Zoe Lofgren

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I thank Congressman Scott for those wonderful words. We have quite a number of California Members as well as others who have asked for their statements to be put in the Record, as our time is expiring at this point, but I just would like to make a couple of final comments. We have talked about Don Edwards' legislative record, but it really was rooted in his values. He was someone who cared about people who didn't have enough, and when he rewrote the Bankruptcy Act, he was thinking about working people who couldn't actually make ends meet. When the service workers in the House were laid off every time the House recessed and without any ability to actually have a paycheck, the one person they sought for help was Congressman Don Edwards. I remember lobbyists came in to lobby in favor of discrimination against women, and I was on his staff. He said, ``Well, let me call in the young lawyer I rely on for this.'' When I walked in, that was sort of the end of the conversation. He lived a long time. He changed this world for the better. We loved him greatly. The fact that so many people went out to California to help him--former staffers, people like Jim Copeland and Debbie McFarland, who actually went out to make sure he had what he needed-- was a tribute to the kind of person he was. As has been mentioned, he was very liberal, but he got along with people who were very conservative. I remember he and Henry Hyde, as ranking member, got along quite well and had a great deal of respect for each other. At this point, I would just like to say that we miss Don Edwards. We honor his life and contributions. We know that we cannot mourn him. For his 100 years, he made a difference, he made our country better, and we love him for it. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the subject of this Special Order.

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you, Congresswoman Eshoo. You know, it is a small community that we have in Santa Clara County, even though we have millions of people who live in the region. After Don Edwards was elected, there was a young mayor called Norm Mineta who wanted to run for Congress. We went to the max trying to help Norm Mineta trying be elected to Congress, and he ultimately was. Later, Norm Mineta helped a young fellow to the max get elected, and we were so proud that that young legislator was also successful in being elected to Congress, actually in the seat that overlapped that was formerly Norm Mineta's seat. I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda), my colleague in Santa Clara County and also southern Alameda County.

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, before coming to the floor, I wanted to reassure myself that the State Department did not have the authority to waive these fees just administratively. It is pretty clear that they need this legislation in order to waive these fees. In fact, they want to waive the fees; they want to support the families. So there is no argument here between the House and Senate, between Republicans and Democrats, between the administration and the legislative branch. This is something that we can all agree on. You know, to raise kids is one of the most wonderful experiences you can ever have, and we have wonderful American families that want to provide a home for orphans, not only in the DRC, but to orphans all around the world. So it is really important for those of us in the government, administration, and Congress to do what we can to support American families who want to raise these adoptive children. It is worth noting that the DRC is the problem today, but we have had other problems in the past in other countries, in Latin America and Asia. So this change in the law is going to provide the necessary basis for relieving parents from excessive fees should this occur, God forbid, with other countries. We would ask our State Department to redouble its efforts with the DRC to get these exit permits underway. It is really unfair to the children and their parents to keep these kids stranded. Finally, I would just note that we have not done very much by way of anything touching on immigration where we could have bipartisan support. I still wish that we had before us comprehensive immigration reform. That is not this, but it doesn't mean that we shouldn't support this. I think that it is important that we pass this and show these American parents that we are on their side and we hope that they can use the funds that they save to provide for their new sons and daughters. Mr. Speaker, unless the gentleman has additional speakers, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. LOFGREN. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 1300, the Adoptive Family Relief Act. As has been mentioned, 2 years ago, the Democratic Republic of the Congo suspended issuing exit permits to children who had been adopted and trying to leave the country to be with their parents. To this day, that country continues to suspend issuing these permits; and without permits, the children can't join their mom and dad, the people who have adopted them, even though the children are in possession of immigrant visas. Now, we know to be separated from a child and not to be able to provide love and care for that child is a stressful and tormenting episode for any parent. For the families that adopted children in the DRC, this is exacerbated by the fact that their children are stuck in a country that has one of the worst healthcare systems in the world. There are hundreds of families throughout the United States--and about 350 of them are waiting simply for an exit permit--missing their children and worried about the health of their children stuck in the DRC. The only thing that is preventing them from bringing their child or children home is this exit visa. Now, our visas are valid only for 6 months, unfortunately, and I think, as was mentioned, it costs $325 to renew a visa even though, really, there is no work involved. We have checked with the State Department, and there is minimal expense. So this is not going to be a hit on the State Department's budget, but it is a hit on the budget of families. Some families have spent $1,000 over the past 2 years, and since we don't know when the DRC is going to start issuing these visas, we don't know how much money these families are looking at in the future. This bipartisan bill doesn't solve the exit problem, but at least it solves the financial burden that we have put, not intentionally, on these families. It is the right thing to do. It will show support for these families during this distressing time. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, India has been a land of religious diversity for thousands of years. Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Jainism, Islam and Christianity, among others, are all important religions with centuries of history in India. Today, I would like to recognize their rich contributions to the Indian state. I hope that each one be afforded full legal dignified recognition by the Indian government.

