Linda Sánchez

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Madam Speaker, I rise today to give voice to the youth of my district. I recently had a Social Security e-town hall where young adults joined me online to discuss this important issue. Billy, a constituent of mine from Long Beach, is currently a student at the University of Southern California. He questioned the wisdom and the solvency of the President's plan. He specifically asked me what would the worst case scenario consequences of the President's plan be. My answer to him was simple. It is clear that Republicans have no desire to strengthen Social Security for future generations. Instead, their only intention is to privatize this guaranteed retirement program. Privatization is a first step on the road to the worst case scenario. Privatization proposals hurt everyone, including today's beneficiaries. But it especially hurts young workers who end up paying for the administrative costs of privatization on the front end and then end up paying for it twice with large benefit cuts on the back end. Privatization does absolutely nothing to extend the solvency of Social Security. If we really wanted to save Social Security, let us work to ensure its solvency. Let us not dismantle guaranteed benefits, especially for young workers like Billy.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise to applaud the United States Supreme Court for their ruling today in the case of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios, Incorporated v. Grokster. By a unanimous ruling, 9-0 in favor of MGM, the Supreme Court sent a strong message today that our courts will protect the work of creative artists. I represent the 39th Congressional District in California. My State, region, and district are home to the motion picture industry, the music industry, and software companies. Many of my constituents work in these creative industries, and I know from talking to them that piracy hits their companies hard and their pocketbooks harder. Intellectual property is important to our economy as a whole, so copyright infringements also severely damage our national economy. In fact, according to the International Intellectual Property Alliance, in 2002, core copyright industries accounted for over 6 percent of the U.S. gross domestic product. That is over $626 billion. When you look at all copyright industries, they accounted for approximately 12 percent of the U.S. gross domestic product, or $1.25 trillion in 2002 alone. Obviously, intellectual property is a vital part of our economy, and piracy robs our economy of billions of dollars from this important industry. Conservative estimates say that counterfeiting of U.S. businesses' copyrighted goods cost our economy between $200-$400 billion each year. When our economy suffers like that, America's workers suffer, too. The ``core'' copyright industries alone were estimated to have employed 4 percent of U.S. workers in 2002, a total of 5.48 million workers. But piracy causes 750,000 American workers to lose their jobs each year. This is where intellectual property laws come in and why the Supreme Court decision today in the Grokster is so important. The Court drew a line in the sand in the Grokster case and said that peer-to-peer file- sharing networks that encourage illegal file-sharing should not be shielded by our laws. The ruling protects the creative community but also allows the public to retain access to the benefits of peer-to-peer file-sharing technology. Mr. Speaker, I love movies and music as much as any consumer, and I use computer software every single day. I am also a fan of the Internet, and I want consumers to be able to use technology to get their favorite music and movies conveniently. But stealing is stealing. Swapping copyrighted files online is illegal, and just because it is easy doesn't make it right. We can have peer-to-peer networks that give every American access to the files they want online, and also provide creators with copyright protections. As long as companies like Grokster are allowed to facilitate illegal file swapping, we will continue to lose hundreds of dollars and hundreds of thousands of U.S. jobs each year. I am pleased that the Supreme Court took the first step today in Grokster towards ending illegal copyright infringement online, and protecting the industries that produce copyrighted works.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the subject matter of my Special Order.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Chairman, envision this: an undocumented immigrant suffers from severe chest pains and a nagging cough. Too frightened to seek out medical attention in the beginning, he lets this condition persist. He finds himself in the emergency room of the local hospital. The first order of business for the emergency physician or nurse is not to ask them where it hurts and do a physical exam to see if their life is in imminent danger, but to ask their immigration status and get a sworn statement to that effect. And if that patient cannot prove their legal status because they do not happen to have the documentation on them, that same doctor must make the choice not to provide care to this person or at least they must report them to immigration officials before providing lifesaving treatment. I ask you, in this universe, what kind of choice is that? There is no choice in asking a person to choose life or death. This amendment unfairly and wrongly punishes health care professionals for doing what they are ethically and legally obligated to do. Our doctors and nurses do everything they can to help these individuals, regardless of their status, in order to save lives and to nurse them back to health. Today's hospitals are already underfunded, understaffed, and under tremendous pressure to meet the new demands of homeland security preparedness. I think we can all agree that our Nation's immigration system is broken. It does not meet our security needs, our economic needs, nor does it reflect the American values of strong families and respect for work. However, we will never fix our country's immigration ills by punishing our local hospitals for treating the ill. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the Tancredo amendment.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the 33rd anniversary of title IX. Title IX creates opportunities for female athletes. Since its inception in 1972, female participation in sports has increased 400 percent in colleges and 800 percent in high schools. As a young girl, I played on several sports teams. These experiences fostered my love of competition. But they have far greater benefits. Girls who play sports are less likely to have an unplanned pregnancy, more likely to leave an abusive relationship, and are less likely to suffer from depression. Unfortunately, under President Bush's administration, the Department of Education has created a huge title IX loophole. By bending title IX rules, it is now easier for schools to evade their responsibilities to provide opportunities for female athletes. It is wrong for this administration to reverse the progress made over the last three decades. Tonight, I will be joining my colleagues in the annual congressional baseball game and when I join the line-up in RFK Stadium, I will be on the line for title IX. Mr. President, I hope you can join us in supporting title IX by repealing these damaging new rules instead of slamming the door of opportunity in the face of women.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, ``Blessed indeed is the man who hears gentle voices call him father!'' The name Ralph Salimpour has become synonymous with charity and commitment in the greater Los Angeles area. Indeed, Ralph Salimpour is blessed for selflessly giving him energy and his love, and dedicating his left to those most in need. Dr. Ralph R. Salimpour is the senior attending physician of the highly acclaimed Salimpour Pediatric Medical Group in Los Angeles. Dr. Salimpour is internationally recognized as a global expert in the fields of Tetanus, Malnutrition, and Rickets and has the largest published series on Tetanus and Rickets in the world. Dr. Salimpour graduated from medical school at the age of 23 and has practiced medicine on 3 continents over the span of nearly 5 decades. He attended the Shiraz School of Medicine in Iran, the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of England, and Cedars-Sinai Medical Center-- UCLA School of Medicine. In Iran, Dr. Salimpour emerged as the Director of the Research Institute of Child Health where he described, for the first time, Rickets and its etiology in tropical countries. This pioneering research eventually helped to change the American Academy of Pediatrics' recommendations for Vitamin D Supplementation in breastfed babies, staving off the debilitating disease in America. His research and his leadership in the treatment of Tetanus cut the mortality rate of this horrific disease from a devastating 100 percent to half of that value, directly resulting in countless saved lives. Dr. Salimpour also tackled the issue of malnutrition in Iran, demonstrating that it resulted from poor education rather than poverty. Dr. Salimpour's scientific and clinical research propelled him to the world's medical center stage, gaining international acclaim for his pioneering research. After the 1979 Iranian revolution, Dr. Salimpour and his family moved to the United States where Dr. Salimpour, a man nearly in the 6th decade of his life, sat for and successfully passed the rigorous series of exams enabling him to once again practice medicine, this time in America. He has been awarded the prestigious Governor's Commendation from the State of California and the Award of Excellence from California's Vaccine for Children Program. Today, Dr. Salimpour serves as Clinical Assistant Professor of Pediatrics at the UCLA School of Medicine and is a practicing pediatrician in Los Angeles. Dr. Salimpour is also a founding Board Member of the NexCare Collaborative, which created a state-of-the-art, highly-innovative and successful call center/web site and communications program aimed at families with young children. This program has assisted more than 100,000 families and helped enroll more than 18,000 children into free or low cost health insurance programs. Married to his wife Farah for 44 years, the 2 have raised 4 children, Pejman, Sherry, Pedram, and Nilou. Dr. and Mrs. Salimpour also have 6 grandchildren, Koby, Alexa, Branden, Gabriella, Allen, and Ariella. Dr. and Mrs. Salimpour have inspired a love of medicine and children amongst their sons. Doctors Pejman and Pedram Salimpour are practicing pediatricians and leaders in their field. Mother Teresa once said, ``I slept and I dreamed that life is all joy. I woke and I saw that life is all service. I served and I saw that service is joy.'' Dr. Salimpour has improved the human condition by way of perseverance and leadership. He has passed on these ideals to his students as a professor of pediatrics, to his tens of thousands of patients, and to his children and grandchildren. As we approach Father's Day, I salute Dr. Salimpour for his blessings as a ``father'' to many.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, yesterday I was unavoidably detained and missed rollcall votes numbers 241 and 242. Had I been present, I would have voted: ``Aye'' on rollcall number 241, S. 643--A bill to amend the Agricultural Credit Act of 1987 to reauthorize State mediation programs, ``Aye'' on rollcall number 242, H.R. 2326--To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 614 West Old County Road in Belhaven, North Carolina, as the ``Floyd Lupton Post Office.''

