Ed Pastor

Mr. PASTOR

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Speaker, during the week of September 22, I missed several votes due to the passing of my father. Had I been present, I would have voted in the following manner: On votes number 509, 510, 511, 513, 514, 515, 516, 517, 519, 520, 521, 522 and 523, I would have voted aye. On vote number 518 I would have voted no. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the understanding of the House and thank each Member and each of my colleagues for their kind words.

Mr. PASTOR

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Speaker, I rise before you today to pay tribute to a man who has served as not only a pioneer in his profession but as a shining role model to our community. I speak of none other than Mr. Tommy Nunez, who recently retired as a referee from the National Basketball Association (NBA) after thirty years of service. Considered one of the most respected and honored referees of the game, Tommy began his officiating career with the NBA in 1972 earning the distinction of being the first Latino to referee in any major sport. Throughout his thirty-year career, he has officiated 2,019 NBA games, 64 playoff games and the 1992 All-Star Game. He began officiating basketball games in predominantly black and Hispanic leagues in his hometown of Phoenix, Arizona. Sharpening his skills he moved on to officiate high school and junior college games. His big break came when an NBA official happened to see him work an exhibition game with the Phoenix Suns and suggested he try out to become an NBA referee. He went on to become one of 16 out of 1000 applicants to join this elite group. However, Tommy's accomplishments off the court far exceed what he has accomplished with the NBA. His dedication and service to his community have been widely recognized. He speaks and gives clinics for children throughout the country encouraging them to stay in school. His annual National Hispanic Basketball Classic for young Latinos raises money for youth activities. To add to this, he directs a summer work program designed to introduce young adults to the basic principals of employment and instill in them a sense of responsibility and pride. Tommy's recognitions, to name a few, include being an honoree of the 1994 Hispanic Heritage Awards, inducted into the National Hispanic Sports Hall of Fame in 2001, and presented with the 1992 Roberto Clemente Award for excellence by the National Council of La Raza. As you can clearly see he serves as an inspiration to us all. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Mr. Tommy Nunez for his work and dedication to his community and to his sport; and best of wishes on his retirement.

Mr. PASTOR

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate a couple who will soon celebrate their 50th wedding anniversary and to honor their outstanding contributions to our community in Phoenix, Arizona. Felix came to the United States as a migrant worker, toiling the fertile fields of California in the late 40's working for the Acosta Company. In 1950 he accepted a construction position refurbishing the Sacramento Fairgrounds. He worked very hard so that he could send money back home to his beloved family. Mexico was never far from his heart and he would visit when time allowed. On one of his trips back home in 1950 he met Soledad. He returned to California to continue to help support his brothers and sisters but his heart was in Autlan, Jalisco were he returned in 1952 to work and on September 29, 1953 Felix and Soledad were married in the company of friends and family. Felix worked for the Mexico Department of Geology and Minerals from 1952 to 1957. The young couple had their first son, Juan Manuel in 1956 followed by their first daughter Maria in 1957. Felix and Soledad made the difficult decision of leaving loved ones and moving to the United States. They knew that their future and that of their children was in the North. They maintained a fierce loyalty to the family that they left behind and continued to help fund and educate their siblings while living in their new adopted home. The Coronas first worked as laborers on the Dansie Farm in Northern California. They wanted to achieve the American dream for themselves and their children and in 1958 they developed a company that helped ranchers cultivate their crops. During this time the young family grew to include six more children, all born in Marysville, California. They welcomed Armando in 1958, Teresa in 1959, Esperanza in 1961, Hector in 1962, Alex in 1964 and Beatrice in 1965. In 1967, Felix started what has been a rich legacy of success, achievement and accomplishment when he formed a partnership with life long friends, Raul Ybarra, Albert Rodriguez and Francisco Mejia. They owned and operated Spanish Movie houses in Marysville, San Jose, San Bernardino and Orange County. In 1970, Felix, Soledad and all eight children moved to Phoenix, Arizona to expand the business. They ran the Palace West Theater from 1970 to 1987. During that time, they saw the need for expanding the Hispanic family entertainment in Arizona and they met that need by opening the Cine Mexico in Chandler in 1979 and the Hayden West Plaza in 1980. This was a busy time for the young and ambitious family, running a couple of restaurants such as the Courtroom Restaurant in downtown Phoenix as well as a record distribution company, entertainment promotions, and gift shops. During this time the Coronas started working on what was going to be their greatest accomplishment as both a family and as leaders in the Hispanic business community. In 1976 they started construction of the Lienzo Charro El Herradero in Laveen, Arizona. Little did they imagine that they were embarking on a project which one day would be known nationally and internationally as Corona Ranch. With Felix at the mast, few deals were made that were not successful. His dream of bringing true Mexican culture and entertainment to the masses has been accomplished during the last 25 years. The Coronas have enjoyed an accomplished, successful and fulfilling life with their 8 children and 18 grandchildren by their side. And although semi-retired, this couple is not content to sit on their laurels. They have been active in community, cultural and religious organizations such as the Friendly House, Ala de La Gente, St. Anthony's Catholic Church and the Laveen Lions. Mr. Speaker, as you can see, Felix and Soledad have truly achieved the American dream and have contributed greatly to our community in Phoenix, Arizona. Therefore, I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating them on their 50th anniversary and for their contributions.

