Loretta Sanchez

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Julie Inman of Orange County for receiving the Clara Barton Spectrum Award. The Clara Barton Spectrum Award, given by the Red Cross, was awarded to eight outstanding women in Orange County. Julie was honored for founding SupportAbility, a non-profit organization that raised $11,000 for scholarship that went to 14 students who have overcome great adversity. Julie herself is not unfamiliar with overcoming adversity. When she was 15 years old, Julie suffered a massive stroke. Doctors told her she would never speak again. Three years later, she graduated from Mater Dei High School. Julie has dedicated herself to helping others beat the odds. Her courage has served as inspiration for many. Let this young lady's accomplishments serve as an example of the wonderful things our young people are capable of achieving. I wish her the best of luck in the future.

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Craig Durfey for his tireless work in the fight against autism. Craig is the founder of Parents for the Rights of Developmentally Disabled Children. As a father of children with autism, he knows firsthand the difficulties that come with dealing with this dreaded disease. Today autism is a national crisis that affects nearly 1.5 million children. According to recent studies, as many as one in every 250 children born today will be diagnosed with autism. Autism costs the Nation between $20 billion and $60 billion annually, and the projection for the next 10 years will be that it will cost $400 billion. Autistic children go to doctors three times more often than normal children, and many times families must travel hundreds of miles to see a knowledgeable doctor that understands autism. Craig has been working tirelessly to provide funding for programs in my community and in the Nation that would train social service and law enforcement personnel on how to identify children with this type of disability. I applaud Craig for his efforts, and I will continue to work on his behalf with my colleagues in the Congressional Coalition for Autism Research and Education to increase funding for ideas like Craig's and to find a cure for autism.

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of Women's History Month, to pay tribute to the dedication and courage of the millions of women who have served in the United States Armed Services. Since the earliest days of our Nation, women have played an integral part in our military operations, either behind the front lines or in actual combat. As far back as the Revolutionary War, there are stories of women who posed as men so that they could go and fight at the frontline. Others offered their services as nurses. Still others worked to support the war movement by leaving their domestic roles to take on jobs that were necessary to maintain the Nation's economy. More recently, the role of women in the armed services has greatly expanded. In 1978, women began to be assigned to duty aboard ships; in 1991, women were assigned to aircraft in both the Air Force and the Navy; and by 1994, the ban on women on combat ships was lifted, allowing women greater opportunities in our armed services. As the war in the Persian Gulf looms ahead, we send our thanks and support to all our members of the armed services. But let us not forget the women and their contributions in this time of need.

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to remember and honor my good friend, Mr. Sunil Aghi, or Sunny, as he was known by most people. I first met Sunny when I received a phone call one morning during my first campaign for Congress. Sunny introduced himself. He said that he was Indian; and since my campaign was a campaign of the people, he wanted to get his people, the Indian community, to come and help me win. When he said Indian, I thought he meant headdress and Native American; but what he meant was the Indo-American community, those who were from India. Sunny had such energy. He was a leading Indo-American in the political arena. He was a one-man show, putting together fund-raisers, hosting dozens of Congresspeople and Senators, spreading the message of democracy. He believed in democracy and teaching many of us about India, the world's largest democracy. Sunny passed away last week, survived by his wife, Dimple, and his three young children. And he was young. But as someone said, he managed to wrap many of us here in the Congress and at other State and local levels, people who represent people, he managed to wrap us as a sari does, in his Indian-ness. Thank you, Sunny, for your life and the life you gave to others.

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Arkansas. I think there was a point that the gentleman made that is so important for America to understand, and that is that when one comes to this country or when one is born in this country and one realizes their potential, one is in the greatest market economy the world has known, and so it is great if one can use their talents and make money. It is the American way. My father did it coming to this country, my brothers and sisters and I have done it in this country. We want the same thing for everybody. And I tell people all the time who make good money, I say, when they complain to me about paying taxes, I say to them, is it not a great country, where you can make $1 million, $2 million, $500 million a year? Is it not a great marketplace? Is it not great to see the infrastructure we have, the communication that we have? The way our market works, the way people can come here with nothing and make something? Is it not a great place? Madam Speaker, one has to make money to pay taxes. I think it is a great thing that we pay taxes, because I see the improvements, I see what we have. We have a market economy where we can succeed. So we are not against rich people. We just want to tell people who are making money, there are the troops sacrificing, there are the unemployed sacrificing. There are teachers in classrooms sacrificing, taking out of their own pocket to buy supplies right now. Can you wait? Can you wait on your next tax cut? Would the gentleman not agree?