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, the Santa Clara Valley, or Silicon Valley, is home to many successful businesses that were founded by immigrants. I rise today to recognize one such business, Guglielmo Winery, which is celebrating the ninetieth anniversary of its establishment this year. In 1908, Emilio Guglielmo departed from the small town of Susa, in the Piedmont region of Italy, in search of the American dream. Upon his arrival in San Francisco, Emilio began working at a tannery, and his wife Emilia worked at a French laundry. After fifteen years of hard work, the Guglielmos had set aside enough to purchase fifteen acres in Morgan Hill, where they established their winery. Emilia and Emilio passed the winery down to their son George W. and his wife Madeline in 1945. Guglielmo Winery is now in its third generation of family ownership--jointly managed by Emilio's grandsons George E., Gene, and Gary--and holds title as the oldest continuously operating family-owned winery in the Santa Clara Valley. On September 12, Guglielmo Winery will celebrate this significant milestone in traditional Guglielmo fashion: with friends, family, and wine. I congratulate them on this significant milestone and wish the Guglielmos many years of fruitful harvests.

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I rise with my Colleagues, Congressman Pete Aguilar, Congresswoman Karen Bass, Congressman Xavier Becerra, Congressman Ami Bera, Congresswoman Julia Brownley, Congressman Ken Calvert, Congresswoman Lois Capps, Congressman Tony Cardenas, Congresswoman Judy Chu, Congressman Paul Cook, Congressman Jim Costa, Congresswoman Susan Davis, Congressman Jeff Denham, Congressman Mark DeSaulnier, Congresswoman Anna Eshoo, Congressman Sam Farr, Congressman John Garamendi, Congresswoman Janice Hahn, Congressman Mike Honda, Congressman Jared Huffman, Congressman Duncan Hunter, Congressman Darrell Issa, Congressman Steve Knight, Congressman Doug LaMalfa, Congresswoman Barbara Lee, Congressman Ted Lieu, Congressman Alan Lowenthal, Congresswoman Doris Matsui, Congressman Kevin McCarthy, Congressman Tom McClintock, Congressman Jerry McNerney, Congresswoman Grace Napolitano, Congressman Devin Nunes, Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, Congressman Scott Peters, Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, Congresswoman Lucille Roybal-Allard, Congressman Ed Royce, Congressman Raul Ruiz, Congresswoman Linda Sanchez, Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez, Congressman Adam Schiff, Congressman Brad Sherman, Congresswoman Jackie Speier, Congressman Eric Swalwell, Congressman Mark Takano, Congressman Mike Thompson, Congresswoman Norma Torres, Congressman David Valadao, Congressman Juan Vargas, Congresswoman Mimi Walters, and Congresswoman Maxine Waters, to honor the life of Mrs. Judy Kern Fazio, the wife of former Congressman Vic Fazio, who passed on August 7, 2015. Judy was a very strong woman who managed the home and a career while working in various positions in Washington, DC. We honor Judy's legacy of working in Democratic politics, being a devoted mother, and wife who supported her husband's political pursuits. A 32-year resident of Arlington, VA, Judy was born November 13, 1943 in St. Louis, MO. The daughter of Mable and Jacob Neidhardt, she moved from Missouri to California as a young girl, and graduated from Sacramento City College. She became active in local Democratic politics, volunteering for Phil Isenberg's Sacramento mayoral race, George McGovern's presidential campaign and eventually, Vic Fazio's State Assembly run where the two first met. They were married in 1983. Judy went on to work in the California district office for her husband before moving to Washington, DC. She remained active in national politics, working in development and fundraising for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and the Center for National Policy. Before her retirement in 1998, she worked for Arter & Hadden, a Cleveland-based law firm with offices in Washington. A devoted wife, mother, and grandmother, Judy was also a world traveler and a voracious reader. A consummate hostess, an invitation to the Fazio home meant a great meal, a beautiful home, and a lively conversation. She managed the home and a career, becoming a self-taught gourmet cook while working various positions in Washington, DC. She is survived by her husband Vic, her children Kevin and Kristie; her stepdaughter Dana; three granddaughters, Kendra Kern, Karly Kern and Keira Jeske, and her sister Carol Davidson. She was preceded in death by stepdaughter Anne Noel Fazio. Today, The California Congressional Delegation salutes and honors the extraordinary life of Mrs. Judy Kern Fazio. We join all of Judy's loved ones in celebrating her incredible life. She will be deeply missed.

