Lucille Roybal-Allard

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona [Mr. Pastor].

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas [Ms. Jackson-Lee). (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Madam Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California [Mr. Torres].

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Madam Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Waters].

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Madam Speaker, we are all aware of the fact that domestic violence is at epidemic levels and rising. What was not known until recently however, is the relationship between domestic violence and welfare dependency: namely, that for victims of abuse, the welfare system is often the only hope they have for escape and survival. A recent study by the Taylor Institute of Chicago offers insights as to why so many women become trapped in the cycle of violence and dependency. The study found that 50 percent to 80 percent of women on AFDC are current or past victims of domestic violence. It also documents how abusers keep women financially and psychologically dependent by deliberately sabotaging their efforts to succeed in education and job training programs. For example, the study found that abusers have been known to destroy their victims' books and homework, hide their clothing, inflict visible and embarrassing injuries, and engage in abusive behavior before important events such as high school equivalency examinations and job interviews. These findings underscore the importance of ensuring that any welfare reform legislation enacted by Congress maintains this critical safety net. Toward this end, Senator Wellstone and I have introduced resolutions expressing the sense of Congress that any welfare reform proposals shall not further endanger women and children who are victims of domestic abuse by denying them access to their last source of support and means of escape. I urge all of my colleagues to support this important resolution.

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Velazquez amendment to restore funding to the Department of Labor's wage and hour division and Department of International Labor Affairs. These funds are critical to the Department's ongoing efforts to combat worksite safety and fair labor standards violations, particularly in the garment industry. Most Americans are aware of the recent news reports documenting sweatshop abuses in foreign nations. We have heard about the rampant wage exploitation of hundreds of thousands of workers--many of whom are children who produce popular American consumer goods and designer products, while laboring under inhumane working conditions. However, many Americans are not aware of the fact that similar abuses are occurring daily in places like Los Angeles, New York, Miami, and Texas. The unfortunate reality is that despite our Nation's historic tradition of protecting workers and the voluntary compliance efforts by reputable garment contractors, sweatshop exploitation is a pervasive problem in America. It is estimated that more than 7,000 garment shops nationwide can be classified as sweatshops. There are numerous examples of the nature and extent of the problem. In August of last year, the raid of a garment sweatshop in El Monte, CA, exposed the working conditions of 70 immigrants enslaved in a factory ringed with razor wire. More recently, a February raid in Irvine, CA, found workers routinely working 12-hour shifts, locked in a windowless room with a single fire escape. In Dallas, a sweep of 11 garment shops found that 82 percent of these businesses were in violation of Federal labor laws. This is nothing less than a national disgrace. The Department of Labor's wage and hour division and International Labor Affairs Department are important lines of defense against sweatshops. Currently, the wage and hour division is combining an aggressive enforcement strategy with an educational program that encourages retailers, manufacturers, unions, and consumer groups to work in partnership to address the problem. Limited resources, however, have cut the number of investigators at the wage and hour divisions by 18 percent at a time when the workload of the division has expanded to include the monitoring of over 110 million workers in 6.5 million workplaces. The funding reductions contained in this bill hampers their ability to police the garment industry, protect workers, and ensure their workplace safety. I urge my colleagues to support our efforts to fight sweatshop abuses by voting in favor of the Velazquez amendment.

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I rise for the purpose of engaging in a colloquy with the gentleman from Illinois, Chairman Porter. The gentleman is to be commended for his support on behalf of the Job Corps Program. As he knows, Job Corps has been our Nation's most successful federally funded residential job training and education program for at-risk youth for over 30 years. Because of its proven record of accomplishment in providing opportunities to disadvantaged youth, it has historically generated strong bipartisan support. Program year 1995 exemplifies the success of Job Corps with 73 percent of all Job Corps participants either obtaining employment, enrolling in the military, or attending an institute of higher education. The Labor-HHS appropriations bill before us provides $1.138 million for Job Corps. Mr. Chairman, through the leadership of the gentleman from Illinois, Chairman Porter, Job Corps received an increase of $35 million over last year's appropriation, which fully funds the operations portion of the program. I commend the gentleman on this accomplishment. However, I have two concerns. First is the possibility that the Senate may provide a lower operation funding level for Job Corps than the House level. Second, there still exists a $14.8 million shortfall in the construction and renovation budget for the program. Adequate funding for the repair and rehabilitation of Job Corps campuses is critical for safe training and efficient operations. These campuses serve as a positive alternative to the dangers of street crime and drugs that many of our Nation's young adults face daily. Mr. Chairman, I would say to Chairman Porter that, based on previous discussions that we have had, it is clear that the gentleman shares my strong commitment to Job Corps. Therefore, when the bill is sent to conference, I respectfully urge the gentleman to continue to exercise his leadership to ensure that the operation funding levels for Job Corps contained in the House bill are maintained and to support any increase to the construction and renovation budget of the program.