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Madam Speaker, the gentleman is right. We need to protect and invest in America. Because we know what happens when we invest in America, when we invest in education, when we invest in a health care system, when we invest in our infrastructure and our communications system. When we invest, we reap more. And when we spend and drive up the debt, we get ourselves in trouble. When we are talking about 18 cents of every dollar going to pay down the debt, it is credit card amounts. It is what one would anticipate as being the highest cost of borrowing. And imagine if we have to go to war. That is outside of the President's budget. It is not included in the spending that he is proposing. So we will be even higher. And the Blue Dogs feel that the first thing we need to do is get down to basics. Hold down our spending, be good about that, tighten our belts in these tight times, spend on the right things, on investment, on homeland security, on education of our children, on our military. But we also believe it is not time for a tax cut. We believe that everyone must sacrifice during this time; and if we sacrifice and we do it right, we will bring down the debt that we see spiraling out of control. And when we do that, we will have more money, more money in the long run to spend on the things that make this country great. So I would encourage my colleagues, in particular on the Republican side, to come and ask us about the Blue Dog budget, because we think it will work and it will bring down the debt. And when we bring down the debt, we will see ourselves where we were 2 years ago: in a surplus situation.

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman. Congratulations, by the way, at being named the ranking member of the new Committee on Homeland Security, another area of government that we will see, undoubtedly, some spending happening this year. I know with the gentleman's fiscal conservative principles that he will really hold the line and try to make America safe, but do it within a budget and without too much overspending, as we see the Republicans are attempting at this point. I thank the gentleman for being here tonight. Next we have the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Ross), who has been a Blue Dog now, I do not know, maybe 4 years, or maybe 2 or 3. He is going to talk about the Blue Dog budget. I yield to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Ross).

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. I would say to the gentleman from Texas, this does not include what it costs for us to go to war with Iraq.

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. If I may ask the gentleman a question on that, right now you are telling us we are paying about $4,400 for a family of four just on the debt that this Nation carries in 2003, and if the President's budget gets passed and signed by him, we are going to be looking at increasing that geometrically, basically?

