Ciro Rodriguez

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, today I recognize Ms. Dorothy M. Moody, who recently received the Woman of the Year award from the Bowden Chapter of Business and Professional Women. Her service to the community and dedication makes this award appropriate. Ms. Moody attended St. Phillips College, a Historically Black College, where she studied business and secretarial applications. These skills led to a diverse range of jobs, from secretary for the Afro-American Insurance Company to secretary for the San Antonio Independent School District, and today she is currently employed at the Emmanuel Baptist Church. Ms. Moody has exhibited leadership and faithfulness in personal development through the college Bible courses she teaches at the church. In her position as chair of the Annual Woman's Day Observance, Ms. Moody exceeded her financial goals and suggested that the surplus be donated to the BBJ Memorial Foundation Inc. Compassion, goal-oriented and generous are standards that Ms. Moody sets for anyone to follow. With the gifts that she has received, she continues to dedicate a part of her life to education by helping a student attend St. Phillips College. Through hard work and dedication she strives to help others reach their dreams of a college education. I join the members of the Bowden Chapter of Business and Professional Women in recognizing Ms. Moody as Woman of the Year.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, today I recognize Santiago Jimenez of San Antonio, Texas, who is being recognized for his accomplishments as a singer and accordion player by the National Endowment for the Arts. The National Heritage Fellowship is an award given to a select group of people, reflecting the diverse heritage and cultural tradition that have become a part of our society. Local artists are nominated by a member of the community, in recognition of the artist's excellence in a particular area. Each year only a select group of these artists are honored. The National Endowment for the Arts has awarded only slightly more than 222 National Heritage Awards. Mr. Jimenez plays a style of music known as conjunto, which has both German and Mexican roots. His music interest began when his father would take him to hear German polka bands in New Braunfels, Texas. At the age of 15, he began performing professionally at weddings, clubs and traditional community settings. Following his father's example he developed creatively and incorporated a wider audience. In 1958, at the age of 17, with his brother he recorded El Principe y el Rey del Acordeon. Since then, he has made 60 recordings of more than 700 pieces of music on several different labels. He started Chief Records, his own label, in order to give younger musicians the opportunity to have their music heard. He works to help others in an industry that he has experienced barriers to entry. Mr. Jimenez has toured throughout the US, Europe and South America to bring the world of conjunto music to millions. I join the City of San Antonio and the National Endowment for the Arts in recognizing Santiago Jimenez on his accomplishment as a recipient of the National Heritage Fellowship award.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I commend the efforts of the VA Committee and staff in developing the VA employee pay and VA health care improvements in this bill. There are many positive elements in this bill dealing with personnel issues and I am happy to support them. VA nurses, dentists, physicians assistants, pharmacists, and social workers play a critical role in the VA health care system. The amendment to improve chiropractic service in the VA is also necessary in order to expand the availability of important chiropractic services. This legislation addresses ever-changing professions within the VA health care system by improving the salaries and working conditions of its employees. I am especially pleased with the sections on mental illness. Authorizing another study on post-traumatic stress disorder is long overdue. We have some quality people working on PTSD at the VA and this provision would bolster that important work. I also welcome the extension of the Annual Report of the Committee on Mentally Ill Veterans. We must continue to recognize the special nature of mental illness in our Nation's veterans and continuing the input from the committee is necessary for that to occur. I represent an area with underserved veterans. Many veterans have to travel more than 200 miles to the nearest VA facility. While I continue to advocate expanding the brick and mortar VA system where there is a genuine need, I support the pilot project at coordinating health care in under-served areas. By limiting the project to four sites and capping the costs, we have an opportunity to see the viability of this service without jeopardizing the VA as a unique hospital system. The VA is not an insurance company, and nothing we do in this bill should show an intent to re-invent the VA as such. I look forward to working with my colleagues in the Senate at enacting the provisions of this legislation this year.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Unless they had already broken the law, we could not help them. That was the way it was structured in terms of how it was funded. So individuals out there that are having difficulties, parents, a multitude of parents with adolescents, we could not reach out to them at all. Those services are lacking throughout this country. There is a real need for us to revisit that. There are a lot of issues in mental health. I think that this is one of the areas that we are looking forward to. I was real pleased to see Tipper Gore reach out and do the conference here in Washington on mental health and the importance and the testimony that she provided on her firsthand experiences with depression and how difficult that is and the need for us to have a better understanding of what that can cause and the problems that that can bring. As a country, we need to recognize that a lot of people are falling through the cracks. If you look at the incident, the shooting that occurred here with that individual that had a mental health problem, that individual had been under treatment and had dropped out of that treatment. One of the few ways that we can prevent those kinds of atrocities is by providing mental health services. I think it is important that we take and work with those youngsters. If I can add one other thing that I am real concerned about, not enough studies and research have been done with the use of Ritalin and prescription coverage with youngsters. Ritalin and some of those prescriptions were made for adults. All of a sudden we started to provide those prescriptions for our youngsters. We do not know what the long-term effects are going to be. And I think we have gone overboard on the use of some of those prescription items with our youngsters. So we really need to be very cautious. There is a need for research to occur in this area. I am hoping that your piece of legislation will be funded and that we can reach out to those youngsters throughout this country that are suffering from depression and a variety of different other disorders.