Zoe Lofgren

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. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the bill we are considering today combines two bills the House passed last November to strengthen the Justice Department's ability to prosecute child pornography. The first fixes a glaring loophole in the Federal statute prohibiting possession of child pornography, which a Federal appeals court last year said requires as an essential element of the offense proof that the images, here kept on a computer desk, had actually crossed State lines. Our colleague, Nancy Boyda of Kansas, introduced H.R. 4120 to clarify that this statute covers conduct ``in or affecting interstate commerce,'' not just ``in commerce.'' This small change will have great legal significance, allowing that statute to reach the full extent of Congress' commerce clause powers. Trafficking in child pornography is national and international in scope, and even conduct that may appear wholly intrastate necessarily affects interstate commerce. This will ensure that our laws reach to their maximum extent, and it is important, because child pornography is one of the worst things that exists in our culture. The Senate also inserted another House-passed bill, H.R. 4136, introduced by Chris Carney of Pennsylvania. It adds child pornography proceeds to the money laundering statutes and fixes another loophole that allowed Internet users to get around the laws against possessing child pornography simply by not downloading or saving the images. Mr. Speaker, these two combined measures will be a tremendous help in the effort to put a stop to this disgusting, abominable exploitation of children and to bring to justice those who traffic in it. I want to commend Congresswoman Nancy Boyda and Congressman Christopher Carney for their sustained commitment to pursuing this effort so that we can see it enacted into law now. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

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.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Madam Speaker, today I rise with Congressman Mike Honda to honor Santa Clara County Supervisor Blanca Alvarado on her 28 years of elected service and wish her the best upon her retirement. Supervisor Alvarado was elected to the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors in March 1996 to complete my unexpired term upon my election to Congress. My colleague, Mike Honda had the pleasure of serving with Supervisor Alvarado during his term in office. As the County Supervisor for the Second District, Blanca represented over 350,000 residents living in San Jose. Her district has one of the Nation's highest concentrations of racial diversity and poverty where the lack of opportunity is prevalent for many individuals and families. During her time in office, Ms. Alvarado served on several committees as an engaged member of the board. As chair of the Children and Families' Committee, her efforts led to programs that focused on the comprehensive care of children and their families and reduced teen pregnancy. As chair of the Public Safety and Justice Committee, Supervisor Alvarado tackled issues of youth incarceration and provided productive alternatives to troubled youth other than incarceration. Her work established neighborhood programs to support anti-gang initiatives and she tirelessly pursued reforms that emphasized prevention and hope for the young residents of San Jose's poorest neighborhoods. Additionally, Blanca served as an advocate for programs for incarcerated women and gave crucial support for programs and services for female inmates in county jail. Her work was so significant that the County Domestic Violence Council Conference presented her with its 2007 Lifetime Achievement Award. Always mindful of her cultural roots and the importance of ethnicity and race in America, Alvarado was the principal visionary behind the Mexican Heritage Plaza. Blanca Alvarado has appointed more Latinas to commissions and committees than anyone else throughout her 28 years of service. This year, Ms. Alvarado launched the Latina Leadership Project in an effort to ensure that Latina leaders continue to have opportunities in Santa Clara County to serve their communities and inspire each other in their dreams of civic service. It has been an honor for us to know Blanca Alvarado and on behalf of the many residents of the county of Santa Clara who have benefited from her leadership; we thank her and wish her the best upon her well- deserved retirement.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of H.R. 6625 and commend Chairman Brady for introducing this important piece of legislation, the Veterans Voting Support Act of which I am an original cosponsor. This legislation is significant to me because the issue of registering veterans to vote was born out of concern by one of my constituents, Steve Preminger. Steve went to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) nursing home in Menlo Park, CA to register veterans. Almost immediately, VA officials threw him out. The VA has since explained that its decision to evict Preminger was part of a policy that bars outside groups from registering voters who live in VA nursing homes, hospitals, and transitional housing for homeless veterans. For the past four years Mr. Preminger has litigated to ensure that all veterans living on VA property have access to voter registration I applaud the VA for its recent change in policy allowing state and local election officials and non-partisan groups to access VA facilities to assist officials in registering veteran voters who are receiving care. But issuing a new policy is not enough and I question the agencies commitment to it. Last Friday, September 12, 2008, the San Francisco VA prohibited Veterans for Peace (``VFP''), a 501(c)(3), from registering voters, even though the ``directive'' instructs local officials to ``facilitate'' nonpartisan groups who wish to register voters. As Paul Sullivan of Veterans for Common Sense stated in his testimony yesterday before the Senate Committee on Rules, ``The VA has changed their policy on veteran voting rights three times in the past five months. VA can easily reverse course again and issue yet another policy banning voting assistance for veterans living in VA facilities.'' I support this legislation, but am concerned that the protection for ``nonpartisan'' activities may create the inference that a government agency can regulate private ``partisan'' conversations just because they are on federal property, even though there is no apparent government sponsorship. Over 5.3 million veterans (23.2 percent of all veterans) were not registered to vote in 2006. Veterans have dedicated their lives to protecting our country and deserve every commitment from the government to offer them the opportunity to participate in the political process. With November rapidly approaching it is imperative that we act both swiftly and vigilantly in passing H.R. 6625.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. As the gentleman knows, I have substantial disagreements with Justice Scalia and his interpretation of the Constitution.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Will the gentleman yield?

