a graduate of the 166th Session of the FBI National Academy held in Quantico, Virginia from June 1991 to September 1991. Donald's graduation from the University of Houston was merely the beginning step of a long glorious journey of public service. Donald worked for Southwestern Bell Telephone Company for about six months prior to his acceptance into the Houston Fire Academy in June 1975. He graduated in October 1975 and was elected President of the 1975- B Class. His first assignment was Hobby Airport, Station 36 on the A Shift. He later transferred to Station 35 after his probationary period was completed. In 1977, as one of two firefighters with a college degree at his fire station, Donald was selected to attend Polygraph School. Donald graduated from Polygraph School, completed his internship and became a Texas Licensed Polygraph Examiner in May 1978. He has conducted polygraph examinations for the Houston Arson Bureau, HFD Internal Affairs, HFD Recruiting Division; Homicide Division of the Houston Police Department; Airport Police, Park Police, City Marshall's Office and other law enforcement agencies. Though Donald had accumulated numerous achievements, he did not rest on his laurels but continued to excel at every level and distinguished himself through a number of praiseworthy promotions. Donald's promotions through the Civil Service ranks of the Houston Fire Department include: Chauffeur in May 1980; Inspector in September 1982; Investigator in 1985; Senior Investigator in November 1995 and Asst. (Chief) Arson Investigator September 2001. Donald was also appointed to the rank of Assistant Fire Chief from 1992 to 1993. Donald also holds a number of State Certifications. He has been a licensed polygraph examiner for 29 years. In, addition, he is a Master Firefighter; Master Fire and Arson Investigator; Master Peace Officer, TCLEOSE Instructor; Intermediate Fire Instructor; and Field Examiner. Madam Speaker, Donald has admirably served over 22 years in the Houston Arson Bureau as a State of Texas commissioned Peace officer. He also has contributed to community outreach service. He has been a member of the Omega Psi Phi Fraternity, Inc for over 35 years. He is also a Life Member of the NAACP, and has served on the Board of Directors of Shape Community Center for over 10 years (1992-2003). Chief Donald W. Haynes has proudly served the Houston Fire Department and the Citizens of Houston, Texas from June 1975 until February 2007, a period for 31 years and 8 months. Though Donald extinguished many fires in his career, it was an inner blazing and burning flame that sparked his desire to perform at the highest level. In closing, Madam Speaker, let me say that I, on behalf of all Houstonians, am grateful for the outstanding dedication and public service Donald has given to the Houston Community for nearly 32 years. We can never repay you for the priceless service you have bestowed on our community. We congratulate you and hope that your well-earned retirement brings joy to your life.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, with great emotion, I come to this floor. Congressman Frank, let me thank you. No one that may be listening had the opportunity to listen to Congresswoman Baldwin and you speak of your existence. So I rise today to make sure that everyone understands that this bill is about hate. Regular order is in place. It is about protecting young people who have an identity that is different from any of us. It is about reflecting the definition of hatred that says that it is an affection of the mind awakened by something regarded as evil. Can we in America regard human life as evil? Even as Christians, and many of us are not, the Bible dictates about the instruction of loving thy neighbor. This bill reflects on the needs of African Americans and Hispanics and the disabled and those with gender identity. It reflects on the fact that brutality and viciousness because of hate cannot be tolerated by a country that believes we are all created equal. This is a fair bill. It does not encourage you to change your faith, but it encourages you to adhere to democracy and to the Constitution. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1592, the ``Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007.'' Mr. Speaker, as important as it is to apprehend, prosecute, convict, and punish severely those who commit hate crimes, we can all agree that in the long run it is even more important and better for society if we can increase our effectiveness in eradicating the desire to commit a hate crime in the first place. I have long believed, and research confirms, that if a person does not acquire a proclivity to hate as a juvenile, he or she is not likely to be motivated to commit crimes out of hate as an adult. Mr. Speaker, Webster's Dictionary defines hate as a ``strong aversion; intense dislike; hate; an affection of the mind awakened by something regarded as evil.'' Mr. Speaker, before I proceed any further, I would be remiss if I failed to note that this legislation is more timely than any of us could have predicted just a month ago. Two weeks ago, at Virginia Tech University, one of the Nation's great land grant colleges, we witnessed the most senseless acts of violence on a scale unprecedented in our history. Neither the mind nor the heart can contemplate a cause that could lead a human being to inflict such injury and destruction on fellow human beings. The loss of life and innocence at Virginia Tech is a tragedy over which all Americans mourn and the thoughts and prayers of people of goodwill everywhere go out to the victims and their families. In the face of such overwhelming grief, I hope they can take comfort in the certain knowledge that unearned suffering is redemptive. But the carnage at Virginia Tech also commands that we here in this body take a stand against senseless acts of violence taken against persons for no reason other than that they are different, whether in terms of race, religion, national origin, gender, or sexual orientation. It is long past time for our national community to declare that injuries inflicted on any member of the community by another simply because he or she is different poses a threat to the peace and security of the entire community. For that reason alone, such conduct must be outlawed and punished severely. That is why I have, Mr. Speaker, since 1999 introduced and supported strong legislation to deter and punish hate crimes, including as noted earlier, H.R. 254, the ``David Ray Hate Crime Prevention Act of 2007'' pending in this Congress. Mr. Speaker, every act of violence is tragic and harmful in its consequences, but not all crime is based on hate. A ``hate crime'' is the violence of intolerance and bigotry, intended to hurt and intimidate someone because of their race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, or disability. The purveyors of hate use explosives, arson, weapons, vandalism, physical violence, and verbal threats of violence to instill fear in their victims, leaving them vulnerable to more attacks and feeling alienated, helpless, suspicious and fearful. Others may become frustrated and angry if they believe the local government and other groups in the community will not protect them. When perpetrators of hate are not prosecuted as criminals and their acts not publicly condemned, their crimes can weaken even those communities with the healthiest race relations. Of all crimes, hate crimes are most likely to create or exacerbate tensions, which can trigger larger community-wide racial conflict, civil disturbances, and even riots. Hate crimes put cities and towns at risk of serious social and economic consequences. The immediate costs of racial conflicts and civil disturbances are police, fire, and medical personnel overtime, injury or death, business and residential property loss, and damage to vehicles and equipment. Long-term recovery may be hindered by a decline in property values, which results in lower tax revenues, scarcity of funds for rebuilding, and increased insurance rates. Mr. Speaker, a study funded by the Bureau of Justice Statistics released September 2000, shows that 85 percent of law enforcement officials surveyed recognize bias-motivated violence to be more serious than similar crimes not motivated by bias. Hate crimes are destructive and divisive. A random act of violence resulting in injury or even death is a tragic event that devastates the lives of the victim and their family, but the intentional selection and beating or murder of an individual because of who they are terrorizes an entire community and sometimes the Nation. For example, it is easy to recognize the difference between check-kiting and a cross burning; or an arson of an office building versus the intentional torching of a church or synagogue. The church or synagogue burning has a profound impact on the congregation, the faith community, the greater community, and the Nation. Mr. Speaker, some opponents of hate crimes legislation claim that such legislation is a solution in search of a problem. They claim that there is no epidemic of bias-motivated violence and thus no need to legislate. I wish to briefly address this claim. victims and perpetrators According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, racially motivated hate crimes most frequently target blacks. Six in ten racially biased incidents target blacks, and 3 in 10 incidents targeted whites. Hispanics of all races were targeted in 6.7 percent of incidents and Asians in 3 percent. Younger offenders were responsible for most hate crimes and most of their victims were between 11 and 31. The age of victims of violent hate crimes drops dramatically after age 45. Thirty-one percent of violent offenders and 46 percent of property offenders were under age 18. Thirty-two percent of hate crimes occurred in a residence, 28 percent in an open space, 19 percent in a retail commercial establishment or public building, 12 percent at a school or college, and 3 percent at a church, synagogue, or temple. examples of CRS hate crime cases In Harris County--Houston--Texas, in a case that drew national attention, 16-year-old David Ray Ritcheson, a Mexican-American, was severely assaulted April 23, 2007, by two youths while attending a party in the Houston suburb of Spring, Texas. One of his teen-age attackers, a skinhead, yelled ethnic slurs and kicked a pipe up his rectum, severely damaging his internal organs and leaving him in the hospital for 3 months and 8 days--almost all of it in critical care. For the supposed crime of allegedly kissing a white girl, young David Ray's assailants punched him unconscious, kicked him in the head, sadistically inflicted 17 cigarette burns that still scar his body, poured bleach on his face and body, and then assaulted with a pipe taken from a patio umbrella. He was left lying unconscious and unattended in the back yard of a house for more than 8 hours. He has endured more than 30 operations to restore his appearance and regain the normal use of his bodily functions. In Jasper, Texas, an African-American man, James Byrd, Jr., was brutally murdered by being kidnapped, beaten unconscious, spray painted in the face with black paint, tied to the back of a pick-up truck, pants dropped down to his ankles, dragged 2.5 miles over pavement through a rural Black community in Jasper County called Huff Creek, leaving his skin, blood, arms, head, genitalia, and other parts of his body strewn along the highway, his remains were dumped in front of a Black cemetery. In Springfield, Missouri, an African-American male in the company of a white female was stabbed at local Denny's restaurant by a group of white males. Near San Diego, California, elderly immigrant workers were attacked by white youths. The body of a Latino immigrant youth was also discovered in the same vicinity as the attacks on the workers. An African-American employee of a construction company in Marquette, Kansas, reported that he had been racially harassed for several months by fellow employees through racist graffiti and name-calling. A Jewish synagogue was vandalized by four Arab-American males in the Bronx, New York. Every individual's life is valuable and sacred, and even one life lost is too many. There is ample evidence that violent, bias-motivated crimes are a widespread and serious problem in our Nation. But it is not the frequency or number of these crimes alone, that distinguish these acts of violence from other types of crime; it is the impact these crimes have on the victims, their families, their communities and, in some instances, the Nation. Evidence indicates that bias-motivated crimes are underreported; however, statistics show that since 1991 over 100,000 hate crime offenses have been reported to the FBI, with 7,163 reported in 2005, the FBI's most recent reporting period. Crimes based on race-related bias were by far the most common, representing 54.7 percent of all offenses for 2005. Crimes based on religion represented 17.1 percent and ethnicity/national origin, 13.2 percent. Crimes based on sexual orientation constituted 14.2 percent of all bias-motivated crimes in 2005, with 1,017 reported for the year. The National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs (NCAVP), a non- profit organization that tracks bias incidents against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people, reported 1,985 incidents for 2005 from only 13 jurisdictions, compared to the 12,417 agencies reporting to the FBI in 2005. Additionally, the Hate Crimes Statistics Act makes the reporting of bias-motivated crimes by State and local jurisdictions voluntary, resulting in no participation by many jurisdictions each year. Hawaii, for instance, did not participate in reporting at all in 2005. Underreporting is also