Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 418, the Military Personnel Financial Services Protection Act. This act helps to ensure that our military personnel are not vulnerable to immoral and dishonest insurance schemes. I think the provisions of this bipartisan bill are crucial for the protection of our Armed Forces and their families. While most of America's focus on the military concerns our actions abroad, protecting personnel and their families at home can sometimes be overlooked. But for years now, men and women in the armed services have fallen victim to unscrupulous salespersons pushing high cost and unnecessary financial products and life insurance. This practice must be stopped. As numerous investigations, studies, and congressional hearings have shown, bad actors within the insurance and financial products industry have been taking advantage of military personnel in order to turn a quick profit. The military personnel they target are often young, inexperienced in financial matters, and particularly vulnerable to the aggressive sales tactics used by some companies. To make matters worse, Department of Defense Directives and state regulations would be violated or completely ignored by these salespersons, without repercussion. In some cases, servicemen and women were sold life insurance policies with low benefits and premiums as high as fourteen times the amount available to every enlisted person under the Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance program. In other cases, they were sold investments that have all but disappeared from the civilian markets because they can rob investors of years of earnings. But some salespersons found a niche outside of the public mainstream to sell these disreputable investments on our military bases. It should be noted that there are many upstanding financial and insurance companies that sell very worthwhile investment and insurance products to military personnel and their families. They should be applauded for the fine job that they do in helping our military members and their families. This bill is targeted at the few who abuse the system and prey upon our military. This bill, the Military Personnel Financial Services Protection Act, will stop these practices by targeting the bad actors, adding much- needed transparency and communication between federal and state agencies. This bill clarifies confusing jurisdictional issues between DoD and state regulators, allowing regulators to better enforce state and federal law on military bases. It would create a registry to track investment advisors, brokers, dealers, and insurance salespersons, and let bases know when a suspicious salesperson has walked through their gates. Finally, the bill would ban the worst types of financial products being sold to our military. These products have disappeared from the civilian market, and they should disappear from our military installations too. This bill has gained bipartisan support in Congress. I urge you to support this legislation and protect the financial future of our military personnel and their families. During a time when so many of our armed forces are bravely fighting tyranny abroad, we must ensure that they are protected at home.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 415, condemning the repression of the Iranian Baha'i community and calling for the emancipation of Iranian Baha'is. I have long been an advocate of a free, independent, and democratic Iran; an Iran that does not destabilize the region, that does not threaten its neighbors, and that honors its commitments to the international community, especially on the issue of the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Since 1982, Congress has declared eight times that it deplores the religious persecution of the Baha'i community in Iran and that we hold the government of Iran responsible for upholding the rights of all Iranian nationals, especially members of the Baha'i faith. It is with dismay that I state that this persecution continues unabated and that the time has come for us as a nation of conscious to take action. Since the Iranian revolution in 1979, the Iranian government has demonstrated its propensity to engage in systematic persecution and discrimination of the more than 300,000 Baha'is who live in Iran. Bahai's constitute Iran's largest religious minority and over the past quarter century, more than 200 Baha'is have been summarily executed or condemned to death. Thousands more have been imprisoned, detained, assaulted, and harassed. On March 20, 2006, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief revealed the existence of a confidential letter dated October 29, 2005, from the Chairman of the Command Headquarters of Iran's Armed Forces stating that the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, had instructed the Command Headquarters to identify members of the Baha'i faith in Iran and to monitor their activities. The U.N. Special Rapporteur expressed ``grave concern and apprehension'' about the implications of this letter for the safety of the Iranian Baha'i community. For years, I have been a supporter of the democratic movement in Iran, and today more than ever, the people of Iran need to be supported, empowered, and protected. In 2005, the Iranian government initiated a new wave of assaults, home raids, harassment and detentions of members of the Baha'i faith; 129 Baha'is are currently awaiting trial for, among other things, charges of ``creating anxiety in the minds of the public and those of the Iranian officials.'' I find this simply unacceptable and call on my colleagues to condemn this form of religious repression. The only effective way to achieve lasting peace and prosperity in the region, along with effectuating reforms in Iran's polity, is assisting the Iranian people in general and members of the Baha'i faith in particular in their quest to achieve political, social, and religious liberty. Every government can be judged with the way in which it treats its ethnic and religious minorities. The current Iranian government gets a failing grade for its treatment of the 300,000 Baha'i who live throughout the regions of Iran. I hold the government of Iran responsible for upholding the rights of the Baha'i community and call on the government of Iran to cease repressive activities aimed at Iran's Baha'i. I consider the Iranian government's human rights record as a significant factor in our foreign policy towards Iran and call for President Bush and the leaders of nations around the world to demand that the government of Iran emancipate the Baha'i community by granting those rights guaranteed to them by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international human rights covenants. I urge my colleagues to support this important resolution condemning the repression of the Iranian Baha'i community and calling for the emancipation of Iranian Baha'is.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 622, to recognize and honor the Filipino World War II veterans for their defense of democratic ideals and their important contribution to the outcome of World War II. In 1941, 250,000 of Filipino men and women responded to President Roosevelt's call and joined the U.S. Armed Forces in order to help preserve peace and democracy in the Philippines. In their tumultuous four-year battle to restore their independence, the courageous young men and women of the combined Philippine Islands suffered many hardships, tortures, loss of life and limbs, yet they never wavered. They endured the unendurable. They bore the unbearable. Four decades after their heroic service under the command of their leaders and General Douglas McArthur, these men and women of Filipino- American national heritage were denied the benefits and privileges provided to their American compatriots who fought alongside them. It is past time that the brave and proud soldiers of the Philippines receive well-earned recognition and thanks for their selfless and heroic contributions. Filipino World War II veterans fought as nationals of the United States and must be given the same recognition and praise as all American veterans. I applaud the service and efforts of all of our veterans and am honored to give such praise to the Filipino World War II veterans. I urge my colleagues not only to support this resolution--I urge my colleagues to also consider legislation, such as H.R. 170, the Filipino Veterans Fairness Act, that will grant these aging patriots the full benefits they are due.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, let me thank my distinguished friend from California for yielding and his leadership, as well as my friend from Texas. Most of all, let me offer my great appreciation for Congressman Conyers and his service and his commitment and years of working on human rights and justice issues in the United States and his collaboration on this legislation. I thank him for allowing me to be an original cosponsor for something as instructive and as insightful as this legislation is. I am delighted to be joined with a number of cosponsors now, Mr. Kucinich as well. And I rise today to applaud the concept, but also to say how vital and how important this idea is. We celebrate Thanksgiving and holidays around the Christmastime. Many of the different faiths call that timeframe in their own faith a name. We have commemorations around the birth of Christ for Christians, and other faiths have their commemorations. We are eager to promote peace, as I am an original cosponsor of the Department of Peace, offered by my good friend from Ohio, Mr. Kucinich. But I do not know if we realize how crucial it is in this day and time to have a Global Family Day, One Day of Peace and Sharing. Maybe if you would take a journey with me back to New Orleans, reminiscing and remembering the horrificness of Hurricane Katrina and the time we spent just a few weeks ago, some 28 Democratic Members who traveled throughout the gulf region. We really went to see the improvement, to be able to shake hands and to see where people had moved from the devastation of 2005. But yet we found ongoing devastation. We bent down and we offered prayers as well as action. And it made me think more and more that we needed to be able to come together as families to address the question of hurricanes and earthquakes, famine and genocide. Because right here in the United States in the gulf region, there are still people who are homeless, not because they are not Americans who have contributed to this country, and veterans and people who have built their homes and raised their families, but because this government has failed to provide them with the resources necessary to go back to their homes, private insurance companies have not been able to provide them with relief to build their homes. So this day is a broader concept of being able to bring us together, not to forget those who are now hopeless sometimes and helpless, but to be able to say that we want to reunite families. Then I want you to think of the child soldiers around the world. I thought maybe we had extinguished that. I offered legislation early in my career about the elimination or the lack of use of child soldiers by cutting some of the foreign relations funding. But yet child soldiers exist. They are still fighting in guerilla warfares around the world. Children who are barely 8 years old, 7 years old, 12 years old have their limbs eliminated because they are now in guerilla warfare. We need this Global Family Day, One Day of Peace and Sharing. Then, of course, the crisis in Sudan. I am asking the President, as he interacts with, again, the nation of families, to demand that the President of Sudan step aside to allow the African Union peace keepers to enter into their territory, to prevent the famine, the genocide, the brutality, the violence, the violence against women. For those of us who have been in the Sudan, who have been in Chad where the refugees are, the stories are horrific. If you sit down on the dirt floor as I have done with the women of Sudan to tell you about how they are raped continuously when they simply go out to get wood, in order to provide fire in order to survive. This is a time now that the United Nations when the President can demand, along with the General Assembly and the U.N. Security Council for the Sudan to step aside and the world family to condemn them. And so this Global Family Day, One Day of Peace and Sharing that the President should call for the United States, should be that we pray for the peace and human rights of the people of Iran, for the troops to come home so that they can be redeployed out of Iraq, and that the Iraqi Government can take their rightful place of leadership. We pray for those in the gulf region who are now suffering. This resolution is so crucial, so vital, so important, because it is a day of action, because it is calling for action. All of us who are comfortable in our homes right now need to be aware that the world is in trouble. But the United States, taking the high moral ground, has the opportunity, based upon this wonderful resolution, to be instructive and to gather its people around to ask for the freedom and peace and justice of the people in Sudan, freedom and human rights, and a new day in Iran and a standing down of any military violence by the United States against Iran. And, as well, the redeployment of our troops out of Iraq, and the governance of the people of Iraq so that we can promote this Global Day of Peace and Sharing. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 317: Requesting the President to issue a proclamation annually calling upon the people of the United States to observe Global Family Day, One Day of Peace and Sharing, and for other purposes. Global Family Day originated from One Day Holiday, a day of peace and sharing together around the world, and is the first major shared global event to annually celebrate the entire human family, its achievements, and its aspirations. Global Family Day is an important and necessary day set aside to represent the unity of the human family. At a time of war, hatred, poverty, and friction within our international community, Global Family Day reminds us to remain hopeful, to weather the stormy seas, to look for peace in the midst of the tempest. We need a Global Family Day, because we are indeed in the midst of a troubling time. In the United States alone, there is plenty to remind of us of the urgency of fighting many of our social maladies. In 2000, 16.2 percent of persons in the United States under the age of 18 were considered poor. In that same year, 11.7 million American children younger than 18 lived below the poverty line. One out of every six American children (16.3 percent) was poor in 2001. More specifically, 30.2 percent of African-American children, 28 percent of Hispanic children, 11.5 percent of Asian and Pacific Islander children, and 9.5 percent of Non-Hispanic White children were poor. 1 in 1.056 children will be killed by guns before the age of 20. Children make up 12 percent of all crime victims reported to the police, including 71 percent of all sex crimes and 38 percent of all kidnapping victims. Participation in the observance of Global Family Day is an important gesture of compassion. When we recognize Global Family Day, we support the idea of peace over war. When we recognize Global Family Day, we support the fight against poverty. When we recognize Global Family Day, we support world unity over ill-motivated antagonism. As the leader of the free world, the United States must foster a sense of empathy, compassion, and brotherhood. We must join our bothers and sisters around the world to build hope at a time of doubt, to spread love and unity in a time of hate and division. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution requesting the President to issue a proclamation annually calling upon the people of the United States to observe Global Family Day, One Day of Peace and Sharing, and other purposes.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 386, honoring Mary Eliza Mahoney, America's first professionally trained African-American nurse. First, I would like to honor my mother, Ivalita Jackson, who served as a vocational nurse while she raised her children. With her nurturing hand and wise mind, she instilled in me a strong work ethic, a value of education, and a compelling desire toward public service. Her lifetime of hard work, and her commitment to giving and healing remains an inspiration to me. Mary Eliza Mahoney was born on May 7th, 1845 in Dorchester, Massachusetts. Mary became interested in nursing as a teenager. Though she worked as a maid, washerwoman and cook at the New England Hospital for Women and Children in Roxbury, Massachusetts for fifteen years, her dream was to practice nursing. The first step to realizing her dream came when, at the age of 33, Ms. Mahoney was accepted into the nursing school at the New England Hospital for Women and Children. One of only four students of a class of forty two to complete the nursing program, Mahoney received her nursing diploma on August 1, 1879. As such, she became the first African-American graduate nurse. This indeed, was a magnificent accomplishment at a time in this country when the odds were heavily stacked against her as an African-American, and as a woman. After graduation, Ms. Mahoney became a private duty nurse. Her employers consistently praised her for her calm and quiet efficiency and for her professionalism. Despite the odds, she proved that African-Americans could successfully enter into the world of professional nursing. She continues to be a source of inspiration to all nurses. Mahoney was one of the first African-American members of the organization that later became the American Nurses Association (A.N.A.). When the A.N.A. failed to actively admit black nurses, Mahoney strongly supported the establishment of the National Association of Colored Graduate Nurses (N.A.C.G.N.). Mahoney recognized the inequalities in nursing education and called for a demonstration at the New England Hospital to have more African- American students admitted. For more than a decade after, Mahoney helped recruit nurses to join the National Association of Colored Graduate Nurses. Today, nursing is the nation's largest health care profession, with more than 2.7 million registered nurses nationwide. In 2003, 9.9 percent of registered nurses were African American. Ms. Mahoney was strongly concerned with women's equality and was a staunch supporter of the movement to give women the right to vote. At the age of 76, Ms. Mahoney was among the first women in Boston to register to vote after passage of the Nineteenth Amendment. At a time in our country when there is a nurse-shortage crisis, it is important to acknowledge the service and dedication of an outstanding American nurse. More than one million new and replacement nurses will be needed by 2012. Ms. Mahoney is a prime example of a professional woman who values and advocates for education, civil rights, and giving something of yourself for your community and for your nation. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution honoring Mary Eliza Mahoney, America's first professionally trained African-American nurse.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 5 minutes.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am very honored to join in this Special Order, and I salute my colleague the honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson for her wisdom in selecting this time, September 10 through September 16, to be able to honor our historic historically black colleges across America. Where would we be today if we did not have those refuges that allowed those ex-slaves to be able to come to a place of comfort and seek an educational opportunity? The colleges range throughout America, from New York to North and South Carolina to Georgia to Louisiana to Texas and many other places. They are the places where young people could not be educated elsewhere because of the dual society and the very hostile segregation that existed in America. These historically black colleges created the opportunities for geniuses to be educated. I am very proud of several of the institutions in our State, and there are so many in the State of Texas, two that happen to be in my jurisdiction that I am particularly proud to mention: Texas Southern University that was created out of the segregated society of Texas. Heman Sweatt, who wanted to attend the University of Texas Law School, could not do so because the doors were closed. So they allowed him to go in the basement of that school but realizing that they could not block Negroes in the 1940s from achieving an education, the birth of Texas Southern University. How proud we are that out of that institution that came out of the ashes of segregation we had the magnificent Members of this body, the honorable Barbara Jordan and Mickey Leland, both graduates of Texas Southern University. Its neighbor just down the street, Prairie View A&M University, has produced some of the outstanding African American engineers who have gone on to NASA and other institutions of engineering prominence to be able to be the scientists, the engineers, and the mathematicians of this day and time. It is interesting to note that historically black colleges have always been alongside the black church, the place where the fight for segregation to end could find a place of comfort. Many do not know that there were few places that African Americans could meet in the 1800s and certainly in the 1900s. There were few places that African Americans could meet as they began to strategize for the civil rights movement after the Brown v. Topeka Board of Education case of Thurgood Marshall's. They could meet at historically black colleges. In fact, Howard University is the anchor of civil rights lawyers. The first place that civil rights lawyers could be trained was at Howard University. And major lawyers who, of course, led the way of the civil rights litigation of the 1950s and 1960s, lawyers who protected the rights of civil rights workers in the Deep South, came out of historically black colleges. And they were the places where the civil rights workers could meet, where the civil rights strategists could meet, with the likes of Martin Luther King, with the likes of Julian Bond, with the likes of Andrew Young, could meet and strategize. And, of course, many of them were the products of African American churches and denominations that provided the resources for those institutions. Let me speak of today because I think there is a challenge for historically black colleges, one, in our recognition, but they should be a challenge in this government. We have to do much better by historically black colleges. If you compare the research grants that have been given to other institutions of learning, the black colleges have not had their equal share. That is patently unfair. And I am delighted that Texas Southern University will be hosting in February of 2007 a major minority institute research conference to focus on that absence of dollars coming from the Federal Government because those colleges are equal too. I know they are equal because they rose to the occasion when the flood waters and winds raged in the Gulf Coast region. Those schools that were devastated were able to seek refuge for their students in other historically black colleges. Dr. Francis, who heads up the Louisiana recovery, is the President of Xavier University. I salute him for his leadership. But his school was devastated. But other historically black colleges, like Texas Southern University and Prairie A&M, were the schools that opened their doors. So, frankly, I believe that we owe more to those schools. And my closing words are simply this: Corporate America, wake up. You are losing the opportunity to partnership with major institutions, institutions that go into the inner city and provide opportunities for children who could not have the doors open elsewhere or their parents did not have the doors open elsewhere. Today they choose historically black colleges, but we must not throw away a huge percentage of Americans who are talented and ready to serve. Let us rise up as a government, provide the research dollars, because they are equal. Let us be fair but not unfair. And corporate America, answer the call of fairness. Provide the partnerships with historically black colleges so they too can continue to march into the 21st century and provide the leadership that has paved the way for equality, justice, and freedom for America. I salute the historically black colleges. It is their week, but the Nation belongs to them. As we belong to them, they will continue to serve.