Ciro Rodriguez

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, as a State representative from Texas I know the situation well, and we in Texas are known for the blue bonnets, the Texas barbecue and the champion San Antonio Spurs, the beautiful Rio Grande; but we are also known for the changes that we have made in managed care reform. Two years ago, Texas was fortunate to have the foresight to enact and implement its own managed care reform. The days and nights prior to that passage are very similar to tonight and this week here in the U.S. Congress where the discussions are over one side that says that health care costs are going to skyrocket and the other side, the good side, saying that we cannot compromise the health care even at the expense of losing one individual for the almighty dollar. I am of the thinking that health care should not be about compromising anyone's life, but rather about health care and promotion and education. Two major issues that have helped address the health care concerns of consumers in Texas are the external review process and the ability to hold an HMO liable through a lawsuit. Through the external review process, hundreds of individuals in Texas have the opportunity to have their cases heard by an outside party. The decisions are made by the doctors chosen by an independent medical foundation. The doctors review the cases and render a decision based on that information. The best part of it is that it is done in a timely manner. In Texas we take pride in that we mandate the review to occur within 14 days and in cases of life or death, for them to move within 3 days in making those life-threatening decisions. What is even better is that what the doctor says goes. It is not the way we have it right now where an accountant or an insurance person is the one dictating what should happen versus what the doctor is saying. Nearly 600 cases have been handled in this manner through the external and internal review in Texas and guess what? Half of them have been ruled on behalf of the patients. So it has gone 50-50. So we feel it has been a very fair system that has been working. For the States that are not fortunate to have this law, I believe that we need to pass Federal legislation here on the Federal level that will ensure that all Americans, not just Texans, have that opportunity to have a due process. A testament to the fact that the Texas' system works is evidenced through the story that was told in an article by the U.S. News and World Report in March. The story is about a young boy, little Travis, who had a medical condition that came from the fact that he had difficulty breathing. And I was hearing the comments by the previous gentleman out here talking about the external review process being useless. The gentleman should tell that to little Travis. That was the difference between life and death. Because of his condition, his doctor asked the HMO to authorize an on-duty nurse. Hard to believe, but the HMO later refused to pay for that nurse. An internal review of the case by the HMO doctor ended up upholding the HMO decision, so the first internal review they sided with the HMO. But thank God the next step was the external review. An outside doctor reviewed the case and found that little Travis was, indeed, entitled to that nursing care. And this is a case with the HMO playing with a little boy's life and it is a serious situation. Mr. Speaker, thank God he lived in Texas. Each time he stopped breathing, he and his parents knew that he was within moments of suffocating. Having a nurse on hand part-time provided the necessary care for little Travis who needed it when his parents were not around. The external review process works for many, but for those that do not have that access, it cannot work. We have got to assure that those individuals have access to that opportunity. For the positive happening for little Travis's case, it is great. But there are too many out there who still suffer under those situations. I would also like to mention that I believe that the ability to sue HMOs in Texas, there was a lot of talk about the fact that there was going to be a lot of lawsuits and that everyone was going to be sue happy. This is not the case, and we have had it there over 2 years. So the reality is, and I will challenge my colleagues, do not be fearful. It is not going to happen. In the State of Texas only five lawsuits have been filed. Think about it. It is a State of 4 million individuals that are in managed care with only five lawsuits that have been filed. Members can say what they will about managed care reform, but in Texas it has been working. It is alive and well and serving the best interests of those individuals under managed care. Mr. Speaker, I want to also just congratulate my fellow colleagues and I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green).

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, making sure that everyone has an opportunity to see the doctor of their choice, that is one of the main principles that we are here for. One of the main things each and every one out there, each American, wants to be able to see the doctor of their choice, especially if they are paying for their own medication and their own health care. For the last 2 years, we fought over the issue of managed-care reform, and we need to make sure that every American has that opportunity to see the doctor of their choice. It is interesting that now as we come to battle on this issue that the other side is beginning to talk about coming together, and we do need to come together, but the reality is that we are skeptical about their proposals. We have the managed-care bill, the patients' bill of rights, that is there to make sure that we can come back and make the managed-care companies, the HMOs, accountable to our constituents. I want to make sure that as we move forward that we do the right thing. Let us stop wasting time. It is time that we come together and we make sure that we are responsive. Instead of reinventing the wheel and derailing things, we have to make sure that the majority is held accountable for health care in this country.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Veterans Millennium Health Care Act of 1999. I commend the efforts of the Chairman and Ranking Member of the VA Committee, along with the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Health Subcommittee and their staff, of developing this needed piece of legislation. This health care bill offers many positive improvements, including the expansion of care for long-term nursing, mental health services, emergency and other needed care. It represents a comprehensive and necessary change to keep our VA health care facilities and services in tune with the needs of veterans and the changing health care industry. I urge the Senate to act quickly in passing this bill so we can have it enacted into law this year. A more fundamental problem we face lies in the funding of such programs, especially for the discretionary health care budget. We can authorize all we want for VA health care. But based on the budget caps set by the House leadership, veterans will be lucky just to avoid having cutbacks in fiscal year 2001 and could face much more drastic cuts in future years. We all want HR 2116, and authorizing bills like it, to expand health care and benefits to veterans and their families. But we must be prepared to bite the bullet and give adequate funding for all veterans services.