common. Wyoming, for instance, reported only 4 incidents for 2005. Six States reported 10 or fewer incidents in 2005. Some large cities have been egregiously deficient in reporting hate crimes. Jacksonville, Florida, for example, reported only 5 incidents in 2005. Sadly, statistics only give a glimpse of the problem. It is widely recognized that violent crimes on the basis of sexual orientation often go unreported due to fear and stigmatization. A Department of Justice report released in October 2001 confirms that bias-motivated crimes are under-reported; that a disproportionately high percentage of both victims and perpetrators of these violent crimes are young people under 25 years of age; and that only 20 percent of reported hate crimes result in arrest. A December 2001 report by the Southern Poverty Law Center, SPLC, a nonprofit organization that monitors hate groups and extremist activity in the United States, went so far as to say that the system for collecting hate crimes data in this Nation is ``in shambles.'' SPLC estimates that the real number of hate crimes being committed in the United States each year is likely closer to 50,000, as opposed to the nearly 8,000 reported by the FBI. Next, Mr. Speaker, let me address the specious claim that H.R. 1592 abridges free speech. Opponents seem to be complaining that the legislation would prohibit pursuant to Rule 404 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, the introduction of substantive evidence of the defendant's expression or associations, unless the evidence specifically relates to the offense or is used to impeach a witness. In this way, the legislation strikes the appropriate balance between two competing interests: the interest of the government in punishing hate crimes and the rights of the defendant. Hate crimes legislation allows society to prescribe greater punishments for hate crimes because of the distinct emotional harm they cause their victims, the community unrest they incite, and the likelihood that they will provoke retaliatory crimes. See Wisconsin v. Mitchell, 508 U.S. 476, 488 (1993) (upholding a hate crimes punishment enhancement statute). However, H.R. 1592 also protects a defendant's rights by only permitting the introduction of evidence within the confines of the Federal Rules of Evidence and the First Amendment. The First Amendment protects speech and expressive conduct. Our bill only punishes criminal conduct, which is not protected by the First Amendment. Any argument that this legislation punishes expressive conduct would likely be unsuccessful because using violence to convey one's ideas is outside the scope of the First Amendment. NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co., 458 U.S. 886, 916 (1982). In Wisconsin v. Mitchell the Court distinguished between statutes that are explicitly directed at expression and statutes that are directed at conduct. 508 U.S. at 487. The Court upheld the statute in Wisconsin v. Mitchell because it was directed at criminal conduct, unlike the statute at issue in R.A.V. v. St. Paul, which the Court struck down because it was explicitly directed at expression. Id. The critical flaw with the statute at issue in R.A.V. was that it was viewpoint discriminatory: It prohibited otherwise permissible speech based on the subject and perspective of the speech. R.A.V. v. St. Paul, 505 U.S. 377, 391 (1992). H.R. 1592 does not ban religious, political, or offensive speech, or even punish expressive conduct, such as cross burning or flag burning. Rather, the legislation is only directed at criminal conduct that is independently criminal, such as assault or murder. It punishes conduct that is already criminal more severely because of the defendant's motivation in choosing the victim. Thus, evidence of a defendant's expressions and associations properly can be admitted under certain circumstances. Moreover, Mr. Speaker, nothing in this legislation would prohibit the lawful expression of one's deeply held religious beliefs. If they wish, any person will continue to be free to say things like: ``Homosexuality is sinful''; ``Homosexuality is an abomination''; or ``Homosexuals will not inherit the kingdom of heaven.'' This is because H.R. 1592 only covers violent actions committed because of a person's sexual orientation that result in death or bodily injury. Mr. Speaker, the American public opinion strongly favors this legislation. According to a recent survey by Peter Hart and Associates, voters overwhelmingly favor expanding the definition of hate crimes to include crimes against people based on sexual orientation or gender identity. Three in four (73 percent) voters favor Congress's expanding the definition of hate crimes in this way, including 62 percent who strongly favor it. Just 22 percent oppose this action, with 17 percent who strongly oppose it. Support for hate crimes definition expansion is strong across the board. Large majorities of every major subgroup of the electorate-- including such traditionally conservative groups as Republican men (56 percent) and evangelical Christians (63 percent)--express support for this proposal. Support also crosses racial lines, with three in four whites (74 percent), African Americans (74 percent), and Latinos (72 percent) favoring Congress's including sexual orientation and gender identity in the definition of hate crimes. Voters believe strongly in government's obligation to protect all citizens, the fact that crimes based on prejudice are directed against an entire community, and that it would give local law enforcement extra help in solving crimes. Voters soundly reject arguments against this proposal. Whether it is the idea that it creates unequal treatment under the law; that it attacks the moral and religious beliefs of those opposed to homosexuality; or that it equates being gay with being Black or a woman, arguments against the hate crimes bill are not compelling to the public. Finally, Mr. Speaker, by passing H.R. 1592 we also pay fitting tribute to David Ray Ritcheson of Spring, Texas, my constituent, friend, and a very courageous young man. David Ray, a victim of one of the most horrible hate crimes in Harris County, Texas came forward to tell his story to the Crime Subcommittee in the hopes of saving others from experiencing a similar brutal ordeal. In coming forward, he has performed a valuable service to our Nation. In going forward with H.R. 1592 and seeing it through to final passage, this Committee is also performing a great service to our Nation by hastening the day when we make hate history. In conclusion, let me say that I strongly support H.R. 1592 and will vote to report the bill favorably to the full Committee.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Let me thank the Rules Committee for very diligent and thorough review. About 14 Members of Congress were able to present their case before the Rules Committee. I think it is important, Mr. Speaker, to reaffirm that this is about hate. There are already well-recognized doctrines and no disagreement that no matter who you are as an adult, sex with children is wrong. Many of us have enthusiastically supported Federal laws that already oppose that kind of abuse and violation. It is important to note that not only in the Rules Committee did Members have the opportunity to make the case as to the relevance of their amendments to this bill, but we sat for hours and hours in the Judiciary Committee going over amendment after amendment, amendments that were not about hate. They were, of course, certainly elements that one could raise, but they were protected in other aspects of the law. This bill pertains specifically to historical documented cases that, because of your disability or because of your race, because of your gender, because of your gender identity you have been abused. You have not seen the depth of degradation unless you've listened to people who have come to you in tears, who cannot, for any reason, tell you why they are who they are, but they say they are who they are, sort of a mix of words. And the pain of living as a human being who is rejected every day of their life, fearful that they may encounter brutality, that is the simplicity of this bill. That is why 31 Attorney Generals currently serving have said we need this. That is why they have asked the Federal Government simply to help us calm the communities, prosecute the cases, make sure that those who have a historical investment in themselves, who they are, can be protected; that a young Hispanic teenager does not have to be brutalized by skinheads. It is emotional, it is tearful, but it is true. And so when my colleagues talk about this rule, let me assure you that hours upon hours of attention to amendments have already been given, debated, presented. But what we have tried to do is to answer the pain, answer the violence, and yes, answer the call of 31 attorneys of the United States of America. Pass this rule so that we can debate the question of preventing hate.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, as a proud member of the Congressional Black Caucus, I rise to express my profound disappointment that the President lacked the vision, wisdom, and respect for the will of the American people to sign H.R. 1591, the ``U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Health, and Iraq Accountability Act.'' This legislation, which was crafted under the combined leadership of the Speaker and Democratic Caucus, Appropriations Committee Chairman Obey and Defense Subcommittee Chairman Murtha, with substantial input from the Congressional Black Caucus, provided a glide path to the day when our troops can return home where we can ``care for him who has borne the battle, and for his widow and orphan.'' But it did more than that. It also would help to repair the damage to America's international reputation and prestige and bring long overdue oversight, accountability, and transparency to defense and reconstruction contracting and procurement. Madam Speaker, the American taxpayers have paid nearly $400 billion to finance the misadventure in Iraq. I stand with the 3,222 fallen heroes who stand even taller in death because they gave the last full measure of devotion to their country. And I am reminded that while it is the armed forces which do the fighting, it is a Nation that goes to war. And it is the costs to the Nation that I wish to speak about today. Madam Speaker, it must be noted that the cost of the war in Iraq to the United States has also been high regarding the new and neglected needs of the American people. Americans have been exceedingly tolerant and patient with this Administration's handling of the situation in Iraq. We have postponed, foregone, or neglected needed investments in education, infrastructure, housing, homeland security. That is why it is right and good and just that the new Democratic majority included in the supplemental appropriations bill for Iraq and Afghanistan $4.3 billion for Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) disaster recovery grants, including $910 million to cover the cost of waiving the matching fund requirements in the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 174 (Public Law 93-288) (Stafford Act) for state and local government meaning the Federal government will finance 100% of the grants. Waiving the Stafford Act's matching fund requirement is critically important to the Gulf Coast states devastated by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Based on my multiple listening trips to New Orleans and the Gulf Coast region, and my numerous meetings and discussions with government officials at all levels in the affected states and with survivors of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, many of whom now are relocated to my Houston congressional district, the most important lesson I have learned is that the Stafford Act is in its present form is simply inadequate to address the scale of devastation and human suffering wrought by a disaster the magnitude of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. I thank Mr. Obey and Mr. Murtha for responding to concerns I expressed to President Bush about the need to modernize the Stafford Act so that it remains relevant to the 21st Century. I believe the Stafford Act must be amended to grant the Federal Government explicit authority and flexibility to provide long-term recovery assistance to communities devastated by disasters of the magnitude of Hurricane Katrina and Rita. Such authority currently does not exist and the Stafford Act's emphasis on temporary assistance to affected individuals and communities is simply inadequate to address the scope of human suffering we witnessed last August and which is still with us today. I will continue my efforts to modernize the Stafford Act. But I very much approve of the nearly $1 billion included in the bill to waive the matching fund requirements for hard-pressed State and local governments coping with emergencies of the scale of Hurricane Katrina. Social Services Block Grant (SSBG) funding has been extended to September 30, 2010. SSBG funding provides critically needed social services, including programs for mental health, child welfare, and the treatment of addictive disorders. Also allocated is $1.3 billion dollars for east and west bank levee protection and coastal restoration systems in New Orleans and surrounding parishes. There is included $25 million for Small Business Administration (SBA) disaster loans and $80 million for U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) tenant-based rental assistance. The supplemental also adds $400 million to restore partial cuts to the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP). This funding will bring much needed relief to many States that are running out of LIHEAP funds just as many utility shut-off moratoriums are set to expire. The supplemental adds $750 million to the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) to ensure continued healthcare coverage for children in 14 states that face a budget shortfall in the program. By taking prompt action now, these States will not be forced to stop enrolling new beneficiaries or begin curtailing benefits. Finally, Madam Speaker, the supplemental provided $30 million for K- 12 education recruitment assistance; $30 million for higher education assistance; and $40 million in security assistance for Liberia. It also includes an additional $1 billion to purchase vaccines needed to protect Americans from a global pandemic. Development of production capacity for a pandemic vaccine must be accelerated so that manufacturers can quickly produce enough quantities to protect the population. In conclusion, Madam Speaker, let me say that although the bill may not be the best I might have hoped for, it was the best that can be achieved at this time, this moment in history. I applaud the leadership of the Congressional Black Caucus for its critical role in helping craft legislation that represents a change of course and a new direction in our policy on Iraq and that is responsive to the unmet and pressing needs of the American people.