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. First I want to thank the gentlewoman for yielding to me, and I want to congratulate her because I know she has had legislation to address this problem. The gentlewoman mentioned some startling statistics, about 13.7 million youngsters in this country that suffer from mental health problems. One of the other statistics that she mentioned that was also very interesting was that only 20 percent of those receive service. That means two out of every ten that get diagnosed actually get service. I want to share with my colleagues that by profession I am a social worker. I worked 3 years with adult heroin addicts, I worked about 4 years with adolescent substance abusers, and approximately a couple of years in community mental health. While I was working with adolescents in the entire Bexar County area, back then it was called the mental health and mental retardation center, we had two people that worked with adolescent substance abuse, two people for a county over a million. And one of the things I recall is that they used to call us asking for help and the first thing we had to ask is, has your son or your daughter been incarcerated? And when they said no, they have not gotten into trouble, but we need help. I would have to say, well, I am sorry, we cannot help you until you get into the judicial system. So it is unfortunate that we could not reach out to these families and provide assistance when those individuals were in school having difficulties and having problems. And I want to congratulate the gentlewoman for pushing forward in this area. When we talk about mental health, I want to share with my colleagues, and I know the gentlewoman from Texas is aware of this, that suicide is the eighth leading cause of death in the United States, accounting for more than 1 percent of all deaths. In addition to that, when we look at persons under the age of 25, it accounts for 15 percent of suicides in 1997. Between 1980 and 1997, suicide rates for 15- to 19-year-olds increased 11 percent. So we have had this real problem in terms of increases in suicide. It is unfortunate that it has gotten to the point that we have very little service. The other reality that we really need to be very conscious about is the suicides. Let me just give you one more figure. Twelve young people between the ages of 15 to 24 die every day. Today, 12 young people on the average committed suicide. African Americans is growing, in terms of the young African Americans who are committing suicide. Latino women are also suffering from depression. So it is an issue that we need to come to and revisit. I know that your piece of legislation helps to begin to address this problem and sometimes we do not realize the connection between what is happening out there, the consequences in terms of our schools and the danger that is occurring there.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I know. One of the things I think that the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) mentioned, because the insurance companies are unwilling to come in and take care of our senior citizens, and they do it for good reasons, is because they know that, when one becomes a senior, that is when one is going to need the service. If I can be as cynical to say that, during the time of LBJ and when we established both Medicaid and went forth with Medicare, there was an understanding with the insurance companies that, number one, it was okay to have Medicare because that is when one becomes a senior citizen, and that is when one was not cost effective for the insurance companies to take one on. So that was okay for government to get involved with that. It was okay for us to have Medicaid because, after all, with Medicaid, one had no money to buy insurance so then it is okay. They wanted to take care of those that were healthy and young during that period. So that is one of the reasons why they would be unwilling to go and get involved in providing prescription coverage when we know full well that the average citizen is expending over $1,000, more than the majority are spending, over $1,000 a year on just prescription coverage. So it is not to their advantage. They are not going to make the profits that they would like to. The ones that are making the huge profits are our pharmaceutical companies, which they ought to be embarrassed; and they ought to be embarrassed in terms of the amount of millions of dollars they are out there expending on the waivers and coming out on TV talking about the fact that we should not want government involved. The ones who are doing a number on us are the pharmaceutical companies, the private sector. I think it is time we put a stop to that.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, let me, first of all, thank the gentleman from New Jersey for allowing me to say a few words. I was very pleased to see that, at least from the Republican perspective, our fellow colleagues before were talking about the price disparities that exist between this country and other countries on the same prescriptions. That same disparity exists in this country when it comes to the price that that senior citizen pays here in the United States and what that HMO individual pays on that same prescription. So that disparity not only exists in this country to other countries, but within our own country itself. So the real problem is that the pharmaceutical companies have chosen to play a game with us. We have taken them on, and we have said we are not going to deal with it anymore. They have actually come back, contributed to a lot of the politicians up here, and are contributing heavily and expending a lot of money, as my colleagues well know, on advertisement that brings out the senior citizen by the name of Flo that talks about that she does not want government involved. Well, the reason she does not want government involved is because she wants to make sure that the pharmaceutical companies continue to do what they have been doing, and that is price fixing as far as I am concerned. One of the things that we have in this country is, as my colleagues well know, is that senior citizens on Medicare who might be receiving the only pension, might be Social Security, having to pay higher prices than someone that is under an insurance HMO. We should not tolerate that. The other thing that I think we recognize as Americans is that health care and prescription coverage go hand in hand. When we established Medicare, the prescription coverage aspect of it was not considered at that point in time. Yet, for Medicaid, for indigent individuals, we provide prescription coverage. It is only fair that we take into consideration our senior citizens and that we provide for them, especially those that are on a fixed income. I think they recognize the disparity, but they lost track of who we need to go after, and that is our pharmaceutical companies that we need to make sure that they are fair about the prices. One of the