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to express my appreciation of the Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) leadership in fighting the rising hepatitis C (HCV) epidemic among veterans. It is my view that the VA, Congress, community health leaders, and veterans' service organizations must do even more to ensure that veterans have access to the testing and treatment they deserve. Today, nearly four million Americans have HCV. But the infection rate among veterans is as much as six times higher than in the general population according to the American Liver Foundation. Recent testing efforts within the VA indicate that nationally 8-10 percent of veterans are HCV positive and in some urban areas it is double that rate. Alarming as these numbers are, the situation in the Hispanic community is especially serious. In our community, the infection rate approaches six percent among those in their late forties and early fifties and I am concerned that among Hispanic veterans the rate could be even higher. I am particularly concerned that we are seeing the beginning of what will be a steadily increasing number of Vietnam era veterans who test positive for this disease. Nearly one million Hispanic Americans are veterans of military service, several hundred thousand of whom served during the Vietnam era. Unfortunately, HCV is a silent killer. The disease progresses slowly without symptoms in a majority of patients for two decades or more. Patients with chronic NCV have significantly lower health-related quality of life than healthy individuals. But let there be no mistake about the serious nature of this disease. Untreated, HCV leads to liver failure, cancer, and death. It is now the leading cause of liver transplantation--a procedure that costs upwards of $250,000 if an organ is even available for the patient. I would like to have seen more funds directed toward veterans' healthcare and I strongly urge the VA to take all necessary steps to ensure that at the local level, every veteran who needs testing and treatment for HCV is able to get it. I applaud the efforts of veterans service organizations and local community health leaders to inform the at-risk members of our communities about the dangers of HCV. I look forward to working with each of these groups in the effort to halt the spread of this epidemic.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Campbell amendment. I think in this day and age it is unfair to hold anyone with secret evidence. I have met with families of some non-citizens who have been held. It is very frustrating when you have people held in such a manner. These are people with families and ties to the community here. Some have fled and sought asylum. None have been shown to be a threat to society. But, neither the individual nor the lawyer can see the evidence. So they wait in jail, with no country to go to. I urge adoption of this amendment so the INS would be forced to disclose evidence on these people it continues to detain. I thank the gentleman for his work on this issue.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the rule. I support the efforts of the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards), and during the committee process, I want to just share with my colleagues, that we had a substitute motion to try to put $3.1 billion that was needed in this particular piece of legislation and that particular motion was not even allowed, despite the fact that it was a proper motion. I want to also indicate that there is a tremendous need out there. These resources are not sufficient. We are going to be seeing some closure of some hospitals and some services that are drastically needed, and I would appeal to my colleagues to please consider the proposal that is here before us. We have an opportunity to be able to do that. We need to make sure that we go out there and provide the services that are needed to some of our veterans that are hurting. The fact is there are extended services in terms of health care, in terms of hepatitis C, and emergency care in certain areas that are right now in drastic need of additional resources. We have an opportunity to address that when this vote comes up today. There is no need for us to be going out and verbalizing we are in favor of the veterans while at the same time we are not showing the action that is needed. I ask we vote ``no'' on the rule. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the rule on H.R. 2684. I support the efforts of Chet Edwards, Debbie Stabenow, David Obey and Lane Evans to add $730 million for veterans' medical care in fiscal year 2000. However, the effort to amend the VA-HUD Appropriations bill with this increase was denied by the House Rules Committee. If the amendment were to be in order, I would support this rule, and urge the House leadership to reconsider this decision to deny needed increase in VA spending. This amendment and the denial of even considering it is nothing new. Members have attempted to offer increased funding ever since the budget recommendations were offered in the House Veterans' Affairs Committee. That effort was based upon the Independent Veterans budget offered the major veterans service organizations such as the Disabled Veterans of America, the Veterans of Foreign Wars, AMVETS and Paralyzed Veterans of America. Many of these groups and the American Legion sent letters to the Rules Committee in support of the Edwards amendment as well, and have been instrumental in raising this issue in VSO halls, rallies, and meeting across the country. Throughout this budget cycle, I have joined my colleagues in meeting with the Administration. Our goal was to remind the Administration that it must put veterans first. We then secured a revised budget request from Vice-President Gore to add a billion dollars to next year's VA appropriation. The VA is in a position to make real progress in comprehensive health care: Expanded mental health care, long-term and nursing home health care, Hepatitis C, emergency care and other initiatives that had never been fully funded. But how can we promise these expanded goals without an adequate budget to keep our promises. Now is the time to keep our commitment to those who served our nation when she called.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the amendment to restore $109 million in funding for the Legal Services Corporation. But even with this increase, there would only be $250 million available for LSC programs across the country. This would still be insufficient to meet our needs across the country, but it is a step in the right direction. Even with this year's funding level of $283 million, Legal Services' resources are over-extended. We must send a more positive signal to the dedicated staff who stretch every dollar to provide basic legal services for the poor. Many of our legal protections today came from the cases made possible by Legal Services. Protections such as due process, voting rights, property rights, women's rights, and many other areas came from Legal Services Corporation litigation. On a day to day basis, Legal Aid bureaus across the country help ensure that individuals have access to the most basic legal services. In today's society, whenever a single person's rights are violated, everyone is in danger. To guard against such infringement, people need competent and timely legal advice. For the less fortunate, this is no different. LSC affords them the ability to protect their rights just as anyone else. What are we construing here? Voting rights, employment right, access to education, freedom from discrimination, due process . . . the list goes on. What price tag can we put on these most precious commodities of our democracy? I urge my colleagues to raise the level of LSC funding. I ask my colleagues to vote their CJS pocketbook for freedom.