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a distinguished member of my community, Mr. Vu Van Loc. Mr. Vu has been a leader in Santa Clara County for nearly forty years. As the founder of the Immigrant Resettlement & Cultural Center, Mr. Vu provided essential resettlement services to Vietnamese refugees immediately after the Fall of Saigon and for decades following. He pioneered the historical preservation of the journey of the Vietnamese Boat People when he created the Viet Museum in San Jose, which displays their journey. Mr. Vu was born in 1933 in Nam Dinh, North Vietnam. He became a Lieutenant upon graduation from the Dalat academy in 1954. During the Vietnam War, he held multiple leadership positions in the South Vietnam Army, including Colonel Director for the General Logistics Department. After the Fall of Saigon on April 30, 1975, Vu Van Loc came to the United States and settled in San Jose, California. Shortly after his arrival, Mr. Vu began working with the Indochinese Resettlement & Cultural Center, or IRCC, to assist immigrants arriving from Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos who were beginning to settle in Northern California. The Social Planning Committee of Santa Clara County created the IRCC as a temporary office in 1976, but it was Mr. Vu who spearheaded IRCC's efforts and ensured the organization's mission was fulfilled in the decades that followed. Over forty years, Mr. Vu built the IRCC as a community-based organization to serve Vietnamese immigrants in resettlement. Due to his efforts, IRCC, which changed its name to the Immigrant Resettlement & Cultural Center in the 1990s, has provided over 20,000 immigrants with access to resettlement services, such as ESL classes, job training programs, housing assistance, U.S. citizenship application assistance, and voter registration information. Mr. Vu's work with the IRCC has also ensured that the history of the Vietnam War, and the sacrifice of many South Vietnamese soldiers, is not forgotten. In 1993, Mr. Vu gathered contributions to help restore the abandoned Bien Hoa Military Cemetery in Vietnam. With this support he helped ensure the Vietnamese government would not destroy the site as it had other military cemeteries. Mr. Vu also had a vision for the creation of a museum that preserved the history of South Vietnam, the Vietnam War, and the diaspora of Vietnamese Boat People. In 2008, the Republic of Vietnam Boat People Museum opened at History Park in San Jose. Mr. Vu's efforts were critical in building community support to establish the museum. Today, the Viet Museum is a San Jose treasure that ensures the courageous stories from survivors of the Vietnamese Exodus are never forgotten, especially by young people. Vu Van Loc has been a dedicated leader within the Vietnamese community in Santa Clara County. I had the pleasure of first meeting Mr. Vu when I served on the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors. He has been an important friend throughout my public service to Santa Clara County. I am grateful for his dedication, and through these remarks I hereby recognize and commend Mr. Vu for his service to Santa Clara County and our immigrant community.

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with my colleague, Congressman Sam Farr, to pay tribute to Saint Mary's Parish of the City of Gilroy. On August 15, 2015, the Parish celebrated a true milestone: its 150th Anniversary. Together we commend the Parish for its century and a half of service, fellowship, and leadership to the Gilroy community. From its founding, Saint Mary's Parish has been at the heart of its Gilroy community. Founding Pastor Thomas J. Hudson built Saint Mary of the Assumption in the young southernmost town of Santa Clara County, Gilroy, in 1865. As the town grew into a city of 50,000 residents, Saint Mary's Parish expanded, adding its third building on its 100th Anniversary in 1965. The Parish has served as a point of gathering for people with diverse backgrounds and experiences. It has also been a home to hundreds of dedicated parishioners of Saint Mary's Parish who have served the residents of Gilroy. Saint Mary's Parish has led and contributed to the spiritual and cultural life of Gilroy for many years through various cultural events, its local and international programs, and St. Mary School, staffed by the Sisters of the Presentation. The Parish's programs have included Saint Joseph Family Center, Lord's Table, Mexico Mission, various disaster and poverty relief collections, and person-by-person counseling. Through the years, Saint Mary's Parish has maintained strong and active social justice outreach within the community. The Parish has contributed to the lives of many individuals and families by extending its support to young families, immigrants, families of farm workers, and persons living with physical and mental disabilities. The Parish has also offered solace to the bereaved. In addition to being attentive to the spiritual, cultural, and social justice needs of Gilroy community members, Saint Mary's Parish has been an important source of unity to our residents. The Parish has continued to focus its efforts on the betterment of our society by providing a spiritual home for our youth and promoting social justice and diversity in the City of Gilroy. As Saint Mary's Parish of the City of Gilroy celebrates 150 years of service to the Gilroy community, we join the many friends and families wishing well to the Parish. On this day of honor and celebration, we do hereby recognize and commend Saint Mary's Parish on this milestone.