Mr. PASTOR

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Speaker, I would like to pay tribute to a man whose tireless dedication to our community has enriched the lives of our citizens, and especially our youth, in the City of Phoenix. For his contributions, Mr. James Colley has recently been posthumously awarded the Ed Pastor Cultural Awareness Award. The Ed Pastor Cultural Awareness Award provides an opportunity to highlight innovative culturally sensitive programs and the visionary, creative leaders who design and implement them. This award also recognizes any research related to the promotion of diversity issues in parks and recreation. It is fitting that this initial award is awarded to a man who directed and created innovative programs and services throughout his career in parks and recreation. The Ed Pastor Award represents the late Mr. James Colley's commitment to all citizens regardless of ethnicity, gender, or age. Minority youth have long suffered at the hands of gangs, drug abuse, teen pregnancy, and other social ills. Jim dedicated significant and substantial amounts of department resources to address the needs of youth throughout the City of Phoenix. He also forged collaboration efforts with city and community organizations in an effort to leverage the City's resources. Jim personally visited many of the inner city areas of Phoenix to discuss issues with the youth themselves. By creating a Youth Advisory Board he was able to get the input directly from those individuals primarily impacted by program policies and their implementation. Input from the Youth Advisory board led to the creation of Camp Colley, a camp created for inner city youth located in Northern Arizona. During his final two years as Director, Jim had the vision of creating a Latino Institute to meet the ever increasing demands of the burgeoning growth of the Latino population in the City of Phoenix. The Latino Institute now in its third year has implemented community forums in the cities of Phoenix and Glendale. For these reasons Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the memory of Mr. James Colley as this year's recipient of the Ed Pastor Cultural Awareness Award.

Mr. PASTOR

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Speaker, due to my father's serious heart condition, I was called back to Arizona, and I missed several rollcall votes on Wednesday and Thursday. Had I been here, I would have voted in the following manner: On rollcall No. 429, final passage of H.R. 2800, the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act, I would have voted ``aye.'' On rollcall No. 432, final passage of H.R. 2739, the United States- Singapore Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall No. 436, final passage of H.R. 2738, the United States- Chile Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall No. 444, final passage of H.R. 2210, the School Readiness Act, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall No. 445, final passage of H.R. 2427, the Pharmaceutical Market Access Act, I would have voted ``aye.'' Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the understanding of the House and my constituents on this issue.

Mr. PASTOR

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the Medicare Prescription Drug and Modernization Act. This bill, long heralded by the Republicans and the Administration as a comprehensive overhaul of the Medicare system, will do nothing to alleviate the harsh effect on our seniors of the high cost of prescription drugs. It only will continue to aggravate the cause of health care inflation. Depsite all Republican claims to the contrary, the bill, which calls for private drug-only plans, would not make drugs affordable. It has no mechanism for keeping prices down, no negotiation for acceptable terms, no guarantee of defined and stable costs. Seniors would be at the mercy of private plans. They would lose their choice of doctors. They would be at risk of continuous coverage. Private plans would only have to promise to stay in the program for one year. We've had these problems before with the Medicare Plus Choice program which failed to deliver its expanded benefits, leaving millions of seniors out on a limb. Seniors have voiced their concerns. They fear the absence of provisions to limit drug prices and the lack of certainty about the future cost and coverage provided. Many seniors in rural areas are worried because they have no access to private plans and would have no ``fallback'' to offer coverage. Seniors are particularly concerned with the ``gap-in-coverage'' that means no coverage at all for drug spending between $2,000 and $5,100. Instead of passing this plan which would privatize Medicare, we should support a plan that would establish a real Medicare prescription drug benefit within the Medicare program. The plan should be available to everyone regardless of income or place of residence. It should be voluntary and comprehensive. And, most importantly, it should be affordable. The Medicare Prescription Drug and Modernization Act fills none of these requirements. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I vote ``no'' on H.R. 1.

Mr. PASTOR

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have my name removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 660.

Mr. PASTOR

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening to express my opposition to this Conference Agreement. This country needs jobs. Since Inauguration Day in January, 2001, more than 2.7 million people in this country have lost their jobs. Though we took the important step today in this House to extend unemployment benefits for those still unable to find work, the most important piece of legislation we will pass today, the duplicitously named Jobs and Growth Reconciliation Tax Act, is one that will do nothing to help them get another job. It will do nothing to stimulate the economy. It will do nothing to cause the large corporations in this country to create jobs. It will do nothing to convince the small businessman to add a position or two to his payroll. The only thing this bill will do is put this nation further in debt and create bitter fiscal hardships for future generations. I suppose if there is a bright side to this bill it is that it increases the debt by only $350 billion, whereas the President initially wanted to add another $726 billion in deficit spending. But, don't be fooled. This $350 billion still comes at the cost of the Social Security Trust Fund. It still comes at the cost of missing another opportunity to help elder Americans buy their prescription drugs. It still comes at the cost of falling down schools and the falling down dreams of the working single mother trying to find a way to put her children through college. The President has once again found a way to take care of the people who need taking care of the least. He has promoted a tax bill that makes the wealthy wealthier, while doing nothing for the working men and women of America. And, while the working class is left further behind, the people who are unable to find work, the unemployed, are completely abandoned. Difficult economic times require bold and innovative solutions. This bill is only bold in its unfairness, and only innovative in its injustice. I urge my colleagues to reject this misguided legislation.