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman.

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Speaker, due to the need to attend the funeral of a close personal friend and campaign advisor in Los Angeles, I was absent for the House Session held on Wednesday, June 26, 1996. As a result, I missed a number of recorded floor votes including amendments and final passage to H.R. 3666, the VA-HUD-Independent Agencies appropriations bill for fiscal year 1997. My constituents have the right to know how I would have voted on the various amendments, bills, and rules considered during this time. For the Record, I would like to indicate my position on each missed vote: Motion to Adjourn, rollcall 271--``no''. Lazio amendment to H.R. 3666, rollcall 272--``yes''. Shays/Lowey amendment to H.R. 3666, rollcall 273--``yes''. Sanders amendment to H.R. 3666, rollcall 274--``yes''. Hefley amendment to H.R. 3666, rollcall 275--``no''. Hostettler amendment to H.R. 3666, rollcall 276--``no''.--This recorded vote was later withdrawn by unanimous consent. Gutknecht amendment to H.R. 3666, rollcall 277--``no''. Walker amendment to H.R. 3666, rollcall 278--``no''. Markey amendment to H.R. 3666, rollcall 279--``no''. Roemer amendment to H.R. 3666, rollcall 280--``yes''. On the Motion to Recommitt with Instructions, rollcall 281--``yes''. On Final Passage of H.R. 3666, rollcall 282--``no''.

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Kennedy-Vento amendment. To many Americans, the homeless are faceless individuals we pass on the streets as they move through the hidden recesses of alleys or abandoned buildings searching for food or shelter. More often than not, we turn our heads and forget. Occasionally, there is a more direct one-on-one encounter when we are approached for a handout. At that moment, we are forced to recognize their existence and decide whether to help or to ignore them and move on. For many of us, this is the closest we ever come to what can only be characterized as one of our Nation's greatest tragedies, the homeless. For the reality is that there is a story of hardship and misfortune associated with every homeless person. The homeless population is comprised of elderly persons, families with children desperately seeking to break out of the cycle of poverty, and men and women with mental illnesses or addictions who have been forgotten by our society. The reductions in homeless assistance programs contained in this bill cannot be justified because over the past year alone, the demand for emergency shelter by homeless families has risen by 15 percent. On any given night in America, more than 700,000 men, women, and children are forced to live on the streets. In Los Angeles County, there are anywhere between 17,000 to 42,000 homeless individuals, 3,800 of whom are children. The homeless families of this country need our help. HUD's homeless assistance programs must be restored to the levels requested by President Clinton. These funds will provide 10,000 additional units of transitional housing, 10,000 units of permanent supportive housing, as well as a continuum of supportive services to help the homeless move into transitional or permanent housing and toward self-sufficiency, providing hope and opportunity to needy American families. The passage of this amendment is critical to our efforts to fight hopelessness and restore dignity to the poorest of the poor. I urge my colleagues to vote for the Kennedy-Vento amendment.