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, today I am privileged to introduce legislation that would designate the Camino Real de los Tejas as a National Historic Trail. This camino real, or royal highway, forged the way for the early development of Texas into a Spanish colony, an independent Republic, and a state in the United States. As the first great highway into Texas, this camino real opened the door to trade and cultural exchange which continues to impact our lives today. The State of Texas recognized the critical importance of these royal highways in 1929 when the state legislature designated portions of El Camino Real de los Tejas, later known as the Old San Antonio Road, as one of Texas historic trails. State Highway 21 marks the trail's pathway in many parts of the state as do state historical markers. Designation as a National Historic Trail would greatly enhance the resources available for trail preservation and public education of its unique and important history. The National Park Service completed its feasibility study in July 1998 pursuant to PL 103-145. The study concluded that the proposed trail met all applicable criteria in the National Trails System Act (PL 90-543). Last Congress, the Senate passed similar legislation, the Camino Real de los Tejas National Historic Trail Act of 1998 (S. 2276). The House did not consider this bill nor a companion bill which I introduced in the House (HR 4724). The bill I am introducing today contains a number of important changes from last year's version. In an effort to clarify the intent of the legislation and to respond to concerns raised during the bill's consideration last Congress, I have worked with the National Park Service to add language addressing the concerns of private property owners. The bill now states unambiguously that no land or interest in land can be acquired by the federal government without the willing consent of the owner, that the federal government has no authority to condemn or appropriate land for the trail, that the trail will not be established on the ground unless a private property owner voluntarily requests to participate, and that designating the trail does not confer any additional authority to apply other, non-trail federal laws. These provisions reflect my desire to assuage any concerns that a national historic trail in Texas would negatively impact private property owners. In fact, the experience of the other existing national historic trails suggests just the opposite--private property owners can and do benefit from participating in the trail program, but only if they want to do so. The Camino Real de los Tejas as defined in this legislation collectively represents a series of roads and trails extending for more than 1,000 miles from Mexico City through Saltillo and Monclova in Mexico to Guerrero and Laredo along the Rio Grande, converging in San Antonio, the provincial capital of Texas from 1772 to 1821, and then heading north and east to Los Adeas, the earlier provincial capital of Texas from 1721 through 1772, now located in Louisiana. Beginning as Indian trails from the earliest days of human activity in the Americas, the trails developed under the Spanish as routes of exploration, missionary work and colonization. The earliest Spanish route stems back to the travels of Alonso de Leon in 1689 and Teran de los Rios in 1691. During the next 150 years, explorers, traders, ranchers, armies and missionaries blazed a series of trails through South Texas to San Antonio and from San Antonio through East Texas and Louisiana. Immigration, from both the east and south, traveled along this transportation system. These trails gained different names over time. In South Texas, beginning at the Presidio del Rio Grande and ending in San Antonio, we find the Lower Presidio Road, or El Camino de en Medio; the Camino Pita; and the Upper Presidio Road. A separate Laredo Road linked Laredo to San Antonio and the Camino Real system. Two major arteries extended northeastward from San Antonio: the Camino de los Tejas along the Balconies Escarpment; and the Camino Arriba through the Post Oak Savannah. Both of these routes converged again in Nacogdoches, Texas. All told, various portions of the Camino Real de los Tejas now in the United States extend for some 550 miles and together make up approximately 2,600 miles in combined length. They served as critical trade routes, post roads, cattle trails, and military highways and opened Texas to the world. The Camino Real de los Tejas linked the Spanish in Mexico to their new outposts in East Texas in the late 17th and early 18th Centuries. These early settlements provided a Spanish presence to counter early French exploration of Texas. The Mission San Antonio de Valero, later known as the Alamo, was established along the Camino real route and later served as a focal point in the military battle for Texas independence. Critical supplies made their way to the American Colonies during the War of Independence via the Camino Real de los Tejas trail system. The Camino Real de los Tejas road system provided the main transportation route for Mexican and Texan armies during the Texas Revolution and continued to play a major role in future military actions. Recognizing the significance of the Camino Real de los Tejas and its historical importance grounds us for the future and provides opportunities for today. Trail designation will help enhance tourism and economic development in the many cities and towns along the trail system. Local museums and historical sites will be given new opportunities for growth. The San Antonio Missions National Historical Park, an important and beautiful network of missions in the San Antonio area, can provide a base of operations for trail activities. A number of public roads, state parks and national forests can provide public access to this important piece of our history. As we strive to boost international trade, develop our local communities, and enhance educational opportunities, we only have to look to El Camino Real de los Tejas for inspiration.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I take this opportunity to commend the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) on this, their 100th Anniversary. South Texas is home to several proud VFW chapters, making me especially proud to support the legislation and recognize the many accomplishments of the VFW. This resolution calls upon the President to issue a proclamation recognizing the 100th anniversary of the VFW, and calls upon the people of the United States to observe the anniversary with appropriate ceremonies and celebrations. For those VFW members back home, and to all 2 million VFW members across this country, I offer a heartfelt congratulations, and thank you for your service to our nation. We owe you our debt of gratitude.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, in San Antonio this past Sunday, more than 230,000 fans lined the banks of the historic River Walk to honor the World Champion San Antonio Spurs. For a city that is the 8th largest in the nation, San Antonio is proud of its humble warriors. San Antonio can not only boast about its strong economy, thriving culture, and beautiful weather, it can now lay claim to pro basketball's finest team. From the rich tradition of the San Antonio Missions and the Alamo, to the Tower of the Americas, San Antonio's skyline can now add the true Twin Towers, David Robinson and Tim Duncan. The whole team acted as one cohesive unit, displaying the chemistry that all great champions have, and to that, they all proved worthy. For a team that has one of the highest college graduation rates in all professional sports, they are truly heroes and role models for us all. This fine athletic achievement is not only for the city of San Antonio, Peter and Julianna Holt, the team owners, or the players, but it is for all the fans of the old American Basketball Association. This is the first time a team from the old ABA has won the NVA Championship. This victory was for all of us who remember the ``Iceman'' George Gervin, along with countless other great stars who toiled long hours for recognition. It is for those who remember the Hemisphere Arena and the ``Baseline Bums''. Team basketball shined this day, and for all the fans of the San Antonio Spurs, it shines just a little brighter.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2280, the Veterans' Benefits Improvement Act of 1999. I commend the Chairmen and Ranking Members of both the Full Committee and the Benefits Subcommittee for their work. This bill brings together elements on benefits improvements from numerous bills. It would give veterans a cost-of-living increase expand eligibility for compensation and survivor's benefits, and accelerate progress on the World War II Memorial. In addition to the approximate 2.4% COLA, this bill would improve the benefits claims for certain surviving spouses. This change is long overdue. This bill would also enhance the oversight of the claims processing system. We have experienced long delays in Texas and throughout the country, and this bill takes steps at addressing this problem: Enhancing the quality assurance program of the Veterans Benefits Administration; and Requiring quality reviews at the Compensation and Pension Service, the Education Service, the Vocational Rehabilitation Service and other programs. It expands to members of Reserves and National Guard who served at least six years eligible for housing loans on a permanent basis. I look forward to these elements being included in any package which is ultimately enacted into law.