Zoe Lofgren

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3079 would apply the Nation's immigration laws to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI). For too long, the CNMI has managed its own immigration system outside of the constraints and protections of Federal law. The result has been a massive influx of exploited workers and victims of human trafficking, with concomitant increases in sex slavery and other abusive labor practices. Recent investigations and prosecutions have uncovered terrible stories of enslavement and forced labor. Thousands of young women and girls lured to the CNMI with promises of good jobs with good pay only to be enslaved and forced into prostitution. Others forced to toil in harsh conditions and for little money in garment sweatshops, made profitable by their ability to exploit cheap labor yet still use the ``Made in the USA'' label. And to understand the depth of the problem, one only has to look at the statistics. For years, foreign workers have actually outnumbered the indigenous population. It is like the United States bringing in over 300 million foreign workers to the mainland, without giving them any rights or protections. We have known about these problems since the 1990s, but we have done nothing about them. It is time to change that. H.R. 3079 would extend the protections of the country's immigration laws to the CNMI, using a balanced approach that takes into account the CNMI's vulnerable economy as well as past abuses. It would reign in the islands' lax immigration policies while appropriately considering the labor needs of legitimate businesses. It would also provide for a regional visa waiver program along with Guam, which would provide both increased security and the tourists needed to help sustain the economies of both territories. This bill is strongly needed to break from the abuses of the past. It is backed by the Administration, and it has bipartisan support in the House and Senate. I want to thank Chairman Rahall of the Natural Resources Committee and Chairwoman Christensen of the Subcommittee on Insular Affairs for caring deeply about this issue and shepherding this bill through Congress. I also want to thank Chairman Conyers for his leadership, as well as Mr. Lamar Smith, the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, for working with us in a bipartisan fashion to improve the bill. I urge its passage.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of my former law school classmate Munir Malik, who has been detained by the Pakistani government for his support for the rule of law. I have contacted the State Department and the Embassy of Pakistan urging his immediate release and an end to martial law in Pakistan. His brother, Saeed Malik, lives in San Jose, my home town. With unanimous consent, I'd like to submit into the record his Thursday op- ed in the San Jose Mercury News about his brother, Munir Malik, and the crisis in Pakistan.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Madam Speaker, I would like to enter into the Record this article by Saeed Malik entitled, ``U.S. Can't Support Both Musharraf and Ideal of Liberty.'' Today, Pakistan is gripped by an existential crisis. This crisis comes just when Pakistanis were beginning to feel optimistic. An independent judiciary was taking root and the fourth estate of the press was in ascendancy. Accountability, long overdue, had finally arrived, or so the people of Pakistan thought. The optimism was cut short this month when the U.S. ally- in-chief, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, fearing invalidation of his recent election by the Supreme Court, dissolved the court, closed the media and jailed dissidents by the thousands. The measured and somewhat muted reaction of the Bush administration to this barbarity is not only morally bankrupt, it is downright dangerous. The fundamentalists on one side of this war on terror cannot defeat the fundamentalists on the other. Fundamentalism in any society will only be defeated and sidelined by moderates from within. By supporting Musharraf, albeit tacitly, the United States is sidelining the very moderates who must win this war. Musharraf's occasional delivery of a wanted terrorist cannot justify suppression of the fundamental freedoms of Pakistani civil society. A society thrives when its constituents take a stake in its well-being and its decision-making process. It has been said that terrorists hate us because of our liberty and one must be either on the side of terrorists or the side of liberty. If today we do not support the Pakistanis who seek liberty, what will they think of us? Will our government deliver on this slogan when liberty is at stake in a Muslim country? Our goals are advanced by demanding restoration of the Supreme Court. We must also demand the immediate release of all judicial activists jailed after the so-called emergency. Pakistanis must realize that America stands for the rule of law and the liberty of all people. A golden opportunity to win the hearts and minds of the Pakistani masses beckons us. Sticking to support for an increasingly unpopular dictator in Pakistan will only solidify President Bush's 9 