Zoe Lofgren

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. I would just note this bill, while perhaps boring to many Members, is important to us. And it is a measure that we have adopted with so many of these Members in prior Congresses, and yet because they have to do with down-in-the-weeds issues in the Judiciary, they don't always get the attention that they should. I'm hopeful, and I'm glad, that we have worked so collaboratively together on these but that we can really work in partnership with our other branch of government for some of these efficiency things. They're not big policy issues, but they're things that will make the judiciary more effective. They need our help in many cases to do that. And I think this may be a marker that we're ready to really hold our hands out in that effort. And I do thank the gentleman for yielding.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, this bill contains what we believe are noncontroversial measures proposed by the Judicial Conference to improve efficiency in the Federal courts. Many have passed the House in a prior Congress in similar forms. The bill makes some realignments in the place of holding court within specified judicial districts so as to better serve local communities. It permits a chief pretrial services officer to be chosen locally by the district court, just like the chief probation officer. It updates the penalty for failure to appear for jury duty, or lying on a questionnaire to avoid jury duty, by raising the maximum fine from $100 to $1,000, and by allowing the judge to impose community service. The bill also increases the maximum penalty for employers who retaliate against employees who are called to serve on jury duty. Other updates include making electronically produced information coverable in court costs, and adding magistrate judges to the list who can be included in circuit Judicial Conferences. I think this bill, while noncontroversial, is certainly important in increasing the efficiency of our judicial branch, and I hope that we will unanimously support it. I would reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. I thank the gentleman for yielding. And as you and I both serve on the Courts and Intellectual Property Subcommittee, and most of what we have done has been on the intellectual property side of that, and important as that work is, this is a measure that the court side also is important. So, again, I look forward to next year. I think both you and I will return and dig in on some of these issues.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Webcaster Settlement Act. Since the Copyright Royalty Board announced its decision dramatically increasing royalty rates for webcasters, Internet radio has really been in serious jeopardy. In some cases, fees under the ruling actually exceeded the revenue, obviously a business model that is impossible to sustain. Because the demise of Internet radio is absolutely in no one's interest, not in the stakeholders, Members of Congress have worked very hard to reach a negotiated compromise that would supersede the CRB decision and preserve the continued viability of Internet radio. I particularly want to commend Representative Berman for his work in bringing the parties together. They were very far apart, and his personal attention to this has been a key element for this progress. This act buys some time for the negotiations to continue, removes the statutory impediment to implementation of a negotiated compromise, and I am very hopeful that we will achieve what we wish. The alternative to this legislation would be a court-imposed solution that would drive many of the newest and most promising innovators like Pandora, located in Alameda County, out of the marketplace. It's not just the providers of content, it's the American public, indeed the world, that is able to use the digital world for access to content. We don't want, any of us, to stand in the way of that. I just want to take a minute here, because this may be the last time that I have an opportunity to work on a bill on this floor with Congressman Cannon, who will not be returning to the 111th Congress. I just want to say, if you look at Congressman Cannon's record and mine, you will find very different records, one of the most conservative Members of Congress, and I am not. But I will say that working with Congressman Cannon is a tremendous honor, because he is a very smart guy and he is very focused. There are never any games working with him. It's always what can he see that's in the public's interest. When you can work with someone like that, even though it's a conservative and a nonconservative, you can make progress. It's just been an honor to work with Congressman Cannon. He has served his district, his State and his country with tremendous distinction. I just want to thank him for all he has done. I know he will have many other things to contribute in the private sector, but it's really been an honor to work with him.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 6838) to establish and operate a National Center for Campus Public Safety.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, over the past few years, we have seen a number of tragic incidents of violence at colleges and universities, including the disastrous incidents at Virginia Tech and Northern Illinois University. This bill will help schools to more effectively prevent such incidents and to more effectively respond if such incidents do occur. It creates a national center for campus public safety administered through the Department of Justice. The center will train campus safety agencies, promote research into improving campus safety, and be a clearinghouse for campus safety information. The director at the center will have the authority to award grants to institutions of higher learning to help them meet their enhanced public safety goals. I would like to thank and publicly acknowledge Crime Subcommittee Chairman Bobby Scott of Virginia, as well as ranking member of that subcommittee, Louie Gohmert of Texas, as well as Senator Leahy for their bipartisan leadership on this initiative. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I simply urge adoption of this measure, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, today, we are preventing a critically important immigration program from expiring. No one disputes that there is a health care crisis in this country. With our population aging, there is no doubt that the demand for health care will only increase. The problem is made worse by a shortage of medical professionals, including doctors, in many communities across America. H.R. 5571 will reauthorize a program--the Conrad 30 J Waiver Program--that has been successful at helping medically underserved communities attract highly skilled physicians. The program allows States to recruit foreign doctors who have received their medical training in the United States, so long as those doctors work in medically underserved areas. This program is critically important to underserved communities across this country, but it unfortunately expired on June 1, 2008. The House passed the bill on May 21, but the Senate did not act until just yesterday, when it extended the program through March 6, 2009. Although I would have strongly preferred to reauthorize this program for 5 years, as the bill I introduced stated, this program is too important to let expire as we continue to negotiate the length of time this program should be extended. We must pass this bill today so that we may have the additional time we need to further reauthorize the Conrad 30 J Waiver Program. I wish to thank Lamar Smith, the Ranking Member of the Judiciary Committee, and Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee for their efforts in helping me bring this bill to the floor. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5571 reauthorizes a critically important immigration program that helps medically underserved communities attract highly skilled physicians. This program expired on June 1 of this year. On May 21, the House passed this bill with a 5-year reauthorization. As sent back from the Senate, the bill allows the program to expire again on March 6, 2009. While this unfortunate limitation will require Congress to revisit this issue promptly next year, the program is too important to let expire. The program helps States attract doctors who have received their medical training in the United States and who agree to work in medically underserved areas. Its importance was demonstrated last year when a tornado utterly destroyed the town of Greensburg, Kansas. That town would not have had doctors without this program, and their presence helped tremendously in the town's ability to keep casualties to a minimum. We need to keep this program going so that the States can attract medical talent and keep the doors open. I commend Ranking Member Lamar Smith, as well as my colleague, Sheila Jackson-Lee, for their efforts to bring this bill to the floor, and I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. I yield myself such time as I may consume. S. 3606 reauthorizes the Special Immigrant Nonminister Religious Worker Program, which provides an avenue for nuns, monks and other religious workers to come to the United States to do their important work. If we do not act, this program will sunset in just 4 days. On April 15 of this year, we passed H.R. 5570 to reauthorize the program for 7 years. As sent over from the Senate, the bill allows the program to expire on March 6, 2009. While this unfortunate limitation will require Congress to revisit this issue promptly next year, I believe the program is too important to let expire. The 5,000 religious workers eligible for these visas each year are called to a vocation or are in traditional religious occupations with bona fide nonprofit religious organizations. They are missionaries, counselors, religious instructors, and other pastoral care providers. There is a bipartisan consensus around this program. It has been extended four times since first enacted in 1990. We have worked with Mr. Smith to craft provisions to guard against potential fraud. The Senate bill incorporates those protections. I think this is a sound bill, and I hope that we're able to pass it tonight. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I just want to comment briefly on the March 6 date. It is my understanding that two Republican Senators requested dramatic changes to the E-Verify program extension that we were able to pass here. When they were unable to get it, the Senate--or I should say the other body--was able to agree on just an extension until March 6. Then the issue was that nothing else was going to go past March 6. So I think it's interesting to note that, even though we oftentimes have very contentious disagreements on various immigration matters here in the House, we were able to come to an agreement to extend the E- Verify program for an extended period of time. They couldn't get that together in the Senate, so we're going to, indeed, have to revisit this as well as E-Verify early next year, and we will have to try and come to an agreement that is bipartisan and bicameral. Certainly, we need to approve this today so that religious workers can enrich the lives of our communities. With that, I urge its adoption. Mr. Speaker, S. 3606 is similar to a bill I authored, H.R. 5570, which passed the House on April 15 of this year. Both bills would reauthorize the Special Immigrant Non-Minister Religious Worker Program, which allows non-minister religious workers to obtain special immigrant status in the U.S. so that they may do the work required of their faith. The program is vitally important to religious organizations as it provides in many!instances the only avenue for nuns, monks, and other people of faith to come to the