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today to introduce legislation to promote water conservation and recycling in San Antonio, Texas. This legislation enjoys the bi-partisan support of the other members of the San Antonio congressional delegation who join as original co-sponsors. Like many places across the Nation, San Antonio and the entire central Texas region faces the challenge of providing adequate supplies of water for human consumption, agriculture, industry, and recreation. Unlike other areas, San Antonio depends on a sole source for its drinking water--the Edwards Aquifer. This legislation would authorize the San Antonio Water System (SAWS) Water Recycling Project Phase III. SAWS has embarked on an ambitious project to recycle water that can then be used for a host of industrial and non-potable uses. Upon completion of the project, SAWS expects to save 35,000 acre feet of water, roughly equivalent to 31.2 million gallons per day. As a result, more than 11 billion gallons a year of aquifer water will be available for potable use. This saving will free up an amount equal to approximately twenty percent of the City of San Antonio's current withdrawals from the Edwards Aquifer. The SAWS recycling project meets federal goals for Bureau of Reclamation water projects under Title XVI of the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act of 1992, as amended (PL 102-575). Specifically, the San Antonio Recycled Water Project will: reduce demand on and use of the Edwards Aquifer water supply and will help protect federally-protected endangered species dependent on spring flows originating in the Edwards Aquifer; reduce and postpone San Antonio's need to develop new water resources; foster a region-wide perspective in addressing usage issues across the Edwards Aquifer area, as well as the San Antonio and Guadalupe Rivers watersheds; and provide economic benefits to a community with significantly economically disadvantaged sectors. Phase III is expected to cost approximately $20 million, and the federal share would be $5 million. The FY 1998 Energy and Water Appropriation Bill contained a $200,000 ``earmark'' for the Bureau to conduct a review of San Antonio's environmental assessment and feasibility study of the reuse program. Staff of the Bureau of Reclamation are currently working in coordination with staff of the San Antonio Water System to perform this review. The SAWS project authorization was included in S. 901 in the 104th Congress, a bill reported favorably by the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Unfortunately, that version of the bill did not become law. We face a continuing challenge to use our natural resources more efficiently so that we can meet our communal obligation to provide high quality drinking water to all of our neighborhoods and to maintain a supply of water for economic growth and expansion. In San Antonio, our five military installations will benefit from the recycling project, reducing their need to rely on Edwards Aquifer water. Other large water consumers will also switch to recycled water for non-potable uses, helping us better manage our water supply. SAWS has stepped up to the plate to find long-term solutions, and this recycling project is part of that plan. I am honored to join with my colleagues from San Antonio, Congressman Lamar Smith, Congressman Henry Bonilla, and Congressman Charles Gonzalez, as original co-sponsors of this legislation.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Let me share with the gentleman, and what the gentleman just indicated is correct, that for those individuals that were not counted, for each individual, the figures are different for each State, but it has been estimated that in Texas if an individual was not counted, we lost $1900 for that individual for that year. So when we look at the whole decade, we can see a tremendous amount of dollars for each individual that was not counted. So that it adds up. The gentleman was mentioning each of the programs. It is over a total of $180 billion of Federal funds that are at stake in terms of distribution and how that should go out. So that what is before us is not only in terms of resources and programs, but also, again, the whole issue of reapportionment. And reapportionment means we have 435 Congressmen, so many from each State based on population. And I know that for those States that are growing it is important, and for the other States it is also important to know how many people reside in those States. I know that that is one of the biggest problems that some of the people have with their areas, and it should not be political, it should be about making sure people get counted appropriately and accurately. So, again, in Texas we are scheduled to receive two additional Congressmen, if not three, and that would be based on the count. From the preliminary figures we have seen, we will gain at least two additional Congressmen because of the increase in population. I think that has a direct impact on representation in the State of Texas as well as throughout the country, California and the other States that are also impacted. One of the things I wanted to share was that when we talk to people, we are not saying that we should not go and not do the traditional things. The census is still going to go out there and make sure that everyone gets their mail out, makes sure that everyone is followed up with a call if they do not respond, and if they still do not respond, that everyone gets a knock on their door. It is an effort that is extremely costly, but we also recognize that statistical methods work in determining a better accuracy. In addition to that, there is going to be some additional advertising resources that are going to be utilized to make sure that people understand the importance of getting counted. And again, remember, if an individual does not get counted, we lose resources because of that. And for all practical purposes, that individual does not exist. And I think it is important that all individuals recognize that they have an obligation not only for themselves and for their families, but for their entire community, to make sure that everyone gets counted. That is why organizations come into play, the ministers, the churches, and everyone has a role to play in educating ourselves about the importance of getting counted. I want to also share with my colleagues that the same methods that have been utilized in the past are going to be utilized but, in addition to that, to get that better accurate count is sampling statistical methods and to look at going to the courts to try to throw that out just means that the 2000 census will even be worse than the 1990 census that lost a large number of individuals that were not counted. And my colleagues heard some of those figures. Now, we also recognize that the Hispanic population is one of the ones that was the most undercounted, with about 5 percent, the African- American population with 4.4, the Asian population with 4.5. And again, low-income individuals, whether they are minority or not, are the ones that are least likely to get counted. And those that are above in the economic bracket usually get over counted because of the fact they have several households. So it becomes important that we look at that as seriously as possible and we ask that the Congress seriously look at this and move forward and assure that the funding comes directly to the Census Bureau and that the politicians stay away from dictating as to what should be happening and the Census Bureau and the individuals that have been doing that and have the education and have the expertise in that area should be the ones dictating what should happen.