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I wish to share with my colleagues and the American public this insightful editorial from the San Jose Mercury News, ``Videos about Planned Parenthood are grossly misleading.'' This editorial clearly lays out how the Republican Party's embrace of this video ``expose'' is really just a continuation of their War on Women, in particular low-income women. Anyone with half a brain can see through the heavily edited ``gotcha'' videos purporting to show Planned Parenthood officials illegally bargaining to sell tissue from aborted fetuses. The videos are grossly misleading and politically irresponsible. The research that fetal tissue makes possible at respected universities across the country has produced vaccines that have saved millions of lives and now targets Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and other fatal, heartbreaking diseases. Planned Parenthood does not profit from it. But Republicans in Congress and in the presidential free-for-all are having a field day with ``facts'' from Fox News. California Attorney General Kamala Harris fortunately is investigating the videos' producers, the so-called Center for Medical Progress, which may have broken federal and California law in the scheme to bring down Planned Parenthood. As an example, one of the interviews of a California doctor may have been recorded without her consent. U.S. Rep. Zoe Lofgren of San Jose is pushing U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch to investigate as well. The organization has tax-exempt status as a biomedical charity but appears to be a fake limited liability corporation. It has never been a secret that Planned Parenthood and many other clinics collect tissue for research. The unedited videos show repeated attempts by Planned Parenthood doctors to explain that they're only trying to recoup costs for their work. Planned Parenthood likely loses money on the whole thing, but the numbers are a tiny part of its budget. Republicans in the House and the Senate shamelessly are using this supposed expose to argue that Congress should defund Planned Parenthood. And so the War on Women continues. Planned Parenthood and its 800 clinics provide health care, particularly family planning, for nearly 3 million low income women a year. It receives more than $500 million in government funding, but not a penny of that pays for abortions--which make up just 3 percent of the organization's work. Cutting Planned Parenthood funding means cutting health care to poor women, period. Scientists using cultures from fetal kidney cells won the Nobel Prize for Medicine in 1954 for developing the polio vaccine. Fetal tissue research helped produce vaccines for chicken pox and rubella. These advances alone have saved countless millions of lives, particularly children's. The National Institutes of Health spent more than $70 million on fetal research in 2014, tackling diseases such as Parkinson's and Alzheimer's. Stem cell research is gradually replacing fetal tissue research, but we can't afford to stop work on these diseases while alternative methods ramp up. More tapes are expected this week, including possibly showing the process of tissue removal. It's ugly to watch, but so are most significant surgical procedures. The core political issue here is abortion. The Center for Medical Progress and many Republican officials and candidates want to eliminate the right of American women to choose to end a pregnancy. In fact Planned Parenthood has done more to prevent abortion than any other organization in this country by giving poor women access to birth control and to prenatal care to have healthy babies. It continues to provide safe abortions because refusing will not stop abortion, it will just drive women to unsafe alternatives. (Speaking of ugly procedures.) Women's ability to control their own reproductive future is the best way to prevent abortion. A Congress really concerned about women and unborn children would give more, not less, to Planned Parenthood.

