Ciro Rodriguez

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, despite the calls from President Bush for efforts to provide legal permanent residents access to Federal nutrition programs, the House conferees on the farm bill have refused to budge. Now we hear today that the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Tancredo) has an amendment to instruct on the farm bill on this particular item. There are too many cases of legal immigrant children suffering from hunger right here in our own backyards. These are legal residents. Their parents work hard, they pay taxes, they serve our country, they play by the rules; but they are unable to qualify for food stamps if they find themselves in that situation. The reality is, and I will appeal to the Republicans, that we have over 62,560 military people right now that are legal immigrants; and as we well know, we have a lot of people in the military that also qualify for food stamps. This amendment would disqualify them from being able to have access to food stamps. So I make the appeal and ask that we look at what the administration has been saying, that we ought to be providing for those services.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank you for the kindness and hospitality you showed our Korean War veterans during their visit to Korea. This commemoration is an important reminder of the difficult time when the United States helped Korea fight Communist aggression, and celebrates the victory of democracy over an authoritarian dictatorship. Since that terrible war, many Americans have had the privilege of serving in Korea, and I appreciate the outstanding support your country has shown them. The Korean people and the United States have been strong allies since the Korean War, and this visit is symbolic of the many years of friendship between our countries. A friendship that was forged on the battlefield is now a partnership based on freedom, and you are helping maintain the good relations between Korea and the United States. I am grateful for the important part you played in making the 50th Anniversary of the Korean War Commemoration a great success.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, many workers lost their jobs as a result of the September 11 attacks on America. Several of those workers are still jobless and continue to struggle financially. H.R. 3986 provides a much-needed 13-week extension of those benefits for those workers who lost their jobs as a result of the terrorist attacks and are ineligible for traditional unemployment assistance. These workers represent part of the millions unemployed in America. Many of these laid-off workers lost more than just steady paychecks. They also lost critical benefits and crucial benefits. Many have lost their family health coverage, joining the ranks of the uninsured. Before we give more tax cuts to large corporations, we should protect workers and their families by extending the COBRA benefits and providing some reimbursement for premium payments. A few months ago, even the Bush administration had proposed that an income stimulus package should include some type of subsidy to help unemployed workers to be able to afford to purchase COBRA coverage. This a step in the right direction. However, for many of the workers eligible for COBRA coverage when they are laid off, the high cost of coverage acts as a powerful barrier, making it difficult to purchase even with Federal and State subsidies, and a tax credit will not serve as a panacea for assisting workers with COBRA coverage. Therefore, we should also consider other options for the majority of workers who do not have access to COBRA coverage because their incomes are too low. The average cost of group insurance for family coverage is now approximately $7,000 a year. This is exceptionally high premiums for unemployed workers to afford. One temporary option is for States to provide coverage through their Medicaid programs to allow low-income workers to be able to afford access to health care coverage. Democrats have proposed helping States meet the increase in Medicaid costs by temporarily increasing the Federal matching rate and protecting State Medicaid programs from further budget cuts. There must be some relief for low-income workers who lose their jobs and their health insurance. We should not relegate uninsured workers and their families to the low costs or no cost health care safety nets provided by the local communities to provide that service. Safety net providers such as public hospitals and community health centers are already struggling to meet the needs of their indigent and the uninsured population despite the growing deficits faced by municipal and State governments. By extending similar benefits to workers affected by the September 11 attacks, the House has again made some progress in meeting the needs of the unemployed workers. It is now time for us to act quickly and provide health care coverage to the unemployed workers and their families.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the nearly 100,000 Social Security beneficiaries that live in my district, nearly 70 percent of whom are 65 years of age and older and are seniors. Today, like so many of us, seniors stand in the recent tragic events that have left an imprint on our national landscape forever. They are uneasy about their lives and the security of their future. Now is the time to address their fears, not the time to wage a war on the benefits they rely on to live. I am disturbed by the number and tone of letters and phone calls I have received from constituents. Many seniors 70, 80, and 90 years old have expressed concern over the solvency of Social Security. They want their leaders in Washington to be responsible in their actions and not take chances with their future and the future of their children. I am further disturbed when I receive the administration's budget recommendations. The administration proposes a budget that takes needed Social Security surpluses out of the Social Security trust fund, not just 1 year, but every year for the next 10 years. This year alone, the budget would train $262 billion in Social Security funds. Ultimately, the administration's proposed budget takes more than $1.5 trillion out of the Social Security surplus. The President and the House Republican leadership, just a few months ago, including some Democrats, claimed that we would also support and establish the Social Security and Medicare surpluses that would be saved for Social Security and Medicare. Now the budget saves virtually nothing of Social Security or Medicare. Recently, the CBO released an analysis of the administration's proposed budget. They concluded that the budget raids Social Security and threatens the solvency of the program for future generations. Further, they project large deficits for the next several years. They project a $121 billion deficit next year, and by the end of President Bush's term in 2004, a $262 billion deficit. However, the administration has, for the first time since 1988, rejected the more conservative economic predictions of the CBO and, instead, are using the optimistic, unrealistic figures produced by the Bush administration's Office of Management and Budget. When they looked at the cuts, they looked at how our economy was last March and they projected for the next 10 years the same type of economy. As my colleagues well know, you cannot even predict what our weather is going to be next year. They took that prediction because it was a very positive prediction. But we should not have assumed that those dollars and that the economy would remain the same way. Alarmingly, the OMB figures for the administration hide the true cost of the administration's sponsored tax cuts. We cannot and must not enact budgets