Mr. PASTOR

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to rise today to welcome the XIX Annual Convention of the Association of Peruvian Institutions of America and Canada, AIPEUC, to our Nation's Capital May 21 to 25, 2003. I particularly want to extend warm hospitality to a special participant at this convention, Peruvian Assistant Secretary of State Manuel Rodriguez, and to delegates from all eight chapters representing AIPEUC. The AIPEUC, a nonprofit entity for technical assistance and support, is made up of 300 associated institutions that group Peruvian men and women from all occupations living in the United States and Canada. Its purpose is to strengthen the traditional ties of friendship and cooperation that unite Peru with the United States of America and Canada in the sectors of education, health, business, arts, and sports. The AIPEUC is recognized for many important achievements including: Promoting the ``Nationality Law'' by which Peruvians residing in another country may keep dual nationality; supporting the victims of the 1996 Nazca Earthquake; constructing an education center in Nazca for 250 children; building a health center in San Juan de la Virgen in Tumbes for pediatric, dental, and general medicine; supporting surgical procedures for harelip for 50 children in Catacaos, Piura; and building a center for 80 adolescent mothers in Huancyo. The AIPEUC represents an important sector of the American community and I am sure my colleagues are happy to join me in recognizing this commendable organization on the occasion of their XIX Annual Convention.

Mr. PASTOR

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in total and complete opposition to this ill-advised legislation that masquerades as a vehicle for creating jobs. There is nothing, I repeat, nothing in this bill that will create any jobs. The President has traveled throughout the country saying this is a jobs bill and if we, once again, give massive tax cuts to the top 10 percent of earners in this country, we will have more jobs. Nothing could be further from the truth. Have we forgotten that in this very month, just 2 years ago, we passed the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Act Reconciliation Act which cut taxes by $1.35 trillion. And, do the Members of this House realize that unemployment, now, 2 years later, remains at 6 percent. This House passed one of the largest tax cuts in the history of the Nation in 2001, in hopes of creating jobs and growing the economy, and we have created no jobs, in fact, we have lost almost 2.7 million private sector jobs, and the economy grows at a measly 1.6 percent, the weakest economic growth in 50 years. Bottom line, Mr. Chairman, huge tax cuts for upper income individuals do nothing to create jobs. What this bill will do, though, is continue to add to the Nation's debt. This tax cut will mean that we will have annual budget deficits year after year after year. This House has already passed a budget resolution with a projected deficit of $385 billion in fiscal year 2004. And, if we don't use the Social Security trust fund to mask this deficit, we are going to put ourselves $558.4 billion further in debt just this year. Economist after economist, including Alan Greenspan who testified to the Financial Service Committee just last week, say that the increased deficits caused by these tax cuts will actually damage the economy. Even our own Congressional Budget Office has said that the effect of this tax cut is not obvious. Mr. Chairman, over 74,000 hardworking Americans are losing their jobs every month. In the last 3 months, more than a half million people have lost their jobs. The President and this House choose to address that crisis by providing another massive tax cut to the wealthiest of Americans, in hopes that this will somehow put these people back to work. I must admit that I am missing the logic in this argument. And the millions of Americans who have lost their jobs since the last tax cut in May 2001 are also missing the logic, in fear. Mr. Chairman, we should send this bill back to the committee and to the White House and ask that they come back with meaningful and serious proposals to move this economy forward. If we want to cut taxes, cut the taxes of those middle class Americans who will actually put that money back into the economy. If we want to create jobs, let's pass legislation that increases educational and training programs and makes sure that large and small businesses invest their funds in programs to put people back to work. This bill does neither. It is time for serious solutions to serious problems. Politically motivated tax cuts for the wealthiest of Americans will not help the elderly pay for their prescription drugs. These tax cuts will not help the unemployed father live his dream of putting his children through college. These tax cuts will do nothing to help the single mother, who works in a factory or cleans 50 hotel rooms a day, find a better job in hopes of giving her children a better life. Let us reject this masquerade. Let us do something to help those who need our help.

Mr. PASTOR

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate and honor a young Arizona student from my district who has achieved national recognition for outstanding volunteer service in his community. Mr. Christepher Romero of Phoenix has just been named one of my state's top honorees in the 2003 Prudential Spirit of Community Awards program, an annual honor conferred on the most impressive student volunteers in each state, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. Christepher, a junior at Sunnydale High School in Phoenix is being recognized for having developed a program to help keep at-risk teens in an inner-city neighborhood away from crime and drugs. Being raised by a mother who struggled with a drug and alcohol addiction, he was recruited by a neighborhood gang. He was later adopted and given the opportunity to turn his life around. As a way to honor his adoptive parents for helping him become a better person he decided to put together a program that would help at-risk teens. He approached a police officer working at his former school, and became a volunteer mentor. Christepher soon began to put together activities such as swimming and soccer, CPR and nutrition classes, and organizing neighborhood clean-ups. He also has encouraged kids to get involved in fundraising activities to help pay for annual theme park trips. Christepher should be extremely proud to have been singled out from such a large group of dedicated volunteers. I heartily applaud him for his initiative in seeking to make a positive impact on the lives of others. He has demonstrated a level of commitment and accomplishment that is truly extraordinary in today's world, and deserves our sincere admiration and respect. His actions show that young Americans can play important roles in our communities, and that America's community spirit continues to hold tremendous promise for the future.