proposals that they had, I was looking at it, and it sounds great, but one of the main fights that we have in this country is the war on drugs. I represent the border. We have packages that come in that Customs has to check. Can my colleagues imagine having to check foreign prescriptions and foreign drugs that come in and to determine whether they are legal or not legal? As it is, we have heroin that is mailed into this country. We have pot that is mailed in. We have other types of pharmaceutical, illegal pharmaceutical things that are mailed in under the black market. How are we going to distinguish that? So I think the best thing to do is to look in terms of that cost now in this country and make sure that they provide an affordable cost and do everything we can to help our senior citizens have access to prescription coverage. I think that is the only thing that makes sense. It is something that they have been unwilling to do in the last two Congresses here; I am hoping that we can make it happen. Again, I just want to thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) for his efforts in this area because I think it is a key area that needs to be dealt with.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this fitting tribute to our nation's newest Hispanic Medal of Honor winner, Alfred Rascon. Naming a post office building is reserved for those rare individuals who have distinguished themselves not only in one event, but through a career of service and excellence. Mr. Rascon is one such individual, who waited 33 years to receive the nation's highest medal for bravery on the battlefield. But during those years, he did not stop in his effort to serve his colleagues and his country. He currently serves as the Inspector General for the Selective Service System. On March 16, 1966, while his platoon was under intense fire from a North Vietnamese unit in South Vietnam, SP4 Rascon risked his own life repeatedly to save the lives of wounded comrades and to prevent his unit from being overrun. While seriously wounded three times, he managed to perform his duties as a medic and save the lives of two of his fellow soldiers. On two separate incidents, he used his body as a shield to protect the wounded from the full force of incoming enemy grenades. Ignoring his own serious wounds from the grenades, he also managed to protect with his body another wounded soldier from incoming machine gun fire and grenades and carry that soldier, who was much larger than himself, to safety. Mr. Rascon also risked his own life to help save his unit. Witnesses testify that he retrieved an M-60 machine gun and its ammunition, under fire in an open enemy trail, that was abandoned by an evacuated soldier. This act alone helped save the lives of the platoon members who were in danger of being overrun by the enemy. In addition to this and despite the fact that he was severely wounded, SP4 Rascon continued to search out the wounded and aid them. When the enemy was routed, he then supervised the evacuation of the wounded, refusing medical attention to himself until he finally collapsed. His wounds were so extensive that he had to be medically discharged from the Army. While his acts of bravery as an Army medic in Vietnam have been recounted on several occasions, it serves as a reminder of the lesson we seek to instill in our children and all our citizens in all facets of life: never leave those who fall behind.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, today I recognize the Odyssey of the Mind world-champion team members, coaches, and parents of Ringgold Elementary School in Rio Grande City, TX. At the Odyssey of the Mind world championship competition for pre-teens, this select group of 5th graders captured the world title. This banner accomplishment reflects the competitors' academic commitment, keen imagination, creativity, and countless hours of preparation. Odyssey of the Mind, a worldwide creative problem-solving, engages students in exercises that challenge their critical thinking skills. More than 1 million participants in 50 states and 20 countries around the world compete in various age and subject categories. The world- champion Odyssey of the Mind team members, Jessica Chapa, Ashley Escobar, Justin Guzman, Karah Hiles, Leonel Lopez III, Armando R. Vela, and Valerie Villarreal, demonstrated world-class dedication to earn this international recognition. I join the people of Rio Grande City, TX, and the United States, to commend the trophy winners for capturing the world championship title of the Odyssey of the Mind competition.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, in July, in Pleasanton, Texas, the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, along with family, friends and members of the community, gather together to present nine individuals, three of whom died in the line of duty, with the 1999 FLEOA Heroism award. The ceremony will memorialize the ultimate sacrifice of those three local Atascosa County lawmen who were tragically killed last October as well as the brave acts of the other officers and civilians. These individuals will be honored for their outstanding courage and bravery in answering the call to duty. The FLEOA Awards Program is intended to honor its fellow peers not only from across the nation but also from Canada, Mexico, Thailand, Bahamas and Columbia. The following individuals have been selected as recipients of the 1999 Heroism Award, the first three of which are to be awarded posthumously: Police Officer Thomas Monse--Atascosa County Police Officer Mark Stephenson--Atascosa County State Trooper Terry Miller--Texas Department of Public Safety Police Officer Louis Tudyk--Pleasanton, Texas Supervisory Deputy David Sligh--San Antonio, Texas Carl Fisher--Court Security Officer--INS Retired--Pleasanton, Texas Wendell Munson--Atascosa County Archie Pena--Retired Police Officer--Atascosa County Oscar De La Cruz--Pleasanton, Texas Many national and international nominations for the awards were received. Seven of the awards were given to those officers and civilians who were involved in the sad event that took place on October 12, 1999, in Pleasanton. On that day, three brave officers of the law sacrificed their lives in the line of duty. Atascosa Sheriff's deputies Thomas Monse and Mark Stephenson, along with Texas state trooper Terry Miller, were all gunned down in an ambush by a lone gunman. Two others, City of Pleasanton Police Officer Louis Tudyk, and a retired U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service agent, Carl Fisher, were also wounded during the ensuing gunfight. Carl Fisher, along with Archie Pena, a retired local Police Officer, and Wendell Munson, a 56-year-old cattle rancher, earned their Heroism Awards by rising to the occasion and risking life and limb to come to the aid of the fallen police officers. None of them was obligated to do so, yet they decided to make it their duty. The tragic incident served as a grave reminder of the risks that law enforcement officers face every day in guarding the peace of our communities. This tribute extends to include officers of all stripes for the hard work and sacrifices they make throughout the country. Far too often their presence is taken for granted and the risks that they take for our security are not fully comprehended. I hope that this award can serve as a symbol of our gratitude for all law enforcement officers who fulfill a much-needed task.