United States to fill a vocation or other traditional religious occupation. Those who use the visas come over to serve as missionaries, counselors, translators, religious instructors, cantors, and other pastoral care providers. Unfortunately, the program is currently set to expire in just a few days. H.R. 5570, the bill I authored, would have extended the program for several years. But S. 3606, as sent back from the Senate, would extend the program only through March 6, 2009. Although I strongly would have preferred to extend the program for longer, the program is too important to let expire. We should extend the program today to allow us the additional time we need to work out a longer extension. I also note tat the program was first enacted in 1990 and that Congress has extended it four times, most recently in 2003. Working with Lamar Smith, the Ranking Member of the Judiciary Committee, we made changes to the program for the first time to address potential fraudulent uses of the program. The Senate bill includes those protections. I urge my colleagues to support this important bipartisan legislation. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 3606) to extend the special immigrant nonminister religious worker program and for other purposes.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, this bill is similar to H.R. 3992, which was authored by Crime Subcommittee Chairman Bobby Scott of Virginia which passed our House in January. The Senate bill focuses on expanding the allowable uses of funds in existing programs that provide assistance to mentally ill offenders. It reauthorizes the Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime Reduction Grant Program at the current level of $50 million. It expands the permissible use of funds for mental health courts that will incorporate pretrial services and assessments for alternatives to incarceration. Funds under this bill can be used to assist law enforcement agencies with identifying and reducing the risk of harm to mentally ill offenders, while also maintaining public safety. Finally, this bill will provide States and units of government with funding to improve the treatment of female offenders with mental illness. Despite common misconceptions, the majority of mentally ill people who are arrested and incarcerated are low- level, nonviolent offenders. This legislation will help jurisdictions assist mentally ill people in ways that help keep them out of our jails and prisons if that's not where they belong. This is a good bill, and I urge its passage. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I would just say that at a time when the majority of mental health treatment provided in this country is provided in county jails, a measure such as this is enormously important to divert individuals who are suffering from an illness to appropriate treatment where their illness would be treated and where their disruptive behavior will not bother others. I'm glad that we are moving forward in a bipartisan manner to approve this. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, the exemption that we are renewing today has worked well. It makes sure that schools don't have to compete for the very top students, which could result in some students, the top students, getting excess aid while the rest of the applicant pool receives less or, in some cases, none at all. As mentioned by Mr. Smith, it was sent back to us by the Senate. The exemption is extended to 2015. Enacting this today protects need-based aid and need-blind admissions, and it will help preserve the opportunity for all students to attend one of the Nation's most prestigious schools. As Mr. Smith has noted, we hope someday to have a permanent extension, but for now, we need to pass this bill. I urge my colleagues to support the legislation.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. I yield myself such time as I may consume. The Need-Based Educational Aid Act, sponsored by our colleagues Bill Delahunt of Massachusetts and Ranking Member Lamar Smith of Texas, extends an antitrust exemption that permits colleges to agree to award financial aid on a need-blind basis and to use common principles of needs analysis in making their determinations. This exemption also permits the use of a common aid application form in exchange of student financial information through a third party. In 1992, Congress passed the first exemption. It has expired several times, and it is now set to expire in 4 days. We hope to avoid that by passing this bipartisan legislation. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 1777) to amend the Improving America's Schools Act of 1994 to make permanent the favorable treatment of need-based educational aid under the antitrust laws.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this bill. While we do need to focus our efforts to combat criminal activity related to intellectual property, the unbounded forfeiture provision in this bill isn't about going after criminals, it's about going after the Internet. The language in the House bill, the bill that we sent over, although problematic in some ways, at least had some measures to ensure that there was a meaningful connection between the property subject to seizure and the underlying offense. This bill, back from the Senate, strips away those assurances. It subjects to seizure ``any property used, or intended to be used, in any manner or part to commit or facilitate the commission of an offense.'' That unqualified language means that virtually anything through which Internet traffic passes is subject to seizure, no matter how incidental the connection to the offense or how innocent the owner. This provision shifts the liability for infringement--and thus responsibility from enforcement--onto innocent intermediaries, whether they are ISPs, businesses, schools, libraries, or consumers. We have seen this before this year and will likely see it again as time