Barbara Lee

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, today I introduced a resolution recognizing the significance of National Caribbean-American Heritage month. This resolution acknowledges the important contributions Caribbean-Americans have made to our nation's history and culture. Let me begin by thanking my esteemed colleagues Representative Donald Payne, Chair of the Caribbean Caucus, Congresswomen Donna Christensen and Frederica Wilson, my esteemed friend Representative John Conyers, Congressman Ed Towns, and many others who have joined me in introducing this resolution today, the first day of Caribbean-American Heritage Month. I am also pleased that the President issued a Proclamation on May 31, 2011, declaring June 2011 to be Caribbean-American Heritage Month, as has been the practice since Congress unanimously passed House Concurrent Resolution 71 in February 2006. As a long-time supporter of the Caribbean and a frequent visitor to the region, I was very proud to see us celebrate this important commemorative month for the fifth straight year. I would also like to acknowledge Dr. Claire Nelson and the Institute of Caribbean Studies as well as all the other Caribbean American organizations in Washington, my home state of California, and across the country that have worked and continue to work to make Caribbean- American Heritage Month a great success. As the President said in his proclamation, ``Immigrants from Caribbean countries have come to America for centuries. Some came through the bondage of slavery. Others willfully left behind the world they knew in search of a better life. Regardless of the circumstances of their arrival, they had faith their descendants would have a chance to realize their greatest potential.'' Throughout the history of the United States, this nation has been fortunate to benefit from countless individuals of Caribbean descent who have contributed to American government, politics, business, arts, education, and culture--including one of my personal mentors, the Honorable Shirley Chisholm. Shirley Chisholm was a woman of Ba-jan and Guyanese descent, who never forgot her Caribbean roots. She was the first African American woman elected to Congress and the first woman to run for the Democratic presidential nomination. My political involvement began as a volunteer for her historic presidential campaign in 1972. Through her mentorship, she strengthened my interest in issues important to the African Diaspora both here in the U.S. and abroad. During Caribbean American Heritage Month, we recognize the important contributions of people like Shirley Chisholm, as well as Alexander Hamilton, Hazel Scott, Sidney Poitier, Wyclef Jean, Eric Holder, Colin Powell, Harry Belafonte, Roberto Clemente, Celia Cruz--and yes, Representatives Donna Christensen, Sheila Jackson Lee, Yvette Clarke, Frederica Wilson, Nydia Velazquez, Pedro Pierluisi--and many other persons of Caribbean descent who have helped shape this country. Caribbean American Heritage Month reminds us of the large and diverse constituencies of Caribbean Americans in our nation, and provides us with an opportunity to celebrate and share in the rich culture of the Caribbean American community through showcases of Caribbean art, festivals, concerts, and film. In my own district of Oakland, California, individuals and organizations celebrate the rich heritage of people of Caribbean descent through musical concerts and family picnics. In addition to presenting us with an occasion to celebrate the legacy of Caribbean Americans, this month also provides us an opportunity to strengthen our long-term partnership with nations of the Caribbean community. From trade, energy, and immigration to disaster preparedness and the challenging issues around HIV/AIDS, we have critical challenges we must face with our Caribbean neighbors. These challenges are regional in nature, so we must confront them together and in partnership. One issue of the region which continues to deserve special mention is last year's earthquake in Haiti. At the international donors' conference in March 2010, fifty-eight donors pledged over $5.5 billion to support Haiti's Action Plan for Recovery and Development. According to the United Nations, as of March of this year, only about 37 percent of these funds have been disbursed. This is unacceptable. If we are to break the cycle of disaster--emergency relief--disaster in which Haiti has been trapped for many years, we must act with the same sense of urgency in reconstruction as we did immediately following the quake. It is critical that any long-term reconstruction and development agenda is Haitian-led, that Haitian civil society and the Haitian Diaspora play a central role, and that such an agenda focuses on building the capacity of the Haitian Government to provide basic services and protect the social, civil, and political rights of its people. Only by empowering Haitians to rebuild their own lives and their own country will we truly ``rebuild differently.'' I would like to end by stating that although the Caribbean faces many challenges, we understand that we must face them together. Despite the often turbulent history between the United States and Caribbean countries, our ties cannot be pinned down to geography alone, or economics alone, or even history alone. The region continues to shape us as Americans as much as we here continue to shape the Caribbean. So I ask all of my colleagues to join me in supporting this measure to honor our nation's Caribbean American community and the rich gifts that they have given and continue to give this country. Let us continue to celebrate the rich diversity of this nation of immigrants and recognize that it will forever be the great blessing and strength of our country.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. First, let me thank Chairman McKeon and also Ranking Member Smith for agreeing to include my amendment in this en bloc amendment for consideration. I urge support for these en bloc amendments and specifically for my amendment, 117, which prohibits funding to construct permanent military bases in Iraq and Afghanistan. I have consistently, and we have successfully, worked to include this prohibition of funding for permanent bases in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2001. Due to our efforts and the support of all of our colleagues here on a bipartisan basis who understand the importance of prohibiting permanent bases in these countries, this language has historically been included in the Defense authorization and appropriations bills and signed into law by President Bush and President Obama. In fact, in working with our colleagues, we were successful in placing the same language in the continuing resolution which was passed by the House and signed into law by President Obama in April of 2011.