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I am not going to take 5 minutes. I just want to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes) on his efforts and all the congressmen, the representatives from California, New Mexico, Arizona, and Texas. I want to just emphasize the importance of the amendment that the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes) had, and I want to put it in perspective in terms of an analogy. The particular language that it would prohibit the Colonias initiatives unless the appropriations funded it, I want the gentlemen to think about the way it was, and I am real pleased that it has been eliminated because if that same kind of language was there, say, that was in the Department of Commerce, and a chamber of commerce or a particular corporation was prohibited, it would be said that it was discriminatory. If that same kind of language was in the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, and it would be said that funding would be prohibited from the veterans to go to specific veterans, it would be said that that was discriminatory. If that same kind of language was in the Department of Transportation and it said that particular resources would not be able to be spent in a specific community, it would said that that was discriminatory. So I want to thank the gentleman for agreeing and being able to remove that language from there because there is no doubt that the Colonias need a lot of help, and I know everyone on the border recognizes the importance of providing resources and access just like anyone would have those opportunities.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1959, which would rename a part of the San Antonio Federal Building as the Adrian A. Spears Judicial Training Center. Judge Spears was an outstanding and dedicated U.S. district judge. Judge Spears holds the record as the longest serving chief judge for the western district of Texas. He moved to San Antonio in the years before World War II and lived there until his death in 1991. He was appointed by President Kennedy and confirmed by the Senate in 1962; and he remained on the bench until 1979, after which he assumed senior status until 1982. Judge Spears was a highly respected jurist who is worthy of this permanent honor. Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity also to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gonzalez) for his efforts on this particular piece of legislation, and I would indicate that Judge Spears should be honored for his tireless efforts for this country and the work that he accomplished. I encourage all of my colleagues to support the legislation as we move forward in memorializing Judge Spears.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, this Sunday, June 25 will be the 50th anniversary of the commencement of the Korean War. I join my colleagues, veterans, their families and all Americans in forever memorializing those who fought and died in the quest for freedom in South Asia. Millions today live in freedom and thrive in economic prosperity as a direct result of the U.S. and our U.N. allies intervening in Korea and taking a stand on the 38th parallel. For that sacrifice, I applaud the thousands of veterans who risked and sacrificed their lives so others could be free. Your service will stand as a permanent reminder of our nation's commitment to securing freedom and liberty for all. Last week we saw a historic meeting which many regard as the first step towards reuniting North and South Korea. While eventual reunification would still take many years of patient diplomacy, such an event looks more and more like a reality. I am hopeful that we can close this chapter and bring home our troops who continue to face danger along the de-militarized zone (DMZ). All across the country, Americans have been and will be commemorating the Korean War. I commend all those who take time out from their everyday lives to pay homage to those who served and sacrificed in Korea. I express my hope that across San Antonio, in South Texas, all over the U.S. and around the world, Americans will make every effort to remember the price we paid in that conflict. Earlier this session, the House unanimously passed H.J. Res. 86, recognizing the 50th Anniversary of the outbreak of the Korean War. The bill was subsequently enacted into law. It expresses congressional recognition of the significance of the 50th Anniversary of the Korean War. The resolution expresses gratitude for members of the Armed Forces who served in the Korean War, especially those who died in action or remain unaccounted for. Finally, the resolution calls upon the President to issue a proclamation recognizing the Korean War and those who fought in it, and to call on the country to observe the anniversary with appropriate ceremonies and activities. I look forward to this and future opportunities that we have to remember those who fought and sacrificed so that the U.S. and her allies could live in peace.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, today and last week, I sent a letter to Governor Bush asking him to suspend executions in Texas and to form a commission to review the administration of the death penalty. The moratorium would give the commission time to review the adequacy of both legal representation, the advances in DNA technology, and the possible biases in the capital sentencing process. The support of the use of the death penalty, in appropriate cases, I support totally. But we must make sure that we impose the capital punishments fairly and without bias. That is basic to our sense of justice. In light of recent events, I am no longer confident that we in Texas are administering the death penalty with the highest standards of justice in mind. We should not tolerate the possibility of executing an innocent person, especially when we have the means to avoid it. Recent reports in the media, other reports and studies that have been conducted, have highlighted the mistakes made in capital cases both in Texas and throughout the country and in other States around the country. As my colleagues well know, concerns with the administration of death penalty and the adequacy of legal representation prompted Governor George Ryan of Illinois to declare a moratorium on executions. We have asked Governor Bush and I am pleased that Governor Bush recently made a decision to pardon a man wrongly convicted of being sentenced for 99 years in prison. His release came, however, after he had served 16 years and was determined that he had been innocent after DNA studies had been conducted. With recent efforts to expedite executions and remove many cases for appeal, it is possible that similar convictions in Death Row equally might be innocent. These executions could