Mr. PASTOR

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Speaker, I rise before you today to pay tribute to one of Arizona's oldest family-owned and woman-run businesses, El Charro Restaurant. El Charro has become an institution in the City of Tucson and is celebrating its 80th anniversary. The story and legacy of El Charro goes beyond decades of culinary excellence in serving fine Mexican cuisine. The restaurant has established deep roots within the community. Dedication and vision have enabled its two owners, Monica Flin and her grandniece Carlotta Flores, to maintain a unique atmosphere and style, which have embraced by the community and kept the enterprise strong through many difficult economic times. Founder Monica Flin, a native Tucsonan of French descent, was smart and resourceful and used her cooking talents to establish El Charro in 1922. That first restaurant opened with three tables and a small simple menu of tamales, chili and tortillas. Through the years, the restaurant continued to grow in size and reputation. The Tucson Citizen characterized Monica's charisma and colorful persona in 1952 when it wrote that: ``El Charro is not a restaurant so much as it is an extension of Monica Flin's personality.'' Through its difficult beginnings, enduring the Great Depression and expanding the business, Flin exemplified the classy, independent and strong business owner in an era in which businesswomen were rare. More than thirty years after establishing El Charro, Ms. Flin passed the business to remaining family members. Carlotta and her husband Ray Flores, Sr. were living in California at the time and returned to Tucson to assist family members with the restaurant. With no experience in restaurant operations, the couple decided to step in and revive El Charro. Carlotta carried the legacy of Monica's determination and passion for service and unique cuisine as the restaurant not only expanded, but also ventured into new venues. She began El Charro's catering businesses as well as a restaurant at the Tucson International Airport. Carlotta's vision to expanded and improve business didn't end there, as she has established a second El Charro restaurant and acquired a food production/processing facility. Managing the family's restaurants and companies has truly become a family endeavor, as Carlotta's children are involved in the operations as well. Eighty years ago, Monica Flin began a business in the small community of Tucson, Arizona. Its current guardians Carlotta Flores and her family have embraced her legacy. The restaurant and its operations have progressed and developed throughout the decades from the tiny restaurant on South 4th Avenue to a Tucson tradition renowned for its excellent Mexican food and warm environment. Therefore, Mr. Speaker I ask that you join me in honoring El Charro Restaurant, Monica Flin and the Flores family for their ongoing success and the examples they have set for businesswomen everywhere.

Mr. PASTOR

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Speaker, I call attention today to an Arizona institution that has risen from dusty frontier beginnings to become one of the nation's most successful public power companies. On Feb. 7, 2003, the Salt River River Project, generally known as SRP, will mark the centennial of its incorporation the oldest multi-purpose reclamation project in the nation. On rivers east and north of Phoenix, SRP maintains a system of six large dams and reservoirs essential to maintaining central Arizona's economy. The company also operates a generation and transmission system that provides electricity to more than 60 percent of businesses, industries and residents of the greater Phoenix metropolitan area. One could say much of SRP's one hundred-year history--how it began when pioneering settlers mortgaged their farms and lands for a federal loan to build Theodore Roosevelt Dam on the Salt River; how SRP paved the way for expanded water storage projects to quench central Arizona's thirst; how SRP got into the power business; and how it grew from hydro-power provider to Arizona's copper mines to the third largest public power utility in the U.S. While these are noteworthy achievements, SRP deserves further note for the community-minded spirit and it has continued to show since the days when a partnership between small desert farm communities led to the building of Roosevelt Dam. Many times in recent years the company's employees have been recognized locally and nationally for their spirit of volunteerism and generosity. They have led in fundraising for the United Way and have contributed time to many good causes, including litter clean-ups, school mentoring, environmental teaching, meal service at homeless shelters, Special Olympic programs, summer camps for youths--the list is long. In short, one could say that the community partnerships that led to SRP's formation a century ago have instilled in the company an ongoing commitment to community service. And, while SRP in virtually every respect must operate by the same competitive standards as private industry, it has not forgotten the meaning of the word ``public'' as a public power and water provider. Mr. Speaker, I wish SRP a bright future of continuing good service in the year of its centennial.