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Sometimes the test of patriotism is courage. And I would simply argue that every newspaper headline is not true. We, the Democrats, maintain the courage that America has asked us to exhibit, the love and respect for our soldiers, full funding in the emergency supplemental. We also are to push the envelope. Isn't it interesting that Secretary Rice is now sitting down with a Syrian official, the same administration criticizing the Speaker of the House, who led to begin the diplomatic surge? This is a failed policy. Vietnam was not a cut and run; our soldiers were victorious. So are the soldiers in Iraq; they are victorious. But this administration has failed and failed and failed. The Democrats will maintain their courage. They are patriots. They believe it is time to bring our troops home, to entrust to the Maliki government the responsibility of sovereignty. It is important to lead the Iraqi people toward peace, not use our brave and valiant soldiers as shooting targets for a failed and miserable policy. Patriots stand for courage, and the Democrats are courageous and will continue to do so.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I rise to support the underlying bill, H.R. 1867, and rise to express my appreciation and thank the Science Committee for the bipartisan effort that they have always engaged in, and frankly, want, to thank them for the opportunity that I have had to serve on that committee for a number of years. Usually we rise and say with great reluctance, I rise to oppose the amendment. I might say with great vigor I rise to oppose the amendment. Because as I served on the Science Committee for a number of years, I used to always start the hearings with the idea that science is the work of the 21st century, and certainly the National Science Foundation sets the framework for encouraging research and innovativeness. I can't imagine that the distinguished gentleman who has offered this amendment would venture to argue with me, and I cite just a few examples that I think most of my colleagues and most of America frankly understand how our lives have been changed by simply these innovations. Of course, some of them were by private ingenuity and private concepts and funding possibly, but that was an America of yesteryear. But where would we be without the Wright Brothers and the airplane? Where would we be without Thomas Edison and electricity and the light bulb? Even though as we move into the 21st century, we want to be protectors of the environment and certainly want to be conservationists, look how that has changed our lives. And what about the Internet, interestingly enough, one of the success stories of DOD research. The most important part of it is the work that was created, the work that was created by these inventions and by the opportunities to allow our imagination to generate a better quality of life for Americans. This bill, H.R. 1867, which, as I said, I enthusiastically support, creates work for the 21st century. It emphasizes the underserved. It encourages research to be done by Historically Black Colleges and Historically Hispanic Serving Institutions, and as well, to encourage diversity in science, technology, engineering and mathematics. There is an important provision that mentions, of course, the intent of this particular legislation to determine how different minority groups are impacted by this funding, which is whether or not we can increase the number of underrepresented minorities in the science, technology, engineering and mathematics fields, and how we can increase women in these fields. For the time I have worked on the Science Committee as a former member of the committee, these were issues that we worked on together. What the gentleman is trying to achieve with this across-the-board cut is amazing to me, because what he is actually saying to the world and to America is we are second rate. We don't believe in investing in the next generation of research. We don't believe in uplifting those who are interested in these disciplines to give them merit and worth. I would ask the gentleman, though I am sure his rebuttal will be that we don't pay those dollars. I don't know if we do. What is a high school football or basketball coach worth? What is a college football, basketball or any other sport's coach worth? Can we not, as a Nation, make a commitment to the research community by affirming their importance? Dr. Ehlers and Dr. Baird have worked together affirming the importance of research, and not closing the door of this important responsibility that we have. I am fearful, Mr. Chairman, of where this Nation is headed when we pull back on the ability of our Nation to invest in the 21st century technology. NASA represents that, the NASA Space Station represents that, the centers represent that, the laboratories represent that. We want to encourage this funneling, this pathway, if you will, this farm team of researchers, and this particular legislation does that by increased funding, by highlighting the underserved, and I believe doing a lot more. Let me conclude by saying I had intended to offer amendment to ensure that Historically Black Colleges and Hispanic Serving Institutions would be a viable part of the legislation. As I have reviewed it, I know that the intent is there, and that we will look forward to working with the members of the committee and working with this Congress to make sure that the United States is creating work for the 21st century. Oppose the amendment and support the bill for the betterment of America. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1867, the National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 2007. This bill is another important component of the new Democratic majority's Innovation Agenda, which is designed to make our Nation more able to compete successfully in the global economy. Mr. Chairman, to ensure that the United States will continue to have a workforce ready for global competition, it is essential that we make a sustained commitment to federal research and development. The National Science Foundation is crucial to these goals, providing vital support to our Nation's science and engineering projects and researchers. Created by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, the National Science Foundation, or NSF, is tasked with the broad mission of supporting science and engineering. This agency provides funding for basic research across many disciplines, and offers support for merit awards, state-of-the-art tools, and instrumentation and facilities. The majority of the research supported by the NSF is conducted at U.S. colleges and universities. This bill reaffirms our commitment to scientific excellence by reauthorizing the National Science Foundation (NSF) for three years and providing nearly $21 billion in funding for fiscal years 2008-2010. This legislation appropriates specific funding for each of the NSF's major accounts: research and related activities, education and human resources, major research equipment and facilities construction, agency operations and award management, the National Science Board, and the Office of the Inspector General. A number of specific programs within the science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) educational categories are singled out as the recipients of funding. Additionally, specific funding is designated for Major Research Instrumentation (MRI) awards. By raising the cap for these awards, this bill allows the NSF to support a wider range of state-of-the-art research tools. This bill contains many other important provisions. It requires an evaluation of NSF's role in supporting interdisciplinary research, and encourages university and industry partnerships. It encourages young investigators through a new grant program, and it requires a National Academy of Sciences report on barriers to and strategies for increasing the participation of underrepresented minorities in STEM fields. The NSF ensures a continued national supply of scientific and engineering personnel, while promoting basic research and education across a wide array of scientific and technological disciplines. In the interest of both economic prosperity and military capability, the United States must continue producing a workforce knowledgeable to maintain technological competitiveness. If we are to do this, this Congress must continue funding and strengthening science and mathematics education. Supporting this bill is an important step, and I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman. Let me be the first, because I believe we are all distinguished gentlepersons, gentleladies and gentlemen, say that my remarks were to the value of this bill and to my philosophical disagreement with the author of this amendment, and certainly recognize that he is proud of America and all of the inventiveness that she has, and therefore any intent that might have been perceived by my words were only to glorify this bill and to celebrate our researchers and our science in this country.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, we just finished looking at two very important legislative initiatives by the Democratic leadership and as well a bipartisan effort dealing with issues like Head Start and the National Science Foundation. As you look at the question of education, I rise today to talk of the plight of historically black colleges in America. It is important that we recognize that America's competitive edge will be based upon the opportunities for all Americans. I am disappointed in the U.S. Department of Education's failure to fully enforce the 1964 Civil Rights Act, title VI, and one of the victims of that failure of enforcement are schools in Texas, Texas Southern University and Prairie View A&M. It has now become a national issue, an issue of importance to America because we are falling behind. That is why the National Science Foundation legislation was important, but it is now also important for the U.S. Department of Education to wake up and do its job in protecting the Nation's historically black colleges.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, as a proud member of the Progressive and the Out of Iraq Caucuses, I rise to announce that I will proudly cast my vote to override the President's veto of H.R. 1591, the ``U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans'' Health and Iraq Accountability Act.'' By vetoing the bipartisan Iraq Accountability Act last night, the President vetoed the will of the American people. The President vetoed a responsible funding bill for the troops that would have provided more funding for our troops and military readiness than even the President requested. By vetoing the Iraq Accountability Act, the President rejected a bill that reflects the will of the American people to wind down this war. By vetoing the Iraq Accountability Act, the President turned a deaf ear to the loud message sent by the American people last November. I will vote to override the President's veto because the Iraq Accountability Act offers us the first real chance to end the misguided invasion, war, and occupation of Iraq. It puts us on the glide path to the day when our troops come home in honor and triumph and where we can care for him who has borne the battle, and for his widow and orphan. This legislation helps to repair the damage to America's international reputation and prestige. It brings long overdue oversight, accountability, and transparency to defense and reconstruction contracting and procurement. Finally, it places the responsibility for bringing peace and security where it clearly belongs and that is squarely on the shoulders of the Iraqi government. Mr. Speaker, in vetoing the legislation, the President claimed the Iraq Accountability Act, H.R. 1591 would undermine our troops and threaten the safety of the American people here at home. Coming from an Administration that has been wrong on every important question relating to the decision to launch the Iraq War as well the conduct of it, this claim is laughable. It is nearly as ridiculous as the President's often stated claim of ``progress'' in Iraq. The facts, of course, are otherwise. The U.S. death toll in Iraq reached 104 for April--making it the deadliest month of the year and one of the deadliest of the entire war. It is therefore little wonder that nearly 70 percent of Americans disapprove of the way the President is handling the war. But more important, the President's claim that the Iraq Accountability Act undermines our troops and threatens the safety of the American people here at home is simply not true. Republican Senator Chuck Hagel recently returned from Iraq and paints a bleak picture: This thing is coming undone quickly, and [Prime Minister] Maliki's government is weaker by the day. The police are corrupt top to bottom. The oil problem is a huge problem. They still can't get anything through the parliament--no hydrocarbon law, no de- Baathification law, no provincial elections. Mr. Speaker, many of the Nation's most highly respected generals and several leading Republicans have endorsed H.R. 1591; all of them oppose the President's plan to escalate the war in Iraq. Take, for example, Maj. Gen. John Batiste, U.S. Army (Ret.): This important legislation sets a new direction for Iraq. It acknowledges that America went to war without mobilizing the nation, that our strategy in Iraq has been tragically flawed since the invasion in March 2003, that our Army and Marine Corps are at the breaking point with little to show for it, and that our military alone will never establish representative government in Iraq. The administration got it terribly wrong and I applaud our Congress for stepping up to their constitutional responsibilities. Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, USA, Ret. supports this legislation because it ``gives General Petraeus great leverage for moving the Iraqi government down the more disciplined path laid out by the Iraq Study Group.'' According to Major Eaton, the real audience for the timeline language is Prime Minister al-Maliki and the elected government of Iraq: The argument that this bill aides the enemy is simply not mature--nobody on the earth underestimates the United States' capacity for unpredictability. It may further create some sense of urgency in the rest of our government, beginning with the State Department. Lt. Gen. William E. Odom, U.S. Army (Ret.), President Reagan's Director of the National Security Agency, supports the bill because it gives the President a chance to pull back from a disastrous course, re-orient U.S. strategy to achieve regional stability, and win help from many other countries--the only way peace will eventually be achieved. Mr. Speaker, to date, the war in Iraq has lasted longer than America's involvement in World War II, the greatest conflict in all of human history. But there is a difference. The Second World War ended in complete and total victory for the United States and its allies. But then again, in that conflict America was led by FDR, a great Commander- in-Chief, who had a plan to win the war and secure the peace, listened to his generals, and sent troops in sufficient numbers and sufficiently trained and equipped to do the job. As a result of the colossal miscalculation in deciding to invade Iraq, the loss of public trust resulting from the misrepresentation of the reasons for launching that invasion, and the breath taking incompetence in mismanaging the occupation of Iraq, the Armed Forces and the people of the United States have suffered incalculable damage. The war in Iraq has claimed the lives of 3,316 brave service men and women--64 in the first 16 days of this month. More than 24,912 Americans have been wounded, many suffering the most horrific injuries. American taxpayers have paid nearly $400 billion to sustain this misadventure. Mr. Speaker, it is time to hold the Bush Administration and the Iraqi government accountable. This bill's timetable and benchmarks finally hold the Iraqis accountable. As retired Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton has stated, This bill gives General Petraeus great leverage for moving the Iraqi government down the more disciplined path laid out by the Iraq Study Group. The real audience for the timeline language is Prime Minister al-Maliki and the elected government of Iraq. Even Defense Secretary Robert Gates has noted that the timetable is helpful--and sends the message that ``the clock is ticking.'' Gates said ``The strong feelings expressed in the Congress about the timetable probably have had a positive impact. . . . in terms of communicating to the Iraqis that this is not an open-ended commitment.'' Mr. Speaker, in overriding the President's veto, this House will be doing the business and expressing the will of the American people. In the latest CBS News/New York Times poll, 64 percent of Americans favor a timetable that provides for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq in 2008. In the same poll, 57 percent of Americans believe that Congress, not the President, should have the last say when it comes to setting troop levels in Iraq. Mr. Speaker, in overriding the President's veto, Congress is fulfilling its constitutional responsibilities and exercising the first check on the President's power in 6 years. As Iraq Study Group Co- Chairman Lee Hamilton has pointed out, The Founders of our Nation never envisioned an unfettered president making unilateral decisions about American lives and military power. They did indeed make the president the commander in chief, but they gave to Congress the responsibility for declaring war, for making rules governing our land and naval forces, for overseeing policy, and of course the ability to fund war or to cease funding it. Mr. Speaker, I urge all members to join me in overriding the President's veto of Iraq Accountability Act, H.R. 1591. This is the best way to ensure accountability to our soldiers who have been sent into battle without proper training or equipment or a clear mission. It is the best way to keep faith with our veterans who are not getting the best medical care when they come home. Overriding the President's veto is essential to restoring our military that is being stretched to the limits by the Bush policy. Last, it is absolutely necessary to regain the confidence of the American people who demand a new direction in Iraq.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman of the full committee for his leadership and all the members of the committee and Mr. Kildee for his leadership as well on some of these very important issues. We have worked together. I thank the ranking member for their long-standing understanding that we must collaborate when it comes to teaching our children. I rise to support H.R. 1429 and had the pleasure of visiting a Head Start facility in my community. What was the greatest joy was to be able to see the parents and children working together on this very special day, and I want to thank the committee for persevering against all odds, particularly the opposition of those who would say it is time to change drastically, to do a surgical reform on Head Start. It has worked for some 30-plus years, and what has been done in this legislation is the right direction: enhanced professional development, providing more degreed teachers teaching, providing opportunity for the associate degrees, working with caretakers or assistants in the classroom, and really teaching our children the ``yes, I can'' method. I rise also to support the amendment of Congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson that will be offered that provides the opportunity for collaboration with historically black colleges. What we need to be doing is investing more in Head Start by proving that it has been a success, improving classroom and teacher quality, raising the quality of teachers, and increasing funding for teacher and staff salaries. But most importantly, anyone who has taken the opportunity to see the youngsters, the babies that are in this program, see their eyes open wide, see them understand the world and the colors and what is real and that they can be the greatness that they are, we know that H.R. 1429 is on the right path, and I encourage my colleagues to enthusiastically support the Improving Head Start Act of 2007. These are the babies not of yesterday, but today. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1429, the Improving the Head Start Act of 2007. This bipartisan legislation would allow up to 10,000 more children from low-income families to have access to the world of opportunities offered by early developmental education. It also appropriates the funding required for a range of necessary improvements, ensuring we are offering our children comprehensive and regulated programs. I urge my colleagues to join me in expressing that a child's educational and developmental opportunities should not be limited by his or her family's income. Head Start creates opportunities for children who are born without any. This program provides comprehensive early education programs and support services for well over a million children across our Nation; children whose families would otherwise be unable to offer them these opportunities. The program's holistic approach to education provides a wide range of services in addition to basic education, including medical and dental screenings, nutritional services, parental involvement activities, and mental health services. Poverty has proven devastating to child development and success, but Head Start has proven capable of providing the broad range of support that all children need to succeed in school, and indeed in life. This program is particularly crucial to minority communities. Of the over 1 million children enrolled in Head Start programs, 65 percent belong to minority groups. In a world and a country where minority children may continue to face discrimination and limited opportunities, Head Start ensures that they are prepared to begin school when they reach the proper age. This program has proven successful in minimizing the ``readiness gap'' between program participants and their more affluent peers. In Harris County, TX, where my district is located, Head Start has been active since 1999. In this county alone, the program currently operates in 17 locations, and has served over 5,000 children since its inception. There are, at present, over 1,170 children enrolled in its wide array of programs. In Harris County, and across our Nation, Head Start programs help children grow mentally, socially, emotionally, and physically. This bill contains many vital provisions. It authorizes an additional $450 million dollars for 2008, funds that would allow up to 10,000 more children access to Head Start programs. It increases funding for teacher and staff salaries, ensuring a quality workforce and providing for the hiring of additional qualified staff. H.R. 1429 re-evaluates and updates the current standards and assessments, suspending the badly flawed National Reporting System. The bill also boosts cooperation between Head Start and state and local child care programs, as well as improving coordination with state health, mental health, and family services. This bill also contains important provisions to improve accountability for these government-funded programs. It includes a new system of application review that assesses program quality, allowing the Secretary of Health and Human Services to more quickly strip funding from low-quality programs. These review systems ensure both that our Nation's children are receiving the best services we can offer them, and that taxpayer dollars are spent to maximum effect. Mr. Chairman, as Chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus, I am dedicated to providing the best possible opportunities and support to our Nation's children. Head Start is an important aspect of ensuring our children's future. I strongly support H.R. 1429, and I encourage my colleagues to do the same.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 347. I rise to recognize the historical importance of the Mexican holiday Cinco de Mayo. The fifth day of May, or Cinco de Mayo, is a special day because it represents the importance of freedom, liberty and determination for the people of Mexico and for Mexican-Americans. It was on that day, May 5, 1862, that untrained, outnumbered, and outgunned Mexican forces--determined to protect their land-- successfully defended the town of Puebla against the French. The quest for an independent Mexico started on September 16, 1810, when the people of Mexico, following the will to become a free nation, refused to submit to Spanish rule. The struggle went on for 10 years. Finally, in 1821, the first independent Mexican government was established. But being an independent nation was not easy. Over the years, Mexico received economic support from several nations, France and England among them. Later on, even Spain supported the new country. Thus, Mexico became heavily indebted to foreign powers. Due to ongoing political unrest caused by many groups struggling for power, Mexico was not able to pay back the loans. On July 17, 1861, President Benito Juarez issued a moratorium in which all-foreign debt payments would be suspended for a period of two years, with the promise that after this period, payments would resume. In 1862, France, Spain, and England dispatched their fleets to Mexican shores pursuing not only money but also land rights as payment for their loans. A government representative greeted them and explained that Mexico acknowledge its debts, but had no funds to pay them. They were offered payment warrants in exchange. The Spaniards and the British decided to accept the warrants and withdrew from the scene. But the French government's representative did not accept the offer and ordered his troops to invade the country and head toward Mexico City, the nation's capital. They had to cross through the state of Puebla to get to the capital. Mexican President Benito Juarez. reacted immediately and prepared the defense. He commanded Ignacio Zaragoza, a young and brave General, to fortify the City of Puebla and repel the French invaders. The