Zoe Lofgren

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the achievements of the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce of Silicon Valley as they celebrate 50 years as an advocate and resource for its members, business owners, professionals, students and the community in general by being the premier voice for Hispanic and minority businesses. The Hispanic Chamber of Commerce of Silicon Valley, originally called the Mexican American Chamber of Commerce, was founded in 1955, and incorporated as a non-profit organization in 1975 when it began offering services to the Latino small business community. Over the years, the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce has provided assistance and support to numerous Latinos and other minority small businesses in business education, economic assistance, international business, entrepreneurship, education, community development, loan program development, and procurement assistance, to name a few. The Hispanic Chamber has helped over 5,000 clients in the past 50 years and has helped businesses procure loans totaling over $3 million. The Hispanic Chamber is a recognized leader and influential player in the development of the social, political and economic landscape of this region, and was recognized as the best Hispanic Chamber of Commerce in the United States by an independent auditing firm in 1999. I am proud of the leadership, volunteers and network of supporters whose dedication has built Hispanic Chamber of Commerce of Silicon Valley into an integral part of the fabric of our local community. And, in so doing, the Hispanic Chamber is contributing to making Silicon Valley a place that recognizes the vital role Hispanic businesses play in the economic development of our nation.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, Harris Miller, president of the Information Technology Association of America, recently wrote an opinion piece for the San Jose Mercury News. In this piece, Mr. Miller addresses some serious concerns about the Chinese government's trade policies and their efforts to control and limit information on the internet. Mr. Miller makes some excellent points and I encourage all of my colleagues to review his article. [From the San Jose Mercury News, May 23, 2005] In Walling Off Software Market, China Forgets Trade Goes Two Ways (By Harris N. Miller) Chinese trade practices have long been the subject of complaint from U.S. manufacturers, particularly in the textile industry. American high-tech firms now see the storm clouds forming for their own business sectors. Two trends are particularly disturbing: China's leaders are quietly closing the doors to domestic market software competition while simultaneously attempting to expand government control over the Internet. Despite U.S. protests, the Chinese government has published draft regulations that effectively would close China's government market to American and other foreign software companies. Software is likely to be the first of many government markets to close to foreign competition. When it comes to information technology, China is a waking giant. With a total information and communications technology marketplace of almost $100 billion, the Chinese appetite for computers, software and networks has more than doubled since 2000. All things being equal, China's high-tech growth is a good thing. With more than 1 billion people and a rapidly growing economy, China should be a tremendously positive trading partner, and the U.S. information technology industry has championed China's accession to the World Trade Organization. But to be widely embraced, the door to global trade must swing both ways. Not even considering a piracy rate exceeding 90 percent, China is now considering taking the additional step of rolling back the access that foreign software companies currently enjoy in the Chinese government procurement market. China is in the process of implementing a ``buy Chinese'' software procurement policy for government systems, which, if implemented restrictively, will dramatically inhibit foreign involvement in software sales to the Chinese government. New draft procurement rules would require foreign software firms seeking Chinese government business to either perform 50 percent of the development work in China and assign copyright to a Chinese entity or make substantial R&D and capital investments in China. Even those foreign companies that might meet China's R&D, manufacturing or outsourcing requirements could not compete fairly for government contracts. Any Chinese government entity that wants to procure foreign software eligible for purchase on these grounds would have to apply and obtain a specific waiver. Equally troubling, China is asserting a larger government role over the operations of the Internet itself In a society like China's, one that represses dissent and rewards conformity, Internet access to news and information from countless points of view is nothing less than a threat. This is no doubt why Chinese officials have jailed dozens of citizens for ``subversive'' Internet-related activity, including issuing warnings about the spread of SARS or advocating greater democracy. This also explains China's interest in blocking politically incorrect Web sites, collecting data on the Internet use and site visits of individuals, monitoring Internet service providers--even keeping tabs on Internet cafes. Not exactly an advertisement for a government-run Internet. But at the Working Group on Internet Governance, a group affiliated with the United Nations, China said ``the basic principles of the Internet, namely, openness, fairness, and democracy and freedom'' are being diminished by the failure of governments to play a more prominent role in Internet governance. Even though the Internet has flourished in a governance environment that brings together government, the private sector and civil society, China rejects this ``trilateralism'' because it denies ``the due responsibility and role of governments in Internet policy-making.'' China wants full access to the U.S. market while attempting to shut down the access that U.S. companies currently have to its market. At the same time, China's government-first stance on Internet governance threatens to throw sand in the gears of Internet proliferation (and the democratizing influence it represents). The U.S. information technology industry wants to continue to support China's role as a major trading partner. But that is possible only when free trade is truly free.