be postponed so that we would be able to assess those three specific areas that I have mentioned. And that is to make sure that we have had adequate legal representation for these individuals; secondly, to make sure that, with the new technology and with the new advances in forensic technology, the DNA analysis in particular, that we have the best opportunity in our history to rule out or, at least, to have serious doubts, concerns, and possibilities that the defendant or convict in fact committed the specific crime in question. As we look in terms of the situation where we find ourselves in, I ask the Governor to help out in the process of asking the Board of Pardon and Paroles to seriously look at assessing our process in Texas. And yes, we might have a great operation in San Antonio, but I know that each county and each community operates differently. I know that a large number of cases in Houston, over 70, that a particular district attorney used to brag about the number of people that he was sentencing into Death Row. Those types of things need to be questioned. We have had specific situations where psychologists have utilized stereotypes and racial profiling to determine some of those decisions. So those biases need to be looked at very carefully. Not to mention, and I stress the importance of the technology that we have before us, and especially in those cases that there is some sufficient DNA that is available where we can go to reaffirm our decision to make sure that in those cases we will not be making a mistake. I fully understand the plea of victims for the swift administration of justice, but justice requires that we know for sure that we are applying the ultimate earthly penalty fairly and properly. I am not sure that we are doing this at the present time. I, therefore, call upon the Governor to help and assist on the Texas Board of Pardon and Paroles to look at a commission that would look at the process in Texas that is being utilized in each of our communities throughout the State. I would ask that we look in terms of what is actually occurring and that in those capital cases that we make recommendations to make sure we streamline the process. Again, I would ask that they look in terms of the legal representation that these individuals have received after the indications that have come out; secondly, in the new technology and the DNA; and thirdly, on the possibility of biases.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas. I think the gentleman has done a tremendous presentation with the data that the gentleman has before him. There is no doubt, as I was listening to the gentlewoman talking about Flo, the woman out there advertising on behalf of the pharmaceutical companies, when she talks about keeping government out, she is talking because she is an individual apparently not on Medicare but on a private HMO, and receiving that 39 or 40 percent cut that is displayed, that the gentleman has that very vividly shows the disparity that we are talking about. That particular advertisement says that if someone is in a HMO, or private, that the pharmaceutical companies will give a 40 percent credit on prescriptions, but if someone is on Medicare, tough luck. They are going to pay not only the 40, but also the profits that we have to make that they did not make on those other individuals. That is what is wrong. As the gentleman has indicated so clearly, why should not everybody get that opportunity to get that 40 percent cut? When we did those studies, and I did them in my district, also, in my district, it showed that our senior citizens, and I went across with all my pharmacists and they reported to us. The pharmacies that are out there recognize the disparity. They have to charge 122 percent for my senior citizens on Medicare for the same prescriptions. What we are talking about is if someone is on Medicare, they have to pay in my district 122 percent to 150 percent more for the same prescription than someone who is on an HMO. The only reason is that the pharmaceutical companies have chosen not to provide that. Now they expended that money and are using people like Flo and talking about keeping government out, because, after all, they are making huge profits on our senior citizens. That should be a crime, to be going after those individuals who need the medication the most in our country, the individuals that are out there in need, and those are the ones who are having to pay more. It does not make any sense, I say to the gentleman. I know he understands this fully, that in 1965 when we started Medicare, at that time we might not have needed prescriptions. But now if someone is under Medicaid for the indigent, they get prescription coverage. But if someone is on Medicare, our senior citizens, they do not get it. That does not make any sense whatsoever. I think that it is time that we move forward and provide that access to our senior citizens so that they will be able to get access to that quality care that is needed. When the gentleman provided that example out there, that hits us right in the forehead. My constituents are also getting those letters. I would ask them to look real carefully, because what we are really fighting for here is to make sure that our senior citizens get access to quality care. That includes prescription coverage and getting the appropriate cost in those areas, instead of having to pay not only what the others are paying, but they are actually paying a lot more for that same prescription, because the pharmaceutical companies are making the profit on them at the expense of our senior citizens. That is unfortunate. So when the gentleman watches that advertisement, make sure he watches real closely in the bottom of that, to show who is paying for that advertisement. It is unfortunate that those pharmaceutical companies continue to provide huge amounts of money to the Congressmen in their lobbying efforts, in the campaigns of a lot of individuals that are running out here. We need to make the changes that are needed in this country. One of those changes is to make sure that we provide the prescription coverage for our senior citizens. That is one thing that we need to do, an obligation that we have, because a lot of these senior citizens go without eating. I have heard testimony after testimony where one of the spouses decides not to buy her prescriptions because she is getting it for her husband. That is unfortunate. Or they decide to buy one prescription, not the second or third one, because they do not have sufficient money. That is unfortunate. That should not be happening. It is time that we can do that now. We have the resources to do that now. We have the surplus. If not now, when? I say that again: If not now, when? We cannot afford for us to continue to go on in this way. I want to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Turner) for his efforts and for continuing this fight. We are not going to let up. We are going to continue this effort. If it does not happen this session, we are going to be back the next session. I know the gentleman has been at it for the last two sessions, and we have been trying to make some things happen. Eventually we are going to do it, because it is the right thing to do, to make sure that, if nothing else, that people pay the right prices and are not gouged the way they are being gouged now at the expense of other senior citizens, and now using those senior citizens that have the private insurance against the senior citizens that are on plain Medicare. That is unfortunate that that is happening. I appreciate the gentleman allowing me the time to be here.