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, now to join us on the House floor is the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Turner), who has been a leader of the Blue Dogs and has some nifty charts here, to really explain, in case any of you have just joined us, that the Blue Dogs are about bringing down the deficit and creating jobs and bringing the economy back, in contrast to what the President and his Republican majority in the House and in the Senate have presented with their 2004 budget. We have a different budget in mind. We have a timeline to bring down the debt and bring this country back into surplus. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Madam Speaker, I was sitting in a military congressional hearing and could not get out in time, but we are here now and really excited about having so many of our Blue Dogs come here today to talk about the real problem on our hands. And what is the problem on our hands? The problem is that a couple of years ago, many of us who were here in the Congress understood that we were in a surplus situation. We were getting more money in taxes than we were spending. And so we had a surplus. In just 2 years, under the Bush administration, we are in a deficit situation, a projected deficit, anybody that you talk to in this year's budget, of anywhere between about $300 billion and $350 billion. That does not include the war on terrorism, the war in Iraq, our work going on in Afghanistan; that is above and beyond the $300 billion-plus deficit that we are running this year. Add that to almost a $6 trillion debt load that we are already carrying, and this becomes a major problem. Yet everything else seems to be going wrong. People are being laid off. There are no jobs being created under this administration with the plan that he had, his great tax cut that was supposed to stimulate the economy. It has not. Businesses are closing; bankruptcies are up. We read that in today's newspaper. That is despite all the other problems that we are having in the international world and with respect to a war. So our economy is weak and in many cases, like in California, is getting smaller as we speak. So what do we do? The President's proposal has been to put forward a budget with stated aims of saying that the economy should get moving, that this budget of his would create jobs and that they would balance the budget. Strike one, strike two, strike three. This budget misses all marks of these three aims. I am going to go through that a little, and then we have got some Blue Dogs here who want to talk about what our proposal is for the budget of 2004. First of all, economic stimulus. The way that the President has structured his tax cut does not and will not stimulate our economy in the short term. It does very little. In fact, even the President's plan when you look at it, only 5 percent of his projected stimulus package would have any impact now. Now, while people are being laid off. Now, while unemployment benefits are running out. Simply put, the President's stimulus plan is not stimulative at all. In contrast, we Democrats, and in particular the Blue Dog budget, would help to expand the economy. It would help those who have lost their jobs, and it would call for immediate tax rebates. That puts money in the pockets of those people who will spend it, not the people who already have money, but the people who need it to live on a day-to-day basis. It is going to create jobs. Let us take a look at the President's tenure. Unemployment went from 4 percent to its current 5.8 percent. In other words, he has not created jobs. We have been losing them. He has done a round of tax cuts, over $1 trillion worth of tax cuts. It did not work. It has not worked. And now he proposes to do the same thing, another tax cut. But if his first one did not work, his second one certainly will not work. We need job creation, and we want it to include small business. Small business is where jobs in America are created today. The stimulus effort needs to be focused in part on small business. The Blue Dog plan calls for immediate aid to small businesses by calling for increases in small business expensing from $25,000 to $75,000 for equipment purchases in 2003 and 2004, right now. If businesses invest right now, we are going to give them a tax break, and that is going to stimulate the economy. Finally, the President's plan, he says, would bring down the debt. But it will not. It would increase the national debt far into the future. As my colleague, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Tanner), said, when we include the service on the debt, or the interest payment that we have to make that the President's plan would generate, his plan will cost at least $925 billion through 2013 alone, with no end in sight. The Democrats, and the Blue Dogs in particular, believe that the main thing we have to get under control is the debt, because when we do that, when we bring down the debt, then the interest payment that we make on that borrowed money becomes smaller and smaller. When I first got to the Congress, it was about 17 cents of every dollar was spent on interest on the debt. By the time President Clinton got out of office, it was only 11 cents. We were bringing down the debt. The Republicans, when President Bush came in, they were having a hard time deciding, my God, what does the world look like when the Federal Government does not have any debt? They were worried. They were actually worried that we might bring down the debt and there would be no debt in the United States. But they fixed that. They fixed it by giving tax cuts, they fixed it with a bad economy, and now we are back up to 18 cents of every dollar we bring in as tax revenue to the Federal Government gets spent on the debt. We need to reduce the public debt. It is a debt tax. We as Blue Dogs believe that we cannot simply stand around and criticize, but that we must present our own solution to the problem, that it has to be credible, that it has to be based in principles. The Blue Dog principles are to bring down the debt, stimulate the economy, create jobs, and get the economy moving again. That is why I am for the Blue Dog enforcement bill, which we call Assuring Honesty and Accountability in 2003. All of the provisions in our budget enforcement bill are for debt and deficit reduction. In very black and white terms, we have a plan of how to bring down the debt and how to stimulate the economy. A handful of my fellow Blue Dogs will be here tonight to speak about that. I believe the next one that we have is the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor), who will give his version of what Blue Dogs are trying to do to help bring down the debt, create jobs, and put more money in America's pockets.

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to voice my opposition to H.R. 5, the so-called HEALTH Act of 2003. The acronym in the title of this bill supposedly stands for Help Efficient, Accessible, Low Cost, Timely Healthcare. But close examination of the provisions of the bill leads me to the conclusion that the acronym instead spells Help Eviscerate Accountability by Law for Traumatic Harm. Supporters of this bill claim that medical malpractice premiums are out of control because of excessively high-damage awards in malpractice suits. But paid losses have tracked consistently with medical inflation rates for the last 3 decades. There simply is no explosion of paid losses. Furthermore, there is no provision in the bill, no provision, that requires insurers to lower their rates once the caps are in place. Supporters of this bill make it plain whom they care for: insurance companies. And it is also clear where the losses will be: people injured due to medical negligence.

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of those fighting domestic violence in our communities. Historically we have viewed domestic violence as a woman's issue, and statistics tend to support that school of thought. Nearly one-third of American women report being physically or sexually abused by a husband or boyfriend at some point in their lives, every 2 minutes a woman is raped in the United States, and more than 500,000 women are stalked every year. But as we all become more educated on the causes and the effects of such actions, we realize that this is a problem that is not gender- biased, but one that touches every aspect of our society. It affects families, children, friends and even coworkers. More and more, men are joining the voices in the fight against domestic violence, and I applaud them for having the insight to understand that this is more than a woman's issue and that it is everybody's responsibility. And I applaud organizations like the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence for continuing to raise awareness of this issue and for all who join them to protect women across this country and in the world.