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Community trust policies result in more efficient policing. When State and local law enforcement agencies promote community trust policies, public safety is increased. The current New York police commissioner and former chief of police in Los Angeles, William Bratton, said: ``When officers can speak freely with victims and witnesses, it goes a long way towards making every American neighborhood much safer.'' Here is a case study in New Haven, Connecticut. According to a 2010 report by the Police Executive Research Forum, New Haven, Connecticut, developed a community trust policy in which New Haven police assured immigrant communities that the police department's goals were to address crime and to make the streets safer. They encouraged people to report crime and to cooperate, regardless of their immigration status. The city law prohibited immigration status inquiries of crime victims, witnesses, or others who approached police for assistance. I would note that the bill before us would prohibit this policy, this law that New Haven adopted. The result of New Haven's policy and their other community trust policies were stronger ties between law enforcement and the immigrant community. Over the next several years, New Haven experienced a 46 percent decrease in murders and a 13 percent decrease in rape incidences. This policy, which this bill would prohibit, worked. This was a very important result. After learning of it, the United States Conference of Mayors, a group that most of us trust pretty much, did a survey of cities around the United States who adopted the same trust policies. They include Alameda, California; Augusta, Georgia; New Brunswick, New Jersey; and a whole host of others. They found that all of these cities also reported the same kind of reduction in crime after they adopted these policies. Adopting these policies is an important component of keeping communities safe, and this bill would prohibit that. It would prohibit it. Now, I understand the outrage over Mr. Lopez-Sanchez. In fact, I share it. Obviously, he has been accused of murder. Even when we have a situation like this, we have to have a trial, but I believe personally that he is guilty, based on all the evidence. I believe he should not have been out on that street in San Francisco. If you look at his record--and I will go through it a little bit--it actually makes certain points. I have heard people say, Well, we have got open borders, and that is why he was here. In fact, that is not the case. This individual attempted to enter the United States repeatedly, and he was caught by the Border Patrol, just as they are supposed to do their job. What happened then is he was deported repeatedly in the nineties, and then they started prosecuting him for felony reentry after removal. He served 16 years in Federal prison for the felony of reentering after removal. Our laws went after him. He should not have been released in San Francisco, but I think some of what we need to do is see what policies would have kept him off that street, and I will deal with those later. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Becerra).

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I just want to close by posing some of the questions that this bill does not deal with and that I think should command our attention. In this case, we had an individual who had a criminal record. He had attempted to enter the United States, was apprehended, deported, was prosecuted and convicted for illegal entry after removal. After serving over 4 years for the last felony prosecution, he was ready to be deported, but they found, even though he had been deported many times before with an outstanding bench warrant from 1995 where the underlying offense was marijuana possession, all of a sudden, this year, he was sent to San Francisco. I think one of the questions we need to ask is: What is the process of outstanding warrants and its interface with the Bureau of Prisons when someone really should be deported? Apparently, there was no communication between the Federal Government and the prosecuting attorney in San Francisco. He was sent to, apparently, San Francisco, but the district attorney did not see this matter until he was already in custody. Now, I don't fault the district attorney for not prosecuting on a 20- year-old marijuana possession case. Where would you find the witnesses? And, in fact, in California today, marijuana possession is an infraction, not a misdemeanor. But the point is he should never have been in San Francisco to begin with. So I think we need to take a look at the processes that we have to make sure that we don't have this kind of situation again. Clearly, he should not have been released when the district attorney declined to prosecute. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to my colleague from California (Mr. Farr).

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. I would just close by saying that we have been asked by law enforcement agencies, by domestic violence advocacy groups, by the faith community not to adopt this bill. I know we can come together to make a safer community. This bill is not the answer, and I urge Members to vote ``no.'' I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. LOFGREN. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. O'Rourke).

Ms. LOFGREN. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time remains?

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Becerra).

Ms. LOFGREN. Madam Speaker, we have an immigration system that is badly broken. There are 11 million undocumented people in this country. Contrary to what Donald Trump may think, the majority of these people are not rapists. They are hard-working people, spouses and parents of U.S. citizens, DREAMers, entrepreneurs who want an opportunity to come forward, submit to background checks, and become fully American. Faced with a broken system, State and local law enforcement have adopted policies to enhance public safety and maintain community trust. Because when people are afraid of the police, when they are afraid that the police might ask them or their family about their immigration status, they are afraid to report crimes, unlikely to cooperate with investigations, and then criminals thrive and the general public suffers. This bill puts an impossible choice between State and local law enforcement agencies. They can either abandon policies that work or they can lose the Federal funds they rely on to police their communities and protect them. The dangers posed by this bill are real. 144 national, State, and local advocacy organizations have written opposing this bill because of the detrimental impact it would have on public safety, big cities, but also little ones like Dayton, Ohio, a place that most people don't think of as a sanctuary city. In Dayton, police officers are told not to check immigration status of witnesses and victims, nor to ask about immigration during minor traffic stops. The police chief there has explained that this policy has helped them have a safer community. According to the chief, after the policy was adopted, serious violent crime dropped nearly 22 percent and serious property crime decreased almost 15 percent. Madam Speaker, why should Dayton, Ohio, be barred from receiving funds for policing when their policies work? Now, punishing the law enforcement officers by withholding the funds they need is not only incorrect, it is why the bill is opposed to by the Major County Sheriffs' Associations, the Fraternal Order of Police, dozens of sheriffs and police chiefs. The President has said we should deport felons, not families, and that is what his priority enforcement program does. The Secretary of Homeland Security told the Judiciary Committee just last week that withholding funds from communities would be a huge setback in efforts to improve the relationship between DHS, State, and local law enforcement in communities across the country. It has been said that this bill is a response to the tragic murder of Kathryn Steinle in San Francisco, just up the road from my district. However, nothing in this bill would have prevented that outrageous murder of Ms. Steinle. Nothing in the bill would have required the Bureau of Prisons and ICE to consult with San Francisco, to ascertain whether or not the 20-year-old warrant would lead to a prosecution. Nothing in this bill would have required ICE to obtain a warrant, as is necessary to hold people beyond the term of their criminal sentence. Nothing in the bill would even have affected the sheriff of San Francisco's decision to release the individual charged with murdering Ms. Steinle. So that tragedy should not be used to advance a different agenda, this bill. Over the last year we have come to the floor to vote on bills to deport the DREAM Act kids, to deport the parents of U.S. citizens, to deport vulnerable children fleeing persecution and sex trafficking. Today we are asked to vote on a bill that overrides the public safety mission of State and local law enforcement agencies and to increase deportations all around. We had the votes to pass comprehensive immigration reform in the last Congress, and I hope we can get back to that point.