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, too often this debate has been categorized about who loves the flag. And it has caused me to think back about the great affection I feel for our flag. The fondest memory I think I have of being a mother is standing on the school yard of the elementary school with my children and joining with them and the other mothers as they saluted our flag. I remember crying, looking at our flag the first time I went to a Democratic convention and we sang the National Anthem and our flag was there. It was overwhelming, that the flag was there for our democracy. And when we enter this Capitol and see the flag flying above it, it is an overwhelming experience to see that flag. We love it so much. And why? Because our Nation's flag stands for the freedoms that define this country. One of those freedoms is freedom of speech. Our country is strong and free because Americans are free to express their opinions even when we do not agree with those opinions. If enacted, this bill would for the first time in our Nation's history modify the Bill of Rights to limit freedom of speech. As has been stated, it is clear that this amendment would only limit speech that some do not agree with. Why are the Republican leadership of the House pushing this amendment? I think it is obvious that it would amend the first amendment. I think the majority party cannot really tolerate dissent. I would like to read something that General Colin Powell said about this amendment when we had hearings several years ago. General Powell: ``The first amendment exists to ensure that freedom of speech and expression applies not just to that with which we agree or disagree but also to that which we find outrageous. I would not amend that great shield of democracy to hammer a few miscreants. The flag will be flying proudly long after they have slunk away.'' Jim Warner, a Vietnam veteran and prisoner of the North Vietnamese from 1967 to 1973, wrote this about the proposed amendment, and I quote this prisoner of war, this American hero: ``The fact is the principles for which we fought, for which our comrades died, are advancing everywhere upon the earth while the principles against which we fought are everywhere discredited and rejected. The flag burners have lost, and their defeat is the most fitting and thorough rebuke of their principles which the human could devise. Why do we need to do more? An act intended merely as an insult is not worthy of our fallen comrades. It is the sort of thing our enemies did to us, but we are not them, and we must conform to a different standard . . . Now, when the justice of our principles is everywhere vindicated, the cause of human liberty demands that this amendment be rejected. Rejecting this amendment would not mean that we agree with those who burned our flag or even that they have been forgiven. It would, instead, tell the world that freedom of expression means freedom even for those expressions we find repugnant.'' I think there is another reason why this amendment has been offered, and that is to divert attention from the shabby treatment of our veterans. Let us shift attention to our beloved flag; maybe the vets will not notice that Congress has not kept our promises to them. According to the American Legion, 30,000 veterans are waiting 6 months or longer for an appointment at a veterans hospital. The Veterans of Foreign Wars estimates that as many as 220,000 men and women veterans could lose their benefits under the proposed veterans budget. Our veterans went to war to protect our Nation and to guarantee our freedoms, including freedom of speech and to ensure that those freedoms would be protected. Now we are about to undercut their sacrifice by amending the first amendment for the very first time. And to add injury to insult, we are also failing to provide the care our veterans earned with their blood and their sweat, and we are denying them what they deserve from a grateful Nation. Some in the past have voted for this amendment assuming that the Senate will stop it, that we really will not do this bad thing to our country. I have great fear that the political landscape has changed. I think this is a sad and shameful day for our Nation.

Ms. LOFGREN of California

Ms. LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Steven Hao for his selection as a finalist in the USA Biology Olympiad, sponsored by the Center for Excellence in Education. Steven was selected as one of twenty students from more than 5,400 who will compete in the National Finals. The four gold medalists from the National Finals will represent the United States at the International Biology Olympiad in Beijing, China. We hope that these students will achieve the outstanding success of the 2004 U.S. Team, who won an unprecedented four gold medals, a feat accomplished for the first time in Biology Olympiad history. The Biology Olympiad promotes education and creativity in a way that is vital to a youth's development. These types of activities encourage students to explore the fields of science and engineering. This kind of innovation will drive the United States' economy into the future. As a Member of Congress from Silicon Valley, I fully understand the importance and impact that these studies have on America's prosperity. I am proud to stand here today to recognize Steven for his accomplishments at the USA Biology Olympiad. Steven was also recently recognized for winning a prize at the 56th Intel International Science and Engineering Fair Project for his project on ``The Effects of Oxidative Damage on Protein Translation Efficiency.'' I urge him and all students to continue to take an interest in these fields, so that the U.S. will continue to lead the world in scientific research.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Chairman, I oppose legalizing marijuana, but I support this amendment. Just like the other voters in California, I do not see why we should prohibit doctors from providing for pain relief for their patients. I will talk to you about someone I knew. I will call him Mr. X. He had terminal cancer, and he could not eat, and the only thing that could get him an appetite was marijuana. Mr. X, who was my age, had to go out and buy marijuana illegally. It was so horrible for him. Why should we force the indignity on terminal cancer patients of having to do that? That is why my State voted to allow doctors to prescribe marijuana, so that cancer patients who cannot eat have the chance to get some nutrition. For the life of me, I cannot understand why we would interfere with that, and I strongly, strongly urge, on behalf of all cancer patients, please support this amendment.