percent favorable opinion rating in Pakistan. Although it has been generations since the CIA deposed Iranian Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadeq and installed the Shah, and decades since our government tried to forestall the Iranian revolution, Iranians have not forgotten these travesties. International relations must be based, first, on democratic principles. Propping up Musharraf negates these principles, fueling antagonism among Pakistanis. I have a personal stake in this sad saga. My 57-year-old brother, Muneer Malik, a Santa Clara University law school graduate, has been ``detained'' under ``preventive measures'' in Pakistan's version of Guantanamo Bay. He is reportedly critically sick and without outside contact. Muneer's crime is that as president of the Supreme Court Bar Association, he was in the forefront of the movement to assert the independence of the Pakistani judiciary. Thousands of heroic lawyers have met a similar fate. Rejecting the recent purge of the Supreme Court, 13 of the 17 judges refused to take extraconstitutional oaths under a draconian ``Provisional Order.'' Predictably, they were summarily dismissed and locked up. The few opportunists who obliged now preside over empty courts boycotted by an overwhelming majority of lawyers. If this takes hold, the judicial purge would amount to retaining the weeds while killing the flowers. Pakistani citizens view the emergency proclamation as Musharraf's desperate attempt to hold on. Democratic stability requires an orderly, defined and predictable means of transferring power. Musharraf, like others in the dust-bin of Third World history, is trying to break this mandate, subjugating national interest to personal power. Does the self-professed ``enlightened-moderate'' appreciate the difference between Robert Mugabe and Nelson Mandela? Why, then, does he walk in Mugabe's footsteps? Muneer, who is supported by Santa Clara's and Yale's law schools, along with the American Bar Association, said while free, ``No army can stop the march of an idea whose time has come.'' I urge our government to be on the side of an advancing idea and on the right side of history. This is also the moral side and the right tactic in the war on terror.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I would note that the motion to recommit itself leads to a nonsense sentence, adding ``United States, a State sponsor of terrorism,'' to section 18. It's inexplicable nonsense. It also guts the bill. On August 2, I rushed to the floor to say that we were passing a bill that was a terrible offense to the Constitution. It gutted the fourth amendment. This bill does not. Mr. Speaker, I urge its passage.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, Thirty years ago, I was in law school studying, among other things, the Constitution and deepening my passion for freedom under law. With me at Santa Clara Law School was Munir Malik. That small Jesuit institution instilled in me a sense of duty to stand for principle that led me to this House. That same sense of duty led Malik to leave behind a lucrative career as a CPA and lawyer to return to Pakistan. Last year, he was named president of Pakistan's Supreme Court Bar Association. This May, he was the target of an assassination attempt. And, this month, he was arrested by our ally. Our ally? President Musharraf. His crime? Standing up for the rule of law. Musharraf is liberating al Qaeda members in the western territories while arresting judges and lawyers who believe in law. Pakistan is using our money to do it. It's time for Pakistan to tell us where Malik and the other lawyers are. Time for Pakistan to set them free. Time for Pakistan to stop being a dictatorship. I include for the Record a letter from the faculty at Santa Clara Law School asking for a return to the rule of law and the release of their former student. Statement by Members of the Faculty of Santa Clara University School of Law on General Musharraf's Abrogation of Rule of Law We are deeply concerned about the abrogation of the Rule of Law in Pakistan. General Musharraf, in a brazen attempt to perpetuate his own rule, has used his state apparatus to disband the highest courts of the country. Thousands of lawyers, journalists, judges, human rights activists have been jailed. in many cases families have no idea of the whereabouts of the detainees. Our own concern is particularly sparked by the arrest and detention of one of our graduates, Muneer Malik, the Immediate Past President of the Pakistani Supreme Court Bar Association. His fate is, of course, merely a small part of the overall tragedy taking place but as we know him to be a conscientious, industrious lawyer dedicated to the welfare of his country, and not in the least a threat to law and order; he symbolizes the injustice being practiced. We, in fact, are not an organized political group. We have never before joined in a statement of this sort with each other. What brings us together in this plea is the fact that we are all professors of law who teach in the law school which graduated Mr. Malik and who share a respect for the rule of law. We deplore what has happened. We assume that many more people