Ms. LEE. By including this language in this bill, we are absolutely being clear that the policy of the United States in Afghanistan and Iraq has never included permanent bases and will never include permanent bases. However, I'm disappointed that we didn't go one step further today by considering my amendment to begin a sizeable and significant reduction of our Armed Forces beginning this July so that we can begin to end the longest war in American history. But I am urging our colleagues to support the amendment prohibiting permanent military bases in Iraq and Afghanistan. It's critical in fighting the perception held by many in Iraq and Afghanistan that we are an occupying army or that we intend to remain as an occupying force. That perception fuels the insurgency and the Taliban and makes our troops more vulnerable and further threatens our national security. So I want to thank the chairman again and our ranking member for the time and for including this amendment in the en bloc package of amendments.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. First let me thank the gentleman for yielding and for his leadership. I would just say to the gentleman, you are absolutely correct, and I oppose this rule because this is such an important issue that affects our national security, but also the economic security of this country. This is an issue that warrants much more deliberation and debate. In fact, Mr. Speaker, when the authorization to use force to go to war in Afghanistan came before us on that terrible day of 9/14, there may have been 1 hour of debate, if that long. And so I think at this moment, as we are turning the corner, hopefully, we should have a full debate on the direction, the timeframe which Mr. McGovern has in his resolution, and also a plan to begin to end the war in Afghanistan. We must have a political solution and reconciliation in Afghanistan because most military experts have told us there's no military solution in Afghanistan. We know and we hear that if it's going well, we need more money and more troops; and if it's going poorly, we need more money and more troops. So we need here in the House to have this debate. What should we do and how should we do it? So this amendment, this proposal by Mr. McGovern, warrants much more than a 5-minute debate because it's such an important issue to the country. Over 70-some percent now of the American people believe it's time to wind down. Many of us believe that beginning in July we should put forth a proposal for a significant and sizeable reduction as the President indicated he would do in the past. Many believe that we should not fund any more combat operations in Afghanistan and that, in fact, we should only use our funding for force protection and to bring our young men and women home.

Ms. LEE. Thank you very much, Mr. McGovern. What the McGovern-Jones amendment seeks to do is begin that debate, to get us on course and to allow this House of Representatives to discuss what in the world should come next. I want to thank the gentleman for yielding, I thank you for your hard work, and just say that I think that it's about time now that we have a rule on such an important issue that allows for this body to engage in debate. Our troops deserve that, the American people deserve that, and certainly we need to begin to reflect public opinion on this because the public gets it. They know that $100 billion a year is no drop in the bucket in terms of our resources. We have a deficit, we have an economic crisis throughout the country, and we certainly need to find some balance between our national security interests and our economic security interest. Beginning to develop a plan to get out of Afghanistan warrants a full-fledged discussion.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I do intend to withdraw this amendment, but I'd like to just say why I offered it and why I think this debate is so important. We're talking about now trying to address a deficit, which we all want to address. We do not want to leave this debt to our children and our grandchildren. That's a given. The big issue I think for many of us is how do we get there and what do we do? And how do we ensure that we have a budget that reflects, yes, our national security priorities, but also a budget that protects the most vulnerable in our country and a budget that ensures that we have priorities to create jobs and to turn this economy around? And so I believe that we have to talk about not only discretionary spending and entitlement cuts, which the other side is talking about and making such an issue of. We have not really talked about the Pentagon budget. We have not talked about looking at what it would mean if we cut the defense budget back to 2008 as the Republicans want to do with regard to our domestic discretionary spending. And so what this amendment basically does is just say that if we are going to do this, we need to engage in a debate that is honest and we need to put everything on the table, and that includes the Pentagon. And in fact, we need to begin to look at how we cut back to 2008 levels. We all know that there is waste, fraud and abuse in the Pentagon. We still haven't been able to come up with a way to audit the Pentagon funds, and so we need to do that. I think we should actually put a freeze on defense spending until we know where our tax dollars are going and until we know that our tax dollars are being spent in a prudent way. We don't even know that because we can't even get an audit of the Pentagon. We also need to recognize that there are weapons systems that do