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. You thought that might be the case. But the point I was making on colloquies and committee reports is this: Justice Scalia says--and I think properly--that the role of the judiciary is to interpret the Constitution and the law, not to make it up themselves. And so to the extent that there is unintended ambiguity in a law that is written by the Congress where the committee report or colloquy can give the court some insight into what the intentions were on the part of the legislative body, then that is a helpful thing. And understanding how that develops would be enormously useful. There are times, as the gentleman knows, where ambiguity is the oil that makes the legislative process work. I remember Wilbur Mills suggesting there could not be an agreement on what Medicare would cover, that it would cover a ``spell or illness.'' And maybe that was necessary in 1965, but it was not the kind of ambiguity that could have been resolved through a colloquy. And I thank the gentleman.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I have said really all I have to say on the Daniel Webster Congressional Clerkship Program of 2008. As mentioned, this will be a tremendous improvement to the development of American law, and I have given the support that has been expressed for the measure here today on the floor. I am hopeful that we will have a unanimous vote for this important measure. I thank the chairman of the committee, Mr. Brady, for his tremendous support on this and in every way, as well as the ranking member, Mr. Lungren. And I don't know if Mr. Brady has anything further to add. If not, I would simply say please vote ``yes'' on H.R. 6475. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. I would just note that there's always room for good lawyers, and I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would like to thank not only Congressman Daniel E. Lungren for cosponsoring this bill with me, but also note the important support of Dean Larry Kramer, the dean of the Stanford Law School, whose original idea this was, and we two California Members took it up. I think that our country will be enriched by the enactment of this measure. It has been mentioned, and we all know, the top law graduates of the top law schools in the country are recruited to serve as clerks in the judicial branch, and as a consequence of that experience, those top legal minds then go on to fabulous careers, understanding the law from the point of view of the judiciary. Well, there's nothing wrong with that, but we also want to have top legal minds that relish and appreciate the law from the point of view of the legislative branch, and that is really the grit and the intent of this measure. As has been mentioned I'm sure, the program created by the bill will have clerks chosen from a pool of exceptional law school graduates who have demonstrated commitment to public service. No fewer than six clerks will be chosen for each Chamber. The clerks will be divided equally among the parties, and they will receive the same pay and equivalent benefits as first-year law clerks in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. As the dean of Stanford Law School, Larry Kramer, said, ``This bill will serve an important role by educating young lawyers and future leaders of the profession about the legislative process. It will be enormously beneficial for both the profession and the public if some of the Nation's brightest young lawyers begin their careers in the legislature and so develop and can convey to the public an appreciation of Congress and the legislative process equal to that lawyers have shown for courts and the judicial process.'' I would like to mention that we were not able to include the Congressional Research Service in the legislation at this time. However, if there is a bipartisan effort to achieve that in the future, I would welcome that collaboration and understand we may yet have the opportunity to do that. So in furtherance of this bill, I would hope that our colleagues would support it. I would again like to thank my colleague, the former Attorney General from California, Dan Lungren, for his cosponsorship. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Would the gentleman yield?

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I agree with the comments made by my colleague from California (Mr. Daniel E. Lungren). And indeed, this is not a measure that does harm or damage to the judiciary or to the executive branch, but it really is to elevate article I. Sometimes we see our colleagues with little buttons that say ``article I'' on them, and we want to make sure that the important role of the legislative branch is understood by these top legal graduates who will go on to careers in the judiciary, in public service, in law schools and the like. I want to make clear not only that this has bipartisan support, but that it will be administered in a totally bipartisan way. The name, ``The Daniel Webster Congressional Clerkship Program,'' really selects somebody who was an honored ancestor of the legislative process, not a contemporary, but someone we can look back on with esteem. The Clerks will be selected by a selection committee that will consist of the committee of Rules and Administration of the Senate, and the Committee on House Administration of the House. And as was mentioned by my colleague and myself, six clerks will be evenly divided between the two parties. Just by way of example, and without mentioning names, sometimes the courts do not necessarily understand how we do business here. And I'll give three examples recently mentioned to me by judicial officers. Colloquies on the floor of the House. We know when we stand up to do a colloquy it is to set something in the Record for a purpose. It is by agreement, but it has a meaning that is meant to stand as the legislation moves forward. Courts don't always understand the meaning of a colloquy. And I think if we had some of these excellent law students here who helped to write a colloquy and were on the floor as it was being delivered, they would understand and be able to impart to the judicial branch the importance of a colloquy. Example number two, committee reports. There are things that committees agree on completely but are not actually part of a bill. And they don't need to be part of a bill because they can be implied by the legislation. A committee report doesn't have the force of law, but it should be enormously persuasive to a court looking for the meaning of legislation if the parties--sometimes fractious parties--can agree to language in a committee report, that means something. And I think if we had some of these excellent law students here helping in the committee process to understand how that comes about and the import that it has, it will help them to tell a judge--or if they are a judge later--what that means and how to interpret the law. And legislative findings, the role of legislative findings; you know, obviously they're precursors to the language itself. These are just three small examples of how the Congress and its will is not always upheld by the courts, not through any chicanery, not through any deviousness, but just a lack of full appreciation for how the legislative process works. And so I think this bipartisan measure is a step forward in seeing that that trend in American law interpretation does change, both in the courts, and also in the teaching of law in the Nation's top law schools. So while this may seem not an earth-shattering measure in some ways, it will have import long after the Members here are retired and reading about the Congress in the paper. What we do here with this clerkship bill will improve the law in America. And therefore, I hope, as Mr. Lungren does, that we will have a unanimous vote. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I was expecting one person here to be a speaker, that person has not shown up. So maybe I will just make a few additional comments in the hopes that their elevator can get to the second floor. And that would be that, in addition to the Dean of the Stanford law school we were advised that the progress of this bill is being watched by law professors and deans throughout the United States who have really resolved that this is going to be a very positive thing for the development of American law. I would just note also, as Mr. Lungren has pointed out, we do these things sometimes very quickly. I think the addition of six top law students in each body--as the ranking member of the full committee has suggested, as time goes on maybe we will find that it works so well it should be expanded--I certainly do think, however, it is appropriate to start at this level, do an assessment. And I think our committee, the Administration Committee, will be in an ideal position to do an assessment. But no doubt, if we have some of the smartest young lawyers in the United States here in this institution, they will not only bring the knowledge of this institution out to the world after they become top lawyers, but they will also help us become even more excellent legislators. So I think that this is a benefit that really there is no down side to it. So it has really been a pleasure to work with the bipartisan cosponsors of this bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that my name be removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 5843.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