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished ranking member for yielding, and I would like to associate myself with the majority whip's comments, as he explained the comprehensive approach that we are arguing for, supporting on the floor of the House. I raised this earlier, a letter from four governors, two Republicans Governor Schwarzenegger from California and Governor Perry from Texas, the Governor of Arizona and the Governor of New Mexico. They begged this body to enforce a response to immigration by making it a comprehensive response. They begged us to stop holding field hearings that do little but stir up discontent, and they asked this Congress to get to work, and that is what Democrats are saying. This whole idea of a fence is not a new idea. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle know that the fence language is in the Senate bill. A simple conference could move a comprehensive response forward, but more importantly, as the Christian Science Monitor said, the fence is only a tactic. It is not a policy. And that is what has happened in this Congress. We failed in the overall policy of addressing the question of immigration. And so we fail our Border Patrol agents, we fail our Customs and Border Protection agents to the extent that they do not have enough resources to have what we call secondary inspections. So what we are talking about is adding 3,000 new Border Patrol agents, making sure we have 12,000 new agents; creating 2,000 new Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent positions, having coordination between the northern and southern border. They don't talk to each other. Creating detention beds, having a virtual reality. Does anybody know what we will do with those individuals that are caught? We are creating 25,000 new detention beds. That is what Democrats are talking about, comprehensive reform. Then I might suggest that the other aspect of what we are saying is that we must have surveillance. We must have physical infrastructure. We have got to be able to address this question from both sides, not a single one-target issue. This issue before us is dividing and divisive. We ask that you support the Democratic motion to recommit but, more importantly, that you answer the question, not a tactic, Mr. Speaker, but yet a policy. And I close by saying read the newspapers. This is a drug fight at the border. Where is the DEA? Where is the FBI? Where is more funding? That is really what we are addressing. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 6061, the so-called ``Secure Fence Act of 2006.'' I oppose the bill because it neither a serious nor comprehensive measure to secure our nation's borders. It does not provide any specific dollar amounts to build the fence called for in the bill, and nowhere does the bill authorize the additional Border Patrol, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or Customs Inspectors needed to secure the border. In short, Mr. Speaker, H.R. 6061 is an election-year gimmick intended to obscure the fact that the majority party has done nothing of consequence in the past 5 years to secure the nation's borders from terrorist attack. It is time to try a new approach; it is time for a new direction. The Democratic Substitute offered by Mr. Thompson, the Ranking Member of the Homeland Security Committee, is a large step in the right direction and that is why I find that legislative proposal far superior to H.R. 6061. Mr. Speaker, building walls and fences is not a panacea and a ``one size fits all'' approach is a wholly unrealistic and inadequate means of securing the border. Although some communities seem to approve of border fences, many others do not. For instance, Alex Perrone, the Mayor of Calexico, California, is opposed to additional fences. Calexico already has a border crossing as well as a chain-link fence that separates it from its Mexican neighbor. According to Mayor Perrone, the border towns have had a close relationship for more than 100 years, and a massive fence would strain their friendship and symbiotic relationship. Mayor Perrone believes that it would change how our neighbors view us and how we do business. According to U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner W. Ralph Basham, it does not make sense to construct fences along the border. Stemming the flow of illegal immigration and drug trafficking requires a combination of manpower, technology, and infrastructure, not just barriers. History shows that even the most substantial walls can be breached. In California, the border fence has been circumvented by tunneling (20 tunnels have been discovered) and by going around both ends of the fence. This has diverted illegal traffic to more remote areas, but it has not stopped people from crossing. It just makes crossing more dangerous and increases reliance on professional smugglers. The diversion to more desolate areas has exacted a heavy toll in human lives. Moving through the mountains and scorching-hot deserts has resulted in many deaths. The number of persons who have died crossing the border since the fences were constructed is conservatively estimated at 3,600. Mr. Speaker, this is not the way to secure our borders. a new Direction on Border Security What we should do instead is follow the direction charted for us in the Thompson Substitute which, among other things: 1. Establishes Operational Control of All Borders and Ports by requiring the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to develop a comprehensive border security strategy that increases deployment of Border Patrol agents, provides increased surveillance through the use of technology, and ensures the free flow of legitimate travel and trade. It also mandates placement of technology to monitor every mile of the border 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and permits the emergency deployment of up to 1,000 additional U.S. Border Patrol agents for the purpose of patrolling and defending the international border. 2. Provides Significant New Resources Annually to Secure the Border including 3,000 new Border Patrol agents (12,000 total) and a new Border Patrol training facility to expand capacity and an increase in Border Patrol agent and inspector pay from GS-11 to GS-13. There are substantial increases in personnel authorized for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), U.S. Marshals, U.S. Attorneys, Immigration Judges, Coast Guard, Investigators of Fraudulent Schemes and Documents, Port of entry inspectors, and Canine Enforcement Teams. 3. Provides the Equipment and Resources Needed to Get the Job Done. The Thompson Substitute recognizes the importance of providing the tools needed to secure our borders by authorizing the purchase of additional helicopters, power boats, motor vehicles, portable computers, radio communications, hand-held global positioning system devices, night vision equipment, body armor, and weapons. 4. Ends the ``Catch and Release'' Practice. To maintain effective control over the border, we must end the Bush Administration's practice of ``catch and release.'' The Substitute makes this possible by authorizing 100,000 additional detentions bed spaces through FY 2010 to assist with the deportation of undocumented individuals. It also increases the number of Detention and Removal Officers by 1,000 through FY 2010 to manage the additional detention facilities and capacity and to enhance the removal process. 5. Promotes International Policies to Deter Illegal Immigration by requiring DHS to report to Congress on the progress of cross-border security agreements signed between Mexico and Canada and the United States, including the Smart Border Accord and the Security Partnership for Prosperity. 6. Orders DHS to Locate Undocumented Immigrants that Have Been Set Free Under the ``Catch and Release'' program and instructs DHS to locate all 110,000 of those undocumented immigrants and deal with these cases, deporting those who are deportable or providing other results as required by law. 7. Finally, the Thompson Substitute Directs DHS to: Locate and Deport ALL Criminal Aliens; Deport ALL Deportable Criminal Aliens Serving Sentences in State or Federal Correctional Facilities; Ensure that Local and State Correctional Facilities Cooperate in the Deportation of Criminal Aliens at the End of Criminal Sentences; Improve and Strengthen Border and Immigration Enforcement; and Return Deported Aliens to Countries that Delay or Deny Return of their Citizens. Mr. Speaker, were the majority party in this House serious about securing the nation's borders, it would eagerly embrace and adopt the Thompson Substitute. A vote for H.R. 6061 is a vote to continue down the same wrong-headed path that got us into the fix we are in. It is foolish to maintain the status quo and stay the course. It is time for change. It is time for a new direction. I urge you therefore to vote against H.R. 6061, the ``Secure Fence'' (but insecure Border) Act.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I do not intend to play hide and seek with the American people this morning. I think unabashedly, I believe in comprehensive immigration reform, and, frankly, so does most of America. My disappointment with my good friends is, one, that they are politicizing this very important debate. And, of course, my friend from Indiana wanted to make sure that he cast his hand to our side of the aisle and suggested that the Democrats do not want a fence or the Democrats do not believe in getting the job done. The question that really should be asked is why the Republican majority passed a legislative initiative dealing with the immigration concerns of America and yet cannot get a compromise between the House and the Senate, both controlled by Republicans, and the presidency controlled by Republicans. But I am not prepared to play with the lives of the American people. This legislation, 730 miles of fence, does not deal with the lives of our Border Patrol agents and Customs and Border Protection. And the reality is that time and time again we have seen that Republicans have spoken the word but have done nothing about it. For example, this particular amendment that we had way back in 2001. Each and every time we offered amendments to provide for border security, 2001, after 9/11, Republicans voted ``no.'' In 2003 Republicans voted ``no.'' In 2001 we asked for $78 million for detention beds. The Republicans voted ``no.'' In 2003 again we asked for border security funding, Democrats. Republicans voted ``no.'' We asked for numbers of items for our Border Patrol agents and Customs and Border Protection. We asked for power boats. We asked for night goggles. We asked for laptop computers. For those who believe that only Republicans have the knowledge of the border, I have walked the border in the day and night, and I have been at hearings all throughout the summer. I would venture to say that there were more questions asked by Border Patrol agents. It was, When are we going to get more Border Patrol agents? And as you can see, the average number of new Border Patrol agents added per year decreased under this Republican administration, 411 in 2005, but in the Democratic, President Clinton's administration we were giving them at least 642 a year. The 9/11 Commission asked us to give 2,000 a year. This administration has yet to commit to 2,000 Border Patrol agents in a year. So, Mr. Speaker, I believe in comprehensive immigration reform. I also believe that we can compromise in a conference committee. They know that you do not need this freestanding bill that is very limited. You can go to conference and actually agree to the fencing language, if that is a priority, in the Senate's conference bill. Now, my question to Mr. Sessions, who is on the Rules Committee, is, does he have an agreement that the Senate leadership is going to take this bill? Because if he does not, we have literally 2 weeks before we are out of session. And is there a commitment to this bill? If it is, tell us on the floor of the House. We might want to join in a reasonable response if we know that you are going to go to conference with your bill, which will pass because you