like him have been swept from public view. The Supreme and High Court judges have been locked in their own homes. Police have stormed into bar-association gatherings and have manhandled lawyers, some of them women, some of them septuagenarian! TV stations have been blacked out and police vans are carting off telecommunication equipment from private TV stations. The U.S. must use all its influence and in no uncertain terms demand the restoration of the Supreme Court status quo ante Nov 2nd 2007. It must demand the immediate release of and accounting for all persons who have been jailed after the promulgation of the so-called emergency. It should be recalled that President Musharraf removed the Chief Justice once before, a short while ago, and that he was forced to rescind his order because of the pressure of world opinion. The embattled civil society in Pakistan must realize that America stands for the rule of Law and the liberty of all peoples. Signed by: George Alexander, Dean and Professor of Law Emeritus. Patricia Cain, Inez Mabie Professor of Law. Colleen Chien, Assistant Professor of Law. Rev. Paul Goda, S.J., Professor of Law. Allen Hammond, Phil and Bobbie San Filippo Professor of Law. Ellen Kreitzberg Professor of Law. Philip Jimenez Professor of Law. Jean Love Elizabeth H. and John A. Sutro Professor of Law. Gary Neustadter Professor of Law. Michelle Oberman Professor of Law. Robert Peterson Professor of Law. Mack Player Professor of Law and Director, Center for Global Law and Policy. Margaret Russell Professor of Law. Catherine Sandoval Assistant Professor of Law. Jiri Toman Professor of Law. Gerald Uelman Professor of Law and Director, California Commission for the Fair Administration of Justice. Stephanie Wildman Professor of Law and Director, Center for Social Justice and Public Service. Nancy Wright Professor of Law. Eric Wright Professor of Law. David Yosifon Assistant Professor of Law.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I join in the recognition of San Jose State on its 150th anniversary. I am proud that San Jose State is located in the 16th Congressional District which I represent in San Jose, California, as has been mentioned. It is the Silicon Valley university. More than 300,000 graduates of San Jose State have gone into Silicon Valley, and it is the largest source of engineering talent, of computer science and business graduates, for Silicon Valley. San Jose State is ranked eighth among the top ten colleges and universities offering bachelor's and master's degrees in the western region, with its 134 programs. It is also known for its innovative partnerships, including a first-ever, I think in the country, partnership with the City of San Jose to have a joint university-city public library, a joint venture with the National Hispanic University for joint degrees, and most recently a joint venture with a historically black college in Mississippi for joint issuance of Ph.D.'s in engineering. I am proud to represent San Jose State. We had to decide who would introduce this resolution. And although the university is in the 16th District, the author, my friend, Congressman Mike Honda, is an alumni of the university, so we deferred to him to take the lead on this introduction. I want to thank him for doing so. This is an important event for those of us in Silicon Valley, and especially the 16th District.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize the author of this bill, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings), for 5 minutes.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I would just close by noting that the mishandling of this application is just infuriating to read through what happened and to have lost this young man who volunteered for our service in such a way is so distressful. But I think we can take a stand by supporting this bill named in Kendell Frederick's honor to make sure this does not happen to another serviceman or servicewoman and also that his family can know that in addition to serving in Iraq, he served as a model for a change in the law and that they may take some comfort with that. So I urge passage of the bill. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

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. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. H.R. 2884, the Kendell Frederick Citizenship Assistance Act, pays tribute to the memory of 21-year-old Army Reserve Specialist Kendell K. Frederick, who was killed in Iraq while attempting to become an American citizen. Specialist Frederick was born in Trinidad and immigrated to the United States when he was 15 to join his mother, stepfather, and two sisters. He attended Randallstown Senior High in Baltimore County, Maryland, where he joined the school's ROTC program. Specialist Frederick enlisted in the Army Reserve in his senior year and was deployed to Iraq in December of 2004. As he was serving our country, Specialist Frederick sought to apply for U.S. citizenship; yet one bureaucratic hurdle after another delayed his application. First, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service failed to route his application to the unit that processed naturalization