not need to be built because they have nothing to do with our national security interests now. I mean, we are out of the Cold War. We are looking at asymmetrical warfare. We need to have a research and development program and a defense budget that reflects this new world that we're in, rather than going back to the Cold War and developing these Cold War-era weapons systems. So there are billions of dollars in those accounts. And so it is just prudent, I think, upon us to really begin to look at why, if we're going to start cutting food stamps and Community Development Block Grants and housing, and if we start cutting workforce training and Head Start and health care and all of the areas which the majority of the American people rely on as taxpayers, then we need to really look at where a huge portion of our budget falls, and that's within the Pentagon's budget. Also, we again want to talk about reducing the deficit, cutting the deficit. There is no way we will even touch this unless we begin to look at the defense budget and the Pentagon's budget. And so basically, once again, this amendment, what it does is it forces us to pause; it forces us to look at what type of savings there would be if we go back to 2008 as we want to do with domestic discretionary spending. Again, I hope that we can discuss this amendment, have this debate. I know there are not enough votes to get this passed, but I do know that we need to begin this process of looking at and examining the defense budget so that the American people can know where their tax dollars are going and to recognize that there are billions of dollars in waste, fraud and abuse that we need to look at in the Pentagon budget. And we need to put all of this on hold and go back to 2008 levels, be honest with the American people, and begin to have some real debate about deficit reduction, job creation, and the reduction of spending. With that, Mr. Chairman, I will withdraw my amendment. Thank you for the time, and let's hope that we can have a debate on the Pentagon budget at some point, a real debate.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Madam Chairman, let me thank the gentleman for yielding and for his leadership. This is such an important amendment, such an important debate. No one in this House would ever defend the deplorable actions of Colonel Qadhafi and the decades he has spent repressing the Libyan people. But no one should fail to recognize that the actions we have taken in Libya since March 19 amount to a war. Missile strikes, naval attacks, bombing of strategic military targets, all of these actions would be a declaration of war if a foreign country launched such attacks on our soil. Congress should have debated this prior to any military actions in Libya. While some of us can disagree as to whether or not we should be involved in a military action in Libya, we can all agree that we should prevent mission creep or any military expansion to include combat troops on the ground in Libya. This simple amendment does exactly that by codifying the President's commitment, as Mr. Conyers just said, to not put troops on the ground in Libya. So I urge a strong ``yes'' vote on this amendment. I thank the gentleman for his leadership.

Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this amendment, which strikes the dangerous, far-reaching section 1034 of this Defense bill. I thank my colleague Mr. Amash for his leadership and for working with all of us in a bipartisan fashion on this effort. On September 14, 2011, which was 3 days after the horrific events of 9/11, the Authorization of Use of Force was brought to the floor. I voted against this because it was overly broad, and it amounted to a blank check to wage war at any time, anywhere and at any place. It was the most difficult vote that I had cast because I was the only one to vote against this resolution, and I will always remember that sad evening when we returned from the National Cathedral memorial services for the victims and the families of 9/11. The entire country was angry and in mourning for the senseless loss of life and injuries resulting from such a brutal terrorist attack. There was very little debate on this resolution then, which took us to what has become the longest war in American history. So let's be clear. Section 1034 goes even beyond that original authorization. It amounts to a declaration of war--without end, anywhere in the world, regardless of whether there is a danger to the United States. If the original authorization were a blank check, section 1034 would amount to an entire checkbook of blank checks. This sweeping provision is dangerous. It should not be included in such a massive bill with, once again, little or no debate. It should be removed. I urge every Member of the House to consider carefully the ramifications of destroying the balance of powers that exist to protect this democracy and our Nation. So I urge an aye vote on this amendment. I want to thank Mr. Amash, once again, for trying to strike this so that we can move in the right direction to really begin to end the longest war in American history.