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 to include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, at this point I would like to yield 5 minutes to the author of the bill, a freshman leader in this area of the bill with Mr. Johnson, Congresswoman Giffords from Arizona.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 6633) to evaluate and extend the basic pilot program for employment eligibility confirmation and to ensure the protection of Social Security beneficiaries.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, at this point I would like to recognize Congressman Moore from the heartland of the country, Kansas, for 2 minutes.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. I reserve my time.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, there are lies, darn lies and statistics. Isn't that the joke? There have been a lot of figures thrown out here today. I think it is important to note that, according to the GAO, of the 7 million employers that are in the United States, less than 1 percent actually use E-Verify. And the GAO also tells us, based on their analysis, that the SSA records contain errors about 4.1 percent of the time; 4.1 percent over 163 million workers is a lot of folks. So we have our work cut out for us. I will note that there are 11 different bills that have been introduced by Members of this House with different ways and ideas on how to improve the employment verification system. We need to do an improvement of this system. I hope that that will be a bipartisan effort. But we are not going to get that done between now and November. And so it is important that we extend the existing program so that at least we have this in place. I would note that Mr. Camarota and the Center for Immigration Studies is not the USCIS. That is sort of a think tank that wants to restrict immigration. It is an advocacy group. But the real point is that you can track immigration, both legal and unauthorized, into the United States based on the exchange rate between the peso and the dollar. And as our economy weakens, you see less individuals either coming or staying. That doesn't mean that we don't need to get this system improved and that we don't need to have a comprehensive reform of our immigration laws and system, because what we have now is not working as well as it should be in the interests of our wonderful America. I am happy to support this extension at this time. I have appreciated working with the ranking member of the full committee, Mr. Smith, in getting this bipartisan consensus. I hope that we can get this through the Senate promptly. And as I said in my opening statement, I have every expectation that the necessary improvements to the E-Verify system or the employment verification system will not take 5 years. Hopefully, that will be done well before the 5 years has expired, and that we will be pleased with the necessary improvement that we will craft together.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the accomplishments of Ms. Lee Sturtevant and wish her the very best upon her 85th birthday. Over her years of service to the County of Santa Clara, Ms. Sturtevant has continually worked within the democratic process to help raise the standard of living for those who have the least. Ms. Sturtevant has sought to get women involved in politics and to run for office. She successfully managed the 1974 campaign of Assemblywoman Leona Egeland, who was at that time the only woman serving in the Assembly. She continues to be a highly influential and informed leader within the Santa Clara County Democratic Central Committee and of DAWN, Democratic Activists for Women Now. As a high school student, she was introduced to politics and its ability to benefit society by her mother, who took her to Los Angeles County Democratic Central Committee meetings. And, as a young girl, Sturtevant once dined over lunch with Eleanor Roosevelt. Although many vibrant and youthful people of her age are enjoying retirement and relaxation, Ms. Sturtevant continues to employ her skills and dedication as a policy advisor for the office of Santa Clara County Supervisor Ken Yeager. In 1981, Lee served as my Chief of Staff when I was first elected to the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors. She has also worked on the staffs of other prominent Santa Clara County area elected officials. Her career also includes working as a teacher and librarian for the Cupertino School District in addition to serving on the San Jose Unified School District Board of Education. I would like to thank Lee Sturtevant for her service to my office and to the community of the County of Santa Clara. Best wishes upon your 85th birthday and may you celebrate many more in the years to come.