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Live Oak High School orchestra for its award of Best Student Orchestra in the 11th annual High School Music Theatre HONORS awards in San Jose. This year, over 25 Bay Area High Schools competed in 10 unique categories. Judges from the American Musical Theatre were sent to each school to watch and evaluate performances. Judges were instructed to evaluate the quality of each production and performance, while keeping in mind each school's budget and available resources. This annual competition awarded four students who reside within California's 16th district. The Live Oak High School Orchestra is conducted by Greg Bergantz. Live Oak High School won the Best Student Orchestra award for its performance in ``Fiddler on the Roof''. The High School Music Theatre HONORS awards promote artistic creativity in a way that is vital to a youth's development. The performances that these youth stage are extremely labor intensive, and promote discipline, team work, and dedication. High School Performing Arts program's are generally underfunded and have been greatly reduced in recent years. I recognize the hard work, time, and energy that these students and teachers put into these productions. I am proud to stand here today and recognize the Live Oak High School orchestra for its accomplishments. I urge all students to continue to take interest in the performing arts.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Tommy Jernigan for his award of Best Student Lighting Design in the 11th annual High School Music Theatre HONORS awards in San Jose. This year, over 25 Bay Area High Schools competed in 10 unique categories. Judges from the American Musical Theatre were sent to each school to watch and evaluate performances. Judges were instructed to evaluate the quality of each production and performance, while keeping in mind each school's budget and available resources. This annual competition awarded four students who reside within California's 16th district. Tommy is a student from Live Oak High School. He won the Best Student Lighting Design award for his work in ``Fiddler on the Roof''. The High School Music Theatre HONORS awards promote artistic creativity in a way that is vital to a youth's development. The performances that these youth stage are extremely labor intensive, and promote discipline, team work, and dedication. High School Performing Arts programs are generally underfunded and have been greatly reduced in recent years. I recognize the hard work, time, and energy that these students and teachers put into these productions. I am proud to stand here today and recognize Tommy for his accomplishments. I urge him and all students to continue to take interest in the performing arts.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Alok Wadhwani for his award of Best Student Scenic Design in the 11th annual High School Music Theatre HONORS awards in San Jose. This year, over 25 Bay Area High Schools competed in 10 unique categories, Judges from the American Musical Theatre were sent to each school to watch and evaluate performances. Judges were instructed to evaluate the quality of each production and performance, while keeping in mind each school's budget and available resources. This annual competition awarded four students who reside within California's 16th district. Alok is a student from Valley Christian High School. He won the Best Student Scenic Design award for his work in ``Godspell''. The High School Music Theatre HONORS awards promote artistic creativity in a way that is vital to a youth's development. The performances that these youth stage are extremely labor intensive, and promote discipline, team work, and dedication. High School Performing Arts programs are generally underfunded and have been greatly reduced in recent years. I recognize the hard work, time, and energy that these students and teachers put into these productions. I am proud to stand here today and recognize Alok for his accomplishments. I urge him and all students to continue to take interest in the performing arts.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Kelly Black for her award as Best Female Performer in the 11th annual High School Music Theatre HONORS awards in San Jose. This year, over 25 Bay Area High Schools competed in 10 unique categories. Judges from the American Musical Theatre were sent to each school to watch and evaluate performances. Judges were instructed to evaluate the quality of each production and performance, while keeping in mind each school's budget and available resources. This annual competition awarded four students who reside within California's 16th district. Kelly is a student from Oak Grove High School. She won the Best Female Performer award for her role of Velma Kelly in ``Chicago''. Kelly will receive a scholarship to the American Musical Theatre Artists Institute, a nine-week intensive professional training program. The High School Music Theatre HONORS awards promote artistic creativity in a way that is vital to a youth's development. The performances that these youth stage are extremely labor intensive, and promote discipline, team work, and dedication. High School Performing Arts programs are generally underfunded and have been greatly reduced in recent years. I recognize the hard work, time, and energy that these students and teachers put into these productions. I am proud to stand here today and recognize Kelly for her accomplishments. I urge her and all students to continue to take interest in the performing arts.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. 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 as long as their fathers take necessary steps to achieve their child's citizenship. Unfortunately, there remains a group of forgotten sons and daughters who, despite being born to American fathers, cannot take advantage of this existing provision of the law to become U.S. citizens. These are the offspring of American servicemen and Asian women during the Vietnam and Korean Wars whose fathers did not take the steps of acknowledging paternity necessary to make their offspring citizens. However, 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 Naturalization Act, along with bipartisan cosponsors, to ensure that Amerasians are accorded U.S. citizenship just like the offspring of other American fathers are. I hope this Congress will act swiftly and pass the Amerasian Naturalization Act. 