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of this very commonsense amendment. And I want to thank my colleague, Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky, who has been such a strong leader on sensible and serious deficit reduction efforts. This amendment is very similar to an amendment that I submitted to Rules. And I want to thank Congresswoman Schakowsky for continuing to move this forward, because it is just extremely important that the financial statements of the Defense Department be audited. Where are our defense dollars going? We have no idea. Sadly, the Department of Defense Inspector General and the GAO have documented time and time again the Department's inability to answer this very basic question. Some of my colleagues may make the argument the Department of Defense is making so much progress on this issue in response to congressional engagement requiring the records to be audited by September 2017, but this is too late. Billions of dollars are going out of the door each month. The American people deserve to know where our defense dollars are going. There can be no more blank checks and certainly no blank checkbook to be handed over to any President. I thank the gentlelady for yielding and for this very commonsense amendment.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Madam Chair, I rise in strong opposition to the underlying, very reckless bill, H.R. 1216. Republicans, and we've heard this over and over again, want to destroy and to deny seniors long-term affordable health care by eliminating programs that are training the future health workforce of our country. This legislation is really part of an ongoing Republican attack on Medicare under the guise of deficit reduction and fiscal responsibility. It really is about privatizing Medicare, and of course that means that there will be some winners and there will be some losers. The Republican plan to end Medicare threatens the healthy and secure retirement that we promised American seniors. In fact, an end to Medicare is an end to a lifeline that millions of seniors rely on. Medicare gives peace of mind to millions of Americans who pay into it all their lives. The Republicans want to give aging Americans a voucher, mind you, that will not come close to covering the cost of health care instead of maintaining and improving Medicare. Sure, waste, fraud and abuse must be addressed wherever we find it, including the Pentagon, but we disagree with the Republican agenda that the program must be killed. The Republicans want to end this program when millions of Medicare beneficiaries are struggling to make ends meet, and when we know that Medicare-eligible beneficiaries will double over the next 20 years. Republicans have the wrong priorities--focused on letting the rich get richer on the backs of the middle class and the most vulnerable in our Nation. Under the guise of reform, Republicans would increase costs for seniors and cut benefits while giving tax cuts to millionaires, subsidies to oil companies, and sending desperately needed jobs overseas. If the Republicans get their way, millions of seniors would immediately begin paying higher costs for prescription drugs. The impact of killing Medicare will be the most severe on vulnerable and underserved populations, including our seniors of color, while negatively impacting all seniors who rely on Medicare to protect their health and economic security. An end to Medicare is really an end to a lifeline that millions of seniors rely on. If Republicans have their way, millionaires will continue to get big bonuses while millions of Americans fall deeper into poverty. Madam Chair, approximately 43.5 million Americans were living in poverty in 2009, but did you know that nearly 4 million of those are seniors? Given our challenged economy, we can't expect these numbers to have improved since 2009. Medicare is part of a promise made to hardworking Americans to ensure that they would not lack the security of having health care. And so rather than stand silently while Republicans destroy a program that protects vulnerable populations, we are here to speak up and stand up for our mothers and our fathers, our grandmothers and our grandfathers, our aunts and our uncles, and yes, our young people and our children, to be their voice in the House of Representatives. We are here to declare that Medicare should be protected and improved to protect our Nation's seniors and most vulnerable populations, and we are here to say that we want to secure it for future generations. Ending Medicare really does end this promise and the security for millions of Americans today and in the future. So we are here today to defend Medicare and the support that it gives to our seniors. We must ensure that those who have worked hard their entire lives strengthening our Nation have the health security that they need and deserve in their later years.

Ms. LEE. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. In this vein, we must give special priority to programs that protect vulnerable populations, including internally displaced persons--women, children, persons with disabilities, and others. We must ensure that these populations are significantly involved in recovery efforts, which reinforces their protection. The United Nations Secretary General, for example, has specifically stated that women should be involved in security decisions that affect their daily lives as a means of combating the alarming level of gender-based violence since the earthquake. On the topic of vulnerable populations, we must take a critical look at the resumption of deportations to Haiti. Given the fragile state in which Haiti remains, I call on the Department of Homeland Security to halt deportations until it proves that its policy does not violate international human rights laws and until it demonstrates that Haiti is able to support the influx of deportees. If we are truly committed to helping our neighbors, we must ensure that we are not assisting Haiti with one hand while undermining its stability with the other.