Mr. PASTOR

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Speaker, although I am a strong supporter of fully utilizing all possible resources to combat this new and tragic war on terrorism, I have serious reservations over the proposal being presented to us today. Realistically, this bill would do nothing more than rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic. What we really need is to address basic agency policies and promote efficient exchange of information without diminishing critical agency missions. Keeping major intelligence gathering sources separated from this agency and moving desks across the hall, begs the question as to what we will be accomplishing by this move? Will it result in a smoother information flow, not just from one Washington office to another, but to the actual communities which must have as much lead time as possible to prepare for attack? Are we actually expanding agency areas of responsibility or will it be business as usual? What are we really doing to ensure dam, water supply, energy sources, and transportation safety? What are we really doing to provide an enhanced capability to address hazardous material, chemical, or biological threats? What are we really doing to improve our risk, threat, and vulnerability assessments? What are we really doing to improve the delivery of emergency food, shelter, and medical care in the event of another tragedy? Troublesome are inconsistencies found in the bill. For example, is the Administration's repeated statements that this bill would consolidate training programs, yet, under Section 403 we see the Department of Justice's Office of Domestic Programs which does COPS training being placed under ``Border and Transportation Security,'' while other training programs are being place under ``Emergency Preparedness and Response'' under Section 503. Another example is found under Section 201(d)7, where the Under Secretary for Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection is charged with exercising primary responsibility for public advisories related to threats to homeland security, while in Section 214(g) it states that the federal government may provide advisories, alerts, warnings to relevant companies, targeted sectors, other government entities, or the general public regarding potential threats. Where is the coordination and are we creating two separate sets of warnings? Questions have been raised on the coordination mechanism between Homeland Security officials and other Departments. For example, if Homeland Security officials are designated to establish research efforts and attempt to direct Department of Defense agencies on those efforts, who actually has final authority? In particular, I am troubled that this legislation offers so little to assist first responders, the men and women on the street who willingly put themselves in harm's way for the greater good. We must ensure that these dedicated citizens are provided with all possible resources to both protect them and support their mission. I am hopeful that this legislation is defeated and the Congress continues to consult with experts in a more circumspect manner and that crafts a measured more approach that maximizes our ability to anticipate, prevent, and react to acts to terrorism.

Mr. PASTOR

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Speaker, I support the Spratt amendment because I believe that we should not rush into war without seeking the support of our allies. We should not send American troops into combat before making a good-faith effort to put U.N. inspectors back into Iraq under a more forceful resolution. We should not turn to a policy of preemptive attack without first providing a limited time option for peaceful resolution of the threat. This amendment would authorize the use of U.S. forces in support of a new U.N. resolution mandating the elimination by force, if necessary, of all Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. If the Security Council does not pass such a resolution, the amendment calls on the President to then seek authorization for unilateral military action. The Spratt amendment demonstrates our preference for a peaceful solution and coalition support without ruling out unilateral military force if it becomes necessary. America has long stood behind the principle of exhausting diplomacy before resorting to war, and at times like this, we must lead by example.

Mr. PASTOR

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Speaker, I am committed to the war against terrorism and believe that stopping Saddam Hussein from developing weapons of mass destruction is a necessary part of that effort. But at this time, however, I believe it is premature to authorize a unilateral attack on Iraq. Working with the international community is the surest means of addressing this threat effectively, sharing costs and resources and ensuring stability in Iraq and throughout the Middle East in the event of a regime change. While the President has spoken of the value of a coalition effort, the resolution before the House today undermines the importance of our allies and of maintaining the momentum of international cooperation in the wider war on terrorism. I support the Spratt amendment to this resolution. This amendment would authorize the use of U.S. forces in support of a new U.N. Security Council resolution mandating the elimination, by force, if necessary, of all Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and means of producing such weapons. Should the Security Council fail to produce such a resolution, the amendment calls on the President then to seek authorization for unilateral military action. In this way, the amendment emphasizes our preference for a peaceful solution and coalition support, while recognizing that military force and unilateral action may be appropriate at some point. We should not rush into war without the support of our allies. We should not send American troops into combat before making a full-faith effort to put U.N. inspectors back into Iraq under a more forceful resolution. We should not turn to a policy of preemptive attack, which we have so long and so rightly condemned, without first providing a limited-time option for peaceful resolution of the threat. America has long stood behind the principles of exhausting diplomacy before resorting to war; and, at times like this, we must lead by example.

Mr. PASTOR

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Speaker, I am committed to the war against terrorism, and believe that stopping Saddam Hussein from developing weapons of mass destruction is a necessary part of that effort. At this time, however, I believe it is premature to authorize a unilateral attack on Iraq. Working with the international community is the surest means of addressing this threat effectively, sharing costs and resources, and ensuring stability in Iraq and throughout the Middle East in the event of a regime change. While the President has spoken of the value of a coalition effort, the resolution before the House today undermines the importance of our allies and of maintaining the momentum of international cooperation in the wider war on terrorism. I support the Spratt amendment to the resolution. This amendment would authorize the use of U.S. forces in support of a new U.N. Security Council resolution mandating the elimination, by force if necessary, of all Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and means of producing such weapons. Should the Security Council fail to produce such a resolution, the amendment calls on the President to then seek authorization for unilateral military action. In this way, the amendment emphasizes our preference for a peaceful solution and coalition support while recognizing that military force and unilateral action may be appropriate at some point. We should not rush into war without the support of our allies. We should not send American troops into combat before making a good faith effort to put U.N. inspectors back into Iraq, under a more forceful resolution. We should not turn to a policy of preemptive attack, which we have so long and so rightly condemned, without first providing a limited-time option for peaceful resolution of the threat. America has long stood behind the principle of exhausting diplomacy before resorting to war, and at times like this we must lead by example.