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, I rise today to recognize Steven Siyi Hao for his prize winning entry in the 56th Intel International Science and Engineering Fair. Last week, over 1,400 pre-college students participated in the Intel International Science and Engineering Fair in Phoenix. Students from several countries submitted entries in hopes that they would win a portion of the $3 million in scholarships, tuition grants, internships and scientific field trips given away. This annual competition awarded six of nine Bay Area students for their entries, three of whom reside in San Jose. Steven is a 17 year old student from Silver Creek High School. His project titled, ``The Effects of Oxidative Damage on Protein Translation Efficiency'' studied the negative effects of oxygen-free- radicals on protein production and DNA. His entry won him a paid summer internship at an Agilent Technologies site. The Intel International Science and Engineering Fair promotes education and creativity in a way that is vital to a youth's development. These types of activities encourage students to explore the fields of science and engineering. This kind of innovation will drive the United State's economy into the future. Being from Silicon Valley, I fully understand the importance and impact that these studies have on America's prosperity. I am proud to stand here today and recognize Steven for his accomplishments. I urge him and youth alike to continue to take interest in these fields, and lead the United States in its development of science and engineering exploration.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I support H.R. 810, the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. Stem cell research holds the potential to improve the lives of millions of Americans suffering from diseases like cancer, heart disease, and diabetes. I believe we should do all we can to support this research, and it is why I am so frustrated at the Bush administration's attempts to stop it. NIH said that U.S. scientists are falling behind because of the Bush 2001 limitations on stem cell research. Elizabeth Nable of the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute said, ``Because U.S. researchers who depend on Federal funds lack access to newer human embryonic stem cell lines, they are at a technological disadvantage relative to researchers funded by California, as well as investigators in Asia and Europe. My home State of California has already moved ahead of the Federal Government by establishing the Institute for Regenerative Medicine, which will devote $3 billion to embryonic stem cell research over the next 10 years. This bill is a modest proposal compared to California's, but it is still an important step; and that is why it is supported by all the major educational research institutions in California. I include their letter of support in the Record. Let us not drive this research overseas. May 19, 2005. Hon. Zoe Lofgren, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Representative Lofgren: We are writing to express our support for changing federal policy on human embryonic stem cell research to allow an expansion in available cell lines. As you probably know, a vote on legislation that would alter current policy is expected in the coming weeks, and we urge your `'Yes'' vote. Embryonic stem cells hold the potential for new cures and therapies for an array of life-threatening diseases affecting millions of Americans across the nation. This potential will be enhanced by the bipartisan Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act (H.R. 810), introduced by Representatives Michael Castle (R-DE) and Diana DeGette (D-CO) and co-sponsored by more than 200 members of the House of Representatives. The Castle-DeGette bill would expand current policy to allow federal funding for research with stem cell lines discovered after the mandated August 9, 2001, cut-off date as well as lines derived in the future. With regard to future stem cell lines, the bill applies only to lines derived from days-old blastocysts that otherwise would be discarded from in vitro fertilization clinics, but that instead are voluntarily donated to research by consenting individuals, without compensation. Further, this legislation would ensure the development of ethical guidelines for research with embryonic stem cell lines. California has moved ahead by establishing the Institute for Regenerative Medicine, which will devote $3 billion to embryonic stem cell research over the next ten years. The provisions within H.R. 810 are more restrictive than those of the California Initiative; however, H.R. 810 is crucial because it will make a significant difference to nationwide federal research programs. This expansion in policy will further facilitate and accelerate the research conducted in our state. When the current federal embryonic stem cell research policy went into effect in 2001, the notion was that 78 cell lines would be available for research. Currently, only 22 are actually available to researchers; many others have been found unsuitable. Furthermore, a number of the available lines are entangled with commercial interests making the cells too expensive or impossible for NIH-funded investigators to obtain. For these reasons, the existing embryonic stem cell lines do not provide a sufficient supply to advance the research to its full potential. Embryonic stem cells offer the potential to reverse diseases and disabilities experienced by millions of Americans. Stem cell research is still very new. Thus, we have a collective responsibility--scientists, university leaders, and government leaders--to support the exploration of the promising possibilities of both embryonic and adult stem cell research for curing and preventing disease. Please support scientific advancement and the possibility of new cures by voting ``Yes'' on H.R. 810 to expand federal stem cell research policy. Sincerely, Robert C. Dynes, President, University of California. Steven B. Sample, President, University of Southern California. David Baltimore, President, California Institute of Technology. John L. Hennessy, President, Stanford University.