Ms. LEE. Finally, we must continue to support the Haitian Public Health Ministry to prevent the spread of cholera, treat those affected with the disease, and build up health systems. The international community must plan for the long-term presence of this disease, unfortunately, which is now endemic, and provide the necessary resources to ensure that this planning is thorough and complete. Throughout this unceasing series of tragedies and crises, Haitians have continued to demonstrate unwavering resilience, dignity, and courage. So I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Ms. LEE. First, let me thank the gentlelady from Florida for yielding and for her leadership on so many issues, especially as it relates to her community, her district, Haitians, Haiti, and the Haitian diaspora. I rise in support of H.R. 1016, the Assessing Progress in Haiti Act, legislation which I authored to direct the United States Government to report on the status of humanitarian, reconstruction, and development efforts in the aftermath of the tragic earthquake of January 12, 2010. Let me thank Chairwoman Ros-Lehtinen for her leadership and for her assistance in helping bring this bill to the floor. I also thank Ranking Member Berman, Chairman Mack, Ranking Member Engel, the staffs of the Foreign Affairs Committee, my staff, as well as the Republican and Democratic leaders' offices for bringing this bill to the floor. I would also like to acknowledge the hard work of my Congressional Black Caucus colleagues. You just heard from Congresswoman Maxine Waters in terms of her leadership and her commitment to the people of Haiti and of so many others who have worked tirelessly in support of the Haitian people in ongoing United States humanitarian and reconstruction efforts in Haiti. Today, we are provided with an opportunity to not only remember those who have lost their lives but to reaffirm the commitment of the United States to support Haitians as they struggle to combat the ongoing cholera epidemic and to rebuild their neighborhoods, their country, and their lives following the devastation of January 12. Following the earthquake, many of us came together to pass a bill that I authored, H. Res. 1021. This was passed by an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 411-1. This resolution expressed solidarity with the Haitian people and our support for the long-term reconstruction needs of the country. Through the bill on the floor today, we are provided with the next step--with an opportunity to assess the progress that we have made, the extraordinary challenges that remain, and the areas in which improvement is greatly needed. As many of us have been many, many times over the years, I traveled to Haiti immediately following the earthquake and again in November during Haiti's recent elections. Once again, let me just say that I saw real progress being made. Of course, the cholera outbreak, an ongoing devastating setback, though, revealed the ramped-up capacity of Haiti's national laboratory. The lab was able to identify the cholera strain very rapidly, improving our ability to respond to the outbreak--a feat that would really have been impossible just a year earlier. However, significant improvements remain desperately needed. The unprecedented relief effort has given way to a sluggish, at best, reconstruction effort. Part of this pace can be attributed to the sheer magnitude of the problems Haiti faces as well as Haiti's legal and bureaucratic hurdles, including the lack of an adequate land tenure policy. Without a doubt, though, part of the blame rests in the lack of urgency--mind you, the lack of urgency--on the part of the international community. At the International Donors' Conference in March 2010, 58 donors pledged over $5.5 billion to support Haiti's Action Plan for Recovery and Development. According to the United Nations, as of March of this year, only 37 percent of these funds have been disbursed. This is unacceptable. If we are to break the cycle of disaster-emergency relief-disaster, in which Haiti has been trapped for many years, we must act with the same sense of urgency in reconstruction as we did immediately following the quake. In addition to delivering on our promises, we must ensure that those promises are in line with the will of the Haitian people. The international community recognized early on that, if our efforts were to be sustainable, they had to reflect the priorities of the people of Haiti. The establishment of the Interim Haiti Recovery Commission was a very good idea in this regard; and moving forward, we must ensure that it is inclusive, transparent, and adequately resourced. Additionally, we must substantially improve our communication with and the participation of Haitian civil society. The United States and the United Nations are sponsoring outreach for civil society organizations; however, many Haitians still hold the perception that recovery efforts are dominated by exclusive foreign actors. Unless civil society, which are the people of Haiti, is involved in every major stage of the post-earthquake response, this perception will remain, and it will prove detrimental to the sustainability of our efforts.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. I want to thank our ranking member for his leadership and for leading for so many years on so many important issues. Madam Speaker, here we go again. Instead of working on creating jobs and jump-starting the economy, we're debating another cynical and divisive attempt to strip away the rights of women. Republicans continue to perpetrate their war on women while millions of people around the country are desperate for jobs to help provide for their families. Let me be clear. Current law already bans Federal funds from being used for abortions. That is a fact--even though I personally think we should get rid of that ban. What's next? Are we going to block transportation funding because it might be used to build a road to a hospital that provides a road to abortion? Come on. By the logic of this bill, any type of Federal funding, whether it's health related or not, would become abortion money. That is such a cynical ploy on the majority side. This bill specifically attacks low-income women in the District of Columbia by permanently prohibiting the District from spending its purely local funds on abortions for low-income women.