with our heads in the sand. We must look at the dollars that we have now and realistically pay down our debt as we should and make sure we hold that obligation to take care of our seniors. Our seniors have questions. They want to know how we have squandered the surplus in just 1 year. And, of course, a lot of us, and for good reason, are concerned about our economy. We do talk about the fact that 9/11 had a big impact on our economy. In fact, economists now tell us that half of the problem that we find ourselves in is a result of the tax cut and half is due to 9/11. Republicans and the administration successfully pushed a tax cut during the first half of this session. This irresponsible tax cut cost $1.7 trillion. Now they want additional tax cuts. So tomorrow we get to see additional tax cuts, at a time when we have declared war. When we are at war, we have always had a war tax. We have always been responsible for paying down what we owe. We need to be responsible as we move forward. Indeed every dollar of the additional tax cut would come directly out of the Social Security trust fund. We are paying for this war on the backs of our senior citizens' pension fund. We ought to be ashamed of ourselves. What our seniors need is for all of us to work together and give them the sense of security. They do not need fancy gimmicks like certificates and promises of benefits with no legal guarantee. What they need is a responsible budget that takes care of our budget and considers the fact that we are at war and that should be our first priority, taking care of our seniors and our national defense. These figures increase significantly if you are a woman or a minority. Social Security is the only safety net to keep many of our seniors out of poverty. Social Security has lifted over 11 million seniors out of poverty and reduced the elderly poverty rate to less than 10%. Now is not the time for gimmicks and broken promises. We must make the choices that reveal our values as a nation and we must keep our promises.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, Social Security has been a successful program that has lifted millions of the Nation's seniors out of poverty. Our seniors are facing a dilemma, one that threatens their security and trust as they reach their retirement years. We must fight to preserve our Social Security trust fund and honor our commitment to our seniors. The President's budget does not honor this commitment to our seniors, and, in turn, fails all Americans. Now is the time for us to focus on a long-term budget plan that will not only help recover the economy, but also help recover and make sure that our Social Security trust fund is kept intact, returning us to an era where we can protect our Social Security and protect our seniors, and even strengthen the Social Security trust fund. We need to recommit to the idea that Social Security surplus dollars are for Social Security, and paying down our national debt is something that we all need to do. We also are aware of the fact that the President has also appointed a committee, and we know that when one stacks a committee, that every single member on this committee was for the purpose of privatizing Social Security. They had no other motive but to do that. Every single one of them on that committee had that one intention. Mr. Speaker, it is our responsibility to make sure we protect our seniors and future generations.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, Social Security has been a successful program. It has helped millions of seniors out of poverty. Our seniors are facing a dilemma, one that threatens their security and their trust. We must fight to preserve our Social Security trust fund and honor the country's commitment. The President's budget does not honor the commitment to our seniors, and in turn fails all Americans. Now is the time for us to focus on a long-term budget plan that will recover as the economy recovers, returning us to an era where we can fully protect and even strengthen our Social Security trust fund. We need to recommit to the idea of Social Security surplus dollars only for Social Security and paying down the national debt. The President's new budget raids the Social Security surplus to pay for government programs, not just 1 year but 10 years. Our seniors deserve better than gimmicks and budget tricks. They need us to lead and fight for the preservation of a historic program and for the needs of seniors. We ask Congress to reconsider their budget, reconsider their tax cuts, and reassume the responsibility, and that is to pay down our debt and take care of our seniors.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about the importance of Social Security and how it impacts the Latino population throughout this country. We must remember that the initial intent and purpose of the Social Security retirement system was to help alleviate the poverty among our elderly Americans and to meet the retirement needs of all workers. We must not forget the severe poverty that our seniors suffered prior to Social Security. Social Security has become the single most effective Federal anti-poverty program in our history, lifting more than 11 million seniors out of poverty. Latinos are critically affected by any proposed changes in the Social Security System. A significant segment of the workforce, Latinos, and especially Latinas, women, represent a disproportionate percentage of those who lack employer pension coverage. We, as Hispanics, tend to work in small companies, small businesses, which do not have pensions. We are underrepresented in government jobs and for that reason do not have a lot of the pensions that others do. More than other segments of the population, Latinos depend heavily on Social Security to live their senior years in dignity. The Latino population is growing rapidly. Currently, Latinos constitute 8 percent of the total U.S. workforce, and by 2010 Latinos are projected to account for 13.2 percent of all the workers. From 1997 to the year 2020, the number of Latinos that are aged 65 will double. Unfortunately, despite the gains in education and other areas, Latinos still remain concentrated in low-wage jobs that provide few benefits. While more than 51 percent of Anglos workers have employer pension coverage, the same is true for only one-third of the Latino workers. Accordingly, Latino retirees are more than twice as likely as Anglo retirees to rely solely on Social Security benefits as a means of economic support. In addition, Latinos are less likely than Anglos to receive incomes from interest on savings and investments. For example, in 1998, of all the persons reporting interest income, only 5.3 percent went to Latinos. I would like to also applaud the efforts of some groups that are looking at the impact that any changes in Social Security will have on women. While reforming the Social Security System, we have serious implications for women, and especially Latinas. The women in our community, Latinas, may be the most severely impacted of all populations. The Latinas are more likely than other women to work inside the home and are less likely than other women to have retirement savings accounts. Moreover, Latinas are less likely than other workers to have access to private pension coverage, and they tend to receive the lowest wages of any group in the work force. Relying heavily on Social Security benefits, changes in marital status or the loss of a principal wage earner places Latinas in a particularly vulnerable situations. Given the paramount importance of Social Security to Hispanic men and women, we must approach so-called reform efforts with caution, weighing the impact on this key, fast-growing population. I am concerned that the plans to privatize Social Security would