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Speaker the month of May has been set aside as teenage pregnancy prevention month. Although May is coming to an end, it is imperative that legislators and the American people continue to focus attention on creating policies and programs to reduce the growing number of teenagers who become pregnant each year. This is critical because, unfortunately, the United States has the highest rate of teen pregnancy among the industrialized nations of the world. The result is the devastation of the lives of millions of young girls and the loss to our country of their talents and potential contributions. This loss weakens our country's future, because in order to compete in the ever expanding global economy, we must utilize the full talents of all our young people. In my State of California, for example, 8 out of 10 teen mothers never finish high school. The result? Thousands of uneducated and untrained young girls forced onto welfare with little hope for a better future. Furthermore, moneys that could be used to help improve the quality of life for all Americans are diminished by the expenditure of billions of dollars on health care and cash assistance programs for families with teen parents. For example, the average AFDC and Medicaid costs for just one teen pregnancy through the first year of support total more than $10,000 per child; and the total spent in California for teen pregnancies is between $5 billion and $7 billion annually. Tragically, this pattern is often repeated from mother to daughter, creating a vicious cycle of despair and dependency on public assistance. It is therefore in the best interests of all Americans to do what is necessary to help end this national tragedy of teenage pregnancy. To succeed however, we must be fair and humane in our solutions. We must not advocate policies that hurt innocent children or punish teen mothers by denying them assistance to care for themselves and their children. Instead we must invest in comprehensive programs that have a proven track record of success. One example is the Teen Outreach Program, known as TOP. TOP, which has been chosen as a model program for California's Teen Pregnancy Prevention Initiative, is a comprehensive program focused on preventing adolescent pregnancy and fostering overall youth development. This program incorporates both a classroom-based curriculum focused on adolescent reproductive health and a community service component which offers young people the opportunity to help others while helping themselves. A recent 10-year evaluation found that students who participated in TOP had an 18 percent lower rate of suspension from school, a 60 percent lower dropout rate, and a 33 percent lower rate of pregnancy than nonparticipating students. The Teen Outreach Program is just one example of the effectiveness of prevention and education programs. Further, statistics support the fact that money spent on prevention programs saves billions of dollars in future costs to society. As May comes to an end, let us remain vigilant in our effort to end teenage pregnancies. In so doing, we save more than dollars; we save our Nation's children and strengthen our country's future.

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Speaker, I rise to observe Asian Pacific American Heritage Month and to recognize the many contributions Americans of Asian and Pacific ancestry have made to our Nation. May was selected as Asian Pacific American Heritage Month because several significant events took place in May that impacted the Asian Pacific community, events such as: the first Japanese immigrants arrival to the United States--May 27, 1869; the Central Pacific Railroad and the Union Pacific Railroad were joined at Promontory, UT, of which 90 percent of the track from Sacramento to Promontory was laid by Chinese workers--May 10, 1869; passage of the Chinese Exclusion Act, the first U.S. immigration law to discriminate on the basis of race-- May 8, 1882; and the Alien Land Law was signed in California prohibiting Asians from buying land--May 19, 1913. America has been enriched by the many contributions and achievements of the Asian Pacific community. We have all benefited from their struggles, their labor, and their achievement. From the railroads and bridges that were built to the works of art, music, and literature, Asian Pacific American contributions to the United States have been innumerable. For example, the most visited monument in Washington DC, the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, was designed by a Chinese-American, Maya Lin; the youngest person to win the French Tennis Open is Michael Chang; and the inventor of Playdoh is a Chinese-American. In addition, Asian and Pacific Island Americans have fought and died in defense of our country. The most highly decorated infantry troop in or country during World War II was the 442d Infantry Battalion, a troop comprised entirely of Japanese-Americans. Asian Pacific Americans' accomplishments not only symbolize our rich and diverse heritage, but also highlights shared ideals and unity in a common quest for freedom and dignity. In the midst of extensive discrimination, both social and legislative, APA's have managed not only to survive, but to build communities and to carry on their rich heritage. Asian Pacific Americans have enriched our country's unique diversity and strengthened us as a Nation.

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Speaker, we just passed the minimum wage amendment and now my Republican colleagues want to take it away from the American worker. The Goodling amendments are slick strategies to prevent 13 million workers from receiving the 90 cents increase. These Republican amendments gut the spirit of the minimum wage increase by denying benefits to almost 10 million minimum wage workers in retail and service firms; and teenagers under the age of 20; additionally millions of hardworking waiters and waitresses will be exempted from the wage increase. Furthermore, millions of additional minimum wage workers will be losers because according to the Labor Department estimates, over two- thirds of American firms will be exempted from paying the minimum wage under these amendments. It is time the Gingrich Republicans stop playing games with the American worker and give them the full benefit of the minimum wage increase just passed by this a large majority of this House and which is supported by the American people who know workers need a raise. Vote ``no'' on the Goodling amendment.