Ms. LEE. These women in the District have already begun to feel the terrible effects of the rider passed already in the CR. This is outrageous. It's ideologically driven and it's dangerous. So let's reject this bill and this attack and this dangerous war on women, especially low-income women. Vote ``no'' on H.R. 3.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, the American people want to know, Where are the jobs? After 17 weeks of controlling the House, Republicans have no plan to create jobs and no plan to spur economic growth. Instead, they proposed a budget that puts our country on a road to ruin. They want to end Medicare, gut Medicaid, strip funding for Pell Grants and elementary and secondary education for our students, while hobbling our Nation's transportation infrastructure. Yet again this week, Republicans are offering slogans instead of solutions: ``Drill Baby Drill,'' ``Kill the Bill.'' These slogans don't amount to a plan to create jobs or guarantee access to health care in America. Instead of another very cynical attempt to repeal health reform and perpetrate their war on women, and instead of offering oil companies free reign off our coasts, we should be working together to help the unemployed and to create jobs. We must not forget the 99ers and we must help them, people who have moved out of their unemployment benefits. They've actually maxed out. And we must invest in our country to stimulate job creation. Democrats have a plan while Republicans can only offer rhetoric.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the extraordinary career and long-time spiritual guidance of Rabbi Steven Chester as he retires from over 22 years at the helm of East Bay's oldest Synagogue, Temple Sinai, located in the City of Oakland. Under Rabbi Chester's excellent leadership, Temple Sinai has become even more effective in the promotion of worship, education, service and volunteerism within its large congregation, and throughout our community. Additionally, with the completion of the new Rabbi Steven and Leona Chester Campus, the Rabbi's work and his family's many contributions have formed a tangible legacy within Temple Sinai. Consistent with his many years of service, Rabbi Chester's namesake is a place of gathering and good works that will serve both the modern and traditional needs of his beloved congregation. Rabbi Steven Chester's multi-faceted career began long before his tenure at Temple Sinai. After receiving his bachelor's degree in History from the University of California, Los Angeles, he earned a B.H.L from Hebrew Union College in Los Angeles and an M.H.L from Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati, Ohio. He spent a seventh year of rabbinical studies in Israel, and was ordained in 1971. By the time of his ordination, Rabbi Chester was already a vocal advocate for many social issues, including supporting civil rights and ending the war in Vietnam. This early penchant for activism and the promotion of peace and human dignity would play a role in Rabbi Chester's spiritual teachings and community service throughout the span of his career. Spending five years of his rabbinate at Temple Beth Israel in Jackson, Michigan, Rabbi Chester utilized proximity to the state's main prison to provide weekly counseling and spiritual services to its prisoners as the facility's Jewish chaplain. From 1976 to 1989, Rabbi Chester served Temple Israel, located in Stockton, California, where he was also an adjunct professor in the Religious Studies department at the University of the Pacific. Over two decades ago, he left Stockton to become Rabbi at Temple Sinai. Founded in 1875, the Synagogue is a historic landmark that continues to serve the largest Jewish community in the East Bay and has deep roots in the Oakland community. During Rabbi Chester's tenure, he added a pre-school, introduced adult education programs and supported the congregation's return to more traditional practices, including the re-introduction of Hebrew into the service. He also continued the congregation's history of advocating for social justice by championing local affordable housing and health care for the underserved, supporting women's reproductive rights and protesting the genocide in Darfur. Whether participating in the Hurricane Katrina prayer service at the Oakland Arena, taking a bold public stance on global conflicts, or sponsoring a school for the poor and orphaned in Siem Reap, Cambodia-- Rabbi Chester has inspired many through his insight and actions. In fact, among his many accolades, Rabbi Chester was voted the 2006 Reader's Choice for ``Minister/Rabbi/Imam with the Biggest Heart'' in the East Bay Express. On behalf of the residents of California's 9th Congressional District, Rabbi Steven Chester, I salute you. I thank you and your wife, Leona, for your countless contributions to the well-being of our East Bay community. Your work promoting the values and traditions of Judaism has served our many Jewish community members and enriched the amazing diversity we enjoy in Oakland. I congratulate you on your many achievements, and I wish you and your loved ones all the best in this next chapter of life.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the extraordinary career of California State Senator Loni Hancock as we celebrate 40 years of her dedicated public service. Having served on local, state and federal levels of government throughout her career, she made history as the first woman elected to be Mayor of the City of Berkeley. Senator Hancock continues to be a celebrated, invaluable member of the California State Legislature, and we join together in praise of her remarkable contributions to the Bay Area, California, and beyond. Raised on the East Coast, Loni Hancock received her B.A. from Ithaca College in 1963. After moving to Berkeley with her family upon graduation, she earned an M.A. in Social Psychology from the Wright Institute in 1978. Her four decades of advocacy for social justice, environmental protection, economic development and access to high- quality, affordable education and health care began with her involvement in the historical political movements