drain needed resources from the Social Security Trust Fund and jeopardize benefit payments to retirees, the blind, disabled workers and survivors. The leading plan proposed by the administration's hand-picked Social Security commission would drain $1.5 trillion from the trust fund in just the next 10 years, money that is already being used for other purposes. Privatization of Social Security would require cuts in guaranteeing Social Security benefits. The President's Social Security commission recommended a privatization plan that cuts benefits for future retirees by up to 46 percent. Everyone would be subject to these cuts, not just workers who choose to have individual accounts, and Latinos would be hit the hardest. Social Security privatization would expose individual workers and their families to greater financial risks. Under privatization, benefit levels would be determined by the volatile stock market, by the worker's luck in making investments, and by the timing on his or her decisions to retire. In light of the Enron disaster, we know the risks. Latinos, who are, more than other groups, dependent on Social Security as a guaranteed income stream in retirement, would lose under privatization. Other proposals, while well-meaning, would not help us reach our goal of ensuring future solvency. I ask that, as we look at Social Security, we make sure we look at its impact on special populations as well as the baby boomers and what we consider the baby echos, those kids of those baby boomers.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge the hard work and dedication of social workers across the nation. This Friday, March 1st, marks the start of the National Professional Social Work Month. I encourage Members to take this opportunity to reach out to social workers in their local communities. Social workers are an integral part of the safety net fabric woven to support the most vulnerable in our community--children, senior citizens, victims of violence. Every day, social workers are on the front lines coordinating services and ensuring individuals have their basic needs of food, shelter, and health care met. On the local level, they can be found in elementary schools, nursing homes, children's and veteran's hospitals, and a variety of service agencies. On the national level, they advocate for better social welfare policy through organizations like the National Association of Social Workers. Through their work, social workers promote healthier and stronger communities, and their experience puts them in a unique position to provide valuable research information on how to address societal challenges. However, the bulk of research addressing these complex social issues has produced clinical and empirical data that is difficult to translate into effective policy solutions. The Social Work Research Center would provide a venue for this research to be coordinated and disseminated to Congress and the public. While the Federal Government provides funding for various social work research activities through the National Institutes of Health and other Federal agencies, it is difficult to coordinate or consolidate these critical activities. Furthermore, for the data we do have, there has been neither an overall assessment of need nor the opportunity to translate the data into effective policy recommendations. For this reason, I strongly believe in the creation of a National Center for Social Work Research within the National Institutes of Health. This proposal has received wide-spread support from the community and bipartisan support in Congress. Mr. Speaker, the establishment of a National Center for Social Work Research would result in improved behavioral and mental health care policy proposals for our nation's children, families, and elderly. I urge my colleagues to support the establishment of this Center and cosponsor the National Center for Social Work Research Act.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Chairman, the amendment we have before us is smoke and mirrors. Veterans have every right, and, in fact, today I am going to ask every single veteran to contact the Democrats, contact the Republicans and hold them accountable. Hold them accountable on the fact that today we have had a budget in the Committee on Veterans' Affairs that talks about $3.1 billion. Yes, of that $3.1 billion, there is a $1,500 codeductible that our veterans are going to have to pay. I am going to ask them to call and call, call every single Congressman, including the Democratic side. That bill also calls for the fact that our veterans are going to have to pay $400 million additional monies on prescriptions. I am going to ask them, and they have the right, to call their Congressman, whether Republican and Democrat. They are also being asked to cut $600 million from VA. That is part of the budget that is calling for a $3.1 billion increase when in reality it is less than $1 billion, which is not even enough to take care of existing costs. If we want to help veterans, let us make sure we help veterans by giving them the needs that they have and the health care needs that they need now.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 3394, the Cyber Security Research and Development Act. This bill would strengthen our nation's ability to protect the critical infrastructure that supplies our water, keeps the electricity on in our homes, and ensures that our law enforcement officials have communication capabilities at all times. San Antonio has been a leader in developing the type of technology and educational programs made possible under this bill. A growing partnership of educational, private enterprise and military expertise make San Antonio ``Cyber City'' USA. The University of Texas at San Antonio has developed the Center for Infrastructure Assurance and Security to educate and train world-class information technology professionals. With a faculty drawn from both the private sector and the Air Force, this outstanding program will produce skilled graduates ready to meet the growing shortage of information technology professionals in the federal government and private sector. It will also serve as a educational program for mid- level professionals to improve their information technology job skills needed for their current job, or help them retrain in the information technology field. San Antonio is also the home of the Information Technology and Assurance Academy, an innovative educational center devoted to talented 11th and 12th graders interested in information technology. The Academy will give these young minds an introduction to future career opportunities in the information and technology field. In addition to developing their interest in information technology, this program seeks to instill a sense of civic responsibility that will serve them and the community in which they live. San Antonio has 45 private companies that have developed state-of- the-art information assurance technology. These companies lead the field in developing intrusion detection technology and providing vulnerability assessments for both the private sector and the government. The military also has a world-class computer monitoring facility in San Antonio. The Air Force's computer emergency response team, located at Lackland Air Force Base, leads the DoD in intrusion technology, and helps protect Air Force computer systems, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, around the globe. This system helps ensure that the computer systems used by our Armed Forces to protect our nation are free from hackers, viruses and other forms of cyber terrorism. This bill would provide the nation with needed resources to fight the war on cyber terrorism. Homeland security starts at the local level and this bill would allow communities throughout the United States to educate and train qualified information professionals in their community and encourage research that would give the government and private industry the tools to protect our nation's critical infrastructure.