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Chairman, last year, the American people rejected the Republican budget, and the President justifiably vetoed it. This year's Republican budget is no better. Instead of moderating their extreme policies, the majority's plan continues to hurt hard working Americans. Raising the minimum wage is supported by over 80 percent of the American people because it will help over 7 million working adults to pay for groceries, health care, rent, or their children's education. The majority, however, is denying Congress a clean vote to raise the minimum wage, while at the same time proposing to cut the earned income tax credit for low-paid workers. The EITC cuts of $21.6 billion will negatively impact 60,000 families in my district alone and 6 million low-income families across this country. It makes no sense that as Congress debates the needs and the value of America's workers, the majority proposes to raise taxes on the poorest workers. This is an unfair and unjust budget, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Chairman, the Republican budget is short- sighted in its policy assumptions on transportation spendings. By singling out mass transit for executive cuts in transportation programs, the Republicans retreat from the ISTEA agreement of 91 [ISTEA]. Although transit represents approximately 10 percent of the 1996 transportation budget, it receives nearly 50 percent of the cuts in outlays. And while maintaining the Federal match on highway projects at 80 percent, the majority jeopardizes mass transit by lowering the Federal match to 50 percent. Under these revised incentives, local planners will inevitably choose highway projects at the expense of much needed mass transit. Also, the phasing out of operating assistance will lead to fare increases, service cuts, and layoffs. This proposal would disconnect thousands of low-income workers from their jobs, isolate many elderly from their daily business and from health care. In addition, the budget terminates funding for new start programs which provide commuting alternatives to some of our fastest growing cities. Rail expansion in areas such as St. Louis, Los Angeles, Portland, New Jersey, and the Sunbelt States will be directly threatened by elimination of new starts funding. The majority's budget is shortsighted and wrong in its effort to pull Federal support from transit planning and programs until the transit needs of urban America are fully met. I urge a ``no'' vote.

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the amendment of the gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. Kennedy's amendment, which maintains income targeting at levels that protect very-low-income families in the section 8 tenant-based assistance program. The Kennedy amendment is necessary to address the provisions in this bill that detrimentally impact the lives of thousands of very-low-income families who rely on section 8 housing assistance. Today, current law ensures that all new vouchers and 25 percent of all certificates are provided to very-low-income families. The legislation before us, however, allows housing authorities to set their own targets as long as 50 percent of vouchers go to individuals earning 60 percent or less of area median income. This means that in cities like Los Angeles, those earning 250 times the poverty level, or put another way, as the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Waters] has stated, families of four earning $40,000 a year, would qualify for half of the city's housing vouchers, leaving many low-income families without vouchers and forced to pay market rents or, worse, become homeless. This is not the intent of public and assisted housing. Furthermore, although achieving income mix is an important goal, the weakening of income targeting in the voucher system is unnecessary because tenants are already free to move to areas of their own choosing. The success of the current program is evidenced by the fact that most section 8 tenants live in neighborhoods where less than one-quarter of the residents are poor. Reducing income targeting for voucher holders has no basis. Although provisions in the manager's amendment help to improve the bill, it still does not have the guarantees of Mr. Kennedy's amendment. By insuring that at least 75 percent of vouchers go to families earning less than 30 percent of area median income, Mr. Kennedy's amendment will allow for an income mix while maintaining assistance for those who need it most. Mr. Kennedy's amendment upholds the intent and integrity of our Nation's assisted housing program. I encourage all my colleagues from both sides of the aisle to vote for the Kennedy amendment.

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Fields amendment which establishes local advisory boards for public housing residents. One of the objectives of public housing reform is to encourage individuals to become involved in their communities and to take responsibility for the neighborhoods in which they live. The Fields amendment will give residents the opportunity to assume that responsibility by requiring housing authorities to establish local advisory boards with 60 percent of its membership made up of residents of that authority. In addition, the amendment requires that the recommendations made by this advisory board be considered by the housing authority in the management plan that it submits to HUD. In so doing, the Fields amendment gives residents a strong voice that will be heard by the housing authority and HUD when making management decisions that directly impact the lives of residents. This amendment is a positive step towards strengthening our goal of personal responsibility by helping tenants take control of their own lives and to determine their own destiny. I encourage Members to vote ``yes'' on the Fields amendment.