of the 1960s and 1970s. Like many involved in Berkeley's hotbed of political activism, Ms. Hancock's opposition to the war in Vietnam and her work championing racial justice and women's equality led her to community organizing. She was active in the Community for New Politics (which later became the Berkeley Coalition), Women for Peace, and Bay Area Women Against Rape. In 1971, Loni Hancock began eight years of service as an elected member of Berkeley City Council. In that role, she had the opportunity to shape programs and policies that reflected the nation's burgeoning civic reforms, including affirmative action hiring of women and people of color, job and benefits restructuring for city workers, and the administration of parental leave, rent control, recycling programs and campaign finance reform. As a council member, she also successfully pushed to preserve the Berkeley marina and its surrounding wildlife from development. From 1986 to 1994, she served two terms as the first elected woman Mayor of Berkeley, resulting in the city's urban renaissance and the revitalization of its downtown. During a tough economic climate, she balanced seven consecutive city budgets, forged innovative city partnerships with the school district and led efforts to secure additional open space (including Ohlone Park and the East Shore State Park). From there, she served President Clinton's administration as head of the Western Regional Office of the U.S. Department of Education, where she helped direct millions in federal funding to launch after-school, early reading preparation, college preparedness and career-to-school programs in California schools. She also oversaw a host of domestic volunteer programs as President Jimmy Carter's Regional Director for ACTION (the precursor of the Corporation for National Service). In 2002, Loni Hancock began three terms representing the 14th District in the California State Assembly. She was elected to the California State Senate in 2008, and currently represents the 9th State Senate District. As a State Legislator, Loni Hancock has authored landmark legislation and provided leadership on important issues. Her work has led to policies that improve and preserve our public schools, invest in programs to prevent crime and reduce recidivism, provide multi-faceted protection of our environment and encourage increased efficiency and fair elections in state government On behalf of California's 9th Congressional District, State Senator Loni Hancock, I salute you. Your 40 years of public service have made an indelible mark in our community. Thank you for your continued work, and best wishes to you and your loved ones in the years to come.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the African American Education Task Force, co-chaired by Mr. Oscar Wright and Mrs. Wandra Boyd, for its record of success in encouraging and acknowledging academic achievement by African American youth in California's Oakland Unified School District. Today, the African American Education Task Force and the Oakland Unified School District will celebrate a successful decade of recognizing our local African American students' Honor Roll status. The African American Education Task Force Academic Achievement Celebration takes place at the ACTS Full Gospel Church, pastored by Bishop Bob Jackson in Oakland, California. During this year's event, 1,150 African American students from the 8th through 12th grades will be honored for attaining grade point averages of 3.00 or above for the 2010-2011 school year. This outstanding group of young people has accomplished a great deal, and we are pleased to commend them for their academic dedication and success. Especially in light of the great budgetary challenges faced by the State of California and the City of Oakland, these students have proven themselves to be bright, capable and resourceful. I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate each and every student for earning this distinction. Thank you for understanding and promoting the importance of staying in school. By continuing to be the best students possible and by making the most of your education, you will enjoy a full range of opportunities to achieve your personal goals, as well as give back to your communities. Your accomplishments represent the strength of your initiative and a commitment to excellence. The skills and discipline you have developed will be of great use as you continue to follow your dreams toward success. I am so very proud of you for taking personal pride in your studies. Oakland's future leaders are certainly present at this celebration of academic achievement, and I welcome your many civic contributions in the years to come. On behalf of the residents of California's 9th Congressional District, I again salute you for your exemplary academic performance. I am confident that you will continue this fine record of scholarship, service and success. Keep up the good work, and I wish you the very best in all of your future endeavors.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with my colleague, Mr. Stark to honor the extraordinary life of Mr. Richard E. Winnie, a brilliant legal mind whose combination of integrity, acumen and good humor made him an outstanding public servant and invaluable in his role as County Counsel for the County of Alameda. With Richard E. Winnie's passing on March 28, 2011 at the age of 63, we look to the remarkable legacy of his life's work and the joy he inspired in his many friends and loved ones. Richard E. Winnie was born April 14, 1947 to Emily and H. Edward Winnie in Oakland, California. The family eventually settled in Eureka, California, where Richard attended high school. He graduated magna cum laude with a B.A. in Economics from Humboldt State University, HSU, received his master's degree in Public Policy at the University of California, Berkeley, and his law degree from the University of San Francisco. Mr. Winnie's early interest in civic service and local municipalities began while still a student at HSU in his work for the Eureka City Manager's office and the Associated Students Council. His next destination was