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, the resolution on the House floor is a sham. Rather than accept responsibility for their reckless budget policies, they try to hide behind a feel-good resolution that does nothing to balance the budget, and does nothing to protect our national obligations to senior citizens or veterans. Yes, we are in a war, and we face new challenges that require a strong response. I support that effort 100 percent. But given that reality, we face a choice. One year ago, our new President told us that we need huge across-the-board tax cuts because the surpluses were so large. Now he says we need them even though the surplus is gone and deficits are back. He promised us that we would meet our national priorities first, before cutting revenues in a way that overwhelmingly benefit the most well-off in our society. But his budget leaves key priorities unmet. This week the administration sent us a budget that breaks the promise not to use Medicare and Social Security funds to fund government operations. Now we have a deficit with no end in sight. And we all know, we all know, that the deficit numbers will end up much worse once we work through all the budget gimmicks and tricks. This resolution champions fiscal irresponsibility. Let's do what the President said we would do: meet our national priorities first. That means we take care of Social Security and Medicare, that means we expand quality health care access for those who still find themselves outside the system, that means we fulfill our promises to veterans, not just next year, but five years from now, that means we invest in our national infrastructure and protect our environment so that we leave our children a world of clean, expanding commerce. The tax cuts enacted last year--especially now--are simply unfair and unwarranted. They help the very few at the expense of the many. Americans loved the $300 rebate they got last year; we could offer all Americans that rebate for years and years to come if we simply did not purse the most irresponsible aspects of the majority's tax policies. Instead, we will likely face rising interest rates, the most unkind tax hike on American consumers and a true drag on our economy. We face a choice. Blindly adhere to a doctrine of tax cuts first and always, or adopt a balanced approach that offers tax cuts to all Americans while still meeting our national obligations. Let's make the right choice and put the interests of America's working families first. Ms. McCarthy of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H. Con Res. 312, expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the scheduled tax relief provided for by the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 passed by a bipartisan majority in Congress should not be suspended or repealed. Since January, 2001, we have seen a 10-year estimated $5.6 trillion surplus completely dissolve. Today, Congressional Budget Office estimates show a meager $600 billion surplus, and this is after every dollar has been raided from the Social Security and Medicare trust funds. Instead of insisting on more tax cuts that will drive us further into debt and raise our long term interest rates, let us consider other options. Last year's tax cuts have already provided income tax relief to most working Americans, and the lowest individual income tax rate has fallen from 15 percent to 10 percent. By waiting to enact additional tax cuts until we can afford it, we can again work towards a balanced budget and ensure the solvency of Social Security and Medicare. In my 25 years of public service, I have worked under the constraints of a President who sought to spend outside of our means, and I had the pleasure of working with a President committed to paying down the debt and balancing the budget. It was this second strategy that allowed America to have the longest sustained period of economic growth in the history of the world. We should follow the lessons we learned then and maintain fiscal responsibility and balanced budgets. Our priority should be to retire the debt so we do not put America's economy at risk. I am for tax relief, but we need to do it the right way at the right time. It is a travesty that the Republican leadership did not allow us to vote on the Social Security lockbox bill that would have maintained continued support for fiscally responsible tax relief that does not take money away from Social Security. A similar bill passed the House last year by a margin of 407-2. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in opposing H. Con. Res. 312, as it threatens Social Security and Medicare funds.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Madam Speaker, while I support the spirit of the bill, I am somewhat disappointed in the introduction and how we have heard the discussion on this bill, in that it is not allowing us an opportunity to place some very significant items on the bill. As a Member who represents the border, I would have liked to have had the opportunity to provide some additional items. The border right now is having to struggle real hard after September 11. We are having a great deal of difficulty with long lines, long waits, as well as Customs that are having to work long hours and not being able to even take vacation during this Christmas period. We understand the reasons why, but we also have an obligation to provide the resources that are needed. Since September 11, communities along the U.S.-Mexican borders have struggled to meet the new security demands. Long waiting times due to more thorough inspections, which are drastically needed, have adversely impacted many businesses also along the border that depend on the cross-border business that happens, and on commerce and traffic. This is why I support providing more resources for the U.S. Customs Service to enhance their personnel and improve their technology capabilities. I am very pleased, and I want to thank the chairman for providing those resources. The Customs Service currently needs over 900 additional Customs inspectors, not only to ease the situation along the northern border with Canada, but to provide assistance to those working long and difficult shifts on the southern border, as well. While I understand the need to place more INS and Customs inspectors along the northern border, we should not be remiss on our obligations to improve inspections on the southern border. Furthermore, I am also disappointed that despite the White House support of H.R. 3525, it fails to include provisions to grant the temporary section 245(i) extensions. The removal of section 245(i) has torn families apart, and we need to really look at putting those families together again.