battle was by no means even. France, under Louis Napoleon's rule, had the world's most powerful army, and sent more than six thousand men to invade Mexico. But the courage and the love of freedom impelled the Mexican people to fight back. General Ignacio Zaragoza led 5,000 ill-equipped Mestizo and Zapotec Indians called Zacapoaxtlas. On the 5th of May 1862, the forts of Loreto and Guadalupe, in the city of Puebla, became the scene of the historical defeat of the great European army. Against overwhelming odds, they managed to drive back the French army, achieving a total victory over soldiers deemed among the best trained and equipped in the world and embarking on the end of the European domination in America. For Mexico, this day has come to represent a symbol of Mexican unity and patriotism in the history of Mexico. In our country, Cinco de Mayo is also a celebration of the rich cultural heritage Mexican Americans have brought to the United States. Hispanics are the fastest-growing minority group in the United States. According to the most recent data available, the estimated Hispanic population in the U.S. is 42.7 million--constituting 14 percent of our nation's population. Hispanics now own a record number of small businesses--1.6 million, with annual revenues of more than $221 billion. Small businesses create two-thirds of American jobs, and the fastest-growing small business sector is Latino-owned firms. Today, there are 30 Hispanic Members in the United States Congress, including 24 Democrats, many of whom are Mexican-American, representing constituencies in all regions of the country, from California to New York, from Arizona to Illinois, from Colorado to Florida. These gains and numbers tell us that Hispanics are a driving force in our country--economically, socially and politically. Hispanics share the common goals with all other Americans of freedom, opportunity, and a chance to build a better life. In pursuing these aspirations, Hispanics have made important contributions to life in the United States in the fields of culture, sports, entertainment, business enterprise, science, politics and others. On Saturday, May 5th, millions of Americans will join our neighbors to the south in celebrating Cinco de Mayo. On this day, we are reminded that all people--regardless of their race, color, or gender--have enriched cultures and are worthy of respect and self-determination. I am happy to be here today to celebrate this momentous day and to recognize the values, traditions, and positive contributions of the Mexican culture. I urge all members to join me in supporting H. Res. 347, and commemorate the historical significance of Cinco de Mayo.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Let me thank the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey, the chairman of the Africa Subcommittee on the Foreign Affairs Committee. I thank the author and sponsor of this legislation, it is historic. And certainly, I thank the ranking member of the full committee for her leadership and presence here on the floor today and our full committee Chair. This is a day that really emphasizes the long and diverse history of this Nation. It is a day that I hope that members of this body will unanimously pass this legislation, H. Res. 272. Certainly, the historic aspect of it has already been noted, some 10 million to 15 million Africans were transported as slaves across the Atlantic. It does not, however, add all of the history when you look at the broadness of this question of slavery and America. What it really did to America was carve out this issue of race. And Judge Higgenbotham made it very clear as he rendered decisions on segregation and separation, that in this Nation, race matters. This historical perspective now puts all of this horrible legacy in place, and it does so as America. It does so, it speaks to America about the horribleness of the slave trade. It adds that this was not a very positive part of America's history, but it is part of America's history. It does so in the backdrop of the commemoration of the 400th year of Jamestown, 1607. And the first slaves that came over were actually from Angola. The person who fought against the slaves who were being taken was a woman warrior of the tribes in that part. Just a few weeks ago, I saw the reenactment or the refilming, if you will, or the reshowing of Roots, the Alex Haley Roots, on TV1, interestingly enough, a station and a company owned by an African American woman. And it brought home again the fierceness of slavery, the violence of slavery, and in fact, that these slaves were taken and violated and abused. And those that came over and made it here were infected with disease, they were suffering from rape and they had been brutalized. This is an important statement. But a more important statement is the vestiges of slavery, and I am glad to have joined the Honorable Congresswoman Barbara Lee and a number of others who went to South Africa to the Conference on Racism, organized by the United Nations in 2001. That was a very, very important effort, and I am glad that Members of Congress did not accept the administration's rejection of going to that conference. It was vital for us to be there. It was a vital part of the healing process, because it had to do with racism around the world. In fact, we know today that slavery still exists around the world. So as we stand here today, we acknowledge the horribleness of the slave history of this country, but we also condemn slavery that exists today around the world, in parts of Asia, in parts of Africa, in parts of South and Central America, in parts of all aspects of the world, possibly even in Europe, where people are held against their will. But the United Nations conference was to speak to the issue of stamping out the vestiges of slavery, so that we could do it in unity, so that we could respect each other for our dignity and for where we have come from, our religious difference, our racial difference, even our regional and country differences. That is why this resolution is so important, because it says to the world that the United States House of Representatives accepts and acknowledges the wrongness of slavery, but we are going forward. We also recognize the vestiges of slavery, and we must go forward to end that separation on the basis of race. We must be able to say that race matters in a positive way. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H. Con. Res. 272, commemorating the Abolition of the Transatlantic Slave Trade. When slavery was introduced into the European colonies in 1619, the dark days that followed ignited the faith and hope of our ancestors that one day their descendants would live in freedom and helped them bear the unbearable burden of bondage. For over 300 years, the United Kingdom and other European countries kidnapped and sold millions of Africans into slavery; contemporary historians estimate that between 9.4 and 12 million Africans arrived in the new world. Although on March 25, 1807, the United Kingdom outlawed the African Slave trade by passing the Slave Trade Abolition Act, the road to freedom was a perilous one, and without Abolitionist movements, protests, and opposition, would not have been realized. Madam Speaker, it is important to commemorate this occasion so that the world will not quickly forget the incorrigible injustices African- Americans suffered as slaves and the humiliation and degradation they bore when they were taken and adjudged to be real estate, the same category as livestock, household furniture, wagons and goods. Although slavery was long, vicious and arduous, African slaves were instrumental in the economic development of this Nation and allowed Europe and the United States of America to be built. Slaves were the foundation of the country--today we recognize the end of this heinous trade of human cargo. It was from the institutional slave trade of Africans that the strong African-American people who have survived despite racism and second class citizenship emerged in the United States. As we condemn the atrocities, human rights abuses, and modern-day slavery worldwide, it would be hypocritical if we did not acknowledge the history of the transatlantic slave trade and slavery that existed not long ago in our country. The end of slavery did not come to pass until 1865, when the United States ratified the 13th amendment to the constitution. But the fight for equality against injustices, though easier today, still carries on. The consequences of the slave trade have been profound and the scars that it produced still have not healed. The most serious legacy is the endurance of racism in various forms that keep changing, but do not seem to dissipate. Madam Speaker, we are committed to overcoming this legacy and assuring a just world society. The dignity of African-Americans demands recognition of the tragic history of the slavery era. It is for that reason that I rise in strong support of H. Res. 272, commemorating the 200th Anniversary of the Abolition of the Transatlantic Slave Trade. I urge all members to do likewise.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, that's the value of this great country, it is that the will of the people can be heard by those of us who represent them. The will of the people always will be to bring our soldiers home. It's interesting that our colleagues are talking about funding that doesn't exist when they know full well that there is funding until July of 2007 minimally. But, really, the message of the Democrats, the legislation of the Democrats, is not to micromanage, it is a bill that this President, who declared victory 4 years ago on an aircraft, should sign, because it leaves the logistics of the war to the generals, but it indicates that the people have spoken, it's time to bring our troops home. Does this body recognize that the Maliki government has begun to purge generals trained by this United States military, who have shown themselves to be balanced and fair, who have shown them themselves to fight against insurgents. The Maliki government is a complete collapse, it is a failure. It is time now to reorder the government to allow allies that are in the surrounding areas to work. It is important for Secretary Rice to be in Iran, to talk to those in Iran and to make sure that we have a plan that works. The President's plan doesn't work. Sign the bill.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 249, which will ``Restore the Prohibition on the Commercial Sale and Slaughter of Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros.'' I am sure my colleagues would agree that horses are as American as apple pie, and a symbol of our great Nation. From the time of great explorers like Lewis and Clark to the present day celebration at Churchill Downs, horses have been an intricate part of our society. To their owners, they are companions, for law enforcement officials they are colleagues, but to the American people they have never served as a source of food. Last year, I stood on this floor in support of H.R. 503, American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act. That act sought to prohibit the horrendous practice of domestic horse slaughter for consumption. At the time I spoke out against the appalling practices of this industry that tend to fly under the radar. Horses are forced to travel across our borders for more than 24 hours without rest, water or food in trailers that provide little protection from the elements. Many horses--sick, lame, pregnant or blind--are in distress even before being loaded. Once at the slaughterhouse, the suffering gets worse. Horses are left for long periods in tightly packed trailers, subjected to further extremes of heat and cold. In hot weather, thirst is acute. Downed animals are unable to rise. All the horses are moved off forcibly when it's time to unload and hurried through the facility into the kill box. In the face of these deplorable conditions, including overcrowding, deafening noise, and the smell of blood, the horses typically become desperate, exhibiting fear typical of ``flight'' behavior--pacing in prance-like movements with their ears pinned back against their heads and eyes wide open. Despite the Federal mandate that horses be rendered unconscious before being put to death, many horses are killed alive by repeated blows to the head with captive bolt pistols. While writhing in pain, the coup de grace is administered by a slit of the throat. The dead animal is then processed for shipment overseas and destined for a foreign dining table. Mr. Chairman, I support H.R. 249 because it extends protection to wild free-roaming horses and burros. This legislation closes the final loophole that jobbers--the middlemen for slaughterhouses--can use. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 249.