Ms. LOFGREN. Madam Speaker, I would note that we have an opportunity here to learn from the tragedy in San Francisco to come up with real solutions that would make our community safer instead of using that tragedy as an excuse to promote a different agenda.

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, during the week of July 6th I was unable to travel to Washington, D.C. for health reasons. Had I been present, I would have cast the following votes: July 7 Roll Call 390--yes Roll Call 391--yes July 8 Roll Call 392--no Roll Call 393--yes Roll Call 394--yes Roll Call 395--yes Roll Call 396--yes Roll Call 397--yes Roll Call 398--yes Roll Call 399--yes Roll Call 400--yes Roll Call 401--yes Roll Call 402--yes Roll Call 403--yes Roll Call 404--yes Roll Call 405--yes Roll Call 406--yes Roll Call 407--no Roll Call 408--no Roll Call 409--no Roll Call 410--no Roll Call 411--yes Roll Call 412--yes Roll Call 413--yes Roll Call 414--yes Roll Call 415--yes Roll Call 416--yes Roll Call 417--yes Roll Call 418--yes Roll Call 419--no Roll Call 420--no Roll Call 421--yes Roll Call 422--yes Roll Call 423--no July 9 Roll Call 424--no Roll Call 425--no Roll Call 426--no Roll Call 427--yes Roll Call 428--no Roll Call 429--no Roll Call 430--no July 10 Roll Call 431--no Roll Call 432--yes Roll Call 433--yes

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I rise with my colleagues, Congressmembers Anna Eshoo and Mike Honda, in memory of William ``Bill'' Alfred Kindricks, who passed away on June 8, 2015. Bill was a leader in our community both in his public work with San Francisco BART and Santa Clara Valley Transit Authority, and in his private life as an integral member of his church and mentor within the black community in Santa Clara County. Bill Kindricks, born the youngest of four siblings on July 24, 1946, on the campus of Tuskegee University to Lewis and Salena Kindricks, grew up in Opelika, Alabama. He graduated from Alabama A&M University and the University of Virginia, Darden Graduate School of Business, and played professional football with the Cincinnati Bengals and Oakland Raiders. For most of his life, Bill resided and was an active member of his community in San Jose. A devout man, Bill was baptized and attended church weekly throughout his life. During his career, Bill worked for General Motors and San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) and retired from the Santa Clara County Valley Transit Authority (VTA) after 23 years of dedicated service. Until his passing, Bill was a nurturing, supportive leader and mentor in the 100 Black Men of America, Omega Psi Phi Fraternity, Inc., National Forum Black Public Administrators, Black Leadership Kitchen Cabinet of Santa Clara County, and NAACP, among others. As the President of the Silicon Valley Chapter of 100 Black Men of America, Bill contributed to the development of hundreds of young adults. Compassionate and generous with his time, Bill was always available to selflessly help those in need. Bill was a genuinely good human being. He bettered the lives of others with his magnanimous presence and spirit. Many loved and respected Bill, and his passing is mourned and deeply felt among those whose lives he has touched. Together with my colleagues, I want to express my sincerest condolences to Bill's family and fellow church members. Our hearts are with them in this time of sorrow. Along with Bill's family, friends, former colleagues and our community, we will miss him. We have been lucky to have him.