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, the Federal Government recently announced what we already knew, that the economy has been in recession since last March. According to the Labor Department, from September to October, the unemployment rate jumped from 4.9 percent to 5.4 percent, the largest 1-month jump since February of 1986. There are now 7.7 million unemployed Americans across this country, an increase of over 1,650,000 since March. The terrorist attack of September 11 only hastened the economic downturn and highlighted the need for a Federal response to stimulate the national economy. Congress, as we all know, is locked in the debate about how best to quickly revive the U.S. and global economy. We need a response that is tailored to meet the problem, one that puts money in the hands of consumers, one that stimulates job creation, one that helps those most immediately hurt by job losses. Following the terrorist attack on September 11, the House and Senate budget committees issued a set of principles for the economic stimulus package. These principles stated that any stimulus measure should, first, be limited in duration; secondly, that it not cause the Federal Government to have an on-budget deficit; thirdly, that it not result in high, long-term interest rates; fourthly, that it be approximately $100 billion in size; and, finally, that the cost should be fully offset in the future to ensure maximum repayment of our $5.8 trillion Federal debt. I repeat that, that the cost be fully offset in the future to ensure maximum repayment of that debt. And that is an important point, that we have to make sure that we pay for what we expend. Sadly, the House of Representatives' leadership passed a tax bill disguised as an emergency stimulus package which ignored each of those principles. The misnamed Economic Security and Recovery Act, which basically only stimulated the corporations, provides little true economic stimulation to lessen our Nation's recession and will delete the U.S. Treasury of $274 billion over the next 10 years. Some 58 percent, or $161 billion, of this total would come from our Social Security and Medicare trust funds. It is coming at the backs of our senior citizens and their pensions. In the long run, the bill is likely to increase the long-term interest rates, which would raise home mortgage rates and, thereby, threaten the long- term growth of the economy. The fiscal discipline of the last 8 years that produced the largest budget surpluses in decades would be wiped out by this legislation, especially when combined with a $2 trillion tax reduction bill passed earlier by this Congress. The bill includes long-term tax benefits for the wealthiest 2 percent of our taxpayers, $24 billion in retroactive tax relief for the largest corporations in America, accelerating the reduction in the top individual tax brackets affecting those persons making more than $297,000 per year, and provided $21 billion in tax benefits to U.S. corporate profits made outside the U.S. as long as the money is kept outside this country. A scant 11 percent of the overall benefits of the bill would benefit those that are unemployed due to the downturn of the economy. That is 11 cents out of every dollar would only go for those that are in need. The irresponsible failure to offset the cost of those tax cuts will leave us with future budget deficits and upward pressure on long-term interest rates. I would repeat that this bill would come and create additional deficits for our country. Finally, the passage of this bill, and as we look at a bill, we have to make sure that it helps those that are in need and that it looks at stimulating the economy. It should follow the balanced alternatives that would quickly put money in the hands of people who have been hurt by the economic downturn and most likely to spend it and stimulate the economy. September 11 not only hurt New York, but it hurt everyone. It hurt those people on the borders that are having to wait. I ask that we really take into consideration and that we seriously look at what we are doing and that we vote for an appropriate piece of legislation.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that the House and the Senate acted quickly on H.R. 1291, the Veterans Education and Benefits Expansion Act of 2001. Veterans deserve the very best we can offer, and I think that H.R. 1291 is an important step in meeting that obligation. Educational benefits are the military's best recruiting tool, and the Montgomery G.I. Bill must be modernized to meet today's demands. H.R. 1291 moves toward this goal of expanding access to higher education by increasing the currently monthly benefits from $650 to $800 in the year 2002 and ultimately reaching $985 by 2004. Clearly, the legislation provides a stronger education package to the men and women who choose to serve our country in uniform. H.R. 1291 improves the Montgomery G.I. bill, and I hope that we can ultimately improve the educational benefits to cover the full cost of tuition, fees, books and supplies, as well as provide a substantive allowances for those who reenlisted for 4 years. Additionally, among other things, H.R. 1291 streamlines the ratings system for certain services-connected illnesses. For Vietnam veterans who were exposed to Agent Orange and now are suffering from diabetes, the Veterans Education and Benefits Expansion Act acknowledges the entitlement to service-connected disability benefits. And for the Persian Gulf veterans suffering from illnesses which modern medical technology cannot readily diagnose, the likewise extends the presumption of service connected. Veterans who suffer from disabilities should not be abandoned. And the disabilities should not be ignored simply because the doctors cannot yet diagnose the causes. While we have a long way to go, the Veterans Education and Benefit Expansion Act is a step in the right direction for veterans who earned these benefits with their service. The September 11 attack is an especially stark reminder of how fragile our freedoms are, in response to our men and women who have answered the call to action carrying the banner of freedom in Afghanistan and in search of those responsible for the horrific acts of September 11. And when they return home, these brave sons and daughters need to be assured that their country will be there for them in their time of need. I wanted to take this opportunity to also say that much more is needed to be done when it comes to our veterans. The cost of education has continued to increase, the cost of books and supplies have continued to increase. I am pleased at this point in time, as we have just passed 5 o'clock, the Christmas tree lighting has occurred and this particular piece of legislation is a beautiful Christmas present to a lot of our veterans. I want to take this opportunity to urge my colleagues to support and vote for H.R. 1291.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that H.R. 2540 is before us, the Veterans Benefit Act, and that the President will soon have the opportunity to sign it into law. I would like to thank the chairman of the committee, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) for his efforts on this particular piece of legislation, and also my distinguished colleague, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans), the ranking member, for this bill. The legislation before us would provide a cost of living adjustment to those receiving disability compensation benefits for the year 2002. As a member of the committee, I am proud to join this bipartisan effort to improve the quality and delivery of veterans benefits programs. The veterans should not be left wondering if the Federal Government is going to fulfill their promises. I have heard too many stories from veterans in my district who do not receive sufficient benefits to meet their living expenses. H.R. 2540 would provide a cost of living increase for those who have received service-connected disability benefits, as well as their survivors. Veterans work around the clock for us. They deserve no less in return. For many of our veterans, the physical and psychological wounds of war do not go away. Today, men and women have answered the new call to action, carrying the banner of freedom into Afghanistan in search of those responsible for the horrifying attacks of September 11. When they return home, these brave sons and daughters need to know that we will be there for them should they suffer from debilitating conditions as a result of their military service. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill and vote for H.R. 2540.