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 240, which urges all member countries of the International Commission of the International Tracing Service, ITS, who have yet to ratify the May 2006 amendments to the 1955 Bonn Accords Treaty, to expedite the ratification process to allow for open access to the Holocaust archives located at Bad Arolsen, Germany. The Holocaust was not a random act of mass murder but a systematic campaign of genocide carried out by the Nazis against the Jews. The world must never forget the more than 6 million Jews who perished in the Holocaust. In total, the atrocities were more than 60 percent of the pre-World War II Jewish population of Europe. We must never forget the evil acts that happened during that era and we must continue the fight against racism, intolerance, bigotry, prejudice, discrimination and anti-Semitism in every form today. After over 60 years, the Holocaust is still a presence, and there are living memorials all over the world dedicated to the memory of those who so cruelly lost their freedom and their lives, and to the continuing education to conquer prejudice, hatred, and injustice. As we allow for open access to the Holocaust archives, we remind the world that the Holocaust indeed was a sad part of our world's history, should anyone doubt its existence. As recently as December 2006, the President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, held the second Holocaust denial conference in Tehran in 1 year. The time to act is now. The opening of the archives at Bad Arolsen could not be more opportune, especially with the resurgence of anti-Semitism in this part of the world. The International Tracing Service (ITS) archives located in Bad Arolsen, Germany, remain the largest closed Holocaust-era archives in the world. The 50,000,000 records on the fates of some 17,500,000 individual victims of Nazi war crimes will forever be memorialized, reminding the world of the travesty and devastation that occurred in Nazi Germany. There have been too many instances of survivors and heirs of Holocaust victims being refused their moral and legal right to information--for restitution purposes, slave labor compensation, and personal closure. Problems persist when those who have requested information in the past have reported facing significant delays and even unresponsiveness; furthermore, the records remain inaccessible to researchers and research institutions. The 1955 Bonn Accords established an International Commission of 11 member countries, which includes the United States, and is charged with overseeing the administration of the ITS Holocaust archives. The amendments to the Bonn Accords require each of the 11 members of the International Commission to ratify the amendments before open access to the Holocaust archives is permitted. The International Commission of the ITS agreed upon amendments to the Bonn Accords that would allow researchers to use the archives and would allow each Commission member country to receive digitized copies of archive materials and make the records available to researchers under the respective national laws relating to archives and privacy. Only 4 members out of the 11 Commission member countries have ratified the amendments to date. Although the United States is one of the 4 members that have ratified the amendment, there are 7 member countries that have yet to ratify. It is imperative that these 7 member nations ratify the amendment because it is essential that Holocaust researchers obtain access now, while survivors are living. I join my colleagues in urging all countries that have yet to ratify the amendments to abide by their treaty obligations made in May 2006 and to expedite the ratification of these amendments. The murder of 6,000,000 Jews and more than 5,000,000 other victims during the Holocaust must not be forgotten. We must remember those who survived the unprecedented horrors of the Holocaust and those who were not so fortunate to survive the evils committed by the Nazis. I strongly urge my colleagues to support H. Res. 240.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, nine more soldiers are dead, and our soldiers can claim victory in Iraq. Madam Speaker, even after losing thousands of American lives and spending billions of taxpayer dollars, the Bush administration continues to demand an open-ended commitment of American troops in Iraq with no exit plan and no strategy. But this Democratic Congress, the leadership of Speaker Pelosi, understands the responsibility of war. We understand the commitment to the American people, and, yes, we understand the needs of national security. Retired military officers support our plan and the new direction for Iraq to begin to redeploy our troops to begin to bring them home. Secretary Gates has gone to Iraq trying to stop the bleeding, but he believes that congressional debate is helpful, and he has said that the clock is ticking. Can the Bush administration understand that? The Pentagon has confirmed, through a Congressional Research Service report, that the President's comments about us stopping funding, the Congress stopping funding, is absolutely wrong. We need to save lives. We need to restore the confidence and the leadership in Iraq, but we need to claim victory for our soldiers. They have done their job. It's time to bring them home now.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 1332, the Small Business Lending Improvements Act. As a member of Congress, I have been a strong supporter of our Nation's small businesses. Already this week, we have debated bills seeking to ensure that America remains competitive in the global economy, and, in doing so, we have recognized the importance of ongoing technological innovation. Small businesses comprise an important segment of this process of development; by acting as a catalyst within our economy, they spur growth for all sectors of business. Small businesses represent the American dream, and they define the American economy. These businesses currently account for 95 percent of all employers, create half of our gross domestic product, and provide three out of four new jobs in this country. However, to keep this sector of the economy thriving, small businesses require access to loans to initiate, develop, and expand their range of goods and services. The Small Business Administration (SBA), a Federal organization that aids small businesses with loan and development programs, is a key provider of support to small businesses. The SBA's main loan program accounts for 30 percent of all long-term small business borrowing in America. By streamlining the SBA's two largest finance programs directed at small businesses, H.R. 1332 would offer these businesses the crucial tools that they need to be successful in today's marketplace. This bill gives the SBA authority to contribute funds to reduce the burden associated with borrower and lender fees on 7(a) loans, making these loans more economical, without upsetting the program's current stability. H.R. 1332 also creates several new loan programs under the 7(a) umbrella. It specifically reaches out to rural lenders, reducing their 7(a) loan paperwork. It makes permanent the Community Express Program, granting improved access to capital for socially and economically disadvantaged small businesses. It recognizes the I need for doctors and dentists in federally designated Health Professional Shortage Areas, and establishes a program to reduce borrower and lender fees in these areas. Finally, this bill offers help to our returning veterans, those who have served our Nation bravely in Iraq and Afghanistan, to establish and expand their own businesses. In addition to all these programs, H.R. 1332 seeks to establish a Small Bank Outreach division within SBA. This new division would provide direct support to community banks participating in the 7(a) program, and would enable these local banks to make loans to a wider range of deserving businesses. It would also work to strengthen local economies by providing lenders deemed Certified Development Companies with a range of tools to grant loans to businesses within their own communities. As we consider what we as a Congress might do to make our Nation more economically secure, and to continue to augment our position within the global economy, it is crucial that we focus on the importance of small businesses. Small business owners are leaders in innovation, creative business operations and new technologies and products. I continue to believe that the success of our economy is dependent on these businesses. I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and to continue to assist small business owners to realize their potential.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, we almost wish we did not have to come to the floor of the House to address this question of ongoing torture in 2007. Again, I offer my appreciation for this work, your leadership and leadership of this committee, and to Mr. Smith who has articulated his ongoing struggle with a crisis that will break your heart. Even today we know that torture goes on in 150 nations around the world. We know that some 4- to 500,000 torture victims have found their way to the United States. Many of us have heard of the lost boys, some of us know the story of Sierra Leone and mutilation that occurred in Rwanda, children who were child soldiers who were victimized. But do we understand the ongoing psychological, traumatic experiences that requires necessary psychological services and therapy to cope with posttraumatic stress? Now with the Iraq War and Afghan War, we hear of prisoners of war and the unending suggestions of torture that have occurred, and so we know that even in our own House we must respond to the crisis. I rise to support this legislation, H.R. 1678, because its journey is not yet finished. Let me applaud the author of this legislation, as I am a cosponsor, that authorizes $12 million per year for centers and programs administered through USAID's victims of torture fund, an additional $12 million per year for centers and programs administered by the U.N. voluntary fund for victims of torture, and $25 million for the Department of Health and Human Services. Let me also salute the Darfur Coalition for Peace. I believe these resources can be utilized for the Darfurian women who have reportedly and repeatedly been raped, a very, very difficult and brutal form of torture. These women have not only been raped, but they have been mutilated. They have been carved and scarred. They have bled, and they have a mass of psychological devastation. The Darfur Peace Coalition will be attempting to place tents on the soil in Darfur, the only kind of structure that can then have counselors who will help these torture victims, these victims of rape. This legislation can certainly be a partner in finding and weeding out torture where it is, but more importantly, in dealing with the torture victims who may have some small chance of regaining their lives again. I rise to support this legislation in sadness, because its work is yet not done, and every day we know that there may be a victim of torture. I am proud of this Congress in moving forward on this legislation, and I ask for its passage.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I can rise enthusiastically to thank both Mr. Ackerman for managing this bill and his leadership and certainly sensitivity to these issues. I thank my good friend and colleague, Ranking Member Smith, who has much roadway in front of him and behind him on these issues dealing with human rights. I am very proud to be a strong member of the Human Rights Caucus that has worked consistently on addressing these issues. And, I thank my friend and colleague, Congresswoman Barbara Lee. We have worked on many, many issues together. I am reminded of our first Presidential congressional trip to Africa, three women who went to address then, some almost 10 years ago, the devastation of HIV/AIDS, and we have pursued these issues of empowerment. There is no doubt, there is no quarreling with the fact that 450,000 have died. The janjaweed is alive and well. It is important that Members of Congress have been to the Darfur region and the south. I am reminded of the time that I sat on the ground in Chad with refugees fleeing from the Sudan, and looked in the faces of women who had been brutalized and raped only because they left their village to get firewood to survive. That is what is going on today in 2007. I also remember the time I can say on the floor of the House that I was banished, and not as some Members have been over the years, given visas to enter into Darfur and had to be utilizing extraordinary means. This is inhuman. This is not civil. This is not a nation that is part of the world family. This resolution is very straightforward: Get your friends to talk to you about ensuring the United Nations can do its work. I ask that this resolution be supported so the raped women can have relief and response. Madam Speaker, the current crisis in the Darfur region of Sudan is of paramount importance. Although Americans may differ greatly on many issues, there is a widespread and broad-based consensus among Democrats and Republicans alike that the ongoing genocide in Darfur is intolerable and must be ended. Today we are presented with a great opportunity to work in a bipartisan fashion to achieve a humanitarian result in responding to the overwhelming suffering in Darfur. Not since the Rwandan genocide of 1994 has the world seen such a systematic campaign of displacement, starvation, rape, mass murder, and terror as we are witnessing in Darfur for the last three years. At least 400,000 people have been killed; more than 2 million innocent civilians have been forced to flee their homes and now live in displaced-persons camps in Sudan or in refugee camps in neighboring Chad; and more than 3.5 million men, women, and children are completely reliant on international aid for survival. Unless the world stirs from its slumber and takes concerted and decisive action to relieve this suffering, the ongoing genocide in Darfur will stand as one of the blackest marks on humankind for centuries to come. The people of Darfur cannot wait. The time has come for decisive leadership from the United States. It has been more than 2 years since my colleagues and I in the Congressional Black Caucus Darfur Task Force met with Secretary Colin Powell. We pressed successfully for the Administration to declare that the campaign of ethnic cleansing and atrocities against civilians in Sudan is genocide. The atrocities are committed primarily by the government of Sudan and its allied Janjaweed militias. It has been more than a year since I flew to Chad, walked