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, on Thursday, February 27, I was unavoidably detained due to a prior obligation in my district. I request that the Congressional Record reflect that had I been present and voting, I would have voted ``yes'' on rollcall No. 37, on ``yes'' rollcall No. 38, and on ``no'' rollcall No. 39.

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, on Thursday, February, I was unavoidably detained due to a prior obligation in my district. I request that the Congressional Record reflect that had I been present and voting. I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall No. 27,``yea'' on rollcall No. 28, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 29, ``no'' on rollcall No. 30, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 31, and ``yea'' on rollcall No. 32.

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to comment on H.R. 4, the Personal Responsibility, Work, and Family Promotion Act of 2003 and to voice my support for the Democratic substitute. The Republican bill is an unfunded mandate for the States. H.R. 4 will cost the States a total of $11.1 billion, with my State, California, being hit the hardest with almost $2.5 billion. In contrast, the Democratic bill properly funds employment services and quality child care for families. The Democratic bill would replace the current caseload reduction credit with an employment credit, which means we would reward States for moving people into jobs, not just off the welfare rolls. Finally, the Democratic proposal ensures fairness for legal immigrant families. It removes the 5-year ban on States to help legal immigrants with Federal TANF funds, Medicaid services for pregnant women and children, and SSI benefits for disabled children. Mr. Speaker, speaking as a daughter of immigrants who are now U.S. citizens, it is un-American to enact laws that discriminate against those who come here legally looking for a chance to start a new life.

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 41, congratulating the University of Portland women's soccer team for winning the 2002 NCAA Division I national championship. In addition to bringing home that trophy to the university, the Pilots fielded the first sophomore to be recognized as the Nation's top collegiate soccer player. How could we have gotten there? I believe the accomplishment of these women is especially poignant as the Bush administration considers making changes to title IX, the 1972 landmark legislation which bans discrimination against women and schools and which is responsible for unprecedented gains in the participation of women in sports. In the 30 years since the enactment of title IX, participation of girls in high school varsity teams has gone from one in 27 to one in three. Female participation in varsity collegiate sports has also risen to over 150,000, and we have already seen the gains that women have made in the Olympics. We have seen our United States athletes win in those Olympic games. Why? Because of title IX. Overall, as a direct result of title IX, we have made great strides. So why are we trying to stop that? Why are we trying to change title IX? We should not, because the progress that we make on the soccer field extends to other places, well beyond that playing field. Girls who play sports are 80 percent less likely to have unwanted pregnancies. They are three times more likely to stay in school and 92 percent less likely to use drugs. So now is not the time to change title IX. High school girls continue to miss out on opportunities. There are 1.1 million less athletic slots in high schools in the Nation for girls as compared to guys. College women receive less money, $133 million less spent on women's sports than on men's sports at the collegiate level. Instead of focusing on title IX, we should figure out how we divvy up the profits that come from some of our athletic teams to ensure that everybody gets the opportunity to be on the playing field if they want to be there. Again, congratulations to the University of Portland's women's soccer team, but remember that it is people like Patsy Mink who went ahead and fought for our rights and laid the groundwork so girls could play. Remember that and help us.

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Kavi Vyas, a senior at Rancho Alamitos High School in Garden Grove, for his achievements in both athletics and in community service. Kavi was named the male recipient of the Fall CIF Spirit of Sport Award. The male and female recipients of this prestigious award are selected out of 1,200 nominated California high school athletes. The CIF Spirit Awards are given to student athletes who have demonstrated sportsmanship and who are leaders in their communities. In addition to excelling in athletics and in the community, he is also active in his school as president of the Junior Statesmen of America, former vice president of the National Honor Society, and is currently a member of the California Scholarship Federation. I am very proud of Kavi. Accomplishing so much at such a young age is truly impressive, and I wish him continued success for the future.

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 17th Annual National Girls and Women in Sports Day. The first Women in Sports Day was organized in 1986. It was to honor Flo Hyman, an extraordinary lady who won a silver medal in volleyball in the Olympics, bringing that sport out of obscurity. Today, the National Girls and Women in Sports Day honors all women athletes and is celebrated in all 50 States. Community-based activities, award ceremonies, and dinners honoring women and coaches all occur today. This year's national celebration is titled ``Celebration: 30 years of Title IX,'' in honor of Title IX's impact on the sports community. Today, 30 years later, one in three girls participate in high school athletics, as compared to 1 in 21 thirty years ago. I hope we all take the time to celebrate this very special day and to honor the triumphs, the dedication, and the spirit of our great female athletes.