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that the Senate has acted quickly to pass this important piece of legislation to assist homeless veterans. I would like to thank our distinguished chairman and ranking member of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs for crafting this bipartisan legislation that targets the specialized needs of an often neglected population within the veterans community, the homeless, which have very little access to services. The VA issued a report last year on homeless veterans. It found that during 1999 there were an estimated 350,000 homeless veterans, an increase of 34 percent above the 1998 estimate. Things are getting worse instead of better. Many of our homeless veterans suffer from posttraumatic stress disorder and other mental illnesses in addition to drug addiction. Unfortunately, the VA has cut the number of inpatient beds in half. We heard forceful testimony in committee that the lack of inpatient beds has adversely affected the quality of care for veterans who suffer from substance abuse, many of whom are homeless. The VA admitted during a hearing that they have not met 1996 capacity requirements for substance abuse. So while I am happy that H.R. 2716 authorizes more resources for homeless programs and promotes greater accountability and oversight for these programs, I have concerns with some of the VA policies which may hinder implementation. In particular, the VA's move from inpatient hospital settings to community-based clinics may have unintentionally turned homeless veterans away from treatment. Therefore, I hope that this legislation will enable the VA to better serve this population through aggressive outreach efforts and to render much needed services as quickly as possible. The events of the recent past have reminded us that our Nation's peace and security must be protected at any cost. Those men and women who answer the call to defend our democracy when it is under attack should be assured that we will take care of them when they are in crisis. Mr. Speaker, I want to reemphasize the importance of these programs for our homeless veterans, and I want to encourage the importance of making sure that we have caseworkers out there that reach out to these veterans. Too many times, these veterans, as we well know, suffer from mental health problems. They are not the type to come in for an appointment. We have to make sure that we reach out to them and make sure that we provide that access to that service. When we look at a lot of these veterans, these are the same ones that might be suffering from substance abuse as a way of trying to correct their problems with mental health and trying to protect themselves. In closing, let me just say, Mr. Speaker, I urge that my colleagues support H.R. 2716.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the Global Access to HIV/AIDS Prevention Act, H.R. 2069. I would like to commend the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee). I want to thank her for her hard work and her dedication as well. I want to thank her specifically for when she first sent that letter for us to sign to get on board, and I was very pleased to see that. I also want to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) for his efforts and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi) and some of the other speakers that have been speaking on this issue, as well as the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde). I thank him for allowing us this opportunity to move forward on this issue. This year marks the 20th year of HIV/AIDS, and in that time the virus has taken the lives of more than 25 million people throughout the world. In claiming lives, the virus has destroyed families and communities. It has devastated economies and created instability. It has changed the very way we interact with our neighbors. The continued spread of the virus calls for a multilateral strategy in the struggle to reduce infections. Domestic and international efforts, prevention as well as treatment, as well as research and development and education, are critical. These are the parts of the equation that will help us change the outcome. We must remember that disease has no borders and especially infectious diseases. We cannot afford to ignore the plight of our neighbors, because sooner or later, it will come and knock on our door. By investing in the international efforts to eradicate this virus, we will be assuring and protecting Americans' health and prosperity. We will also show ourselves as a Nation committed to alleviating human sufferings everywhere else. It is the right thing to do for our neighbors and ourselves and for our constituents and for our children, for untreated and mistreated HIV/AIDS can hamper us all. For not treating appropriately, other types of strains can be created that will cause us more harm. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2069, the Global Access to HIV/AIDS Prevention Awareness, Education, and Treatment Act of 2001.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Madam Speaker, in 1995, Congress took important steps to address the deterioration of conditions by nearly half of the military families in housing by enacting the Military Housing Privatization Initiative. The program has expedited the renovation and construction of military family housing by having developers construct private family housing on Federal property, which is then made available to military personnel. The unintended consequence of this worthwhile program is that children of many junior personnel living in privatizing housing are disqualified from being eligible for free and reduced price meals. The bill before the House today will temporarily solve the problem, and will ensure that 10,000 military children do not lose their eligibility for free and reduced price meals. A service member living in privatized housing has their housing allowance included on their monthly earnings statement even though the funding passes directly to the privatized housing developer. This reported housing allowance, which is not reported for members living in traditional on-base housing, causes certain service members' children to lose eligibility for free and reduced-price meals. So you have a certain person who receives the same wages but is housed in traditional types of homes, those kids can qualify; but the other kids that are in a different housing do not qualify. Compounding the problem, numerous State and Federal education, nutrition and technology programs are contingent on the number of children eligible for the free and reduced- price meals program. And so both the schools suffer as well as the students suffer and families. At Fort Hood, Texas, for example, the Army privatized nearly 6,000 housing units earlier this year. Because of the privatization effort, more than 1,000 children of Army families will lose eligibility for free or reduced-price meals. The Killeen, Texas, Independent School District would lose about $1.1 million annually in State and Federal funding. I want to take this time to thank the Military Impacted School Association for their efforts because they were out there in support of all the military schools throughout the country. Working with them, I contacted the Department of Defense to remedy this quality-of-life problem that they were encountering. The Department of Defense responded that it could not fix the problem without dismantling the entire housing privatization finance method that they had intact and suggested instead that Congress amend the national school lunch program. In October, I introduced legislation to amend the national school lunch program to permanently fix the problem. The bill before the House today will fix the problem for 2 years with no cost, as estimated