Mr. PASTOR

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Speaker, I rise before you today to recognize an outstanding citizen who has been honored for his life-long dedication to Latino issues through which he has impacted the lives of many in our community. On September 6th, the Honorable Armando de Leon was honored by his peers at the annual Profiles of Success Hispanic Leadership Awards presentation in Phoenix, Arizona. This event, coordinated by Valle del Sol, a local non-profit community based organization, kicks off National Hispanic Heritage Month in Arizona and is now in it's thirteenth year of honoring worthy individuals. Judge de Leon began a 32-year career in the U.S. Air Force Reserve as a judge advocate. After being admitted to practice in Arizona, he worked briefly as a law clerk/bailiff. In 1965, Armando entered private practice in Phoenix, specializing in international law and serving as general counsel and volunteer pro bono attorney for twenty non-profit organizations. Armando served four years on the Phoenix City Council. He served on the Arizona-Mexico Commission and on Federal Advisory Committees to the U.S. Attorney General and INS Commissioner as well. He was appointed to the Arizona Superior Court bench in 1983 with rotations on civil litigation, criminal, domestic relations, and special assignment calendars. He chaired the Court Interpreter Policy & Bilingual Forms Committee, and the Unified Extern Program Liaison Committee of the Superior Court and the Arizona State University College of Law. Upon retirement from the bench, he returned to his hometown of Tucson, where he served as an adjunct professor at the University of Arizona College of Law. Armando's extensive community involvement includes serving as general counsel and board member to the National Council of La Raza, referral attorney for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, board member of the Southwest Voter Registration Education Project, memberships in the Hispanic National Bar Association, Los Abogados Hispanic Bar Association, the Phoenix Hispanic-Jewish Coalition, and the League of United Latin American Citizens. He served as a General Officer and was awarded the Legion of Merit upon retirement in 1991, as well as the Distinguished Service Medal. Mr. Speaker, please join me in recognizing this outstanding citizen for his fine work and dedication. Throughout his life Judge de Leon has been a long time advocate for the Latino community and he has been a great role model for many.

Mr. PASTOR

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Speaker, I rise before you today to recognize two outstanding citizens who have been honored for their leadership qualities and service to their community. On September 6th, Mr. and Mrs. Lauro and Margarita Garcia were honored by their peers at the annual Profiles of Success Hispanic Leadership Awards presentation in Phoenix, Arizona. This event, coordinated by Valle del Sol, a local non-profit community based organization, kicks off National Hispanic Heritage Month in Arizona and is now in its thirteenth year of honoring worthy individuals. Lauro and Margarita met during his service in the U.S. Air Force, after which they moved to Phoenix where Lauro began his studies at Arizona State Teachers College. They moved to Guadalupe in 1960 and began organizing the community by teaching Catholic catechism classes in their home. What started as three students quickly grew to 165 every Saturday. In December 1964, they founded the Guadalupe Organization, which became the voice of its citizens in the absence of an elected town government. The following year, a small building was purchased and an office was opened to assist residents by distributing food, establishing a postal sub-station and registering voters. This office would become the first Office of Economic Opportunity in the state of Arizona to help establish Guadalupe's first credit union. In 1963, citizens of Guadalupe were granted the first-ever voting precinct within the town's boundaries,by Maricopa County, after extensive lobbying by the Guadalupe Organization. In 1967, President Lyndon B. Johnson and Mexican President Gustavo Diaz Ordaz recognized Lauro for his dedication in improving Guadalupe. Margarita organized a dental clinic for citizens in the mid-70s by seeking the help of volunteer dentists to provide care. She continues her community service with the local parish and most recently served on the Guadalupe Town Council. The couple also participated, along with the Guadalupe Organization, in one of the first lawsuits over the issue of bilingual education by challenging the Tempe Elementary School District in 1978 for discriminatory practices against Guadalupe's Yaqui and Mexican students. As a result of this litigation, the district was forced to adopt measures to rectify existing language deficiencies of non-English speaking students. Mr. Speaker, please join me in recognizing these outstanding citizens for their fine work and dedication. They have provided their community with vision, sacrificed to help the poor and under-represented, protected their culture and enriched the lives of Guadalupe's children.

Mr. PASTOR

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Chairman, it is with great reluctance that I must oppose H.R. 5005, the Homeland Security Act. The tragic events of September 11 thrust this nation across the threshold into an entirely new world where terrorism is a real and viable threat to the well-being of all Americans. For that reason, I supported the President when he recommended that we create a new department to address the prevention and impacts of terrorists. However, our experience with forming new cabinet posts in the past has taught us that this is an undertaking that should be done in a careful and deliberate manner, not one that is rushed to meet an arbitrary deadline. The reorganization as proposed by the President would create the third-largest Cabinet department, in terms of personnel, by combining 22 federal agencies with 170,000 to 225,000 employees and a total budget of $37.5 billion. However, that budget estimate was simply the compilation of those agencies' current budgets with no regard to the costs associated with creating an entirely new infrastructure and giving those agencies expanded areas of responsibility. Clearly, this rearranging of agencies is going to cost many billions of dollars above that budget estimate. It has been exactly 48 days since the President made his proposal, but in that time, Congress has had less than 29 working days to hold hearings, consult with experts, receive input from interested parties, and evaluate all this information. That is simply not enough time to form a sound structure that addresses Congressional oversight, elimination of redundancy, budget and labor issues, in addition to the critical delineation of areas of responsibility. Furthermore, consideration must be given to the impact that such a change will have on agency core activities which do not have a direct interface with the war on terrorism, such as Customs collecting duties and the Coast Guard rescuing people at sea. Many are concerned that these non-security missions may be diluted under the new department's mission to fight terrorism. In the few days available, an attempt was made by ten authorizing committees to hold hearings and formulate recommendations on how they thought the plan should be implemented. But after all was said and done, the 9-member Select Committee on Homeland Security dismissed many of those recommendations and gave the Administration most of its wants, irrespective of the wishes of many lawmakers. In particular, I am concerned over the White House's desire to deviate from established federal labor practices and protections such as collective bargaining rights, the potential for the Administration to assume too much fiscal power by shifting funds among agencies without Congressional oversight or approval, and the diminishment of non-security roles. With such a short time to stimulate national debate and to review the above issues, I can not support this measure.