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Chairman Lazio and Mr. Kennedy for addressing the issues facing our Nation's housing providers and public and assisted housing residents. I would also like to acknowledge Secretary Henry Cisneros for his leadership and successful efforts to improve our Nation's public housing programs. The deregulation of the housing industry and the more efficient use of scarce housing resources are important goals. This bill, however, simply goes to far. The repeal of the Brooke amendment and changes to current income targeting laws in this bill will eliminate important safety nets, causing the devastation of millions of families across the country. With the repeal of the Brooke amendment, in my Los Angeles district alone over 10,000 residents will no longer be protected from rents that exceed 30 percent of their monthly income. Furthermore, drastic cuts to income targeting in public and assisted housing will drastically reduce the availability of housing for thousands of families, many of whom are currently homeless or living far below the poverty line. Although the bill contains provisions that authorize HUD to review the rent structure of large housing authorities if certain income targets are not met or if a significant percent of tenants are paying over 30 percent of their incomes in rent, the bill does not have the guarantees of affordable and available housing that the Brooke amendment and current targeting laws provide. Mr. Chairman, today we have the opportunity to preserve the Brooke and income targeting laws by voting for the amendments offered by Mr. Frank, Mr. Gutierrez, and Mr. Kennedy. It is crucial that these amendments pass, if this bill is to successfully meet the challenge of public housing: To prevent homelessness and provide public and assisted housing to those in greatest need.

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Speaker, America's workers need a raise. It has been almost 7 years since Congress raised the minimum wage. Nearly all the benefits of that bipartisan effort have been eroded by inflation, reducing the value of the minimum wage to its lowest level since the early 60's. Those who will benefit from a minimum wage increase are the 7 million working adults earning less than the President's proposed wage increase of $5.15 an hour, and the 40 percent of minimum wage workers who are the sole breadwinners of their family. The additional $1,800 a year these workers will earn can pay for several months of groceries, health care services, household utilities, or go toward their children's education at a local community college. Now is the time not for promises but for action. If this Congress wants to encourage work we must reward working families by increasing the minimum wage and giving them hope for a better future. It is time to give America's workers a raise.

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Democratic substitute. By correcting the most obvious deficiencies in the health insurance market, this legislation is a much-needed, albeit small step toward reforming our health care system, because it frees the American worker from job lock which prevents millions from taking better jobs for fear of losing their health care coverage. It protects people with preexisting conditions by limiting the exclusion period and prohibiting employers and insurers from denying coverage to these individuals. It expands availability and access by prohibiting insurers from denying coverage to specific employee groups, and it increases the deduction for the self-employed to 80 percent in support of America's small business. The Democratic substitute brings a measure of fairness and justice to our health insurance system without the special interest provisions in the House Republican bill. I urge all Members to vote in favor of the Democratic substitute.

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this bill. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 125, a measure that is consistent with the Republican majority's theme for the 104th Congress: ``Promises paid for, promises kept.'' Today's consideration of the assault weapons ban repeal fulfills the Republican leadership's commitment to the National Rifle Association, but is nothing short of a betrayal to the safety of the American public. Indeed, as characterized by an editorial in today's edition of the Los Angeles Times, in view of the likely Senate filibuster and a certain Presidential veto, this House vote is little more than a blatant special interest payback that has become the hallmark of the NRA. The American people know that the violence that is ripping apart our families, classrooms, and communities throughout the Nation is nothing short of a crisis. That is why the polls have consistently shown that between 77 and 80 percent of Americans support an assault weapons ban. The ban is also supported by law enforcement agencies, including every police chief in my district. Whenever a law enforcement officer is shot, it is 18 times more likely that an assault weapon was used. The reason the Republicans and the NRA are trying to overturn this Democratic-passed law is because the law is working. Attorney General Janet Reno has estimated that the number of assault weapons traced to crime has dropped 18 percent since the law took effect. In the past 2 years, thousands of people with criminals records have been denied access to these weapons. That is why I supported the original assault weapons ban. I will vote against its repeal. This law balances the legitimate concerns of law- abiding gunowners against the need to take affirmative steps to curb senseless violence in our communities. The assault weapons ban is a carefully crafted compromise measure. It targets 19 specific styles of semiautomatic weapons, while exempting approximately 650 rifles and shotguns and privately owned assault weapons purchased before the bill's date of enactment. The banned assault weapons are not firearms that can be used for hunting and sporting purposes--they are designed to kill people and are the weapons of choice for street gangs and drug traffickers because they intimidate as efficiently as they kill. At a time when drive-by shootings and the murder of innocent bystanders is on the rise, we must not retreat from this Congress' obligation to make our streets safer. I urge my colleagues to join forces with the enforcement organizations, medical associations, the American Bar Association, the National League of Cities, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, and the National Association of Counties, among others, and defeat H.R. 125.