have the numbers, but with the idea of comprehensive immigration reform. Let me share a letter that has just come from Governor Rick Perry of Texas, a Republican; Governor Janet Napolitano, Governor of Arizona; the Governor of California, Governor Schwarzenegger; and Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico. Allow me to read this: ``As governors who are on the front lines of America's immigration crisis, we write to urge you to take real action and pass comprehensive reform legislation that secures the border, protects taxpayers, and restores the rule of law by practically dealing with the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants currently in this country. ``Instead of holding dozens of field hearings that do little but stir the pot of discontent, we urge you to get back to work and pass legislation that puts the interests of taxpayers first and solves this crisis once and for all. We ask that you pass comprehensive reform and address this critical crisis before Congress adjourns for the year.'' These are two Republican governors and two Democrats who are on the front lines of immigration issues in America. And I will submit this letter for the Record. I am not going to hide the ball. I want comprehensive immigration reform, but I am not afraid of border security. Read H.R. 4044, 100,000 detention beds. That is by a Democrat. Mr. Speaker, I think it is important that we vote down this rule, we do what the Governors have asked us to do, comprehensive immigration reform. Let us not operate in the darkness. Let us not label Democrats weak on border security. We are ready to fight the battle. We know that 9/11 impacted all of America. I am not going to take that rap. You need to do your job. August 25, 2006. Hon. J. Dennis Hastert, Speaker of the House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Hon. Bill Frist, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Speaker and Senator Frist: As governors who are on the front lines of America's immigration crisis, we write to urge you to take real action and pass comprehensive reform legislation that secures the border, protects taxpayers and restores the rule of law by practically dealing with the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants currently in the country. We believe that a solution modeled on these principles would attain these goals and greatly benefit taxpayers in our states. In all of our states, we face a crisis not of our making. Over the past 6 years the combination of lax and ineffective enforcement of our borders and the failure to enforce immigration laws has led to an explosion in the illegal immigration population. As a result, our states are flooded with illegal immigrants, our taxpayers are angry, and citizens and noncitizens alike are losing respect for the rule of law. We are doing our part. At President Bush's request, we have sent our National Guard to the border to do the job the federal government is supposed to do. We have used state and local law enforcement to help enforce the laws the federal government is supposed to enforce. We ask you to do your part. Instead of holding dozens of field hearings that do little but stir the pot of discontent, we urge you to get back to work and pass legislation that puts the interest of taxpayers first and solves this crisis once and for all. We ask that you pass comprehensive reform and address this critical issue before Congress adjourns for the year. Respectfully, Rick Perry, Governor of Texas. Janet Napolitano, Governor of Arizona. Arnold Schwarzenegger, Governor of California. bill Richardson, Governor of New Mexico.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, it is my sad duty to report to the House of Representatives the loss of an American original, and that is our former governor, the great Ann Richards. Governor Richards died yesterday after a long battle with throat cancer. She was 73. I can tell you for sure that Ann Richards made us proud to be Texans. Dorothy Ann Willis Richards began her career in politics in the early 1970s after having raised four children. A Democrat, she served as County Commissioner in Travis County, Texas, from 1977 to 1982. Ann Richards was elected to the first of two terms as Texas State Treasurer in 1982. She was born in Lakeview, Texas. She grew up in Waco, Texas, and graduated from Waco High School. And she loved her Texas. After graduation, she taught social studies and history at Fulmore Junior High School in Austin, Texas, from 1955 to 1956. She had two daughters and two sons in the following years, and she campaigned for Texas liberals and progressives such as Henry B. Gonzalez, Ralph Yarborough, and Sarah Weddington, and she was not ashamed. In 1976, Richards ran against and defeated a three-term incumbent on the Travis County, Texas, Commissioner Court. Ann Richards gave that unforgettable keynote address in the 1988 Democratic National Convention, and she turned the Nation around. In 1990, she sought the Democratic gubernatorial nomination. She won and she won as governor. And I am reminded of the Honorable Barbara Jordan, who campaigned for her; and the two of them were Texas' dynamic duo. She did a lot as governor. The first thing she said was to cut the shackles off of the governor's house and opened it to the people of Texas. That is the kind of public official Ann Richards was and continued to be, someone who believed in the people's house and the people first. She helped jump-start the economy in Texas. She helped reform the prison system by providing an abuse program for inmates, and she instituted the Texas lottery so that educational opportunities could be improved for our children. Texas has lost a wonderful native daughter, someone who loved and cherished democracy, justice, the opportunity for those who could not speak for themselves. Ann Richards stood for the opportunity for women in the public sector. She said to us, do not turn back, and yes, we can. None of us who knew and loved Ann Richards will ever forget her or the way she heightened and brightened the lives of all the people she served. She was one in a million and she will be deeply missed. She will never be replaced. She was an American original. She was my friend. We will forever be in her debt and forever miss her. Thank you, Ann Richards, for being the kind of role model for all the women, all the girls and all of America.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate two outstanding young students who live and go to school in my district in Houston, Texas. Alejandra Garcia, 10, of Crockett Elementary School and Alina Arevalo, 8, of Sherman Elementary School recently won a national art competition in support of afterschool programs called the ``Art on Labels'' contest, sponsored by Torani, the specialty syrup maker, and the Afterschool Alliance, an organization dedicated to advocating for quality and affordable afterschool programs for all children by 2010. The girls' artwork was chosen from hundreds of entries nationwide and will be featured on two of Torani's soda syrup products this fall. Both students attend the Cooperative for After-School Enrichment program and were encouraged to enter the contest by their afterschool teacher. Afterschool programs play a critical role in the lives of many students who need a safe and nurturing place to go after the school bell rings. In communities today, 14.3 million children take care of themselves after the school day ends, including almost four million middle school students in grades six to eight. Just 6.5 million children are in afterschool programs--but the parents of another 15.3 million children say their children would participate in afterschool-- if a program were available. Afterschool programs keep children engaged in learning and work to find students' hidden talents as an alternative to going home alone to watch television all afternoon. It is important to continue to support afterschool programs like the ones Alejandra and Alina attend, which increase academic achievement, keep kids safe, and help working families. It is an honor to be able to congratulate two wonderful young ladies, Alejandra and Alina, for their tremendous accomplishments and to thank their afterschool program providers for helping to develop their talents.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, it is my sad duty to report to the House the loss of an American original and the First Lady of Texas politics, the great Ann Richards. Governor Richards died yesterday after a long battle with throat cancer. She was 73. Dorothy Ann Willis Richards began her career in politics in the early 1970s after having raised four children. A Democrat, she served as County Commissioner in Travis County, Texas from 1977 to 1982. Richards was elected to the first of two terms as Texas State Treasurer in 1982. We who knew and loved her will remember her always as a forcefully articulate and amusingly folksy speaker. She first gained national prominence with her keynote address at the 1988 Democratic National Convention. In 1990 she was elected governor of Texas, the first woman chief executive of Texas in more than fifty years. Dorothy Ann Willis was born in Lakeview, Texas. She grew up in Waco, Texas, and graduated from Waco High School in 1950, participating in Girls State. She received a bachelor's degree from Baylor University while on a debate scholarship. She married her high school sweetheart, David Richards, and moved to Austin, Texas, where she earned a teaching certificate from the University of Texas at Austin. After graduation, she taught social studies and history at Fulmore Junior High School in Austin, Texas from 1955 to 1956. She had also two daughters and two sons in the following years, and she campaigned for Texas liberals and progressives such as Henry B. Gonzalez, Ralph Yarborough, and Sarah Weddington. One of her daughters, Cecile Richards became president of Planned Parenthood in 2006. Throughout her life Ann Richards was a forceful champion for economic and social justice for all Americans, especially women and the disadvantaged. In 1976, Richards ran against and defeated a three-term incumbent on the Travis County, Texas Commissioner Court, holding the position for six years. She then was elected State Treasurer in 1982, becoming the first woman elected to statewide office in more than fifty years. In winning the Democratic nomination for treasurer, Richards ended the career of a Texas politician with the same name as a president (but no relation), Warren G. Harding. In 1986, she was re-elected treasurer without opposition. Ann Richards delivered the keynote address to the 1988 Democratic National Convention, a move which put her in the national spotlight with the line ``Poor George [H.W. Bush], he can't help it . . . He was born with a silver foot in his mouth.'' The speech set the tone for her political future; she described herself as a real Texan (in supposed contrast to George H.W. Bush), established herself as a feminist, and reached out to African-Americans and Hispanics. In 1989, with co-author Peter Knobler, she wrote her autobiography, Straight from the Heart. In 1990, she sought and won the Democratic gubernatorial nomination besting such venerable vote getters as Texas Attorney General James ``Jim'' Mattox and former governor Mark White. In the general election she defeated multi-millionaire rancher Clayton Williams after a brutal campaign and was inaugurated the 45th governor of Texas in January 1991. The Texas economy had been in a slump since the mid-1980s, compounded by a downturn in the U.S. economy. Governor Richards responded with a program of economic revitalization, yielding growth in 1991 of 2% when the U.S. economy as a whole shrank. She also streamlined Texas's government and regulatory institutions for business and the public. Her efforts helped to revitalize and position Texas's corporate infrastructure for the explosive economic growth it experienced later in the decade. Her audits on the state bureaucracy saved Texas taxpayers more than $6 billion. Governor Richards reformed the Texas prison system, establishing a substance abuse program for inmates, reducing the number of violent offenders released, and increasing prison space to deal with a growing prison population (from less than 60,000 in 1992 to more than 80,000 in 1994). She backed proposals to reduce the sale of semi-automatic firearms and ``cop- killer'' bullets in the state. The Texas Lottery was also instituted during her governorship-- advocated as a means of supplementing school finances; Ann Richards purchased the first lotto ticket on May 29, 1992. However, most of the income from the lottery went into the state's general fund rather than specifically to education, until 1997, when all lottery net revenue was redirected to the state's Foundation School Fund, which supports public education. School finance remained one of the key issues of her governorship and of those succeeding hers; the famous Robin Hood plan was launched in the 1992-1993 biennium which attempted to make school funding more equitable across school districts. Richards also sought to decentralize control over education policy to districts and individual campuses; she instituted ``site-based management'' to this end. In March 2006, Richards announced that she had been diagnosed with esophageal cancer and will be seeking treatment at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas. The disease has a five-year survival rate of 25 percent. Despite the statistics, Governor Richards vowed to beat her illness and battled valiantly until the very last day, when she finished her journey on earth and ascended to the heavens. None of us who knew and loved Ann Richards will ever forget her or the way she brightened the lives of all the people she served. She was one in a million and she will be deeply missed. She will never be replaced. She was an American original. She was my friend.