Washington, DC, where from 1971 to 1977, he served the Urban Institute's State and Local Government Research Program as a policy analyst. During his time there, Mr. Winnie authored several publications on municipal government, one of which became the Institute's largest-selling published text. In 1975, Mr. Winnie was admitted to the California Bar. He returned to his roots to serve as Oakland City Attorney from 1981 to 1987, and also worked for the cities of Berkeley, Palo Alto, and Santa Rosa. For the next 6 years, he specialized in property, business and municipal law as a partner with Jacobs, Spotswood, Ryken, and Winnie, and in 1993 began a 4-year stint as an advisor to the Government of Armenia in its transition to independence and a market economy. In fact, Mr. Winnie's penchant for international legal guidance had a global reach. Over the course of his career in the Bay Area, he also helped to develop local property laws for emerging governments throughout the South Caucases, Central Asia, Southeastern Europe, and small parts of South America and the Middle East. After specializing in public law as a partner of Oakland's Wendel, Rosen, Black, and Dean from 1994 to 1997, Mr. Winnie began his 13-year tenure as Alameda County's top legal advisor to the Board of Supervisors, County Administration and the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum Authority. In his role as County Counsel, Mr. Winnie's many accomplishments included successful litigation to restrict gun shows at the Alameda County Fair, to allow public access to Oakland's waterfronts and to confront legal clashes with local professional sports teams. Among his many accolades and associations, Mr. Winnie served numerous local boards, was a member of the U.S. Supreme Court Bar, worked to promote micro-enterprise with the New America Foundation, and received HSU's Distinguished Alumni Award in 2009. Richard E. Winnie was known for fostering mutual relationships of respect and pride among his talented staff and colleagues. In his legal dealings, he was skilled at eliciting an agreement through logic, diplomacy, and steady professionalism. And in his free time, he enjoyed being a youth mentor, an avid baseball fan, an accomplished mountain climber and a prolific party host. Mr. Winnie will be remembered as much for his ability to inspire people, as his ability to make them laugh. Today, the residents of California's 9th and 13th Congressional Districts salute and honor a stalwart member of our community and a dear friend, Mr. Richard E. Winnie. The countless contributions he made to others throughout his life are lasting and significant. We express our sincere condolences to his extended group of loved ones, friends and colleagues. He will be deeply missed.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the Republican war on women, and that is what this is. Republicans have already moved to ban the District of Columbia from using its own money for abortions. Shameful. Now they want to go after America's most trusted provider of health care services for women. Shameful. In many underserved communities, Planned Parenthood is the principal source of basic primary health services for poor and low-income women. Last year, millions of women received breast and cervical cancer screenings, testing, treatment for sexually transmitted infections, HIV and AIDS, and family planning, and contraception, mind you, through Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood saves lives. This is not about abortions. Only 3 percent of the services they provide involve abortions, and the law already prohibits Federal funding for abortions, though this law really should be repealed. This does not reduce the deficit nor create jobs. Family planning programs actually save taxpayers $4 for every $1 we invest in them. This is really about pandering to the extreme right wing that wants to take us back to the days of back-alley abortions. They want to deny family planning and basic health care services for women. This is a war on women.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. I want to thank the gentleman from Washington for yielding and also for his leadership. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this continuing resolution. Budgets are moral documents that reflect who we are as a Nation. They're not just about dollars and cents. These cuts won't create jobs, foster economic opportunity, or provide pathways out of poverty. Instead, this bill eliminates billions in investments in our workforce, our transportation infrastructure, our small businesses and, most importantly, in our people. It's a bold assault on millions of people who rely on our safety net. These budget cuts and warped priorities should be a moral outrage to every Member of this body. That's why 36,000 people and approximately 30 Members of Congress have joined the faith community in a 24-hour fast to highlight the enormous impact, the devastating impact of these budget cuts. This bill is nothing more than a tea party checklist targeting programs that help the most vulnerable: $504 million from the WIC Program, $300 million from COPS, $125 million from Dislocated Worker Assistance programs, $49 million for mentoring children of inmates, $17 million for Title X family planning programs, and $25 million for Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing vouchers. Instead of targeting low-income and middle-income individuals and the residents of the District of Columbia particularly, and especially low- income women and women of color, we should be serious about getting our bloated military budget together and reduced and end these three wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya. We could save billions, mind you, billions of dollars by ending these wars. Madam Speaker, we should reject these cuts which hurt our most vulnerable populations and the residents of the District of Columbia. It's shameful. It's a moral disgrace. And I urge a ``no'' vote on it.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I missed rollcall vote No. 225 on H.R. 1246. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on this vote.