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleagues who have joined us to commemorate women's history month by recognizing outstanding women in our Nation. Throughout the month of March, we in this country honor women from the past and present, who have, each in their own way, made a positive difference in their communities and toward the betterment of our Nation. These women come from all walks of life, cultures and economic backgrounds. They are the women who work in our fields and our factories, in Federal, State and local governments and in the armed services in defense of our country. They are the women who work hard at home to preserve the family, the very foundation of our country. The struggles and pioneering efforts of the women who came before us, and the courage and determination of the women of today, have opened new opportunities for all of us. It was not that long ago when women were thought of only as mothers, daughters, sisters, and men's wives. The fact that I am here this evening celebrating Women's History Month with my colleagues, many of whom are women, is indicative of the changing role of women in our society. We all know, however, that there is significant room for improvement. Even today, working women still earn only 70 cents for every dollar paid to their male counterparts, the glass ceiling has still not been shattered, women are still victims of sexual harassment at both work and school, gender equity in education is not yet a reality, and women are still much more likely to live in poverty than men. But because of women such as those we are honoring tonight, I am confident that we will not only continue to elevate the status of women, but strengthen our communities and our society as a whole. This evening, I would like to recognize one of the many women in my district who embodies this spirit, Mrs. Senorina Rendon. Mrs. Rendon, a resident of the city of South Gate CA, has always been an active force in her community. She is a member of the South Gate PTA and formerly served as its president. She combats the problem of gang violence in her community, through her work with police officers and local youth. For the past 6 years, Mrs. Rendon has been the president of the South Gate High School parents group, where she works to motivate parents to get involved in their children's education. Her ultimate goal is to give all the students in her community the opportunity to attend college. Mrs. Rendon knows first hand the benefits of education. While volunteering in her community, and raising six children, all of whom have graduated from high school and two from college thus far, Mrs. Rendon herself has gone back to school to continue her own education. Mrs. Rendon exemplifies the utmost dedication to both family and community. She is a shining example of an outstanding woman in public service and I am honored that she is the ``woman of the year'' for the 33d Congressional District. Mr. Speaker, I yield the remainder of my time to the gentleman from Utah [Mr. Orton].

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. Although I am going to be speaking later, I just wanted to take this opportunity to thank my colleague the gentlewoman from Connecticut [Ms. DeLauro] for joining me in sponsoring this event and for helping to make this tribute to women possible. She is to be commended for her deep commitment to helping to elevate the status of women in this country.

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD

Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Velazquez/Roybal-Allard amendment. My colleague, Ms. Velazquez, has ably highlighted the injustices to American children that will result from section 607. I would therefore like to focus on an additional three compelling reasons to strike this section. First, section 607 will create an administrative nightmare. Under the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution, local governments will be required to provide services to American children whose parents have been deemed ineligible. The result will be a tremendous administrative burden on local governments, who will be forced to create a huge bureaucracy to manage and allocate benefits for these citizen children. Most likely this will be accomplished by instituting a costly guardianship system. Local government agencies will be required to locate, screen, and appoint a guardian for these American children. Furthermore, they will have to provide continued oversight to prevent fraud by these third-party guardians. Second, it is important to note that there is no funding authorization provided under this bill for reimbursement to local governments. Therefore, section 607 would impose a costly unfunded mandate at a time when States and local governments are already struggling with limited resources and expanded demands for services. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated the cost of establishing the guardianship system to be approximately $250 for each individual case. Localities with large numbers of affected American children, such as Los Angeles County, will be forced to maintain thousands of guardianship caseloads. And third, section 607 abandons Congress' earlier commitment to relieve States and local governments of Federal unfunded mandates. If section 607 is not deleted, States and local governments will be forced to deny needy American children the benefits they are guaranteed as citizens under Federal statute and the U.S. Constitution or to divert already scarce social dollars from programs critical to the well-being of local communities. Simply put, section 607 is a costly and an unworkable, unnecessary, unfunded mandate that serves absolutely no legitimate national interest. We must not punish innocent American citizen children. I urge my colleagues to vote for the Velazquez/Roybal-Allard amendment. 1330 Simply put, section 607 is a costly and an unworkable, unnecessary, unfunded mandate that serves absolutely no legitimate national interest. We must not punish innocent American citizen children. I urge my colleagues to vote for the Velazquez-Roybal-Allard amendment.