goes on. We saw the same type of provisions--although not as wildly extravagant--in the Higher Education Act, even after colleges told us it would divert resources from their primary mission of education. We're seeing it in the secret negotiations on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement that apparently is going to, in some manner, require ISPs to police the conduct of their users, potentially in violation of their privacy rights. I understand why the content industry pushes for these measures. They're trying to protect an analog business model in the digital environment, and that's difficult and expensive; and treating one's customers like criminals is bad for PR. Accordingly, the content industry has every incentive to make others do the work for it. What I don't understand is why Congress goes along with these proposals. With each successive Congress, copyright law and policy becomes less of a balanced system of rights to promote creativity and innovation and more of a set of tools by which certain corporate interests protect themselves. In our unbridled zeal for IP enforcement and utter indifference to the rights of users and consumers, we are losing sight of the underlying principles of our copyright system. This bill takes us further away from those principles. And I would add that I can't think of a single other circumstance where civil libertarians would even consider the concept of seizing the property of innocent bystanders in any other legal scheme, whether it was fraud or any other matter. We wouldn't permit that, and we should not permit it in this case. I urge that we defeat this bill. And although there are some provisions in it that are meritorious, there is consensus for those, we can certainly adopt them next year. I urge defeat and yield back to the chairman with thanks.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Madam Speaker, I rise today at a time when our country is facing grave concerns over the economy, yet this administration has supported $1.3 billion on ineffective abstinence- only programs. The CDC has just reported that more than 1 in 4 girls are infected with a sexually transmitted infection. It is clear that teens do not have access to full information about how to lead safe and healthy lives. This reaffirms what people in my home state of California already know: abstinence-only programs do not work. I am proud to be from the first state that has rejected wasteful Title V abstinence-only funding. California leads the Nation in its effort to prevent unintended pregnancy through access to family planning, comprehensive sex education, public funding of family planning services and laws and policies protecting access to reproductive health care. We must expand access to these services. This is why I support the outreach and community programs of the Planned Parenthood of Mar Monte. They provide comprehensive sex education programs through community outreach to high school students, parenting and pregnant teen mothers and train young males in responsible decision making. This week, Planned Parenthood affiliates around the country are sponsoring grassroots events to raise awareness about the need for comprehensive sex education. A majority of voters strongly support comprehensive sex education and want public schools to teach it to keep our youth healthy and safe. These parents are just looking to Congress to eliminate funding for dangerous abstinence only programs and instead fund comprehensive sex education programs.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. I would certainly like to commend Congressman Rodriguez and Senator Schumer. This is a measure that I support. Mr. Speaker, I would just like to note there is another measure that we have marked up in the Judiciary Committee that would broadly assist our American soldiers and their families. I hope that in the same spirit of collaboration we see this evening, we will be able to achieve that wonderful advance for the fathers, mothers, wives, spouses, and sons and daughters of our brave American soldiers.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise today in support of this resolution expressing the sense of Congress that the President should grant a posthumous pardon to John Arthur ``Jack'' Johnson for the 1913 racially motivated conviction of Mr. Johnson, which diminished his athletic, cultural and historic significance and tarnished his reputation. More importantly, Mr. Speaker, adoption of this resolution and granting of this posthumous pardon by the President would remove a nearly century-old stain from the reputation of this Nation. Although the harm inflicted on Mr. Johnson can never be undone, it is nevertheless important that we set the record straight and acknowledge that he was wrongfully convicted in a disgraceful climate of racial hatred. John Arthur ``Jack'' Johnson was a flamboyant, defiant and controversial figure in American history who challenged racial biases. The son of former slaves, Jack Johnson was a professional boxer who traveled throughout the United States and the world, fighting both black and white heavyweight boxers. He was without question one of the greatest boxers this Nation has ever produced. The resentment felt towards Mr. Johnson by many whites was not limited to his successes in the ring. It was compounded by his relationship with white women, an issue which aroused not just anger, but brutal violence. Between 1901 and 1910, 754 African Americans were lynched, some simply for being perceived as ``too familiar'' with white women. In 1912, Jack Johnson was arrested by United States marshals and charged with transporting his future wife, Lucille Cameron, across State lines for an ``immoral purpose'' in violation of the Mann Act. Ms. Cameron refused to cooperate with the authorities, the charges were dropped, and she later married the champion. Federal authorities continued to pursue Jack Johnson