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gonzalez) is right. I have been an educator. I taught at Our Lady of the Lake University at the university level. My wife teaches first grade. One of the key things to remember is that the census did not count the largest number of youngsters that were missed, that were the students and those youngsters. When we look at the amount of resources that come in based on what they call ADA, Average Daily Attendance, and other figures, they utilize the population figures to determine some resources for those areas. So if those youngsters are not counted, then we lose out on that, those resources that would go directly to those individuals in the form of access to health care, in the form of access to education, in the form of access to extracurricular types of programs that youngsters can participate in. Let me just share, what is at question is the whole concept of trying to do the most accurate, complete 2000 Census. That should be our objective. I know the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gonzalez) would agree with me that that is what we need to do, to make sure everyone gets counted. We also recognize, and all the people that have been involved in it, from the Academy of Science to all, they recognize that there is a need to use sampling and statistical method to determine that. The Carter administration, the Bush administration, the Clinton administration all concluded that the Constitution permits the use of sampling and other methods or statistical methods as part of the census. They utilized that in the past. In addition, one of the other things that is also important is that all courts that have considered the question have concluded that the Census Bureau may use sampling and other statistical methods to prove the accuracy and good faith and direct accounting of individuals. Again, what is at question is to make sure that everyone gets counted and as accurately as possible. What the fight seems to be all about is politics and trying to determine that maybe certain States should not get as many congressmen as they are getting, to determine whether certain areas, as we draw the lines for the year 2000, as we draw the lines for every congressional district and all the other elected officials' districts, that that population utilization, if it is the areas that are poor areas that do not get counted, then those areas are going to be over-represented in comparison to some of the other areas that have some of the more middle to upper income brackets, so that we will have congressional districts that will be way over the population figures than some of the others. So that will create a disparity, not only in terms of representation, but a disparity as it deals with the funding. So the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gonzalez) has hit it right on the nail in terms of the fact that we need to make sure that we get the appropriate consensus. Now the other thing that really we need to bring to light is the fact that we should not drag our feet, and we should be funding the census now. We should not be waiting and try to just fund them the next 6 months and the next 6 months, because that is creating some real serious problems; and that is definitely going to have an impact on whether we do a good job or not. I know the gentleman from Texas would agree with me. The Census Bureau has been moving to try to streamline. In fact, we have been told that, for the Year 2000, the standard census form will be the shortest in 150 years. So they are already trying to streamline it to make it simpler. It will only have six questions. So that becomes important. Each individual is going to be getting that. Where we have the difficulty is the nonrespondents. When we talk about the census, everything that we have done in the past, and that is the direct mail, the follow-up, the calls, the visits to those household that are nonrespondent, all that is going to be done. But when all that is said and done, one of the key things is that we still had a problem in the 1990 census, and we want to make sure that we try to correct that as much as possible. That is why the statistical sampling is one of the areas that we need to make sure that is utilized so that we can get a more accurate count. I know that the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gonzalez) would agree with me.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. If the gentleman will yield, I wanted to indicate also the importance of the role that the community plays, and that is that every church, every minister, every organization out there has a role and a responsibility. And I am glad the gentleman mentioned in terms of the involvement of the schools. I think there is going to be a need for all of us to make sure we all have that obligation, to make sure we all get counted. And when that form comes in, the sooner we can send it in, the better. There is no doubt that if we do not send it in, we are going to get called, we are going to get mailed again, we are going to get visited, and we are going to get visited, and we are going to get visited. So I think it is important that when we get the particular mail out on the census that we fill it out as quickly as possible and send it in. Neighborhood groups can play a very significant role. Earlier the gentleman was mentioning about the importance of what the experts are saying, and I want to quote a couple of things. This particular quote is from the U.S. General Accounting Office and it says, ``Sampling households that fail to respond to questionnaires produces substantial cost savings and should improve final data quality.'' That is the U.S. General Accounting Office in support of the use of statistical methods. I also want to quote a little bit from the U.S. Department of Commerce, the Honorable Frank DeGeorge, Inspector General, that says, ``The Census Bureau has adopted a number of innovations to address the problem of past censuses; declining accuracy and rising costs. One innovation, which we fully support, is the use of statistical sampling for non-response follow-up.'' Those individuals that do not respond to those questionnaires initially. Let me also quote from the American Statistical Association, where they say, ``Because sampling potentially can increase the accuracy of the count while reducing costs, the Census Bureau has responded to the Congressional mandate by investigating the increased use of sampling. We endorse the use of sampling for these purposes; and it is consistent with the best statistical practice.'' There are some additional individuals that have continued to indicate, and I want to read from the panel that evaluates alternative census methodologies, the National Research Council, and they state, ``Change is not the enemy of an accurate and useful census; rather, not changing methods as the United States changes would inevitably result in a seriously degraded census.'' So we run the risk of having one of the worst censuses ever in the Year 2000 if we do not allow both the appropriate funding to go as quickly as possible. We need to move forward, instead of just putting a stop to it in June. We need to try to move it quickly, and also to allow the census itself to work. Politicians should not be involved in trying to dictate to them as to what they should or should not do. They should know what some of the best approaches are and they are the ones that should be able to do the job that needs to be done, and that is to make sure that every American gets counted. Again, if we ask why it is so important, this is one of the constitutional obligations, as the gentleman well knows, that we have as a Congress, to make sure that every 10 years everyone gets counted. So it becomes real important.