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to salute a young girl who is in a league of her own--Kate Brownell. Katie is a shy 11-year-old girl of few words. But when she gets on the baseball field she lets her pitching do the talking. And she rocks! Brownell is the only girl in the Oakfield, Alabama Little League baseball program. She threw a perfect game for the Dodgers in an 11-0 victory over the Yankees. How dominant was she? Katie struck out all 18 batters she faced, yielding no more than two balls to any batter, in a six inning victory. Katie accomplished something league officials can't remember anyone--boy or girl--ever doing. Brownell is not just good at pitching; she is also great at the plate. Katie's batting average is .714. When I first read her story I was so excited and inspired by this young girl's feat. I was so impressed that I wanted to be sure to come down to the floor and recognize her. She exemplifies what you can achieve regardless of gender. Young women like Katie also serve to remind us that we can pretty much do everything men can, and sometimes better.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to salute a young girl who is truly in a league of her own, Kate Brownell. Katie is a shy 11-year-old girl of few words, but when she gets on the baseball field she lets her pitching do the talking, and she rocks. Brownell is the only girl in the Oakfield-Alabama Little League Baseball Program. Last week, she threw a perfect game for the Dodgers in an 11-0 victory for the Yankees. How dominant was she? She struck out all 18 batters she faced, yielding no more than two balls to any batter in a 6-inning victory. Katie accomplished something that league officials cannot remember anyone, boy or girl, ever doing. Brownell is not just good at pitching, she is also great at the plate, and her batting average is .714. When I first read her story, I was excited and inspired by this young girl's talent. I was so impressed that I wanted to be sure to come down to the floor and recognize her achievement. She exemplifies what you can achieve, regardless of gender. That is why it is bewildering to me that in this day and age we are debating whether or not to allow women in combat. If anything, young women like Katie serve to remind us that we can pretty much do anything that men can, and sometimes even better.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, today marks Israel Independence Day, the 57th anniversary of the founding of Israel. This is a time to recognize a strong, stable, and democratic nation, as well as a loyal ally. The fact that Israel is a thriving country carries significant meaning not only in the Middle East, but also throughout the world. In a short time, Israel has established itself as a rich cultural destination and a center for Jewish beliefs and practices. This is largely because the people of Israel have been carrying on their traditions for thousands of years. In spite of its enemies, Israel has continued to grow, inspiring democracy and independence in the region. When I first visited Israel, I immediately noticed the resilience that showed itself in so many ways. Despite the nearly constant danger, Israelis go about their daily lives without fear. Shopkeepers kept their businesses running, even after their storefronts had been destroyed by terrorist bombings. Worshippers maintained their schedule of religious services, defiant to any threats to their safety. Students packed classrooms during the day, eager to learn about Israel's history. They made it a point to get out and experience that freedom, not letting any scare tactics ruin their lives or dash their hopes for peace. We could all take a lesson from their enthusiasm, their zest for life, and their courage. Israel continues to serve as a beacon of democracy in the Middle East. The Israeli people have an unrivaled appreciation for their freedoms. You can see it in the public displays of their strong Jewish faith. You will hear it as you walk down the streets, vibrant with markets, artisans, and music. You know it by their involvement in the political process, with each vote regarded as a privilege that their leaders must earn. Their patriotism is evident, and not just on Israel Independence Day, but during the entire year. For this year's celebration, I want to commend Israel for standing strong in the face of opposition. While there is a lot of work to be done to foster lasting peace in the region, they have much to be proud of. The United States must maintain its support of Israel, especially at this crucial time in history. We have a real chance not only to aid Israel in establishing peace within its own borders, but also to help them set an example of democracy for other countries. It is certain that Israel will have many more Independence Days to look forward to in the future.