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize David I. Marash- Whitman for his prize winning entry in the 56th Intel International Science and Engineering Fair. Last week, over 1,400 pre-college students participated in the Intel International Science and Engineering Fair in Phoenix. Students from several countries submitted entries in hopes that they would win a portion of the $3 million in scholarships, tuition grants, internships and scientific field trips given away. This annual competition awarded six of nine Bay Area students for their entries, three of whom reside in San Jose. David is a 13-year-old student from Kehillah Jewish High School. His project, titled ``Design for Biodegradation: Harnessing Natural Decay by Managing Physical and Chemical Dynamics'' investigated optimal nitrogen-carbon ratios, moisture and aeration for increasing the rate and total degradation of compost. His entry won him a second-place prize ($1,500) in environmental sciences. The Intel International Science and Engineering Fair promotes education and creativity in a way that is vital to a youth's development. These types of activities encourage students to explore the fields of science and engineering. This kind of innovation will drive the United States' economy into the future. Being from Silicon Valley, I fully understand the importance and impact that these studies have on America's prosperity. I am proud to stand here today and recognize David for his accomplishments. I urge him and all youth alike to continue to take interest in these fields, and lead the United States in its development of science and engineering exploration.

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Terik Daly for his prize winning entry in the 56th Intel International Science and Engineering Fair. Last week, over 1,400 pre-college students participated in the Intel International Science and Engineering Fair in Phoenix. Students from several countries submitted entries in hopes that they would win a portion of the $3 million in scholarships, tuition grants, internships and scientific field trips given away. This annual competition awarded six of nine Bay Area students for their entries, three of whom reside in San Jose. Terik is a 15-year-old student from Oak Grove High School. His project titled, ``The Derivation and Interpretation of Geochemical Ratios Generated by Meteoritic Impact'' derived meteor composition by examining chemical composition of granite before and after impact. His entry won him a fourth-place prize ($500) in earth science; $8,000 tuition scholarship from Office of Naval Research (on behalf of U.S. Navy and Marine Corps). The Intel International Science and Engineering Fair promote education and creativity in a way that is vital to a youth's development. These types of activities encourage students to explore the fields of science and engineering. This kind of innovation will drive the United State's economy into the future. Being from Silicon Valley, I fully understand the importance and impact that these studies have on America's prosperity. I am proud to stand here today and recognize Terik for his accomplishments. I urge him and youth alike to continue to take interest in these fields, and lead the United States in its development of science and engineering exploration.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in support of this legislation. H.R. 32 is aimed at criminals who traffic in counterfeit labels and packaging rather than the products themselves. Many counterfeit products are labeled with brand names or trademarks that consumers know and trust. However, under current law, trafficking in counterfeit labels is not illegal if the labels are not affixed to the counterfeit products. Counterfeiters have exploited this by importing the counterfeit labels and products separately, and then affixing the labels in the United States. This bill expands criminal penalties to include those who traffic in counterfeit labels and packaging. It also requires forfeiture of any property derived from the proceeds of the violation and requires restitution to the trademark owner. At the same time, H.R. 32 now includes language that will ensure that criminal sanctions do not reach legitimate businesses that repackage goods or services with no intent to deceive or cause confusion. The original bill left open the question of whether someone other than the manufacturer could affix marks to goods that could correctly identify the source. This confusion struck at the very heart of the parallel market in which third parties lawfully obtain goods and make them available in discount stores. Not only has this practice been upheld by the Supreme Court, but it also saves consumers billions of dollars each year. I appreciate that the majority worked with us to address this concern. We now have a bill that protects manufacturers, targets illegitimate actors, protects consumers, and leaves the legitimate parallel market unscathed. Therefore, I urge a ``yes'' vote on this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin), an original cosponsor of this bill.