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 2784, which authorizes the awarding of the Congressional Gold Medal to Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama. The Congressional Gold Medal is the highest expression of national appreciation for exceptional service and for lifetime contributions. The medal has been awarded to individuals from all walks of life. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Coretta Scott King, Pope John Paul II, the Navajo Code Talkers, Rosa Parks, Frank Sinatra, and Elie Wiesel are among those who have been honored. The Dalai Lama is well qualified to join the list of individuals who have received this most distinguished of honors. Tenzin Gyatso, the Fourteenth Dalai Lama is recognized in the United States and throughout the world as a leading figure of moral and religious authority. He is the unrivaled spiritual and cultural leader of the Tibetan people, and has used his leadership to promote democracy, freedom, and peace for the Tibetan people through a negotiated settlement of the Tibet issue, based on autonomy within the People's Republic of China. This Dalai Lama has led the effort to preserve the rich cultural, religious, and linguistic heritage of the Tibetan people and to promote the safeguarding of other endangered cultures throughout the world. For his efforts on behalf of humanity, this Dalai Lama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989. His efforts to promote peace and non- violence throughout the globe, and to find democratic reconciliation for the Tibetan people through his ``Middle Way'' approach has won him world-wide acclaim. This Dalai Lama has significantly advanced the goal of greater understanding, tolerance, harmony, and respect among the different religious faiths of the world through interfaith dialogue and outreach to other religious leaders and, perhaps most important, he has used his moral authority to promote the concept of universal responsibility as a guiding tenet for how human beings should treat one another and the planet we share. For these reasons, I strongly support S. 2784 and urge my colleagues to join me in voting to award the Congressional Gold Medal to Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 4893, amending section 20 of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act to restrict off-reservation gaming. This bill amends the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act for the first time since 1988. The bill would require Tribes to enter into compacts with local government entities, in addition to State governments, to conduct casino-style and non-casino-style gaming (such as bingo). The U.S. Constitution article 1, section 8 acknowledges Indian Tribes as governments, equal to states and foreign nations. H.R. 4893 includes a provision that forces Tribes to enter into binding negotiations and arbitration with counties and parishes. This is directly counter to the constitutional provision recognizing Tribal governments as sovereign nations equal to Federal and State governments. I oppose this bill because it is inconsistent with and dismissive of current law and policy. The National Indian Gaming Association, National Congress of American Indians, Native American Rights Fund, and the National Indian Business Association have all expressed concern that this bill requires Indian tribes to negotiate financial arrangements with local municipalities and counties, rather than the arrangement of government-to-government interactions, which is the current precedent. Indian tribes are sovereign entities, and as such negotiate in government-to-government settings. The provision in this bill to require Indian tribal governments to negotiate with municipalities and counties in effect replaces the state government partner with a sub- government entity. This intrusive action violates the constitutional principle of tribal sovereignty. A bill with consequences this far-reaching deserves thorough consideration and debate. The fact that this bill has been placed on the suspension calendar, and thus is not subject to amendment, is irresponsible. Tribal sovereignty is a bedrock principle of American law. It should not be dismissed without proper debate that allows every concerned and affected Member of Congress to participate. The Department of the Interior is presently reviewing Section 20 in order to publish regulations pertaining to the economic opportunities, liability and jurisdictional issues, and policy implications for the greater American Indian community. In March, the Committee on Resources heard Mr. James Cason, Associate Deputy Secretary of the Interior, give testimony in which he expressed the need to review and work on certain elements of the bill. To my knowledge, the issues have not been resolved to the satisfaction of all of the Members of the Committee, let alone Members of Congress who are not on the Resources Committee. This bill does not belong on the suspension calendar, and should instead be open to review and amendment by all Members of Congress. I urge my colleagues to speak up for proper procedure in this House, as well as respect the precedent that this bill ignores.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished ranking member and my colleagues who are here. There is not a single heart of a Member of this body that I would challenge on the basis of their commitment, their passion, and the sense of loss that we have experienced through these 5 years and now on the commemoration of this 5th year and certainly on 9/11. So I will read a section from this resolution, and I am going to attest to my complete loyalty and commitment to this language: That we reaffirm ``that the American people will never forget the tragedy of September 11, 2001, and the loss of innocent lives that day,'' that we ``will continue to fight the war on terrorism in their memory, and will never succumb to the cause of the terrorists.'' That should have been the guiding moral standard by which this body continued to do its work after 9/11. I rise today, Mr. Speaker, to offer my deepest sympathy and empathy to those who still grieve. The families who lost their loved ones in the World Trade towers, those who lost their loved ones in United Flight 93, American Airlines 77, American Airlines 11, and United Airlines 175, and as well those who have since lost their lives, who may have lost their lives because they were first responders and they suffered terrible injuries that caused an early demise. I wish we could bring them back, frankly. I wish we could tell them how much we appreciated them. I wish the children who had lost their family members, their moms, their dads, their grandparents, and others could again have the joy of hugging them and showing the love. But, unfortunately, we stand here acknowledging that this tragedy will live with us forever. We noticed on September 11 we were not Democrats or Republicans. We were not red States or blue States. We made a commitment that we were going to do the right thing, and I can remember the sense of urgency of a united America as we instigated Operation Enduring Freedom and pursued the enemy and were diligent as we toppled the Taliban and liberated Afghanistan, and as has been said, we were hard fast on the heels of Osama bin Laden. But, Mr. Speaker, I think it would be both remiss and dishonest to not challenge us and ask the question, where are we today? I recently came back from Afghanistan and Iraq, and it is interesting, as I listened to the distinguished gentleman from New York, the same question was asked of us by President Karzai. He gave the same answer, and that answer was that we need security. At the time we visited, the poppy fields were raging. The Taliban was alive and well. Members of the Afghanistan Parliament asked us whether or not they could have us provide security so that they could go home to their districts. All is not well. And, frankly, I believe it is important to note, Mr. Speaker, that it was not well because we detoured from our task. The commitment we gave on the steps of the United States Capitol, as we sang ``God Bless America,'' to fight the terrorists was not kept because instead of staying the course in Afghanistan, we moved the ball. We detoured. We used up resources. We used up international capital. We used up the ability to do the job. And I say that because I do it in the memory of the first responders, who still some of them are looking for health care benefits that we have not been able to give them. I say that in the name of an unwieldy war in Iraq that had nothing to do with the immediacy of the war on terror, a costly diversion, probably where the money for Afghanistan has gone, $308.58 billion. This red clearly gives us the picture. This is Iraq, a country that could afford to pay for many of its own needs. And in the course of that, we have failed. Our border enforcement and immigration enforcement have fallen drastically under this administration. Between 1999 and 2004, work-site immigration enforcement operations against companies were scaled back 99 percent by the Immigration and Naturalization Service, which subsequently was merged into the Department of Homeland Security. In 1999 the United States initiated fines against 417 companies. In 2004 it issued fines against only three. Years of neglect have brought us where we are today. We know that Democrats offered amendments where there would be 6,600 more Border Patrol agents, 14,000 more detention beds, and 2,700 more immigration agents along our borders. And yet we failed. There is a concept called OTMs. Now we hear a raging voice on OTMs, ``other than Mexicans,'' who come across the border who may, in fact, be the very ones who are here to do us harm. Those very porous aspects of our border have been defeated and the resources for such have been defeated time and time and time again. So what we find is that 84 percent of the experts said we are losing the war on terror, 86 percent said that the world is becoming more dangerous for the U.S. and the American people, and 57 percent consider an attack on the scale of the London bombing against the U.S. to be likely or certain by the end of the year. I stand committed and wedded to the concluding language of this resolution. We will not let the terrorists win. But the debt that we owe those who lost their lives on 9/11 has not yet been paid, and this Congress is at fault. This majority is at fault. And I beg today, as we vote on this resolution with all of its inadequacies in terms of its language, that our single commitment should be as every Member has stood on this floor to those who lost their lives and to the first responders. Can