applications for members of the military. That agency then rejected his application for failure to pay an application filing fee, despite the fact that active military personnel applying for U.S. citizenship do not need to pay a filing fee. Thereafter, this agency directed Specialist Frederick to get his fingerprints taken in Maryland, despite the obvious fact that he was deployed in Iraq at the time. Also, he had recently had his fingerprints taken and undergone a background check when he enlisted in the Army Reserve. When his mother called the agency's ``help line,'' she was told that there was nothing that could be done. After trying for more than a year to become a U.S. citizen and having his application rejected and delayed as a result of various bureaucratic failings, Specialist Frederick was forced to travel on a convoy to a base where he could get his fingerprints taken for his naturalization application. Tragically, he was killed en route by a roadside bomb. Specialist Frederick was posthumously granted U.S. citizenship a week after his death. H.R. 2884 would remove unnecessary procedural hurdles like the one Specialist Frederick faced for naturalization applicants who are serving or who have recently served in the military. It would require the Department of Homeland Security to use the fingerprints provided by military naturalization applicants at the time of their enlistment in the Armed Forces if the applicants were fingerprinted in accordance with DOD requirements, if the naturalization applications are filed within 24 months of enlistment, and if the fingerprints are deemed sufficient by the Department of Homeland Security for naturalization purposes. The bill would require DHS to inform a member of the armed services applying for naturalization when submitting new fingerprints would result in a more timely and effective adjudication of the naturalization application along with the description of how to submit the new fingerprints. It would also ensure that the DOD complies with the requirements of this bill so that fingerprints they hold are sent to DHS. It would clarify the time frame in which DHS is required to publicize changes in regulations and forms regarding the naturalization of members of the Armed Forces. And, finally, it would promote accountability by requiring the GAO to report on the naturalization process for Armed Forces members. Approximately 35,000 lawful permanent residents are currently serving in our Armed Forces. More than 13,000 noncitizen members of the military have applied for U.S. citizenship since 2002. This is an excellent bill that will help ensure that from now on, American soldiers do not face the kinds of unnecessary and unreasonable hurdles to American citizenship that cost Specialist Frederick his life. I urge my colleagues to support the bill and would note that this was passed unanimously out of the House Judiciary Committee. I urge my colleagues, again, to support the bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2884) to assist members of the Armed Forces in obtaining United States citizenship, and for other purposes, as amended.

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 include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 4 minutes to the author of the bill, my colleague from California, Congresswoman Davis.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1119) to amend title 36, United States Code, to revise the congressional charter of the Military Order of the Purple Heart of the United States of America, Incorporated, to authorize associate membership in the corporation for the spouse of a recipient of the Purple Heart medal, as amended.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. H.R. 1119, the Purple Heart Family Equity Act of 2007, provides an excellent opportunity for us to recognize and honor the brave women as well as brave men who served our Nation in the armed services. As many of you know, the Purple Heart is awarded to Armed Forces members who are wounded by an instrument of war in the hands of the enemy, and posthumously to the next of kin for those who are killed in action or who die of wounds received in action. It is specifically a combat decoration first conceived in 1782 by General George Washington. Seventy-five years ago, an organization now known as the Military Order of the Purple Heart was formed for the purposes of protecting the mutual interests of all those who have received the decoration. Composed exclusively of Purple Heart recipients, it is the only veterans service organization comprised strictly of combat veterans. When the order was federally chartered in 1958, however, very few women had received the Purple Heart. And to this day, women recipients of the Purple Heart do not have the same benefits as their male counterparts. Under the current law, male members can invite their wives to join the Ladies Auxiliary of the Purple Heart, but there is no place in the order for husbands of Purple Heart recipients. The order has identified at least 97 female purple heart recipients who have joined and who are not enjoying the full benefits of membership that they deserve. H.R. 1119 seeks to fully honor