Mr. PASTOR

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Chairman, I find myself in a very awkward situation, because I think this is the only time that I have been in opposition to my two friends from the Democratic Caucus. The gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) and I are good friends, and I have always followed the lead of the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), but do I want people to be less secure as they get on a plane? The answer is no. I fly twice a week so obviously there is a self-interest to make sure that the baggage is examined and it is safe. Did I vote for this bill? Yes, I did. At the time I thought it was needed and the deadline was there. I am a member of the Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, and since I voted for this bill and to date, I have been involved in a number of briefings, and also three hearings that involve the TSA, and I have to tell my colleagues that after listening to the testimony and reading the evidence presented to me, that I have come to the conclusion that the airports need an extension, not because they have pressured me, but because I think it is the right thing to do. If we talk about the equipment, and there is a various mix of equipment, but if we talk about the detector, it is about as big as an SUV, and it costs about $1 million, and I have been told at least in the evidence I have seen that probably it works for one out of three baggage. So at 30 percent, it is effective. I feel that if there is the case, then possibly this technology may not be the proper one, but then if my colleagues persuade me, say Ed, you know we need it and we cannot delay, let us order more of these machines, well, then, I would tell my colleagues that at least the evidence I have seen and testimony I have heard, the machines are going to take a long time to put in operation. In fact, the operator is not going to have enough equipment to install, and so in installing this equipment, it is going to take hundreds of millions of dollars for the airports to install them. I would say let us take three deep breaths and let us make a decision that would allow the airports to take reasonable time to make sure that they are safe and secure with our luggage.

Mr. PASTOR

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the work of the Arizona Coalition for New Energy Technologies. This coalition brings together over three dozen business and non-profit organizations from around Arizona to educate opinion leaders and other key stakeholders about the many benefits of renewable energy and energy efficient technologies. Since its formation in January of this year, the Arizona Coalition for New Energy Technologies has achieved some important accomplishments. It helped four Arizona state legislators launch a bipartisan Renewables and Energy Efficiency Caucus in the state legislature, modeled on the U.S. House Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Caucus of which I am a member. The mission of this state caucus, which has grown to 14 members of both parties, is to educate lawmakers about cutting-edge advances in new energy technologies to market in Arizona, the United States and the world. Under the auspices of this caucus, three member companies of the Arizona Coalition for New Energy Technologies presented a well-received informational briefing in February to state legislators and other interested parties at the state capitol in Phoenix. Arizona is a national leader in promoting clean new energy technologies through state laws and policies, which is appropriate, given our state's wealth of solar and other renewable resources. I salute the Arizona Coalition for New Energy Technologies and congratulate the Coalition for its leadership in educating key stakeholders on the growing importance of new energy technologies to the energy security of our state and nation.

Mr. PASTOR

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise before you today and take this opportunity to recognize the meritorious achievements of an outstanding Arizonan and American, Mr. Vincent Roig. Mr. Roig has distinguished himself as a leader in the essential work of providing educational opportunities for qualified citizens. From his early years as an educator and financial aid administrator at a number of universities, he dedicated himself to helping young people gain the knowledge and skills that they would need throughout their life. In 1982, he was one of the founders of the Arizona Educational Loan Marketing Corporation, the state's secondary market for Federal student loans, which is now an affiliate of the Southwest Student Services Corporation. Although the Congress of the United States had the foresight to create the Federal Family Education Loan Program, it takes the leadership and dedication of a person such as Mr. Roig, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Southwest Student Services Corporation, to effectively implement the Congress' intended goal. The Southwest Companies initially supported only students at Arizona colleges and universities. However, to date, they have provided more than $3 billion to more than one million parents and students nationally in support of providing financial access to post-secondary education. Under the initiative and leadership of Mr. Roig, not only have the Southwest Companies facilitated the availability of student financial support, they have reduced costs to the borrowers and provided the critically important informational services that ensure that low-income families understand that educational opportunity is available to them. Mr. Roig has worked tirelessly with the U.S. Department of Education, Congressional Subcommittees and the many organizations supporting student financial assistance to bring about useful change and modernization to improve service to educational institutions and students alike. In recognition of his efforts, in 2001 he was awarded the Jean S. Frohlicher Outstanding Service Award by the National Council of Higher Education Programs. This is a prestigious award for which he was chosen by his peers for his exceptional service. Today, on the occasion of the celebration of Southwest Companies' 20th Anniversary, I ask my colleagues to join me in extending our heartiest congratulations to Southwest Student Services Corporation and to Mr. Vincent Roig for his 20 years of leadership and dedication.