and subsequently sought to prosecute him based on charges of ``prostitution and debauchery.'' This time they were able to obtain a conviction, and Mr. Johnson was forced to flee the country. He returned to the United States in July 1920, surrendered to the authorities, and served nearly 1 year in the United States Penitentiary at Leavenworth, Kansas. Jack Johnson fought boxing matches after his release from prison, but never regained the heavyweight championship title. Although this Nation failed him, Jack Johnson remained a patriotic American. He supported this Nation during World War II by encouraging citizens to buy war bonds and by participating in exhibition boxing matches to promote the sale of war bonds. He died in 1946. In 1954, Jack Johnson was finally inducted into the Boxing Hall of Fame, a fitting recognition of the outstanding accomplishments of this great sportsman. It is time that we also recognize the wrong that was done and do what is in our power to make amends for this wrongful conviction, which destroyed a great boxing career, but not a courageous and indomitable sportsman. I urge my colleagues to support the measure. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 214) expressing the sense of Congress that the President should grant a posthumous pardon to John Arthur ``Jack'' Johnson for the 1913 racially motivated conviction of Johnson, which diminished his athletic, cultural, and historic significance, and tarnished his reputation.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Madam Speaker, I rise along with my colleague, Congressman Mike Honda, to honor County Executive Pete Kutras for his 39 years of public service and his well-earned retirement which will be effective November 1, 2008. The Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors appointed Kutras to the top spot as county executive in August 2003, after he served as interim county executive for 4 months. He oversees the nearly 15,000 county employees in 29 departments and agencies. Santa Clara County with a population of about 1.8 million is the sixth largest of 58 California counties and the 17th largest of the more than 3,100 counties in the United States. Kutras' extensive history in public service, most with the county of Santa Clara, and his knowledge of the organization and issues were major factors in the Board's decision to appoint him as the county's Chief Executive Officer. Kutras had occupied the number two spot of assistant county executive since July 1999. Prior to that appointment, Kutras held various positions with the county beginning in 1974, including the Directorships of Labor Relations, Personnel and Labor Relations, Employee Services Agency and Deputy County Executive. Among the challenges that Kutras encountered during his 5 years at the helm, and the 2 years that preceded his appointment, has been continuously shrinking resources. Over that time period, each year the county confronted substantial budget deficits that resulted in $1.2 billion in budget solutions to retain services that are vital to vulnerable members of the community. Despite the financial challenges, the county's financial management acumen continues to earn top bond ratings. Kutras enjoys the support and respect of peers and colleagues. Throughout his career, Pete has built coalitions and convinced disparate groups to work together for common solutions. He focused on public safety and introduced reforms in the Probation Department after voter approval of Measure A in 2004, which placed probation under the management of the county executive and oversight of the board of supervisors. During the past few years, Kutras has focused the county organization on disaster preparedness and called for training, drills and readiness to respond to earthquakes and fires, and cold and hot weather emergencies to prevent needless deaths. In light of the recent fires experienced by the area, the results of Kutras' leadership are apparent. The organization has also demonstrated leadership and preparedness for public health threats such as pandemics. Kutras previously served as an elected member of the Campbell Union High School District Board of Trustees and has also served as an appointed commissioner on the Moreland School District Personnel Commission. He is a past president of the California Public Employers Labor Relations Association and also served on the board of directors for the organization. Kutras also has been a member of the Personnel Commission for the city of Morgan Hill. A Morgan Hill resident, Kutras holds a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Political Science, with a concentration in Public Administration, from San Jose State University. He served in the U.S. Army from 1967-71 with overseas duty in Vietnam and Ethiopia. He was awarded the Bronze Star Medal and the Army Commendation Medal, both for meritorious achievement. As a veteran, Pete understands the debt our Nation owes to the men and women who have served in our armed services. He has always made sure that employees of the county who serve in the military receive all the assistance possible from the county as their employer. He also cares very much for the needs of veterans in Santa Clara County and is always eager to take steps to meet the needs of veterans. On behalf of the thousands of Santa Clara County residents who have directly and indirectly benefitted from Mr. Kutras' leadership I thank him and wish him the best upon his retirement. On a personal note, I served as a member of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors for 14 years and know, firsthand, that Pete Kutras is a public servant with special talent and extraordinary ability. He has left county government a better place and his efforts have improved the lives of those in need who reside in the County of Santa Clara, I wish him well in his retirement and county government will miss his guidance and intelligence greatly.