by the Congressional Budget Office. A permanent fix can then be addressed in the reauthorization of the national lunch program in the 108th Congress. I want to thank Chairman Boehner of the Committee on Education and the Workforce and Subcommittee Chairman Castle for their efforts in introducing and expediting consideration of H.R. 3216. Without their strong support and the efforts of all the staff that have been extremely helpful, we would not be able to be here on the floor. As members of the Armed Forces are fighting terrorism abroad and at home, I would urge my colleagues in the House of Representatives to pass H.R. 3216 unanimously. In these difficult times, the least we can do while these people are serving our country is to make sure that we take care of their children and their education. Once again, I want to thank both chairmen and the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Davis) for helping out in this effort. I think it is something that we have to come back in the 108th and make sure we take care of it completely. In addition to that, I know that there are about 16,000 housing projects that have been implemented. There is an additional 15,000 whose contracts are out. And then in the future we hope to improve the housing quality for all our military. We have over 51,000 housing projects, so it is an area that we really need to look at very seriously. I once again thank very much both sides for this effort. The children will appreciate it.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, that is correct. That is 450,000 Americans in the month of October alone.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I want to thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis). I know she invited me to come over and say a few words as it deals with the stimulus package, but let me say that my colleagues are exactly correct. One of the things we have heard, and we have heard from every single economist, with perhaps one exception, we do have Senator Gramm, who was an economist, but every single economist who is worth anything, the seven Nobel Prize winners, have indicated that we have been on the wrong track; that we have been in this recession since March; that we need to be able to come together and be able to do the right thing. And they agree that if we are going to consider any tax cuts, they have to be for the basis of creating additional jobs. But we have been sending checks. And the economists tell us they do not need cash, what they need is consumers. And in order for us to create consumers, we have to allow those resources to go down there. So one of the first things we need to do, and one of the first responsibilities that we have, is that we have declared war. We have to make sure our homeland is secure. That should be first before any tax cuts. In addition, let me add that they were quick to give the tax cuts, and I saw a check for $1.4 billion for IBM, but at the same time they are dragging their feet when it comes to taking care of the people who have been losing their jobs. Just what happened in New York, a lot of people have lost their jobs in South Texas. On the Mexican border, it is taking 3 hours for people to cross the border. I have a 13 percent unemployment rate in Starr County, and we are having a rough time, and they are getting impacted like everyone else. When we look at stimulating the economy, the only thing we have stimulated is the corporations. The rest of us have not received any stimulus. In the month of October, 450,000 people have lost their jobs, the most in any month since May of 1980. We have a serious situation. In addition, the comments that were made earlier by the gentlewoman from Georgia (Ms. McKinney) regarding the impact to minorities, the African American is a little higher, about 9 percent. Unemployment for Hispanics and Latinos is 17.2 percent, while the national is 5.5 percent. In order for us to turn this around, our first priority ought to be our national defense and taking care of our homeland. We have been told that we do not have enough people in the medical fields and in the areas to make sure that we have first responders to help our communities, our cities. I got a report from the city of San Antonio, and I was told in the first 2 weeks after September 11, that we had over 500 calls. The majority were hoaxes, bomb threats, but it cost the community resources is the bottom line. That is occurring across the Nation and has a great impact on our local communities. This battle, we have to protect our troops, but now it is a war, and we have to protect our families. Our families should come first. We ought to consider that and do the right thing when it comes to taking care of the pensions and making sure that workers get good benefits. As we looked at pensions and unemployment benefits, the data is startling. The fact that a great number of people, if they worked 30 hours, worked part time, they get nothing. Some States are worse than others. People are hurting. Mr. Speaker, what little insurance they had, they are having difficulty getting access to their insurance. The minority, both African Americans and Latinos, are the least likely to have insurance coverage.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I want to leave one last message. That is that every single war that we have declared, from the Spanish American war where we had the phone tax to the Gulf War, we have always had a war tax. This is the first time not only do we not have a war tax, we are giving tax cuts to special interests and taking care of them and stimulating them. At the same time, this is the first war that we run it on the so-called surplus which we know is the resources that provide for Social Security and Medicare. This war is being run on the backs of our senior citizens. Once again, I congratulate the gentlewoman.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I am here today to call attention to the dramatic rise of hate crimes and voice my support of H.R. 1343, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act. Last Congress, we came closer to enacting legislation that would have reaffirmed our commitment to prosecuting those who commit hate crimes. The Senate passed the hate crimes amendment on the defense appropriations act. The House subsequently passed a motion, which the majority of us supported, to instruct the conferees to retain the language contained in the Senate version of the defense authorization bill. Unfortunately, the conference committee ignored the will of the House and the Senate and chose not to retain the hate crime provisions in the final conference report. Opponents of the hate crime measure have charged that it grants preferential treatment to certain groups. This is totally a false presumption. Heinous crimes that target victims solely on the basis of their race, their color, religion, national origin or sexual orientation deserve enhanced punishment. Because hate crimes are as diverse as the persons who commit them, we are all vulnerable to becoming victims. Hate crime legislation is a reaffirmation, not a denouncement of our Nation's commitment to civil rights and equal protection under the law for all Americans. Furthermore, I reject the notion that a hate crimes bill would undermine one of the most important constitutional tenets, the freedom of speech. This could not be further from the truth. Racist groups and other extremists would have the constitutional right to preach and spread their propaganda. However, if those views translate into premeditated violence against a person or persons because of their ethnicity, their religion, or their sexual orientation, then those perpetrators should be held justly accountable for their acts. The Texas legislature passed a hate crimes bill