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. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to have partnered with the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte) on this legislation, H.R. 744, the Goodlatte- Lofgren I-SPY bill. Spyware is quickly becoming one of the biggest threats to consumers on the Internet. It is one of the reasons why we have an identity theft epidemic in this country. Thieves are using spyware to harvest personal information from unsuspecting Americans. Criminals are even using spyware to track every keystroke an individual makes, including credit and Social Security numbers. Spyware also adversely affects the business community, who are forced to spend money to block and remove it from their systems. In fact, Microsoft has stated that spyware is at least partially responsible for approximately one-half of all application crashes reported to them. Experts estimate that as many as 80 to 90 percent of all personal computers contain some form of spyware. Last year, Earthlink identified more than 29 million spyware programs. In short, spyware is a very real problem that is endangering consumers, damaging businesses and creating millions of dollars of additional costs. I am proud to be a party to H.R. 744, this bipartisan measure, because it identifies the truly unscrupulous acts associated with spyware and subjects them to criminal punishment. This bill is unique, however, because it focuses on behavior rather than technology. It targets the worst forms of spyware without unduly burdening technological innovation. Why is this important? We know that innovation goes faster than legislation. It is important that we not try to fix the development of legislation in time. Instead, we need to focus on misbehavior, not technology, so that technology innovation can continue to move as rapidly as it does and yet the American consumer and businesses can be protected. It is important, and this is an issue that there was some question about and I think we can answer quite easily, it is important to note that H.R. 744 does not prevent existing or future State laws which prohibit spyware. This bill only preempts civil actions that are based on violations of this new Federal criminal law in State courts. It does not prevent a State from passing a similar law, nor does it prevent any lawsuits that are premised on existing State laws. H.R. 744 also gives the Attorney General the money he needs to find and prosecute spyware offenders. And, finally, it expresses the sense of Congress that the Department of Justice should vigorously pursue online phishing scams in which criminals send fake e-mail messages to consumers on behalf of famous companies and request personal information that is later used to conduct criminal activities. Phishing and spyware are not just an inconvenience to consumers. They represent a direct threat to the vitality of the Internet itself because if people cannot trust the Internet, they will not utilize Internet commerce. I would like to note that I also serve on the Committee on Homeland Security, and we are well aware that phishing to the extent that it yields identity theft information is of great concern as we seek to protect the Nation from terrorism. So what we are doing here today is important for consumers, it is important for business, it is important for the future of our high-tech economy, and it is important for the security of the Nation. I would urge my colleagues to strike a blow for the continued vitality of the Internet and again pass this bill unanimously. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would just note that the House will be considering at least two items having to do with spamming and phishing and the like today. Certainly we hope to move this issue forward. I strongly believe that the approach that this bill takes, which is targeting behavior instead of technology, puts us on the soundest footing; and I hope that in the end as we sort through the various approaches that that will be our guide to protect technology innovation.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Chairman, I want to commend the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson) and the gentleman from California (Chairman Cox) for their work and leadership on this bill, but I would also especially like to compliment the ranking member for his work on this substitute. There is much in the bill that is good; the substitute is even better, for the reasons outlined by the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson). However, there is one provision that is the same in both the bill and the substitute and equally good in both cases, and that is the provisions regarding cyber security. As Members know, in the 108th Congress there was a Subcommittee on Cyber Security within the Select Committee on Homeland Security. The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) was the chairman and I was the ranking member, and we worked very hard together to craft the provision that is incorporated in the bill and in the substitute. We held over 17 hearings and further briefings, and we heard from the private sector. I think that is why the following people support our provision: The Business Software Alliance, the Computer and Communications Industry Association, the Cyber Security Industrial Alliance, the Financial Services Roundtable, the Higher Education and Information Technology Alliance, the Information Technology Association of America, the Information Technology Industry Council, the National Association of State Chief Information Officers, the Software and Information Industry Association, Tech Net, and the Association of American Universities, the Association of Research Libraries, the National Association of College and University Business Officers, and the list goes on and on. The bill does something, and the substitute does something that is very important, and that is, to elevate the attention paid to cybersecurity within the Department. You know, several years ago when the strategy for cybersecurity was adopted, we had a cyberperson in the White House who drafted that plan and had the attention of the White House. Since that time, this position has devolved to one that really does not have direct access to decision-makers. In fact, the last person to hold the job, Amit Yoran, from Silicon Valley, quit 1 year to the day after he took the job; and we do not have a permanent replacement for him to this day. We have got contractors. In fact, the current contractor is not even on the payroll. It is a Carnegie Mellon employee. We need to have attention at the highest level for cybersecurity. Let me be clear. The job of securing cyberspace at DHS is just not getting done. Recently, Berkley professor Shankar Sastry warned of the possibility of what he called a digital Pearl Harbor. He urged that the Nation act before it is too late. We in Congress must not stand by while our cyberinfrastructure remains vulnerable and so little is accomplished in the Department of Homeland Security. Securing cyberspace must be a national priority. The substitute and the bill do it. And I thank the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson) for including it.