we, Mr. Speaker, do our job today? Can we do it united? Can we do it on behalf of those who sacrificed? Can we do the right thing Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak on H. Res. 994, a resolution purporting to express the sense of the House of Representatives on the fifth anniversary of the terrorist attacks launched by Osama bin Ladin and al-Qaeda against the United States on September 11, 2006. Mr. Speaker, in the life of this Nation there have been a few events of such consequence and moment that they have a transformative impact on the people of the country. For my parents' generation the death of President Franklin Roosevelt was such an occasion. For my generation, the assassination of President Kennedy in 1963 is a moment that lives with us forever. The explosion of the Shuttle Challenger in 1986 left a traumatic and indelible impression on my children's generation. The morning of September 11, 2001 is a day all living Americans will remember forever. Because not since Pearl Harbor have we witnessed such a dastardly and deadly attack on American soil. As I stand here today, my heart still grieves for those who perished on flights United Airlines 93, American Airlines 77, American Airlines 11, and United Airlines 175. When the sun rose on the morning of September 11, none of us knew that it would end in an inferno in the magnificent World Trade Center Towers in New York City and the Pentagon and in the grassy fields of Shanksville, Pennsylvania. How I wish we could have hugged and kissed and held each of the victims one last time. I stand here remembering those who still suffer, whose hearts still ache over the loss of so many innocent and interrupted lives. My prayer is that for those who lost a father, a mother, a husband, a wife, a child, or a friend will in the days and years ahead take comfort in the certain knowledge that they have gone on to claim the greatest prize, a place in the Lord's loving arms. And down here on the ground, their memory will never die so long as any of the many of us who loved them lives. Mr. Speaker, as hard as it is to believe, out of a tragedy so overwhelming and horrific, something good and great emerged. In the aftermath of September 11, there were no Republicans or Democrats. There were no Northerners or Southerners or West or East Coasters. We were not Red State or Blue State. We were all simply Americans. On that day, we were united in our shock and anger and sadness. More importantly, we were united in our resolve to defend our country and protect the freedoms that has made America the greatest country in the history of the world. We lit candles, held hands, helped neighbors, and prayed for our country and its leaders. A united America can never be defeated as Operation Enduring Freedom showed. The brave and valiant armed forces of the United States swiftly toppled the Taliban and liberated Afghanistan and was hard on the heels of Osama bin Ladin, who was trapped in Tora Bora. But before they could bring this mass murderer to justice, they were inexplicably diverted to Iraq, where the President had launched a new war against an enemy that posed no immediate threat to the security of America and had no involvement in the attack of September 11. In dividing our armed forces between Afghanistan and Iraq, this Administration divided the American people and alienated friendly nations who were helping us to win the Global War on Terror. Victory in the Global War on Terror is the best way to honor those who lost and gave their lives on September 11. Ensuring that America is safe and secure and protected from another attack on American soil is the least we owe to the heroic passengers on Flight 93 and to the brave firefighters of the FDNY and officers of the NYPD and the officers and civilians we lost in the Pentagon who gave faithful service to our Nation. So, Mr. Speaker, as we reflect back on the history-changing day 5 years ago, we need to ask ourselves today this haunting question: have we done everything necessary to make America as safe as it can be? The sad truth is we have not. Osama bin Ladin is still at large. Our seaports and trains and chemical plants are still vulnerable. And most important, our borders are not as secure as they could be. In recent months, the American public has been focusing on the lack of security we have on the Nation's borders. Four-and-a-half years after 9/11, it is clear that our borders remain alarmingly porous and that much needs to be done to truly make our borders secure. The fact that our border is porous is not the fault of our hard- working Border Patrol agents and Customs and Immigration agents, who are doing the best they can with the staffing levels and resources that they have been provided. Rather, it is the result of the neglect and underfunding of border security over the last 4\1/2\ years by the Bush Administration and Congressional Republicans--who have failed to provide our border security agencies the resources and personnel they need to succeed in their mission. Indeed, under this Administration and this Republican-led Congress, from 9/11 through April 2006, only 1,641 new Border Patrol agents had been hired--which is less than a 17 percent increase in 4\1/2\ years. Furthermore, border enforcement and immigration enforcement have fallen drastically under the Bush Administration. For example, between 1999 and 2004, worksite immigration enforcement operations against companies were scaled back 99 percent by the Immigration and Naturalization Service, which subsequently was merged into the Department of Homeland Security. In 1999, the United States initiated fines against 417 companies. In 2004, it issued fine notices to only three. After years of neglect, Congressional Republicans and President Bush are now busying themselves with speeches about the importance of border security--but the question remains: where have the Republicans been for the past 4\1/2\ years? Over the past 4\1/2\ years, Democrats have been attempting to highlight the serious security gaps that exist along both our southern and northern borders--and have been attempting to get the GaP- controlled Congress to focus on targeting resources on unfilled gaps. But the Republicans time and again resisted efforts to enhance border security and provide our borders the agents, equipment, and state-of- the-art technology that our borders so desperately need. Seven times over the last 4\1/2\ years, Democrats have offered amendments to enhance border security resources. If these Democratic amendments had been adopted, there would be 6,600 more Border Patrol agents, 14,000 more detention beds, and 2,700 more immigration agents along our borders than now exist. Each time, these efforts have been rejected by the Republican Majority. Mr. Speaker, consider these examples of the majority's failure to provide leadership for America on border security since 9/11. 1. 2001 Vote #454--November 28, 2001--H.R. 3338, FY 2002 Defense Appropriations/Emergency Supplemental: Republicans voted against consideration of an amendment that would have added $223 million for border security--to help meet the promises in the 2001 PATRIOT Act on border staffing and to build needed border facilities. After 9/11, experts recognized that the porousness of the northern border represented a major security threat to the United States. And everyone remembered the attempt by an Islamic extremist to get a large amount of explosives across the Canadian border in December 1999 to blow up the Los Angeles Airport in the Millennium bombing plot. Recognizing these concerns, Congress included a provision in the PATRIOT Act mandating the tripling of the number of border agents and inspectors along the northern border. This amendment included $145 million to make a down payment on the promise of Congress in the PATRIOT Act to triple northern border personnel, which the bill failed to do, and to purchase surveillance equipment. The amendment also included $78 million for the highest priority facility needs of the Border Patrol and other parts of the INS--particularly the Border Patrol's detention facility needs. 2. 2003 Vote #301--June 24, 2003--H.R. 2555, FY 2004 Homeland Security Appropriations: Republicans voted against consideration of an amendment that would have added $300 million for border security, including making a further downpayment on the promise of Congress in the 2001 PATRIOT Act to triple the number of border agents and inspectors along the northern border. The amendment was critically needed because the level of northern border personnel funded in the Republican bill was about 30 percent below the commitment made in the PATRIOT Act. 3. 2003 Vote #305--June 24, 2003--H.R. 2555, FY 2004 Homeland Security Appropriations: This vote was regarding the same amendment as 2003 Vote #301 above. On a vote on appealing the ruling of the chair, Republicans once again voted against consideration of this amendment that would have added $300 million for enhancing border security, including adding border agents and inspectors along the northern border. 4. 2004 Vote #243--June 16, 2004--H.R. 4567, FY 2005 Homeland Security Appropriations: Republicans voted against consideration of an amendment that would have added $750 million for border security--to help meet the promises in the PATRIOT Act on border staffing, better monitor our borders, and deploy radiation portal monitors. Under the GOP bill, the level of northern border personnel funded was still about 30 percent below the commitment made in the PATRIOT Act--so the amendment was designed to help Congress keep its promise. The $750 million would also have been used for giving Border Patrol more of the equipment they critically needed--including air stations for air patrols, radiation portal monitors, and state-of-the-art surveillance equipment. 5. 2005 Vote #160--May 5, 2005--H.R. 1268, FY 2005 Supplemental Appropriations Conference Report: Republicans voted against a motion to send the report back to conference with instructions to add $284 million for border security measures--that would bring funding for border security in the conference report up to the level in the Senate- passed bill. The $284 million included the funding for 550 additional Border Patrol agents and 200 additional immigration agents that was included in the Senate bill. It also included the funding in the Senate bill for unmanned border aerial vehicles, which have been used successfully in Arizona to assist in surveillance. 6. For FY 2006 and FY 2007, Republicans Have Repeatedly Broken the Promises They Made on Border Security in the Intelligence Reform (9/11) Act of 2004: In December 2004, the Congress enacted the Intelligence Reform (or 9/11) Act (PL 108-458). One of the key commitments Congress made in that Act was to beef up border security measures. This included the specific promise of providing 2,000 additional Border Patrol agents, 800 additional immigration agents, and 8,000 additional detention beds per year from FY 2006 through FY 2010. And yet, both for FY 2006 and FY 2007, the Republican Congress has repeatedly voted against efforts to meet this mandate, as seen below. 7. 2005 Vote #174--May 17, 2005--H.R. 2360, FY 2006 Homeland Security Appropriations: Republicans voted against consideration of an amendment that would have added $400 million for border security, to meet the promises Congress made on additional Border Patrol agents, immigration agents, and detention beds in the 9/11 Act. First, the President's budget for 2006 broke the promise of the 9/11 Act by providing funding for only 210 new Border Patrol agents in 2006--1,790 below the number promised. The Republican appropriations bill was better than the President's budget, funding 1,000 new agents--but this was still 1,000 agents short of the promise made in the 9/11 Act. The Republican bill also broke the promises on immigration agents and detention beds. This amendment was designed to live up to the commitments of the 9/11 Act. It added funding for Border Patrol agents, and also added funding for 600 additional immigration agents to get to the 800 promised and added funding for 4,000 additional detention beds to get to the 8,000 promised. 8. 