earlier this year after failing to do so during the previous legislative session. The bill was named to commemorate James Byrd, Junior, an African American man who was dragged to his death in Jasper, Texas, in 1998 by three white men solely because of the fact that he was black. During the 1999 legislative session, the Texas House also passed a hate crimes bill. Unfortunately, opponents blocked consideration of the measure in the Texas Senate. Even more disappointing was that then- Governor George Bush was silent on the issue and refused to pledge his support for the bill. I am pleased that this year the legislature in Texas was able to remove the previous roadblocks and secure passage of the bill. However, now that Texas has committed itself to hate crimes prevention, it needs the tools to facilitate the enforcement. For this reason, I am proud to be a cosponsor of H.R. 1343, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act, which has been introduced by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers). H.R. 1343 provides the technical, forensic, as well as prosecutorial tools local law enforcement needs to combat this type of violence. H.R. 1343 has garnered the support of over 202 co-sponsors. Now more than ever we need the Federal hate crimes bill. Since September 11, hate crimes, especially those targeting Arab Americans and Muslim Americans have dramatically increased. This is unfortunate, and we need to make sure that this does not occur. While I am sure that we are all angry and frustrated, and have a great deal of anxiety as a result of what has transpired and what a lot of Americans are feeling, such feelings cannot ever, and I repeat, such feelings cannot ever justify senseless acts of violence against innocent people. I ask my colleagues and the Republican leadership to speak out against these hate crimes and secure passage of H.R. 1343 as immediately as possible.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to a woman of extraordinary ability, Jamie Rochelle, who this month ends an illustrious career at San Antonio's municipally-owned utility, City Public Service (CPS), and concludes her year-long service as chairman of the board for the Greater San Antonio Chamber of Commerce. She has proven herself not only a capable leader and chief executive, but also an important member of our community. Her efforts have made San Antonio a better place to work and live. Jamie Rochelle is a true success story. What began as a computer programming job at CPS started her on a 31-year path that led her to become in 1998 the first female general manager and chief executive officer at CPS, now the second largest municipally-owned utility in the United States with more than $6 billion in assets. What's best, her leadership has helped keep CPS rates among the very lowest in the country. During her time at CPS, she handled a large debt refinancing yielding $20 million in interest savings, streamlined company management, managed supply crises well, and struck beneficial deals that helped the company save money and improve service. These experiences made her a successful manager and an astute chief executive. CPS enjoys a diverse array of energy sources, protecting customers from market fluctuations and supply interruptions. Ms. Rochelle saw to it that CPS expanded its generating capacity while working to protect the environment. Last year, she took pride in bringing on-line a new state of the art gas-fired power plant. Under her leadership, the company was quick to respond last year to surging gas prices in an effort to soften the impact on the many vulnerable families it serves. Even in the absence of crisis, CPS a Project WARM fund to provide financial assistance to help needy families pay their utility bills. CPS also takes pride in the success of its small and disadvantaged business outreach program. This past year CPS received the coveted Dwight D. Eisenhower Award for Excellence from the United States Small Business Administration. Competing against 2,500 utilities nationwide, CPS won this honor for its proven record of reaching out to and including small business in its contracting operation. Similarly, CPS has proven to be a good corporate neighbor. Whether through its Share the Warmth program to provide warm clothes in the winter, or its Weatherization Program to better insulate older, inner city homes in the summer, CPS and its employees reach out with a helping hand. Jamie Rochelle has helped make CPS a pro-active leader in renewable energy research and development. In April 2000, CPS began to offer wind-generated electricity to its customers. With a financial investment, CPS supports solar energy projects in San Antonio. One project, in cooperation with Solar San Antonio, will assist local government in reducing energy consumption and researching the feasibility of renewable energy sources. One of its new service centers will become a working showcase in the possibilities of solar energy. Jamie Rochelle has worked closely with me and my staff on projects important to our community and the Nation. Among other things, she has supported our efforts to transform Brooks AFB into a more efficient entity, known as a city-base, by partnering with the Air Force and academia on innovative energy projects. CPS partners with the Southwest Research Institute, Brooks AFB, St. Philips College and DCH Technology, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on a year-long fuel cell research project at Brooks AFB, to find ways to make fuel cell technology feasible for residential uses. CPS has supported the Brooks Energy and Sustainability Laboratory, an effort coordinated by the Texas Engineering Experimental Station of Texas A&M University to make energy consumption in buildings operate at peak efficiency, cutting waste and conserving valuable resources. Most recently, Ms. Rochelle signed off on a partnership with the Department of Energy to develop at Brooks AFB a building cooling and heating plant as a model for efficient energy generation and use. Jamie Rochelle is more than just a series of accomplishments, though she has had many and will likely have many more in the future. Quiet, confident and sure, she exemplifies good leadership. Knowing of the challenges facing not only CPS but San Antonio, she has provided a positive and inclusive vision for the company. She reaches out to others and has participated in numerous civic organizations, culminating in her past year as the head of the Greater Chamber. It has been my honor to work with her on behalf of the people of San Antonio.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, aviation security is matter of national security, protecting our skies is a matter of national defense, and we should not leave national security to the private companies that contract to the lowest bidder. The current system is broken. Contracting to the lowest bidder has created a workforce that suffers from high turnover rates, from low pay and low morale. Baggage screeners should be a highly skilled, highly trained workforce that serves the frontline for our national defense. There is a broad, bipartisan support of this particular effort. The Washington Post poll showed 82 percent of Americans support Federal Government taking over the airport screening. The Airport Pilots Association endorsed this. The Association of Flight Attendants endorsed this. The U.S. Conference of Mayors endorsed federalization. The Senate also endorses it, by 100 to zero. 100 Senators voted in favor of it. The U.S. should be a leader in airline security. The size and complexity of our system requires a Federal workforce that is professional, well-trained and well-paid. We ask that we reconsider, and ask the House to pass the bill and federalize them as quickly as possible.