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Madam Speaker, I rise as a coauthor in strong support of H. Res. 228, a resolution that marks the 30th anniversary of the fall of the Republic of Vietnam and that honors the contributions of Vietnamese-Americans to American society over the past three decades. April 30, 1975 marked a very somber day for millions of people when the Republic of Vietnam fell to Communist forces from North Vietnam. Instantly, the world was faced with millions of refugees, many who resettled in the United States, but also hundreds of thousands who perished at sea in their attempt to escape Communist forces. Those who remained in Vietnam were forced to re-education camps and detention as their punishment. Unfortunately, to this day, the Vietnamese Communist government continues to violate basic human rights of its own citizens. As it has been documented by various States Department reports, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, Amnesty International and various Vietnamese-American groups, the Vietnamese government has been an egregious violator of religious freedom, human rights, and free speech. The government in Vietnam has continuously imprisoned religious figures who simply want to practice their faith, journalists attempting to print basic information about the actions of their government, and democratic activists in Vietnam. Vietnamese-Americans are playing a vital role to ensure that the Vietnamese government improves its human rights record, but much work remains to be done. Even though April 30th, 2005 marks the 30th anniversary of a very sad day for millions of Vietnamese and American families whose sons and daughters gave the ultimate sacrifice during the Vietnam War, it is also a day to enthusiastically commend countless contributions that millions of Vietnamese-Americans have made in the United States. In just 30 years, 1.5 million Vietnamese refugees rebuilt their lives to become leaders in education, business, and government in the United Sates and have greatly enriched the cultural diversity of our country. So today I rise to remember the sacrifice of American and Vietnamese soldiers who fought for democracy in Vietnam and for their families who suffered their loss and injury. But I also rise to commend millions of courageous Vietnamese-Americans who have successfully rebuilt their lives in the United States while fighting to improve the human rights situation for their brothers and sisters left in Vietnam.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise to defend the integrity of the House this evening. The established practice of the House regarding committee reports is to accurately and objectively describe the proceedings when a bill is considered in committee. These reports are historical products that are used to understand and determine the intent of a bill, opposition to a bill, and to provide any additional information to understand the context of a bill reported by committees of the House. In committee we argue and we disagree and we offer amendments and we vote. We may vote and disagree in committee, but when the report is issued it is supposed to be objective. This institution must uphold this established practice of describing a committee mark-up in an accurate and objective manner so that history is accurately documented and reported for generations to come. Unfortunately, that is not what happened last week when the Committee on the Judiciary reported H.R. 748 to the House floor with the committee report, House Report 109-51. Republicans that ruled the Committee on the Judiciary mischaracterized five Democratic amendments in an extremely disparaging and distorting manner. When alerted to the misleading and inaccurate description of the amendment in the committee report, they refused to correct the mischaracterization. Here is something I can say that would be true about H.R. 748. The bill could permit a father who raped his daughter to profit in a lawsuit against his minister. That is a true thing about that bill. It is an argument against the bill. But no one expects that argument against the bill to substitute for the name of the bill in the committee report. In prior Congresses, Democratic amendments like these were described in neutral terms. The vote last week was about H.R. 748. The vote this week is about arrogance and abuse of power and ignoring the rules. The Republicans changed the ethics rules when they were afraid they might not work for them at the beginning of this Congress, and we are all watching the other body looking about changing the rules relative to filibuster because it suits their purpose and now this. We, including the chairman of the committee, each have a duty to uphold the integrity of this institution. We must not play politics with the records of history. The majority should live by the rules and precedents of the House. The House cannot function if the majority uses its raw power to corrupt the record of the proceedings.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a great American mind, who forty years ago this month made a prediction about integrated circuits that has driven the pace of innovation, helped make the U.S. the world's technological leader and brought endless benefits to consumers, businesses and economies in my district and around the world. In April of 1965, Gordon Moore, a young engineer with Fairchild Semiconductor, postulated that the number of transistors on a chip would double at a regular interval without any additional cost increase. Essentially, he predicted that computer chips would double in power every 18 months. Forty years later, Moore's Law, as it has come to be known, has helped drive innovation at leading American companies like Intel Corporation, which Gordon helped found. Even the most enterprising minds of 1965 could not have imagined that computers the size of a refrigerator would one day fit in the palm of our hands. Or that a children's toy would pack four times as much processing power as an Apollo moon lander. These mind-blowing developments have led to advances in virtually every industry and aspect of our lives. Consider that families and friends can now send messages and share photos instantly, even from thousands of miles away. Doctors can now diagnose patients in other countries and get instantaneous access to the latest treatment options. The drive towards maintaining Moore's law has kept Intel and the rest of the U.S. technology industry at the forefront of this innovation. The premise of Moore's Law dictates that computer power essentially improves for free, bringing increases in productivity unprecedented since the Industrial Revolution. As a result, consumers get more for less and our economy benefits. Since 1995, information technology industries have accounted for 25 percent of overall U.S. economic growth while making up only 3 percent of the gross domestic product. This means that technological advances are the key to growing our economy. In my home of Silicon Valley, we are proud to be part of the drive to keep pace with Moore's Law. I rise today to commemorate Gordon's contributions to our economy and to our world.