2005 Vote #187--May 18, 2005--H.R. 1817, FY 2006 Homeland Security Authorization: Republicans voted against a Democratic substitute to the Homeland Security Authorization bill that was designed to fulfill the promises in the 9/11 Act. For example, the Democratic substitute included a full authorization for funding a total of 800 additional immigration agents for 2006 promised in the 9/11 Act and a full authorization for funding a total of 8,000 additional detention beds for 2006 promised in the 9/11 Act. 9. 2005 Vote #188--May 18, 2005--H.R. 1817, FY 2006 Homeland Security Authorization: Similarly, Republicans voted against a motion to recommit the Homeland Security Authorization bill with instructions to report it back immediately with instructions to add 15 mandates from the Intelligence Reform (or 9/11) Act that had not been included in the Republican bill, including full authorization for funding a total of 800 additional immigration agents for 2006 and full authorization for funding a total of 8,000 additional detention beds for 2006. 10. 2006 Vote #56--March 16, 2006--H.R. 4939, FY 2006 Supplemental Appropriations: Republicans defeated an amendment to H.R. 4939, FY 2006 Supplemental Appropriations, offered by Representative Martin Sabo, which would have added $600 million for border security measures to the bill. The $600 million included $400 million for installation of 1,500 radiation portal monitors at locations along the border and $200 million for additional air patrols and other aviation assets at our land borders. 11. 2006 Vote #210--May 25, 2006--H.R. 5441, FY 2007 Homeland Security Appropriations: Republicans voted against consideration of an amendment that would have added $2.1 billion for border security, including $1.5 billion to meet the promises Congress made on additional Border Patrol agents, immigration agents, and detention beds in the 9/ 11 Act. The Republican Congress has failed to meet these mandates for both 2006 and 2007. This amendment provided enough funding to address the cumulative shortfalls that have resulted from underfunding in both 2006 and 2007. For example, on Border Patrol agents, the Republican Congress had funded only 1,000 additional agents for 2006 and was funding only 1,200 additional agents for 2007--leaving the Congress 1,800 agents short of what it had promised in the 9/11 Act. Hence, the amendment provided funding for these 1,800 additional agents. Similarly, the amendment also funded the nearly 500 additional immigration agents and 9,000 additional detention beds beyond those in the bill that were promised by the 9/11 Act. The amendment also included $610 million to further increase border detection capabilities, including funding more radiation portal monitors along the borders and providing additional air patrols along the borders. Conclusion I believe it is the resolve of all Members of this House and of all Americans to prevail in the Global War on Terrorism. I believe all Americans want their country to remain safe, free, and invulnerable to another cowardly attack like the one we witnessed 5 years ago. We owe that much to the Americans who lost and gave their lives. We owe it to them to ensure that their children and loved ones will never again experience such pain, suffering, and loss. We can do this. We must do this. But to bring this new future into being, we need a new direction from the present course.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, it is, without a doubt, that the supposed agreement on Darfur in Sudan that was supposed to bring some reconciliation and relief to the Darfurian refugees is of little value at this time. The agreement is crumbling, the refugees are desperate, and, frankly, I think it is crucial that we rely more upon the Members of this body asking the administration to again intercede. We understand that there has been an envoy that has been sent, but there is no understanding of his or her purpose to be able to solidify this agreement that is falling apart. It would be far better for this Congress to address this as a collective body, because it is urgent. It is a crisis. The Darfurian refugees are suffering. There is violence and there is no relief. There needs to be more funding for the African Union peacekeepers. The U.N. needs to be in place. And, frankly, scores by independent polling surveys should not be the answer to the solution for saving those in Sudan.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I didn't want this week to pass without the appropriate recognition and the pointed recognition and offering of sympathy to the American people and to the victims who experienced a horrific tragedy on September 11, 2001. In the next 48 hours, we will be debating on the floor of the House a resolution regarding 9/11. It would be good, Madam Speaker, if that resolution could focus on solutions. But because we are just a few days away from the November 2006 elections, I would venture to say that the majority in this House will attempt to cover up the major failures of making America more secure. I pause for a moment again to reflect on the tears and pain that were expressed over the last couple of days by families of victims, those who worked at the World Trade Center, but also the firefighters and Port Authority police and police persons of New York and others who were the heroes of the day and lost their lives. I join with my colleagues to say that an appropriate tribute certainly to the first responders would be the right kind of compensation and long-term care for those survivors in tribute to those who lost their lives. I hope that tomorrow's debate could be stopped for a moment so that we could pass immediate legislation, legislation proposed by Congresswoman Maloney, that would allow a response to the first responders who now still live. But, no, we will engage again in the one-upmanship of what this Republican majority believes they have done. I would simply say to you, Madam Speaker, that it is little that they have done. The Washington Post today says it right: ``America Marks a Grim Anniversary.'' But I add the words, is there much reason for joy or commemoration that things are better? I would say not. The New York Times today says: ``Grim Outlook Seen in West Iraq,'' calling for more troops and aid. The assessment was prepared last month by Colonel Peter Devlin at the Marine headquarters in Anbar Province, one of the first times that a document like this has been made public. We are literally failing in Iraq. The Secretary of Defense has already said they don't need any more troops. Frankly, they have dissipated the troops in the other parts of Iraq to send into Baghdad to get that under control. It is difficult to get a civil war under control. Iraq does not pay tribute to the tragedy of 9/11 by giving to the families a sense that we are in charge of the war on terror. Iraq simply shows our failure and failed policies. Madam Speaker, I would say to this body that rather than debate a resolution that is distorted and one-sided, I would ask that we roll up our sleeves and respond to the American people. And I think it is important for us to be balanced. There are allies around the world that really want to help us. I have heard discussions from those in Egypt and Jordan and Qatar and Mideast alliances that we have had who desire to have an opportunity to work with Iraq, work in the Mideast, to bring resolution, to allow the existence of democratic states. But we have not offered to collaborate with these states. Madam Speaker, I think it is important to note that Pakistan, which continuously is maligned and is not perfect, there is no doubt, but we should remind our colleagues that we should work with states like Pakistan that are Muslim-based, if you will, recognizing the difficulty of balancing the leadership in a Muslim state and fighting the war on terror. There are those who draw together, who want to work with the United States to fight the war on terror, Muslims around the world, Muslims in the United States; but we must give them an opportunity. And it is important to note with the difficulties of the border region between Afghanistan and Pakistan that Pakistan's soldiers have lost their lives, and it was the Pakistan Government that gave to England the tip on the individual that broke the British terrorist act with the fluids. So it is important, Madam Speaker, as I close, that we work with those who want to work with us. Let's stop the false promises. Let's fight the war on terror. Let's bring our troops home.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I couldn't help but listen to the gentleman's very effective presentation of the plight of America today. And I thank you for yielding, because what caught my attention was the gentleman's very, very important analysis of homeland security and veterans. We are within 24 hours of honoring the victims of 9/11, and the tragedy is that we have in New York those first responders that survived and yet cannot get the health care that is owed to them because of the lack of sensitivity and responsibility of this Congress to provide resources for those victims, first responder victims who cleaned up or worked in the World Trade aftermath and cannot get the health care that they need. And it is a shame that veterans now of the Iraq war will be coming home injured and don't have the resources because of this enormous debt to provide for keeping veterans hospitals open and providing the 18,000-plus that are injured the resources that they need. And my final point is that, as you noted, homeland security as it is suffering, isn't it interesting that we went on a series of hearings throughout August and the constant refrain was the necessity of border security and securing America. But yet this debt, which has interest payments that cause us to really not finance the Republican majority these vital programs, specifically Homeland Security and veterans. So we don't have the money for border security, we don't have the money for more Border Patrol agents, we don't have the money for more equipment because of this enormous debt. So when we hear these voices raised about 9/11 and securing America, it really is with dual voices, voices of talk but no reality. Because with this enormous debt that Democrats really working together have over and over again tried to get the Republicans to stop these enormous tax cuts and recognize our priorities, we are now suffering with this enormous debt, and homeland security is suffering and our veterans are suffering. So I thank the gentleman for providing us with this insightful discussion, and I hope that we will get our priorities straight. And I hope we will move in a new direction, because, frankly, we are not going to meet the promise of America in terms of our obligations with this enormous mounting debt and the interest payments taking away from the very people who need it, securing our Nation, and our veterans who have put their lives on the line for this country.

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