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman very much for yielding to me. It is a pleasure to be with him tonight. I want to congratulate him on his efforts as we move forward on this important issue. As the gentleman well indicated, we recognize that every 10 years this country has an obligation to make sure that everyone gets counted. I want to share with the Members in terms of where we find ourselves now. The gentleman from Illinois (Speaker Hastert) recently submitted a proposal that indicated that he wanted to move forward on the Census and to let the courts resolve the remaining issues. Why should we let the courts resolve the issues? I was real pleased to see Democratic leader, the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Gephardt) offer a counterproposal that includes three components of a compromise on the Census. I want to share these three components. The first one is to completely lift the current June 15 cutoff of funding for 1999, Commerce, Justice, State appropriations at the earliest possible opportunity. We need to allow this agency to move forward. For us to cut the funding on June 15 is going to have a detrimental effect on the Census and being able to do an accurate Census, thereby allowing full funding for the rest of the fiscal year. It is only the most appropriate thing we can do. Secondly, we should provide full funding for the year 2000 Census Bureau activities within the normal 2000 Commerce-Justice-State appropriations process without limiting or any other conditions. We should not wait on the court. We have an obligation to do the count as quickly as possible and as accurately as possible. Thirdly, to also incorporate into a single compromise authorization bill those elements of the act, which is the America Counts Today, and initiatives proposed by Republicans that are consistent with what the Census Bureau has determined is necessary to conduct an accurate and complete 2000 Census. So it becomes important that we do not play politics with the Census, and that we make sure that everyone gets counted in the process. Members heard earlier the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gonzalez) indicate the disparities that occurred in the 1990 Census and how individuals were left behind. As a direct result of this undercount, many individuals were effectively denied government representation and many communities were adversely affected on Federal and State resources by schools, crime prevention, health care, and transportation. One of the things that we need to recognize is that the count, the 2000 count, just like the 1990 count, is utilized for the purposes of distribution of resources, as well as reapportionment and determination of the number of Congressmen, for example, that each of the States will entail. Based on projections now, Texas has indicated we might have up to two additional Congressmen. If we look at an appropriate count, and if we look at the number that we lost last time, there is a possibility that we might even get a third congressman. Texas was the one that had one of the highest figures of individuals that were undercounted, so it becomes really important for us to recognize the importance of this issue. I also want to take this opportunity to appeal to the churches, the organizations, the neighborhood groups, the PTAs, the schools, the advocacy groups, to participate, to make sure that everyone gets counted as we move forward to the year 2000. All of the groups and a lot of the experts that we have have indicated the importance of utilizing the most advanced methods to assure that this count can be the most accurate. If we do not utilize those methods, then we are bound to have even a worse situation before us than we had in the 1990s. I want to share a couple of quotes. One comes from the Report of the Panel on Census Requirements in the Year 2000 and Beyond, Committee on National Statistics. This is the National Academy of Sciences. They are quoted as saying: ``Physical enumeration or pure 'counting' has been pushed well beyond the point at which it adds to the overall accuracy of the census. . . Techniques of statistical estimation can be used, in combination with the mail questionnaire and reduced scale of follow-up of nonrespondents, to produce a better census at reduced costs.'' Remember, this sampling only occurs in those areas where, after everyone has had an opportunity to receive the mail and be able to respond, these are the areas of the nonrespondents, where they have a process of calling them, of visiting them, and continuing to visit them, and then doing a sample. One of the things that I also want to mention, of the undercount, one of the biggest populations that is undercounted is children. So in those areas, especially urban areas and rural areas that are poor areas, usually they are the ones that are undercounted. In areas of people that are a little more wealthy, that have several households, usually we have an overcount there, so there is a need for estimates and statistical data to be used in order to get a more accurate count. Grassroot campaigns need to be undertaken to make sure we educate everyone in this process, but we as a Congress have an obligation to move now, before June 15, to make sure that we fund it appropriately. Not to move now is negligent on our part. To wait for the courts to make a decision, they did not elect us for that purpose. They elected us to make the decisions as we see fit, and to do the right thing. That is to move forward on the year 2000. I want to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gonzalez) for allowing me to make a few comments today on this very key issue that has an impact on everyone, not only just for some individuals but the entire community and the entire United States. This particular issue of the 2000 Census once again has an impact on the number of resources that come into the community, the representation that we get, and also in terms of the redistricting that occurs.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, let me, first of all, congratulate the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutsch) on his efforts; and I want to thank him for taking this lead. And I want to also congratulate the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart) on his efforts also. As we debate this motion and this motion to support and ask the conferees to consider the disaster aid, we look at the fact that there are tens of thousands of Central Americans that still face each day this disaster. The numbers are striking. Over 9,000 dead. Over 9,000 missing. Over 3 million displaced individuals from their homes. Death and injury continues some 6 months after the deadly hurricane has hit. I think we need to recognize, if we look at our infrastructure in our own country, we realize that in countries such as Honduras, one of the poorest countries in Central America, has been hit and they do not even have the infrastructure now so they are having to deal with dysentery and a whole bunch of other problems. Even now, inadequate supplies of clean drinking water and damaged infrastructure help spread disease among the population. The administration has acted quickly to provide some $300 million in emergency assistance. But more is clearly needed, and this additional assistance is far overdue. Congress has not risen to the challenge. We have allowed politics to stand in the way of providing the disaster aid that our neighbors in Central America desperately need. And let me remind my colleagues that there are neighbors and there are neighbors, and we have a moral obligation and a responsibility. Their suffering is our suffering. But if moral duty is not enough, we also have a self-interest reason for helping. The continued loss of life and economic desperation will only encourage more migration from this region in Central America to the United States. Our borders are already seeing greater numbers of Central Americans trying to enter, and the numbers will swell if we do not act quickly. The money we seek today will provide basic infrastructure: roads, schools, and clinics. It is a helping hand to those who suffer from natural disaster. It gives them the tools to rebuild and move forward. Let us stop wasting the time and let us move forward. Even countries such as Costa Rica who were not directly hit have been impacted by the number of refugees that have gone over. We had over 300,000 that have gone into that country. That is equivalent to over 25 million refugees that would come into this country by just the numbers that we are referring to. At this point, I would ask that we seriously consider that and move forward. And, again, I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutsch) for his efforts.