the women of the Armed Forces who have been awarded the Purple Heart defending our Nation. Specifically, the bill amends the order's Federal charter to allow members to invite their spouses to join as associate members, both for male and female recipients of the Purple Heart. With this minor revision to the Federal charter, the husbands of female members could join the organization. This bill also allows members to invite their siblings to join as associate members so that they too can take part in the full honor of their brothers and sisters who fought so bravely for our country and received a Purple Heart. It is only right that we allow the members to include their siblings in this honor. This bipartisan legislation is endorsed by the Military Order of the Purple Heart. It recognizes the important role women have played in defending our Nation in times of war. We owe this long overdue recognition to these women and their families. I urge my colleagues to support this bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I urge support for this bipartisan bill. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Madam Speaker, our immigration law has long recognized that children born outside our country to an American father and a foreign national mother are U.S. citizens. Unfortunately, there remains a group of forgotten sons and daughters who, despite being born to American fathers, have been unfairly denied U.S. citizenship. These are the offspring of American servicemen and Asian women during the Vietnam and Korean Wars whose fathers did not personally take the steps of acknowledging paternity necessary to make their offspring citizens. But, the American government did that for them by acknowledging that their fathers were American citizens. Many of these individuals have lived through devastation during war, have been mistreated by their governments because of their mixed race, and many now live in the United States, but only as legal permanent residents. There is no doubt that Amerasians are the sons and daughters of American fathers. Our American government already made that determination when we admitted them to the United States as legal permanent residents. To correct this unfair inequality in our law, I am introducing the Amerasian Paternity Recognition Act, along with bipartisan cosponsors, to ensure that Amerasians are accorded U.S. citizenship just like the offspring of other American fathers are. It is time for us to finally close a chapter in our history that has too long denied Amerasians the opportunity to become citizens and be recognized as the Americans that they are.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, as Chair of the California Democratic delegation, I rise along with Speaker Pelosi, Chairman Waxman, and my Republican colleagues to honor the heroic services, actions, and sacrifices of our first responders, State and local officials, volunteers, and others who participated in responding to last week's devastating outbreak of wildfires in Southern California. This was the worst outbreak of wildfires in California history. Over 500,000 acres burned, nearly 1 million residents evacuated, over 3,000 residential and commercial properties destroyed or damaged, 116 reported injuries, seven reported fatalities. I have no doubt that the quick and valiant response of our firefighters, police officers, National Guard, and thousands of selfless volunteers saved lives and hundreds of millions of dollars. The State of California owes these brave men and women our gratitude. California and our Nation also owes a debt of gratitude to our neighbors, Canada and Mexico, for volunteering their own firefighters and equipment. I would also like to commend the cities, counties, and State for showing great leadership and preparedness in dealing with this disaster. Leadership at the local and State government levels allowed for effective coordination with Federal agencies in the allocation of resources and making sure our residents were out of harm's way. Because of the change in weather pattern, coupled with the extraordinary efforts of firefighters, we are now beginning to contain most of these fires and are closing the evacuation shelters. However, many families are going back to literally ruins of their former homes, lives, and communities. I ask that all of my colleagues continue to stand with our California neighbors as they begin to rebuild their lives. The fires may be dying down, but the emotional impact and financial hardship faced by these families are only beginning. With the leadership of Speaker Pelosi, Senators Feinstein and Boxer, and Chairman Dicks, we hope to quickly move an emergency appropriations bill to help the rebuilding process for the families, cities, and counties affected by this devastating wildfire. This resolution today, cosponsored by every single member of our 53- member-strong bipartisan delegation is, I believe, the first legislative step forward for Congress to meet the needs of California as she recovers from this disaster.