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 503, the American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act. Mr. Chairman, horses have served humans throughout history, carrying us on their backs to safety, tilling our fields, drawing wagons and carriages across the great plains and grand prairies, enriching our lives as friends and companions. But they have never served the people of the United States as a source of food. Yet today, American horses are being killed so their meat can satisfy the palates of overseas diners in Europe and Asia. Show horses, racehorses, wild horses, and family horses can all be destined for the slaughterhouse and exported as foodstuff to foreign lands. This trade in horsemeat is hidden from most Americans and the industry wants to keep it that way. To quote the operations manager of a horse slaughterhouse located in Canada: Talking about horses is kind of a scary thing, especially in the West, where people think it's more of a pet than protein. When anybody starts writing about horses, everybody gets up in arms. Every time we say anything about horse in the paper, there's always an uproar, so I don't want to talk about it. Mr. Chairman, it has been reported that most of the horses that end up being slaughtered are brought in by jobbers who serve as middlemen for the slaughterhouses. These jobbers readily purchase as many horses as possible at livestock auctions around the country and haul them to the plants to be butchered. Many horses are sold at auction by irresponsible owners seeking an easy means to dispose of animals they no longer want. Others, however, are consigned by caring owners who simply have no idea of the fate awaiting the animals. Additionally, hundreds--perhaps thousands--of horses are stolen each year. Horse thieves make fast money by unloading their stolen bounty to jobbers or slaughterhouses, which typically kill and process the animals within 24 hours, making it virtually impossible to trace and recover the stolen animals in time. Currently, there are foreign-owned slaughterhouses operating in the United States that slaughter horses for human consumption. They are Beltex Corporation in Ft. Worth, Texas; Dallas Crown in Kaufman, Texas and Cavel International in DeKalb, Illinois. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 65,976 horses were slaughtered in 2004, up from 50,564 the previous year. In addition, thousands more horses are transported under deplorable conditions across our borders to Canada and Mexico to face a similar fate. Conditions of transport can be brutal. It is not unusual for horses to be hauled 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 coupe 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 this legislation because I do not wish to sanction the abuse of another noble creature of the American West. The magnificent buffaloes that at one time roamed the Great Plains were killed by too many settlers and pioneers for sport when they should have been used the way they were by Native Americans--for food and clothing and fuel. How ironic it is that horses--magnificent, powerful, graceful, and athletic--are being used for food instead of sport and husbandry. Mr. Chairman, I support H.R. 503 because it bans the shipping, transporting, moving, delivering, receiving, possessing, purchasing, selling, or donation of horses and other equines to be slaughtered for human consumption. This is not a fitting end to the animal that has played such an important role in defining American character and culture. I urge my colleagues to join me in protecting an enduring symbol of the West and the favorite animal of Americans everywhere. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 503.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support this resolution, which recognizes the goals and ideals of National Life Insurance Awareness Month. Life insurance is an essential' part of a sound financial plan. Life insurance provides financial security for families by helping surviving members meet immediate and long-term financial obligations and objectives in the event of a premature death in the family. Around 68 million United Sates citizens lack the adequate level of life insurance coverage needed to ensure a secure financial future for their loved ones, most aware of neither the options nor the consequences. Life insurance packages can help families protect themselves from additional burdens after the death of a family member by enabling individuals and families to manage the financial risks of premature death, disability, and long-term care. It is not, however, sufficient to simply encourage consumers to buy life insurance. There is an implicit responsibility in the business of insurance to conduct benefits with honesty, integrity, and decency. I have been shocked and appalled over the last year to see that those who so desperately needed assistance in the gulf region were denied coverage on specious reasoning. Many of my constituents, both newly arrived and long-term residents, continue to try to rebuild their lives after last year's hurricanes. Many insurance policies distinguish between rain, wind, and flood damage. Government-issued policies do insure against flood damage, but most homeowners don't have them. In the Katrina-hit region, only about one-third of homes and one-fourth of businesses carried this Federal policy. Just 2 weeks ago, a judge issued the verdict on the first of many pending lawsuits by homeowners trying to recover the costs of their lost homes. In Leonard v National Mutual Insurance Co., the homeowners, Paul and Julie Leonard, stated that their agent implied that they did not need flood insurance if they purchased wind and rain coverage. They thought storm surges and other water damage were covered if caused by a hurricane's wind. Aside from the fact that it is unkind to exclude flood insurance in an area prone to flooding, yet it is immoral, and should be illegal to dissuade homeowners away from flood insurance by erroneously describing policy. Flooding exclusion language may make a few rich business people happy, but it irreversibly harms our neighbors and constituents. Katrina cost insurers about $41 billion in claims, the largest event in the history of the industry, with homes accounting for nearly half of the total. More than 100,000 homes were damaged or destroyed by Katrina in what has been called the worst natural disaster in U.S. history. The predicament of the Leonard family is not unusual, and a major public policy problem. Life insurance, and other insurance policies, must dutifully act as the crutch they are needed to be in times of crisis. Insurance companies should be ashamed of any activity that results in misleading, tricking, or deceiving its customers out of needed benefits.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2808, the Abraham Lincoln Commemorative Coin Act. This Act recognizes the fact that the year 2009 will be the bicentennial anniversary of the birth of Abraham Lincoln and directs the Secretary of the Treasury to mint coins commemorating his birth. President Abraham Lincoln is one of the most important, most instrumental, and most revered individuals in our Nation's history. Few others have had such an important role in guiding the future of our Nation. He was committed to a government of the people, believed the Constitution was inviolate, and fought for the rights of every individual. President Lincoln's achievements include no less than the abolishment of slavery, the survival of the Union and the civil rights of all individuals, regardless of race or creed. President Lincoln truly believed in and fought for one indivisible Nation with liberty and justice for all. The legacy he left after his tragic death has continued to inspire generations. I hope that we, as elected Members of Congress of this great Nation, continue to find inspiration in President Lincoln's words from his Second Inaugural Address: ``With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation's wounds.'' In order to honor the 200th anniversary of his birth, the Abraham Lincoln Bicentennial Commission has been charged by Congress with planning the celebration of President Lincoln's bicentennial. The proceeds from a commemorative coin will help fund the celebration and the continued study of the life of President Lincoln. 500,000 one dollar silver coins will be issued, dated in the year 2009. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support S. 3534, a bill to amend the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 to provide for a YouthBuild program. The YouthBuild Program enables disadvantaged youth to obtain the education and employment skills necessary to achieve economic self- sufficiency in occupations in demand and postsecondary education and training opportunities. The program provides disadvantaged youth with opportunities for meaningful work and service to their communities. The goals of the program include fostering the development of employment and leadership skills and commitment to community development among youth in low- income communities, and expanding the supply of permanent affordable housing for homeless individuals and low-income families by utilizing the energies and talents of disadvantaged youth. The program provides a crucial package of work experience and skills training, occupational skills training, internships and job shadowing, remedial education, language instruction educational programs for individuals with limited English proficiency, secondary education, counseling and assistance in obtaining postsecondary education and required financial aid, and job search assistance. If you are between the ages of 16 and 24, and have dropped out of school, this is a way to pick up the pieces and learn a craft that can literally rebuild your life and rebuild your neighborhood. The program is intended for individuals who are serious and committed, interested in learning construction, interested in helping to rehabilitate affordable housing, a low income School drop out, and member of a low-income family, a youth in foster care including youth aging out of foster care, a youth offender, a youth who is an individual with a disability, a child of incarcerated parents, or a migrant youth. This is an excellent program; we are pleased to have it in my district in Houston. However, it is underfunded, and because of this, it struggles to find the direction it needs to achieve, its maximum benefit. Worthwhile programs like this must be fully funded and supported. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support this resolution expressing condolences to the families, friends, and loved ones of the victims of the crash of Comair Flight 5191. It should come as a sobering fact that this is the worst aviation crash our country has seen since 2001. The crash occurred on Comair Flight 5191 upon take-off at 6:07 am at Blue Grass Airport, in Lexington, KY. The flight was en route to Atlanta, GA. All but one of the 50 people on board, including passengers and crew, died. The only individual who survived the crash, copilot James M. Polehinke, is recovering at Chandler Medical Center, in Lexington, Kentucky, and we wish him a speedy recovery. Many individuals and entities who responded to the disaster acted nobly, cooperatively, and admirably. Federal, state, and local officials and volunteers were soon on the scene, and I applaud their efforts. However, this was clearly a mistake, and an accident that should never have occurred. We desperately need adequate and rigorous oversight to ensure the operational safety of every commercial flight in this country. Air control towers across the country are currently short-staffed. Since September 2003, the number of air traffic controllers has plummeted from 15,386 to 14,305 in August 2006. Moreover, at the time of this tragic accident, there was only one air traffic controller present, which is a violation of FAA guidelines which mandate at least two air traffic controllers be present. At the heart of every oversight issue is inevitably a funding issue Funds must be provided and managed effectively and efficiently in order to make sure that there exists a sufficient level of trained air traffic controllers ensuring the safety of air travel. I offer my sympathy to the good citizens of Kentucky, and I join Mr. Chandler in mourning those lost and honoring their memory. I encourage my colleagues to support this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I just want a moment in reflection of those that we lost on the front lines of Iraq and Afghanistan in the absence of this Congress. I believe we owe them not only a debt of gratitude, but also an apology. It is time now for there to be a defined strategy by this administration to return our soldiers home, those who have been deployed once, two times, three times, and to have an orderly redeployment as soon as possible. I will not accept the condemnation that Democrats do not understand the war on terror, nor will I accept the condemnation that we are not patriotic or respect our soldiers, for we know a civil war when we see it. We know bloodshed when we see it. We know a wrong policy when we see it. We know a failed Secretary of Defense when we see it. Might I just say for those of us who traveled across the country on immigration hearings, there was much more testimony than undocuments create a criminal situation in America. Undocuments are families and children who are basically seeking an opportunity. Democrats want border security. We want comprehensive immigration reform. We are not here to condemn and suggest that those children are the basis of crime in America.