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of significant increased funding for Pell Grants and Campus-Based Aid programs. Coming from south Texas, I know the dire need for Pell Grants. By providing resources for our students, we create real opportunity for them to attain higher education. The Pell Grant program is the largest need-based Federal grant program for students pursuing higher education. I know that in San Antonio, this program is the foundation for student aid. Pell Grants help our students from families of modest income who could not otherwise afford a college education. I support the resolution but would like to express my strong reservations about the wording. This resolution is another example of how Republicans are purporting to be education friendly when they are not. Just like a wolf in sheep's clothing there is a face behind this resolution. The language in this resolution essentially says that any new programs we come up with would have to take a backseat to Pell Grant increases. To make demands on what programs should take precedence at this time, is unrealistic and removed from the approach we should be taking on the funding of our education programs. For example, what if a new program is introduced later on this year that will seriously address the needs of our youth and the issue of violence? Does this program automatically get a back seat simply because it is a ``new'' program under this resolution? Yes, we should fund Pell Grants but we should also look at the bigger picture and realize that there may be other ``new'' programs that have been introduced that will be equally as important and help with the early development of our students in the K-12 grades. Higher education is a priority and what better way than through increases in Pell Grants. However, we should also make sure that we are doing what we can to strength the foundation of our elementary and secondary education system. If our Republican colleagues are serious about the Pell Grant program I encourage them to support H.R. 959, the Affordable Education through Pell Grants Act. The legislation will raise the maximum Pell Grant award level to $6,500 for the academic year 2000 to 2001, bringing it to funding where the Pell Grant is meant to be. If Republicans want to put their money where their mouth is, I would ask that they also support H.R. 959. Education is our number one priority. The future of our economy, and our communities rests our ability to increase access to higher education but to also ensure our students can get from point A to point B.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to our nation's teachers. It is with great appreciation that I recognize teachers across America who are shaping a brighter future for our children. Today teachers face many challenges in the classroom, challenges that often force them to give more of their time and energy on matters other than teaching. Increased classroom sizes, crumbling infrastructure, and new social challenges in the lives of children require our teachers to wear many different hats. They play a vital role in not only setting a solid academic foundation for all students, but also teaching our students basic life skills to succeed in the future. To say the least they are extraordinarily influential in shaping the lives of our students. I would like to thank teachers everywhere for their time and commitment. As a former school board member and the husband of an elementary school teacher I know that teachers do not stop working when the school bell rings. A teacher's job never stops. Each day brings new challenges and new opportunities. Many evenings are spent reviewing papers and preparing for the next day's class, and teachers often devote their time to extracurricular activities on evenings and weekends. They have one of the most important jobs in the country and should be praised for their diligence in the classroom. As we mark National Teachers Day this week, we cannot fail to mention one teacher in Littleton, Colorado, William Sanders, who gave his life defending and protecting his students. Teachers across the nation share his love of students and devotion to their well-being. Unfortunately, he paid the ultimate price and we should honor and remember his sacrifice. We must provide our teachers with the means to do their job well. If they don't, our children lose. Without an education, our children will not be prepared to compete in the global economy, they will not be empowered to escape poverty, they will not have the tools to succeed. But worst of all, they will never know the joy of challenging and expanding their minds. It is most appropriate to honor our teachers who daily engage our children in the art of learning.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution to fully fund the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). IDEA ensures that all children with disabilities receive a free appropriate public education. Prior to IDEA, 2 million children were excluded from receiving their right to a public education. Another 2.5 million children received an inadequate education. IDEA has served as a civil rights initiative for our Nation's children for more than 22 years. Fully funding this educational program is important to the millions of learning disabled students in our districts across the country. It is important to our communities that benefit from the achievement level of all these students. IDEA is another example of how government support of an educational program provides the foundation for states and local educational agencies to work together. Funding this initiative for the sake of our children is important for the future success of our schools and communities. In addition to fully funding IDEA, Congress should also better fund other educational programs that are seriously underfunded. For example, consider Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSI's). We have charged these institutions with ensuring the academic success of the Hispanic students that are at their institutions. Similar to IDEA, these institutions cannot fulfill their duty to the students and the community at large without adequate funding. The funding of IDEA is critical along with the funding of all our education programs that aim to serve every child that has the right to fair, and equitable access to a quality education.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, sixty years ago Nazi Germany prepared for the invasion of Poland that thrust the world into darkness, despair and death. We put our heads in the sand. It wasn't our problem. It became our problem, and before it was over more than 50 million people lost their lives. At the heart of Hitler's madness was the conscious decision to kill every Jew in Europe. He almost succeeded. Sixty years ago we did not have NATO and the United States was not the pre-eminent world leader. But once again we have a European leader whose rise to power is premised on the forced dislocation, rape, torture, and murder of an internal ethnic and religious minority. This time it is the ethnic Albanians, who are for the most part Muslim. How should we respond to this challenge? We could hide in the sand. Or we could take action in the name of humanity. That is what we have done. We have acted properly by using our military to end the atrocities. We must now complete the job. We must fight to win. Ending our participation would be a horrible disaster--for the United States, for Europe, and for the ethnic Albanians we seek to help. It is not in our character to duck and run. Rather, we should take a stand for democracy, for hope, and for a secure Europe. We have spent considerable effort trying to reach a peaceful settlement. The ethnic Albanians accepted a compromise. The Serbs rejected it. This is not a new problem and this bombing campaign is not a knee jerk response. President Bush, as he was leaving office, threatened military action against the Milosovic regime, and President Clinton and other world leaders have repeated that threat numerous times. Sometimes you need to back up a threat with action. And that is precisely what President Clinton has done. He has not acted alone, but with the unanimous consent and widespread participation of our NATO allies. I am proud that we have taken a stand against inhumanity and for basic human rights. We waited to take action in Bosnia, at the cost of many lives, and once we did, we were able to end the daily horrors. As President Clinton observed, if a united force had moved to stop Hitler early, we might have spared the world its darkest hour. Our military must remain fully ready to respond to traditional threats to our national security. But we must not be afraid or unwilling to take action to stop or prevent genocide where we can make a difference. We cannot solve every world problem, but we also cannot therefore refuse ever to act. A European genocide, as we should have learned, can destabilize the entire world.