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3678. In a welcome and refreshing instance of bipartisan, bicameral cooperation, the Senate took our bill and improved it. The longer moratorium means that service providers will have more certainty when deciding whether to make critical investments in basic infrastructure of the Internet. The 7-year extension is longer than any that has ever been approved by any previous Congress. Consideration of this bill today shows that the Democrats in the 110th Congress truly understand the importance of the Internet to our economy. Equally important, the bill as amended makes absolutely clear that Internet access embraces ancillary services such as e-mail, instant messaging and personal storage capacity. This change removes ambiguity with respect to these services, and thereby encourages robust competition among Internet service providers. And importantly, today is October 30. By passing the extension of the Internet tax moratorium with ample time for the President to sign the bill into law, we avoid the almost certain disruption that would attend any further delay. Failure to act would be a mistake and a step away from the pledges we made in the Innovation Agenda. I continue to believe that a permanent ban on the taxation of Internet access is important to maintaining and improving our place in the information economy. I remain a proud cosponsor of my friend Anna Eshoo's bill that would have made the moratorium permanent. I will continue to work with her and Mr. Goodlatte to achieve that goal, but I heartily accept H.R. 3678 as a fair compromise between our position and the views of those who are reluctant to entirely abandon the possibility of one day taxing the Internet. Ultimately, we will reach the legislative conclusion that taxing the Internet is simply a bad idea. Fortunately, this bill buys us enough time to get there and is an important, big step in the right direction. Aside from supporting expansion of the broadband and innovation, it's also good news for American families that they will not face a new tax burden when they utilize the Internet come November 1. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important and very timely legislation. I thank the chairwoman of the subcommittee.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3678. Mr. Speaker, the Internet is one of the main drivers of the United States economy. But we are quickly losing our edge over our global competitors on the Internet. Over the past year, the United States slipped from 12th to 17th in broadband adoption, and average broadband speed in the United States is only 1.9 megabits per second. Now, compare that to 61 megabits per second in Japan. France and Canada also enjoy broadband speeds well beyond ours. We made a commitment in the Innovation Agenda to reverse this trend and bring affordable broadband access to all Americans. H.R. 3678 furthers that commitment in three very important ways: first and foremost it prevents the moratorium from expiring on November 1. Expiration would be a disaster, leading to hastily imposed taxes that breed confusion and litigation. Even if we fix the problem later, the damage will already have been done. Second, the bill codifies an agreed-upon definition of Internet access that clarifies what services are and are not taxable. Finally, the bill removes ambiguity that some States have tried to exploit to tax the Internet backbone. Eliminating that ambiguity is absolutely essential. We must remove obstacles to investment in the basic infrastructure of the Internet. As my colleagues and constituents know, I strongly favor a permanent Internet tax moratorium. That is why I'm a cosponsor of my friend Anna Eshoo's bill that would have made the moratorium permanent. That's why I voted for the amendment offered by Mr. Goodlatte in committee to make the moratorium permanent. But we must take stock of a few basic facts. First, no permanent moratorium will make it through the Senate. Second, the Senate has yet to even vote a bill out of committee. And, third, it is October 16. The moratorium expires in 2 weeks. Given the state of affairs, I think it is crucial that we act now. We need to send a clear message to our colleagues in the Senate that the hour is late and the time for dithering is long since past. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Madam Speaker, I rise, not only for myself, but also on behalf of Congress Members Anna Eshoo and Mike Honda, to honor Ms. Jane Decker who is retiring after 35 years of dedicated and honorable service in county government. The County of Santa Clara encompasses what is popularly known as Silicon Valley. While the rest of the nation may speak of ``Googling'' or ``Podcasting'' as tech tools, those of us lucky enough to live there tend to regard the companies who invented those terms as neighbors, employers and members of the community. Known internationally as the high tech center of the universe, Santa Clara County's people are diverse. In addition to those who are highly successful, the County also encompasses individuals who face challenges from life. It is especially those persons upon whom County government focuses. Jane Decker, in her long service to the County, helped make sure that as the County's people celebrated success, they did not forget those who