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I believe with the allocations made by the leadership, and I appreciate the $30 million additional in terms of nursing homes for veterans, but still we need $80 million to take care of existing costs. I feel compelled to speak out on this amendment which would inadequately fund the State Veterans Home Program. It is imperative that the veterans and their families be able to be taken care of in the twilight of their years. Getting the funding increase is only the first step. While I am primarily concerned about the dire need of these homes in Texas, veterans all across the country need these services. The key to strong recruitment into our military is a strong evidence of helping veterans throughout their life. On behalf of the nearly 1.7 million veterans in Texas, I want to boost this appropriation for the Department of Veterans Affairs' grants for construction of State extended care facilities to $140 million for fiscal year 2001. The $30 million would only give us $90 million. We need $80 million additional to bring us up to $140 million to be able to take care of existing costs. This increase of $80 million, if you add $50 million to your request from the VA, was recommended by both the chairman and the ranking member of the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs in their letter to the House Committee on the Budget expressing our views and estimates of the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs. I look forward to working with the gentleman from New York in securing necessary resources to fund this crucial program which is very important. Providing for the long-term health care needs of veterans remains one of our most important commitments to those who have served our Nation. I feel that providing this stepped up level of funding for 2001 sends a strong signal to our veterans and their families across this country that Congress is committed to serving veterans in the twilight of their years. Texas has only received 3 percent of the funding from these types of programs in the past since its inception even though we have over 7 percent of the Nation's veterans. As they get older and are in more need of nursing home care, we must be there for them and be able to provide that service. Texas has been a newcomer to this program, and we have not taken advantage of it in the past which provides funding for State nursing homes for veterans. We have begun construction of four sites in Texas. Those sites are in Floresville, Texas; Temple, Texas; Bonham; and in Big Spring. The reality is that the way it is structured now, Texas will not be entitled to a red cent, to not a single penny of the resources that are there unless we go beyond the existing resources because of the wording that you have for renovation and not for new construction. I am hopeful that we can continue to work on this to provide the additional resources that are needed. Once again, it was unfortunate the administration had only recommended $60 million. Your $30 million will bring it up to $90 million. We really need to look in terms of bringing it up to $140 million to meet the needs. That is one of the recommendations that was made from our committee. I want to ask the committee to please consider the possibility of increasing these resources beyond the $30 million that is there before us.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. I thank the gentleman for yielding. This amendment will basically require, or almost make it assured that the 30 Members from Texas will have to vote no despite the fact that we feel very strongly about the need for nursing homes because they are taking it from NASA and not only that they are taking it from NASA, but in addition to that $30 million that is going to nursing homes, none of that with the exception of $10 million would be qualified to where we could even begin to participate because we cannot even get that first $80 million for Texas for nursing homes. So not only are they taking the money from there but we are not going to be able to benefit from that, either.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise at this time to support the Waxman amendment to allow the Government to reclaim its damage from tobacco companies. Tobacco use is the single most preventable cause of death and disease in our society. Tobacco products cause more than 400,000 deaths in the U.S. each year. Each person who dies of tobacco-related lung cancer loses an average of 14 years of expected life. I again repeat, each person loses over 14 years of expected life. In addition to that, in terms of the quality of life of the individual, I do not know if anyone has ever witnessed someone who suffers from emphysema, where they have the difficulty where before they had strength, they are unable to even walk from their bedroom to the kitchen to be able to get a cup of coffee, the quality of life that is also lost is not even recorded. The record is clear that the health care and compensation costs have gone up as a result of tobacco-related illnesses. We all recognize this fully. Our government must be able to provide proof to the courts, so that we need to go to court to assure that these resources are obtained. Remember that in 1998, we took veterans' tobacco compensation from our transportation projects. At that time we made it clear that the Attorney General should recover this from the tobacco companies. The rider in the VA-HUD bill flies in the face of that commitment. Remember that this amendment takes only the legal funds at the VA; it does not take away any other resources in terms of health. So it is important for us to move forward in that direction. The tobacco industry's denials about the deadly effects of smoking are not stopping over 3,000 youngsters who start smoking every single day. American youth is relying on the Congress to be protective. I would share with my colleagues a particular research project that was done in Austin, Texas, when I was a legislator where they took youngsters from one of the high schools, these were high school youngsters and it was a research project where the students were allowed to go around the neighborhoods and purchase cigarettes. One of the things that they found when they provided that testimony before us, they laid hundreds of packages of cigarettes before us, and each one had the label where they had bought those cigarettes. These were all youngsters underage that had bought those cigarettes. These were youngsters that were sold those cigarettes. It was not surprising that on the east