across the border to Sudan, and met with African Union troops who pleaded for more peacekeeping authority and the resources to protect the refugees from violence, rather than merely monitor it. After returning from that Congressional delegation, I worked with other Members of Congress to secure increased funding to aid the thousands of Sudanese displaced to refugee camps in Chad and to provide additional funding to assist Chad in responding to the humanitarian crisis. It has been almost two years since the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1556 demanding that the government of Sudan disarm the Janjaweed. This demand was later followed by Resolution 1706, which authorizes a 20,000 strong U.N. peacekeeping force. It has been 9 months since the Darfur Peace Agreement was brokered in May 2006 between the government of Sudan and one faction of Darfur rebels. However, signs of progress have recently emerged, even if it has come too late for the dead. The Sudanese government agreed to let a 3,500- person-strong United Nations peacekeeping force enter the country and join the African Union troops already there. It made the decision under pressure and only after months of unwarranted backtracking and delay. But the Sudanese government has resisted the U.N.'s efforts to send 20,000 peacekeepers to Darfur. Let me be clear: the difference between a small, targeted force and a substantial deployment is no mere sticking point. It is absolutely essential. It is essential to stopping the Arab militias from continuing to perpetuate a genocide. It is essential to clearing the path for crucial food and water and health supplies to reach refugee camps. And it is essential because injustice is only really addressed when it is obliterated, not when it is slowed to an excruciating trickle of displacement, harassment, and disrupted lives. We must have that larger U.N. force in Sudan. The international community has spoken with one voice but more pressure needs to be applied on Khartoum. This resolution urges those who may have the most influence, the Arab League and its member states, to declare the systematic torture, rape, and displacement of Darfurians a genocide; to support and accept U.N. peacekeepers to enforce the ceasefire, protect civilians, and ensure access to humanitarian assistance in Darfur; and to work with the United Nations, the African Union and the United States Presidential Special Envoy for Sudan, Andrew Natsios, to bring about peace and stability to Darfur, the refugee camps, and along the Chadian border. H. Con. Res. 7 urges the League of Arab States to: (1) declare the systematic torture, rape, and displacement of Darfurians a genocide; (2) pass a resolution to support and accept U.N. peacekeepers to enforce the ceasefire, protect civilians, and ensure access to humanitarian assistance in Darfur; and (3) work with the United Nations, the African Union and the United States Presidential Special Envoy for Sudan, Andrew Natsios, to bring about peace and stability to Darfur, the refugee camps, and along the Chadian border. Nevertheless the violence continues; indeed, the violence is escalating. This violence is making it even more dangerous, if not impossible, for most of the millions of displaced persons to return to their homes and for humanitarian relief agencies to bring food and medical aid. According to Jan Egeland, the U.N.'s top humanitarian official, the situation in Darfur is ``going from real bad to catastrophic.'' We have come full circle. Violence is increasing, peace treaties and resolutions are not being implemented, and action must be taken. We must increase pressure on Sudan President Omar Hassan al-Bashir of Sudan to allow in U.N. peacekeepers, or alternatively, a peacekeeping force of similar size comprised of Arab and Muslim troops under the auspices of the Arab League. As with any government, dialogue is the best way to attempt a solution to the issue at hand. However, previous engagements have too often yielded poor results--the government of Sudan has been all too willing to cooperate on the surface level by signing agreements and the like and all too willing to fail to implement them. In 1997, the Clinton Administration imposed trade and economic sanctions on Sudan, an approach which I feel is likely to yield the best results. However, sanctions imposed by a limited number of countries do not pressure the government of Sudan adequately enough. It must be noted that no just and lasting peace in Sudan can be achieved without the responsible intervention of China. For too long, China, which is Sudan's biggest oil consumer, has also served as Khartoum's enabler and protector by preventing the U.N. Security Council from imposing more serious sanctions on Sudan in response to the genocide and crimes against humanity committed in Darfur. As former Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick stated in a major policy speech on China a year ago: ``China should take more than oil from Sudan--it should take some responsibility for resolving Sudan's human crisis.'' It is my hope that China may be persuaded to provide the type of constructive leadership in Sudan befitting a great power. These are the kind of constructive efforts that I feel will best represent the interests of the people of Darfur to bring an end to this horrible crisis. I am in favor of deploying U.N. peacekeeping troops to the region, and the U.N. needs to move swiftly. In addition, any options regarding United States military intervention should be carefully considered and not ruled out. As we consider these options, Madam Speaker, I would like to remind you that it is not too early to begin the planning efforts needed to transform the Darfur region from a killing field to an economically, politically, and socially viable community. This work will, of course, require the active and purposeful engagement of the United States and other key stakeholders, such as China, and the Arab League. Finally, we must be bold and imaginative in fashioning a solution commensurate with the scale of the problem. The way to do that is to develop a Marshall Plan for the Sudan. But the United Nations, and the international community, must draw a line in the sand and act to stop the genocide in Darfur. The words of President Lincoln speak to us from the ages: [W]e cannot escape history. We, of this Congress and this administration, will be remembered in spite of ourselves. No personal significance, or insignificance, can spare one or another of us. The fiery trial through which we pass, will light us down, in honor or dishonor, to the latest generation. It speaks volumes that H. Con. Res. 7 has 111 co-sponsors, and I urge all of my colleagues to support this resolution.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, take a moment to travel through the Nation's hospitals and speak to those in this final injury ward, see the young women bending over their soldier husbands who now have lost the use of all of their limbs, 25,000-plus injured and 3,000- plus dead. It is not the policies of this Democratic majority that is causing this absolute disaster. It is the misdirected policies of those in the administration who are causing harm to our soldiers. Let me thank our soldiers for their leadership, for their service, and their patriotism. But as I stand here today and look at my Members, the Speaker of the House who went into the Mideast, Mr. Giuliani, there is no white flag on this side of the aisle, and I reject your insult and insensitivity. This legislation will not give the administration a blank check. It will give a new direction to Iraq. It will begin to redeploy soldiers if the President cannot certify the readiness in July and then in October of 2007. It provides funding for veterans hospitals, for the injured with spinal injuries, with brain injury. And, yes, there are those on this side of the aisle who understand the shedding of blood of our soldiers. That is why this legislation will allow us to go and fight the terrorists, to find Osama bin Laden, and to do the job that we have not done since the tragedy and the terrorism of 9/11. This is a sad day in this body. I want us to support the rule and the underlying bill because there is no white flag. We have the solution, and that solution is a policy that responds to the needs of the American people and our soldiers on the battlefield. No more nine soldiers of the 82nd Airborne. We thank them for their service. We declare a military success. And we bring our soldiers home. And maybe it will be good if some of those who did not serve would understand what it means to serve. Mr. Speaker, as a proud member of the Progressive and the Out of Iraq Caucuses, I rise to speak in support of the Conference Report on H.R. 1591, the ``U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Health and Iraq Accountability Act.'' I support the Conference Report because this compromise offers us the first real chance to end the misguided invasion, war, and occupation of Iraq. It puts us on the glide path to the day when our troops come home in honor and triumph and where we can ``care for him who has borne the battle, and for his widow and orphan.'' This legislation helps to repair the damage to America's international reputation and prestige. It brings long overdue oversight, accountability, and transparency to defense and reconstruction contracting and procurement. Finally, it places the responsibility for bringing peace and security where it clearly belongs and that is squarely on the shoulders of the Iraqi government. Mr. Speaker, the House and Senate conferees have approved legislation providing $124.2 billion primarily for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. As part of the legislation, conferees approved a sensible plan to redeploy U.S. forces in Iraq paired with progress made by the Iraqi government in meeting diplomatic and security benchmarks. These legislative provisions, which are subject to a Presidential waiver, will ensure adequate rest between tours of duty of both active duty and Guard and Reserve forces, while also requiring that their service in Iraq not be extended beyond a year for any tour of duty. President Bush would be required to certify that the Iraqi government is meeting the diplomatic and security benchmarks. If he makes that certification, deployment shall begin no later than October 1, 2007, with the goal of completing the redeployment within 180 days. After that period, a limited number of U.S. forces could remain in Iraq for force protection, training and equipping Iraqi troops, and targeted counterterrorism options. The legislation makes it possible for the U.S. military to focus its resources on Osama bin Laden, whose organization attacked the nation on 9/11, and destroying his base of operations in Afghanistan. Additionally, the U.S. commander in Iraq would provide regular progress reports to Congress on both the progress of the Iraqi government to take control of that country as well as the status of the redeployment efforts. Finally, the conferees are also to be commended for providing needed funding to improve health care for returning soldiers and veterans, for continued Hurricane Katrina recovery for the Gulf Coast, to fill major gaps in homeland security, and to provide emergency drought relief for farmers. Overall, the conference agreement provides more than $100 billion for the Department of Defense, primarily for continued military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The legislation includes a $1 billion increase for the National Guard and Reserve equipment and $1.1 billion for military housing. The legislation also provides $3 billion ($1.2 billion more than the President's request) for the purchase of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles (MRAP)--vehicles designed to withstand roadside bombs and more than $5 billion to ensure that returning troops and veterans receive the health care that they have earned with their service. Mr. Speaker, I would be remiss if I did not point out that the tragic loss of life last week at Virginia Tech still weighs heavily on our hearts and minds. Neither the mind nor the heart can contemplate a cause that could lead a human being to resort to such senseless violence to injure and destroy fellow human beings. The thoughts and prayers of people of goodwill everywhere go out to the victims and their families. In the face of such overwhelming grief, I hope they can take comfort in the certain knowledge that unearned suffering is redemptive. The war in Iraq has also caused a lot of unearned suffering in Iraq and here at home. This is the same war, Mr. Speaker, whose proponents misrepresented to the nation would last no more than six months and likely less than six weeks. This same war in Iraq, we were led to believe by the Administration, would cost less than $50 billion and would be paid out of the ample revenues from Iraq's oil fields. The war in Iraq, the American people were promised, should have ended years ago with Americans troops greeted as liberators by jubilant Iraqis throwing rose petals at their feet. The President has threatened to veto the legislation now before us if it passes. According to the President and the Vice-President, H.R. 1591 ``would undermine our troops and threaten the safety of the American people here at home.'' Coming from an Administration that has been wrong on every important question relating to the decision to launch the Iraq War as well the conduct of it, this claim is laughable. Little wonder that nearly 70 percent of Americans disapprove of the way the President is handling the war. But more important, the President's claim is simply not true. Mr. Speaker, many of the nation's most highly respected generals have endorsed H.R. 1591; all of them oppose the President's plan to escalate the war in Iraq. Take, for example, Maj. Gen. John Batiste, U.S. Army, Ret. ``This important legislation sets a new direction for Iraq. It acknowledges that America went to war without mobilizing the nation, that our strategy in Iraq has been tragically flawed since the invasion in March 2003, that our Army and Marine Corps are at the breaking point with little to show for it, and that our military alone will never establish representative government in Iraq. The administration got it terribly wrong and I applaud our Congress for stepping up to their constitutional responsibilities.'' Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, USA, Ret. Supports this legislation because it ``gives General Petraeus great leverage for moving the Iraqi government down the more disciplined path laid out by the Iraq Study Group.'' According to Major Eaton, the real audience for the timeline language is Prime Minister al-Maliki and the elected government of Iraq: The argument that this bill aides the enemy is simply not mature-- nobody on the earth underestimates the United States' capacity for unpredictability. It may further create some sense of urgency in the rest of our government, beginning with the State Department. Lt. Gen. William E. Odom, U.S. Army (Ret.), President Reagan's Director of the National Security Agency, supports the bill because it ``gives the president a chance to pull back from a disastrous course, re-orient U.S. strategy to achieve regional stability, and win help from many other countries--the only way peace will eventually be achieved.'' Mr. Speaker, to date, the war in Iraq has lasted longer than America's involvement in World War II, the greatest conflict in all of human history. But there is a difference. The Second World War ended in complete and total victory for the United States and its allies. But then again, in that conflict America was led by FDR, a great Commander- in-Chief, who had a plan to win the war and secure the peace, listened to his generals, and sent troops in sufficient numbers and sufficiently trained and equipped to do the job. As a result of the colossal miscalculation in deciding to invade Iraq, the loss of public trust resulting from the misrepresentation of the reasons for launching that invasion, and the breath taking incompetence in mismanaging the occupation of Iraq, the Armed Forces and the people of the United States have suffered incalculable damage. The war in Iraq has claimed the lives of 3,316 brave servicemen and women (64 in the first 16 days of this month). More than 24,912 Americans have been wounded, many suffering the most horrific injuries. American taxpayers have paid nearly $400 billion to sustain this misadventure. The depth, breadth, and scope of the President's misguided, mismanaged, and misrepresented war in Iraq is utterly without precedent in American history. It is a tragedy in a league all its own. But it was not unforeseeable or unavoidable. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1591, the U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Health and Iraq Accountability Act the House passed last month provides real benchmarks and consequences if the Iraqi Government fails to live up to its commitments. First, it requires the President to certify and report to Congress on July 1, 2007 that substantial progress has been made on security, political and reconstruction benchmarks by the Iraqi government. If the President cannot certify that the Iraqi government has made substantial progress, redeployment of U.S. combat troops must begin, with a goal of being completed within 180 days (by December 31, 2007). If the July certification is made, redeployment of U.S. combat troops must begin by October 1, 2007, with a goal of being completed within 180 days (by March 31, 2008). The measure changes the mission of U.S. troops in Iraq after redeployment from combat to training and equipping Iraqi troops, targeted counterterrorism operations, and force protection. I have to say, Mr. Speaker, the Iraqi Government is not off to a good start. The Green Zone surrounding Baghdad remains insecure. Two weeks ago, a suicide bomber managed to penetrate the security perimeter of the Iraqi Parliament and detonated a bomb that killed at least three members of the Iraqi parliament and wounded scores of others. Additionally, the market represented by Senator McCain as an example of the improved security situation in Iraq was turned into a killing field within days after Senator McCain's visit. And just last week, we saw the bloodiest and deadliest day in Baghdad since the so-called ``surge'' began when 198 Iraqi civilians were massacred by insurgents. Mr. Speaker, radical Shiite Muslim cleric Muqtada al-Sadr has reasserted his political power by yanking his loyalists from the Cabinet, a move aimed at showing his supporters he retains his credentials as an opposition leader and which increases the pressure on Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to loosen his embrace of the U.S. occupation, which many Iraqis blame for violence in the country. These developments, Madam Speaker, illustrate the wisdom of requiring benchmarks the Iraqi Government must meet to justify continued American blood and treasure in Iraq. Moreover, because those benchmarks are established pursuant to President Bush's policies, it is passing strange indeed that he would threaten to veto the bill since it necessarily means he would be vetoing his own benchmarks for the performance of the Iraqi government. He would be vetoing his own readiness standards for U.S. troops. The President demands this Congress send him an Iraq war bill with ``no strings.'' But the only ``strings'' attached, Madam Speaker, are the benchmarks and standards imposed by the President himself. Mr. Speaker, in addition to the enormous financial cost, the human cost to the men and women of the United States Armed Forces has also been high but they have willingly paid it. Operation Iraqi Freedom has exacerbated the Veterans Administration health care facility maintenance backlog; placed an undue strain on the delivery of medical treatment and rehabilitative services for current and new veterans; and exacted a heavy toll on the equipment, training and readiness requirements, and the families of the men and women of the United States Armed Forces. The emergency supplemental acknowledges the sacrifices made by, and the debt of gratitude, we and the Iraqi people owe to Armed Forces of the United States. But more than that, it makes a substantial down payment on that debt by providing substantial increases in funding for our troops. The supplemental includes a total appropriation of $2.8 billion for Defense Health Care, which is $1.7 billion above the President's request. The additional funding supports new initiatives to enhance medical services for active duty forces and mobilized personnel, and their family members. Included in this new funding is $450 million for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder/Counseling; $450 million for Traumatic Brain Injury care and research; $730 million to prevent health care fee increases for our troops; $20 million to address the problems at Walter Reed; and $14.8 million for burn care. Unlike the Republican leadership of the 109th Congress and the Bush Administration, the new Democratic majority is committed to America's veterans. What's more, we back up that commitment by investing in their well-being. For example, the supplemental includes $1.7 billion above the President's request for initiatives to address the health care needs of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans and the backlog in maintaining VA health care facilities, including $550 million to address the backlog in maintaining VA health care facilities so as to prevent the VA from experiencing a situation similar to that found at Walter Reed Medical Center. We provide an additional $250 million for medical administration to ensure there are sufficient personnel to support the growing number of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans and to maintain a high level of services for all veterans; $229 million for treating the growing number of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans; $100 million for contract mental health care, which will allow the VA to contract with private mental health care providers to ensure that Iraq and Afghanistan veterans are seen in the most timely and least disruptive fashion, including members of the Guard and Reserve; and $62 million to speed up the processing of claims of veterans returning from Iraq and Aghanistan. Madam Speaker, when American troops are sent into harm's way, America has an obligation to do all it can to minimize the risk of harm to the troops. That is why it was so important that we included additional funding above the President's request to support our troops. We provide $2.5 billion more to address the current readiness crisis of our stateside troops, including ensuring that they are better equipped and trained. We include $1.4 billion more for military housing allowances and $311 million more for Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles for troops in Iraq. And there is included in the supplemental $222 million more for infrared countermeasures for Air Force aircraft to address the growing threat against U.S. air operations in Iraq and Afghanistan Equally important, Mr. Speaker, the supplemental contains language directing the President to adhere to current military guidelines for unit readiness, deployments, and time between deployments. The supplemental requires the Defense Department to abide by its current Unit Readiness policy, requiring the chief of the military department concerned to determine that a unit is ``fully mission capable'' before it is deployed to Iraq. The President may waive this provision by submitting a report to Congress detailing why the unit's deployment is in the interests of national security despite the assessment that the unit is not fully mission capable. The Defense Department is also required to abide by its current policy and avoid extending the deployment of units in Iraq in excess of 365 days for the Army and 210 days for the Marines. The provision may be waived by the President only by submitting a report to Congress detailing the particular reason or reasons why the unit's extended deployment is in the interests of national security. Mr. Speaker, to reduce the incidence of combat fatigue and enhance readiness, it is important that our troops have sufficient ``time out of the combat zone and training between deployments. That is why we require the Defense Department to abide by its current policy and avoid sending units back into Iraq before troops get the required time away from the war theater. The President may waive this provision by submitting a report to Congress detailing why the unit's early redeployment to Iraq is in the interests of national security. Mr. Speaker, the American people spoke loudly and clearly last November when they tossed out the Rubber-Stamp Republican Congress. They voted for a New Direction in Iraq and for change in America. They voted to disentangle American troops from the carnage, chaos, and civil war in Iraq. They voted for accountability and oversight, which we Democrats have begun to deliver on; already the new majority has held more than 100 congressional hearings related to the Iraq War, investigating everything from the rampant waste, fraud, and abuse of Iraq reconstruction funding to troop readiness to the Iraq Study Group Report to the shameful mistreatment of wounded soldiers recuperating at Walter Reed Medical Center. Mr. Speaker, I urge the President should sign this measure, in order to get these needed resources to our troops and to our veterans and to hold the Iraqis accountable. By signing this legislation the President can help deliver the message to the Iraqi people that they must take responsibility for their own future. By signing this measure the President can show some leadership in the transitioning of the mission of U.S. troops from combat to training Iraqi troops and counterterrorism. Last, this legislation will help restore and strengthen our military, with a new Strategic Reserve Readiness Fund among other measures. Last November the American people signaled clearly their loss of confidence in the President's leadership and their desire for a new direction in Iraq. In less than 120 days, the new Democratic majority has begun to deliver. And we will not rest, Madam Speaker, until we are clearly on a glide path to the day when our troops come home. And even then our work will not be done. We must still be about the business of repairing the damage to America's international reputation and prestige. But this Democratic majority, led by the Progressive Caucus and the Out of Iraq Caucus, has ushered in a new era of oversight, accountability, and transparency to defense and reconstruction contracting and procurement. I urge all members to join me in supporting the Conference Report to H.R. 1591. This is the best way to ensure accountability to our soldiers who have been sent into battle without proper training or equipment or a clear mission. It is the best way to keep faith with our veterans who are not getting the best medical care when they come home. Passing this supplemental appropriations bill is essential to restoring our military that is being stretched to the limits by the Bush policy. Last, it is absolutely necessary to regain the confidence of the American people who demand a new direction in Iraq. Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Reprogrammed?

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. It just sends it back if they are not utilized?