suffered, whether from poverty, health troubles or tragedies. Jane Decker, with her high degree of professionalism, ethics and knowledge helped craft the strategies that allowed the government of Santa Clara County to meet its challenges successfully. While Congressman Honda and I served on the County Board of Supervisors, we had the pleasure of working closely with Ms. Decker. We appreciated her outstanding service then. In the roles we three Members of Congress play, each of us can attest to the high degree of intelligence, caring and dedication Ms. Decker has exhibited in her professional life. Jane Decker joined the County of Santa Clara in 1979 as the Director of Intergovernmental Relations. Because of her demonstrable leadership qualities, she has been promoted several times until her most recent post as Deputy County Executive. In addition to her professional commitments, Jane Decker is a committed and valued volunteer for several prominent organizations in the County of Santa Clara. We collectively extend our thanks to Ms. Decker for her years of excellent service and wish her the best upon her retirement and this new phase in her life. She has served the people of Santa Clara County well.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Madam Speaker, I was necessarily absent from the House on July 19, 2007. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on vote No. 684.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Madam Speaker, I rise to honor the ``National Hispanic University on the occasion of its 25th anniversary. I have the pleasure of representing one of the most diverse cities in America and in California--San Jose. Along with the rich diversity of the people, culture and traditions in San Jose is a firm commitment to higher education. This commitment stems not only from our mantle of being the ``Capital of Silicon Valley,'' but also from a strong tradition of excellence in collegiate education, as demonstrated through our world renowned University of California and California State University systems. The National Hispanic University was established in 1981 to serve the needs of Hispanics, women, other minorities and other learners. Although programs through the UC and CSU systems attempted to address the burgeoning numbers of minorities who needed higher education, and many Latinos benefited from these initiatives in the 1970s and 1980s, the gap between Hispanics and others continued to widen. The National Hispanic University, NHU, was founded after extensive research about the success rate and high quality of education provided by historically black colleges and universities that graduated (and still do today) almost half of the African American professionals in American society. NHU believed that a small private independent college could make a difference in the graduation of Hispanic professionals in education, technology, and business. Dr. B. Roberto Cruz, the founding President of NHU and its academic visionary for 22 years, paved the pathway of success for NHU. Although he is no longer with us, his spirit and firm commitment is the driving force behind the establishment of the University and his spirit remains today in the halls and classrooms of NHU. NHU's current president, Dr. David P. Lopez, along with the Board of Trustees and Advisors, are continuing in Dr. Cruz's spirit to ensure that the University remains committed to its standards of excellence and the core values of its foundation that made it the fine institution of higher education it is today. It is my distinct pleasure to congratulate the National Hispanic University on its 25th anniversary and wish it many more years of continued success.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Madam Speaker, books and movies abound these days about the ``Greatest Generation,'' those men and women who fought and won World War II to save us from fascism. But it is not just the winning of World War II that leads us to admire and be grateful to members of our parents' generation. To know the individual is to understand the generational achievement of greatness. My father-in-law, Dr. John J. Collins, is a person whose life can so instruct us. Like so many of his generation, John J. Collins was not born to wealth or privilege. Born in Oklahoma in 1917, his family soon moved to California, where his father worked in the oil fields in Coalinga. He was the oldest boy in a big Irish-American family, with several older sisters. And when his father died at an early age, as a boy he was the ``oldest man'' in his household during the Great Depression. Like so many of his generation, he learned habits of frugality and hard work in those early years. These habits have served him and his family well. They are with him to this day. In the best American spirit, he struggled to go farther than his parents. He was educated at Coalinga Junior College and then worked his way through the University of California at Berkeley, where he received a Bachelor of Arts degree. Like so many others, he enlisted to fight in World War II, joining the U.S. Army before Pearl Harbor, in 1941. In the Army, he became an infantry and artillery officer. He served for years