side of Austin and in those sectors where the minority populations were that this is where the most number of packages were sold. In addition to that, as we move forward, I would remind my colleagues that when veterans joined the military, they were also provided with access to cigarettes, so that it becomes important for us to recognize that they recognize that one of the reasons why they go after the young, that that is when they can catch those individuals, because as adults, a lot of times we know better than to smoke. And they recognize that if anyone is going to be smoking it is if they catch them early enough. So every effort needs to be taken to make sure that we do the right thing. We have an obligation to ourselves and to our country and to our veterans to make sure that we go after the companies that have been abusing. The VA spends over $4 billion annually treating tobacco-related illnesses. Under the Medical Care Recovery Act, any recovery of this cost would be returned to the VA health programs. In effect, the rider blocks the VA from obtaining potential tens of billions of dollars for the recovery and for the use of our veterans. It is also disheartening that the 106th Congress would act to prevent the Department of Justice from pushing forward the claims. The 105th Congress had denied veterans' compensation for tobacco-related illnesses in Public Law 105- 178 with the express recommendation that the Attorney General take all steps necessary to recover from tobacco companies the cost of that treatment. It is our obligation, it is our responsibility, and I would ask that we move forward. Mr. Chairman, I would ask my colleagues to please vote to stop this outrageous gift to the tobacco industry and let us move forward and do the right thing and vote ``aye'' on the Waxman amendment.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, we all know the importance of small business to our economies and local communities. I am proud today to let my colleagues know that our municipally owned utility, City Public Service of San Antonio, TX (CPS), has put words into action in its efforts to increase small business participation. In recognition of these efforts, CPS this week is receiving 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. CPS has made the participation of small and historically disadvantaged businesses a central tenet of its operating policy. CPS conducted numerous seminars and individual interviews to explain the purchasing process and identify potential obstacles. By listening to the target audience--small, minority and women-owned businesses--CPS learned what was needed to make its outreach efforts most productive. Among other actions taken to increase subcontracting opportunities, CPS subdivided larger contracts into smaller ones, eliminated bonding, except in high risk areas, implemented longer contract terms in certain cases to allow small businesses the chance to amortize their capital costs, significantly reduced and sometimes eliminated insurance requirements, facilitated meetings with CPS personnel to foster communication, expanded the use of target businesses in professional contracting, lowered the subcontracting requirements for prime contractors to submit a plan for the use of small businesses from $500,000 to $100,000, and waived contract requirements on low-risk jobs under $50,000. CPS has been a leader in developing programs for small business. For example, in July 1998, CPS launched the first Mentoring/Protege year- long program for small, minority and women-owned businesses. The goal of this program is to enhance business skills for start-up businesses and to assist in the development of firms in operation from 4 to 7 years. In 1999, CPS joined with the city of San Antonio and other local governments to establish the South Central Texas Regional Certification Agency to centralize, and thereby simplify, the process for certification as a small, disadvantaged, or woman-owned business. CPS has also found success in its one-stop Supplier Diversity Program, which now has 3,800 certified vendors. CPS works with local chambers of commerce to increase local and small business participation in contract bidding. Through educational programs and one-on-one meetings, the utility has been able to identify potential business partners. As a result, millions of dollars in contract awards have gone to businesses owned by women, Hispanics, and African-Americans. The SBA's Eisenhower Award is a great tribute to the years of hard work by CPS leadership and its small business team. I welcome the CPS Chairman of the Board, Clayton Gay, and the Director of Purchasing, Contracts and Small Business Development, Fred Vallasenor, to Washington, and I congratulate CPS General Manager and CEO Jamie Rochelle for her leadership and vision. As you accept this award, I hope that it will be for you and the company an inspiration to continue your leadership in small and minority business contracting. You and all of CPS have made us proud.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, this week we mark an important day in American history--June 14, 1775 is the day the United States Army was born. The birth of the Army was the prelude to the birth of freedom for our country the following year. This Army earned, and continues to earn, the respect of our allies, for fear of our opponents, and the honor and esteem of the American people. The Army's ninth oldest installation was established in 1876 on land donated by the city of San Antonio, Texas. In 1890 the post was named Fort Sam Houston and it has continuously performed five basic roles and missions; as a headquarters, a garrison, a logistical base, mobilization and training, and a medical facility. By 1912 it was the largest Army post in the United States. Highlights of the post's illustrative history include: Geronimo and thirty-two other Apaches were briefly held prisoner there. The 1st US Volunteer Cavalry (Roosevelt's Rough Riders) was organized and trained at Fort Sam Houston before heading for San Juan Hill. Military aviation was born at Fort Sam Houston in 1910 when Lieutenant Benjamin D. Foulois began flight operations there in Army Aircraft #1, a Wright biplane. Lieutenant Dwight D. Eisenhower met Mamie Doud on the porch of the officers' mess, married her, and lived in Building 688 on the post. George C. Marshall, Douglas MacArthur, and John J. Pershing were among sixteen officers who served at Fort Sam Houston and later became general officers and distinguished leaders in the First and Second World Wars. In 1917 over 1,400 buildings were constructed in three months to house and train more than 112,000 soldiers destined to serve in World War I. The Army's first WAAC company arrived in 1942 to train and serve. Fort Sam Houston, known as the home of Army medicine, has been a leader in the medical field since its first 12-bed hospital was built in 1886. Today, with a new, state of the art, medical treatment facility, the Brooke Army Medical Center, and the Army's Medical Department Center and School, Fort Sam Houston continues the important medical role it has played since the post was founded. As we honor the United States Army, our nation's oldest service, now celebrating its 225th birthday, it is fitting we reflect on the historic role Fort Sam Houston, Texas, has played, and continues to play, in the defense of our country. It is a tangible connection with the history of the Army and the United States. It is important we preserve its legacy for future generations.