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to condemn any weakening of Title IX. This week a national commission will vote on various proposals to reform Title IX for the Secretary of Education, Rod Paige. Since 1972, Title IX has made landmark strides to prohibit sex discrimination in education and to reverse discrimination against women in collegiate sports. However, under one proposal, women would be given only 43 percent of collegiate scholarships versus the 55 percent of enrollment in universities. Critics of Title IX are saying that the law should be revised according to female interest. However, since its enactment, athletic participation by women in college has increased five times, despite the lack of resources devoted to make it an attractive thing to do. Title IX has been a cornerstone for improvements for women not just in sports, but in key areas such as standardized testing, higher education and math and science employment. Until women are equal in all areas, weakening of Title IX should not be an option.

Ms. SANCHEZ

Ms. SANCHEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Lucy Santana of Santa Ana. On September 1, Lucy was appointed as Executive Director of Girls Incorporated of Orange County, an organization that strives to help girls and young women develop the values and skills they need to become productive and successful adults. She is the first Latina to head the local chapter of the national organization. Her desire to help young Latinas in Orange County comes from her experiences in school as a young girl. Noticing that the boys were called on more frequently and received better opportunities in school, she learned from an early age the barriers young women face in getting an education. Lucy refused to believe the message she was taught. She worked hard and became the first college graduate in her family. Her desire to help other young women in her community is truly an inspiration.

Ms. SANCHEZ

Ms. SANCHEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Professor David Pagni from California State University, Fullerton. David, a math professor from Cal State Fullerton received a grant in the amount of $6.5 million from the National Science Foundation. It is the largest grant ever awarded to a Cal State faculty member. David will be using the funds from this grant to head a team of professors and teaching coaches to show teachers how to teach advanced math at Orange County high schools and their middle school counterparts over the next 5 years. The hope is that better math instruction in middle school will better prepare students for advanced math classes in high school. I am very proud of David for his achievement and dedication.

Ms. SANCHEZ

Ms. SANCHEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Andrew Saavedra for his service to the city of Santa Ana. Andrew was recently awarded the Rosita Diaz ``love in Action'' award from the Loyola Institute for Spirituality for his hard work and dedication to the community. Sixteen years ago, Andrew started a soup kitchen at St. Joseph Catholic Church. When it first opened, the kitchen served only a handful of people. Today, the kitchen has expanded and now serves over 600 each week. Andrew has also helped to establish citizenship and English classes in Santa Ana to help immigrants in the community to become a part of the Democratic process. I am very proud of Andrew and appreciate his service to the citizens of Santa Ana.

Ms. SANCHEZ

Ms. SANCHEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Zlaket Family of Garden Grove for 75 years of service to their community. In 1927, Leo and Mary Zlaket decided to open a general store, selling bulk items to farm housewives, like flour and sugar, as well as fabric to sew clothes for heir families. Chickens were sold whole, without the modern day pre-packaging. Today, the Zlaket market caters to the fast-paced and busy community of Garden Grove by selling specialty and gourmet items. However, they still maintain their old world charm by selling ``Moms Cakes'' baked by 81-year-old mom Kay Roman, who wakes up early each morning to bake her delicious creations. I am very proud of the Zlaket family for sustaining a business over 75 years through events like World War II and the Great Depression. Their dedication to their community, their business, and their family is to be commended.

Ms. SANCHEZ

Ms. SANCHEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to American Airlines pilot Linda Pauwels, a mother, a Latina, and a pioneer on behalf of female pilots throughout the world. Linda is an immigrant from Argentina who came to the U.S. when she was 6 with her 2 year-old brother and widowed mother. Through hard work and dedication, she began her flying career at the young age of 17. By age 25 she had become the youngest female jet pilot ever. Since then, she has flown most major jets including huge C-130 transports and 707s. Just last year, she diverted tragedy when the MD- 80 she was flying with 128 passengers experienced engine failure on its way to Chicago. Because of her experience and her ability to handle difficult situations, she was able to successfully perform an emergency landing in Sioux City, Iowa. Linda is a dedicated wife and mother of two. She is also the only woman spokesperson for the Allied Pilots Association, and dedicates much of her free time to promoting women in aviation and encouraging Hispanics to work hard to fulfill their dreams. Lindas Pauwels is a striking example of the many hardworking pilots who are dedicated to making sure that the skies are safe for all airline passengers.