in the Pacific, including taking part in the fighting in Saipan and Okinawa. This was rough combat and many died. Like most of those who I've met who served under such conditions, he prefers not to discuss the details of combat but remembers still those of his colleagues who did not return. He merely served bravely, honorably and saved our country, emerging as a Captain. He is humble about his service. We are honored by it. After the war, he returned to the San Francisco Bay Area and then moved to Bakersfield where he went to work at Bakersfield High School. The soldiers came home from the war to make a life for themselves with marriage and children. He was no exception, and he and his wife Patricia were blessed with three children, three grandchildren and one great-grandchild. From Bakersfield High School, he moved on to Bakersfield College. In his early years at the college, he taught sociology and also served as a very successful track and cross-country coach. Always striving to improve himself, he took classes nights and summers while pursuing an education career, and obtained a Master's degree. A counseling credential allowed him to begin serving as a counselor for students. Subsequently, he became first the Director of Student Activities and then the Dean of Students. During this period, he engaged in more evening, weekend, and summer study at UCLA in the Education Department. Ultimately, a doctor's thesis was written and published, and he was awarded a doctorate in education. In 1965, he was selected as the first President of Moorpark College, a community college in Ventura County. There, he supervised the building of the College's physical plant, planned the curriculum and opening, hired the faculty and administration, and took Moorpark from a plan on paper to a thriving junior college with a variety of innovative educational programs. Later he got the chance to return to Bakersfield College as President and the family moved back to that California community. As President of Bakersfield College for many years, he kept the school in the top rank of community colleges, established an endowment and the B.C. Foundation, and won the respect of the community, his colleagues, and the students. He retired as President of Bakersfield College in 1982. But, with his work ethic, he never has been fully ``retired.'' He served as interim President of Mission Community College in Santa Clara County and then as interim Chancellor for West Valley-Mission Community College District. Throughout this time, he retained the title President Emeritus at Bakersfield College, and has worked as an administrator there most of time since his ``retirement.'' Never one to forget the remembrance and honor due to the past, Dr. Collins has been instrumental in setting up the Bakersfield College Archives. Recognizing his many years of service, several years ago Bakersfield College renamed its student center building as the John J. Collins Student Center. Along the way, he acquired the skill to make beautiful furniture, and has blessed his family members with many graceful and attractive pieces. At age 90, he continues to work for the Kern Community College District and to be a joy to his friends, family, and community. Dr. John J. Collins, ``Doc'' to his grandchildren, is to me the model of all we admire in his generation. When times were tough, he just worked harder. When his country called in time of war, he bravely answered. When his country needed him, he spent a career giving back to his community as an educator--making sure that young people had a chance to learn and succeed. As family man, he devoted himself to his wife, his children, his siblings and extended family. He has shown real courage--whether on the battlefields of the South Pacific or when facing and coping with the serious illness of his wife of more than 60 years. He has shown a steadiness of purpose which allowed him to leap to a level of erudition, education and economic stability not dreamed of by his parents or grandparents. Widely admired in his hometown, he is recognized as someone who made a difference. We Americans owe much to the Greatest Generation. But we also owe to them as individuals our love and gratitude. I feel that greatly today on the occasion of the 90th birthday of Dr. John J. Collins, who it has been my privilege to know as my father-in-law.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Marine Cpl. Carlos Gil Orozco, who died on September 10th while out on patrol in AI-Anbar province. In 1993, Carlos and his family immigrated to San Joe, California from Colombia, in search of a better life. Carlos graduated from Willow Glen High School, and later decided to join the Marines with the support of his family. Carlos was described by friends as a good American, who will be sorely missed. More than 300 mourners gathered in downtown San Jose this past Monday to attend his memorial service. On behalf of this Congress and California's 16th Congressional District, I offer Carlos's family our deepest condolences as they cope with this painful loss. We are so thankful for his dedicated service to our country. Our thoughts and prayers are with Carlos's family and friends.