Mr. PASTOR

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Chairman, it has come to my attention that the application of precisely controlled heat has shown excellent results in the treatment of benign and malignant skin disease. I am aware of the great potential of the ThermoMed Instrument in this regard and the published results of physicians using it. Impressive benefits including high cure rates, non-invasive and safe treatment, rapid healing and excellent cosmetic results, confirm the applicability of this new technology for the curative treatment of diseased tissue. Accordingly, I encourage the Department of Defense to conduct clinical evaluation of the ThermoMed Instrument and its applications for treating armed forces deployed around the world.

Mr. PASTOR

Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Substitute Amendment offered by Mr. Pomeroy and in opposition to the base bill, H.R. 2143. Let me make it perfectly clear. I support an adjustment to the Estate Tax, but I believe we should address this tax in a responsible and meaningful manner. If you are a supporter of H.R. 2143, there is no reason for having this debate or this vote at this time. H.R. 2143 is an effort to fix a problem that does not happen, if it happens at all, for nine years. But the Substitute will provide immediate relief. Earlier in this Congress, I supported a proposal which would have immediate and lasting benefit for family owned small businesses and family owned farms. The Substitute is a similar proposal, and if we are interested in helping people, people who have just lost their loved ones and are facing the responsibility of paying an estate tax, we should pass the Substitute. The Substitute would immediately eliminate the Estate Tax for all but one percent of the estates in the country. It does so by increasing the estate tax exclusion to $6 million effective on January 1, 2003. Under current law and H.R. 2143 this does not occur until sometime in 2009. If we really want to have an impact on people who are facing an estate tax that could cause them to lose their family business or family farm, we should do something to help them right now. My other concern with H.R. 2143 is that we face a much different fiscal world than we did when the so-called Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act was passed last year. Before this $1.35 trillion tax cut passed and was signed by the President, there was a projected ten year budget surplus of more than $5 trillion. Now, after the tax cuts, the economic slowdown, and the terrorist attacks of September 11, it is estimated that we will have a deficit of more than $100 billion just this year. And there are budget deficits stacked up in the out years as far as the eye can see. This bill, H.R. 2143, will cost $55.8 billion in Fiscal Year 2012 alone, its first year of full implementation. And during the following decade, its negative economic impact to the Federal budget will be more than $1 trillion. It does nothing to relieve the family farmer or the family businessman until then. So if you have a small or medium size business or a family farm, you should do your best to postpone dying until 2012. Nevertheless, even with these budget concerns, I believe it is important to give some immediate hope and relief to the hard working small businessman and his survivors. That is why I urge my colleagues to support the Substitute Amendment offered by Mr. Pomeroy. MR. DELAHUNT. Mr. Speaker, two years ago, I was one of the few Democrats to join with my friends across the aisle to support legislation to repeal the federal estate tax. I did so because I believed that this tax burdens small business and family farms to unfairly that it puts our overall economy at risk. I still believe that. And that is why I will today vote in support of the Democratic substitute. The estate tax is wrong. At a time when small firms are already buffeted by all kinds of economic uncertainties, the last thing they need is more trouble from federal tax policy. When we debated this question in 2000, I supported the majority bill because, overall, it was better than existing law. The committee bill before us today does not meet that standard. At the very moment we are struggling with mounting deficits and the growing cost of national security, we're asked to lock in-- permamently--changes in the tax code that will cost the Treasury billions. As one who voted to repeal the estate tax, I think I'm entitled to wonder aloud: ``what's the urgency?'' The effective date of the bill is nine years away. Who knows what might happen between now and then? At the very least, can we win the war on terrorism first? As one who voted for estate tax repeal, I think I'm entitled to ask: what constituency was this debate concocted to impress? Because it's clear to me that this measure hurts many of the same people its proponents claim to be helping. Under this bill, many Americans would never reap the promised benefits, even upon its full and permanent repeal in ten years. Because for all the talk about tax relief, this bill actually raises taxes. Sure, it eliminates the estate tax. But not before changing the rules to cost the middle class, and the upper middle class, a lot more in capital gains taxes. Here's why. Traditionally, inherited property was assessed at its value at the time of death--so-called ``stepped-up basis''. That changed in the Republican ``reforms'' of 2001. Now, it's assessed at its value at the time of its original purchase. The bill before us now seeks to make that change permanent. For most Americans with assets to pass on to their kids, eliminating ``stepped up'' basis is a killer. Take my own congressional district. If you bought a home in 1970 in Duxbury or Chatham, chances are pretty good that it's gone up--maybe tripled or quadrupled in value--in the years since. The Republicans will tell you that you can go ahead and pass your home on to your children without worrying about the estate tax. But they probably won't tell you that instead your kids will probably owe a boatload in capital gains taxes. The same goes for stocks, bonds and other assets. There's no rational reason for this, and the Democratic substitute would restore stepped-up basis. While offering relief to 99.6 percent of Americans now subject to the estate tax. Mr. Speaker, I showed last year that I am willing to swim against the tide to get a good bill passed. Regrettably, this year's committee proposal is not that bill. I urge my colleagues to join with me instead in supporting the Pomeroy substitute.