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, how irresponsible have we become? How greedy have we become? We all pay taxes; we all have a responsibility to pay down the debt. This is irresponsible, and it is a callous disregard for all Americans, when we only favor the top 2 percent of the richest. Let us cut the taxes on all Americans, not just on the richest 2 percent of this country. The top 1 percent own 40 percent of the assets. This piece of legislation would even cause the divide to even be more between the haves and the have-nots. This is un-American, it is unfair, it is unethical and irresponsible. It is heartless, to think that we are going to be giving $50 million to the top 2 percent richest when, at the same time, we have said no to our veterans. This same Congress has said no to our veterans. When we have promised them access to health care, we have said no. We have been unwilling to give them that $5 billion that they need; yet we say yes to the 2 percent of the richest of this country when we say that we are going to give them $50 billion.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3544 which would award the Congressional Gold Medal to Pope John Paul II. As he celebrates his 80th birthday this Thursday, May 25, the spiritual leader of more than one billion Catholics around the world and millions of Catholics in the United States deserves our nation's highest Congressional honor. In the recent past, we have honored Mother Teresa and South African President Nelson Mandela. The Pope clearly serves in such company as a global figure who continues to make an impact on spiritual and moral leadership and the struggle for equal rights and protection for all people. There is no doubt that historians of the future will single out Pope John Paul II as one of the most influential leaders of his time. He used all the modern tools in transportation and communications to personally deliver his message of love and compassion to the far reaches of the globe. He not only made dialogue, but also influenced world movements such as the fall of Communism and the beginning of the third millennium of Christianity on earth. We are fortunate to have lived in such changing times and to have had such leaders as the Pontiff who recognized the ever-changing facets of life around him and took steps to utilize necessary tools to effect change for the better. As he travels the world, he leads by example as a symbol of tolerance, peace and fairness not only for Catholics, but for people of different faiths, ethnicity and economic status. I commend the House for bringing this legislation to the floor and urge the enactment of this bill as expeditiously as possible.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, as an original co-sponsor of the House version of this measure, I commend the House and the House Veterans' Affairs Committee for bringing this long-awaited increase in education resources for veterans to quick passage. I urge the Senate to accept the House version and send this bill to the President. In this legislation, we boost Montgomery GI bill funding significantly. The increase is fully offset and will go directly to veterans to help pay for their education. The bill would primarily increase the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) benefit from $536 to $600 per month on October 1, 2000, and to $720 per month on October 1, 2002, for full-time students, with proportionate increases for part-time students. I am disappointed that we cannot offer a benefit which is tied to the real escalating costs of higher education, and plans that recognize the actual growing costs of tuition should be given their day. As a college professor who taught and advised students who were eligible for Montgomery GI bill benefits, I know first hand the tremendous help that this program has conferred upon those who have served their nation. I am pleased with the additional provisions of S. 1402. As amended, these include: 1. Furnishing individuals still on active duty who either turned down a previous opportunity to convert to the MGIB or had a zero balance in their Vietnam-era Veterans' Education Assistance Program (VEAP) account, the option to pay $2,700 to convert to MGIB eligibility. 2. Increasing survivors' and dependents' educational assistance benefits for full-time students from $485 to $600 per month effective October 1, 2000, and $720 per month effective October 1, 2002, with proportionate increases for part-time students; also authorizes an annual cost of living adjustment. 4. Permiting the award of Survivors' and Dependents' Educational Assistance payments to be retroactive to the date of the entitling event, that is, service-connected death or award of 100 percent disability rating. 5. Allowing monthly educational assistance benefits to be paid between term, quarter, or semester intervals of up to 8 weeks. 6. Allowing use of MGIB benefits to pay the fee for a veteran's civilian occupational licensing or certification examination. The added flexibility this bill would provide is crucial as more and more veterans seek higher education after their service. While this does not satisfy all the problems that may be out there or emerge in the future, it goes a long way in boosting the finest educational program for those who have served, the Montgomery GI bill. I regret missing the vote on this important bill, where I would have voted aye on passage, as I was in the district attending my daughter's high school graduation.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I oppose the intent of the Largent amendment. The existing utility privatization statute is unclear and needs the clarification we added in Committee with bi-partisan support. The Committee language ensures fair competition and helps guarantee the reliability of energy distribution to our military bases. The amendment would create unregulated monopolies with unprecedented bargaining power that could hold bases and taxpayers hostage in contract renegotiations. Default, abandonment or early termination by the unregulated entities could imperil reliability and impose huge costs on our bases. The amendment would upset the process of utility deregulation; no state has deregulated distribution services. As approved in Committee, unregulated utilities could still compete. They would simply be expected to comply with the same health, safety, reliability, and system standards which apply to every other energy distribution system in that state. I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment and maintain the carefully drafted language approved by the Armed Services Committee. Sequential Votes Postponed in the Committee of the Whole