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to the Good Friday Peace Agreement signed on April 10, 1998, and to the continuing efforts to bring peace to Northern Ireland. The conflict in Northern Ireland has been agonizing, not only in the region, but also among many Americans, including myself. As a Texas State representative, I visited Belfast in the early 1990's and learned a great deal about the sources of so much tension and hatred in that historic region. On that trip, I had a chance to meet many of the principals on all sides of the dispute. I was able to put faces and personalities behind the struggle: members of Sinn Fein, Unionists, and other individuals that were trying to make a difference. After my return from Northern Ireland, I worked with both parties in the Texas Legislature on the issue. We passed legislation based upon the MacBride Principles to hold companies in Northern Ireland engaged in business with the State of Texas to nondiscrimination and equal justice. As a Congressman, I have continued to deal with the Northern Ireland issue, endorsing efforts to leverage our presence in the region to foster a more tolerant and stable society. I joined all of us in welcoming the breakthrough for peace last year by Special Envoy George Mitchell and the administration as they tackled this delicate problem. As a cosponsor of this bill, H. Con. Res. 54, I continue to share in the hope that this region will take the final steps in realizing a just and lasting peace.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, today we pay tribute to a great civil rights leader, Rosa Parks. It was a great honor to see Rosa Parks at the State of the Union address earlier this year. Looking up at her in the gallery, sitting there with the First Lady and other distinguished guests, it gave me great pride and reminded me of what America is and how great it is. The Gold Medal is a fitting tribute. Congress has honored more than 100 great Americans and world citizens, including George Washington and most recently Mother Theresa and Nelson Mandela. It is the highest award that can be given by Congress and we know that she deserves the Gold Medal of Honor. Mr. Speaker, today we pay tribute to a great civil rights leader as we prepare to vote on awarding the Congressional Gold Medal to Rosa Parks. Her quiet, non-violent refusal to adhere to racist segregation helped break open the flood gates of freedom in this country. That act put us all on the road to a more equal society and to an integrated society. It was a great honor to see Rosa Parks in person as a guest of the President at the State of the Union address earlier this year. Looking up at her in the gallery, sitting with the First Lady and other distinguished guests, gave me great pride and reminded me why America is the land of great potential. The Gold Medal is a fitting tribute. Congress has honored more than 100 great Americans and world citizens, including George Washington and most recently Mother Theresa and Nelson Mandela. The highest award given by Congress to civilians, it is my honor to be a co-sponsor and supporter of this legislation. Since that historic day on December 1, 1955, in Montgomery, Alabama, when she took a stand against a fundamentally unfair and immoral system, Rosa Parks has served as a source of inspiration and courage to those who continue the struggle for civil rights and equality for all Americans. She taught us that one individual can make a profound difference, that one individual can bring down the walls of division in our society, that one individual can clear the path to a better tomorrow. Rosa Parks has earned this medal.

Mr. RODRIGUEZ

Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, this year we have an opportunity to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. I, like many of our Members, we are all concerned in terms of the changes that we foresee and some of the things that might happen. One of the things that I would like to do this afternoon is talk about the importance of bilingual education. One of the main programs the schools rely on is bilingual education. For many of these youngsters and the students in my district, this is not an option but a necessity. This program allows these individuals an opportunity to be able to learn the core items of the curriculum in their native language so that they will be able to function as quickly as possible in the English language. This program allows our children to feel included in the learning process. From firsthand experience, I can say that I started in the first grade not knowing English, and it took me 5 to 6 years to comprehend what was occurring in the classroom. Now I have learned that language acquisition requires from 5 to 7 years to be able to learn a second language, and so it is important for us to have a good understanding of what it takes to learn a second language. Programs like bilingual education will allow our students the opportunity to learn not only English but learn basic subjects in the native tongue that are essential for continued growth and development. As we move to a global economy, more and more languages will be considered a necessary resource. The highly competitive nature of today's global economy underscores the importance of knowing more than one language. America needs bilingual education to produce educated, well-informed citizens. The Texas Educational Agency commissioner supports this idea by stating, ``In the future all children should be trilingual: proficient in their native language, proficient in a second language and proficient in computer literacy. The business community understands the value of trained multilingual employees. We must offer a work force that can meet such demands. This is the commissioner from Texas. By supporting bilingual education, we are supporting our country and also the importance of learning English, at the same time retaining as much of the native language as possible. It also is important that through bilingual education and various types of options, the two-way developmental bilingual education programs, for example, English speakers and language minority students are in the same classrooms learning all grade level skills at the same time. Studies show that the most successful programs, models for language for minority students, as well as for native English speaking, bilingual education is a tool that fosters a successful future for these Americans. Bilingual education is an investment that pays off. If we are to make changes in bilingual education, I hope that it is to improve in terms of assessing the importance of teacher training. We do need teachers to be well trained, to be able to provide that instruction. We also need the ability of the staff to be evaluated and for those programs to be assessed to see how well they are doing. Also important are the initiatives that include parents in the teaching of their children. These are drastically needed and we hope that as we look forward that these are some of the things that we will be looking at. Again, I would also just stress that in the bilingual education we will also see dual language instruction that allows both monolingual English-speaking youngsters as well as monolingual Spanish-speaking and other language youngsters be able to work together and learn both languages at the same time. As we move forward in the global economy, we all recognize the importance of knowing more than one language, and I hope that as we look forward, we move in this direction. I hope that there is no talk of eliminating bilingual education or thinking that Washington, D.C., is a platform for implementing a national 227 initiative. This is not the place. There will never be a time for it to be addressed. If we do not continue to support bilingual education, we will do a disservice to our children and our Nation. I encourage everyone to support the program. It is a beautiful program.