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support the House Committee Funding Resolution for the 109th Congress as approved by the House Administration Committee on Thursday, April 21, 2005. This Resolution assures that the Minority will be treated fairly in regard to both committee budgets and staff. It abides by the 2/3-1/3 principle in which the Minority receives 1/3 of the staff, 1/3 of the budget, and control over that budget. It is my understanding that every Chair and Ranking Member in the House have come to an agreement on their individual budgets, and all treat the Minority in a fair and respectful way. I commend Chairman Ney and Ranking Member Millender-McDonald for their hard work on this Resolution. During Markup of the Committee Funding Resolution, Congresswoman Millender-McDonald offered an amendment regarding House Committee's use of the Frank. Under this amendment, Committees will be limited to a $5,000 franking budget per year, and Committees will need to abide by, and receive approval from, the House Franking Commission for any mass mailings. This is an important proposal that I strongly support. This amendment assures that House Committees will only use the Frank for official purposes, and stem the questionable franking practices that developed at the end of the 108th Congress. Finally, I must comment on the controversy surrounding the budget of the Resources Committee during the 108th Congress. My colleague Chairman Ney was elected to Congress in 1994, the same year as me. As you will recall, 1994 was the year that the Republicans took control of Congress for the first time in 40 years. Led by Newt Gingrich, the incoming members of the House promoted the Contract with America. The Contract promised that under Republican rule, the House would pass a number of resolutions and bills within the first 100 days of the 104th Congress. One of the promises made by the Republicans was to pass a resolution on the first day of the 104th Congress that would provide for the selection of a major, independent auditing firm to conduct a comprehensive audit of Congress for waste, fraud or abuse. Republicans were concerned that tax dollars were being misspent by the House of Representatives. Chairman Ney signed the Contract with America, and I can only assume that he supported this provision. It seems odd to me now that a little over 10 years later, my friend Bob Ney and his Republican colleagues do not seem to have the same zeal for investigating waste, fraud and abuse here in the House. During the Committee Funding Resolution hearings in March, I posed several questions about the budget and policies of the Resources Committee during the 108th Congress to Resources Committee Chairman Richard Pombo. On October 6, 2004, The Hill reported that Chairman Pombo planned to close the Resources Committee for a month leading up to the November 2004 elections. It went on to state that the staff would receive a month of vacation time and Chairman Pombo's spokesman stated on-the- record that some staff may choose to go and work on campaigns during their time off. During the hearing, I posed several questions about the vacation policy of the Resources Committee to Chairman Pombo and gave him the opportunity to clear up the confusion about the events leading up to the 2004 elections. Chairman Pombo welcomed the opportunity to address the issue. He answered some of my questions at the hearing, and said he would need to get back to the Committee regarding others. In an effort to get to the bottom of this issue and clear up any confusion, I put my questions in writing for Chairman Pombo. The record, at the direction of Chairman Ney, was held open so Chairman Pombo could respond to the House Administration Committee within 30 days. Chairman Pombo did respond to some, but not all, of my questions in writing on April 13, 2005. Both Chairman Ney and representatives of Chairman Pombo have categorized these ordinary and routine inquiries as something extraordinary. Mr. Pombo's spokesman has actually compared me to Senator Joseph McCarthy. While I find that comment to be a bit weird, I am prepared to state unequivocally that I do not believe Chairmen Pombo or Ney are communists! So the record is totally clear, I have included in the Committee Report accompanying this resolution all of the correspondence between myself, Chairman Ney and Chairman Pombo on this issue as well as the transcript of our discussion at the committee hearing. This report should be posted on the House Administration Committee Web site. I will also note that at this time, Chairman Pombo has still not answered all of my written questions. It is the job of the House Administration Committee to oversee all operations of the House of Representatives, including the approval of taxpayer-funded committee budgets. Under this Committee Funding Resolution, the Resources Committee will receive a 7.5 increase in their operating budget in the 109th Congress. It is only appropriate that the House Administration Committee confirm that the money spent by the Resources Committee during the 108th Congress was done so in a proper way. Chairman Pombo still has the ability to quickly clear up this confusion. I remain hopeful that Chairman Pombo will take the time to answer all the written questions in detail about the policies and practices of the Resources Committee to reassure that tax dollars are being spent in a legal, fair, and ethical manner. Chairman Ney, signers the Contract with America, and anyone else that believes in good government, should demand nothing less.