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Miguel Contreras, who died unexpectedly on Friday, May 6, 2005. As executive-secretary treasurer of the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor and a vice president of the California Labor Federation, Miguel was a staunch champion for working families in Los Angeles and throughout our Nation. His leadership reenergized our Nation's labor movement. Miguel began his life working in the fields of southern California alongside his immigrant parents. After meeting Cesar Chavez, he became active in the United Farm Workers Union. Under Miguel's leadership, union membership in the Los Angeles County area grew by more than 125,000, creating a powerful voice for working families. Miguel led successful organizing campaigns for janitors and bus drivers, among others. In a lifetime dedicated to service of working men and women, Miguel Contreras touched many lives, including my own. It was Miguel who encouraged and supported my run for executive-secretary treasurer of the Orange County Federation of Labor. I became the first Latina to head a federation, so I jokingly described myself as Miguel Contreras in high heels. I want to thank him for being a great role model and teaching me many of life's invaluable lessons. Miguel was not only a friend and a mentor to me, but more importantly, he was a remarkable labor leader, activist, community spokesman, power broker, husband and father, and he will be sorely missed.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to H.R. 1279, the Gang Deterrence and Community Protection Act, because this bill fails to adequately deter youths from joining gangs and does not do enough to protect our communities. This bill fails to create a much-needed, comprehensive approach to fighting our national gang epidemic. Instead of offering funding for proven intervention and prevention programs that effectively keep youths from joining gangs in the first place, this punitive bill simply imposes harsh and sweeping mandatory minimum sentences. Locking up 16-year-olds for 10 years will not make gang crimes disappear. As any law enforcement officer will tell my colleagues, suppression is merely one of the avenues by which we can prevent gang violence. In fact, as many of my Democratic colleagues have repeatedly stressed, imposing mandatory minimums on youths often results in a greater likelihood of repeat, and more violent, offenses. Prevention and intervention programs, on the other hand, have a proven track record of keeping kids out of gangs; but at the Committee on the Judiciary markup of this bill and in the Committee on Rules last night, amendments to include intervention and prevention programs in this bill were defeated along party-line votes. I joined my colleagues, the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff), the gentleman from California (Mr. Cardoza), and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Watson), in submitting an amendment to expand the Project Safe Neighborhoods program, to authorize the Attorney General to make the FBI increase Safe Streets Initiative efforts, to reauthorize the Gang Resistance Education and Training Projects program and, more importantly, to double-funding for high-intensity interstate gang activity areas and require half of those funds to go to community- based anti-gang programs. I know from personal knowledge that our amendment would have reduced gang activity nationwide because I have seen community-based programs work in my very own district. The Gang Resistance in Paramount, or GRIP, program has been educating kids about the dangers of gang participation for years. I spent some time inside a fourth grade class inside of Paramount last year to see the GRIP program in action. I saw firsthand how the program caught the attention of the students, and it was amazing how the program engaged the students in learning and how quickly they saw the dangers in gangs. I urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 1279 and instead work towards a comprehensive approach.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, communities will gather in the United States, Israel, and around the world today to observe Holocaust Martyrs' and Heroes' Remembrance Day, known in Hebrew as Yom Hashoah. This solemn day commemorates the anniversary of the beginning of the Warsaw Ghetto uprising. This year, the day comes as the world marks the 60th anniversary of the end of World War II.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, today, Mexican- Americans across the country celebrate Cinco de Mayo--a day that commemorates the past and relishes the present by embracing American culture. So many Mexican-Americans have made positive contributions to our Nation. One area in particular where Mexican-Americans have made great strides is in the Armed Forces. There are many Mexican-Americans proudly serving and giving back to their country right now. I want to share the story of Daniel from South Gate. He is the son of Mexican immigrants, who came to this country to make a better life for his family. Growing up, Daniel said he always felt patriotic. When I asked him what he thought patriotism was, he replied, ``I think it's working for freedom. I have always felt that I needed to earn my rights and that I had to contribute, even for the right to vote.'' He went on to say that serving in the military was his civic duty. So as soon as he was able, Daniel enlisted in the Marines and graduated boot camp at 17. Daniel was one of the first Mexican-Americans that many Iraqis had ever seen. I can think of no better ambassador for our country. While he was shot at, he returned to southern California unharmed. As you can see by this story, Mexican-Americans share the same goals as other Americans of freedom, opportunity, and a chance to build a better life. On this day, let us salute Daniel, and all other Mexican- American soldiers and veterans for their great service to this great Nation.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, this evening I rise in opposition to the Central American Free Trade Agreement. I am glad to see that there are other Members fighting against this deeply flawed trade agreement. When a trade agreement is so terrible that the Costa Rican president says he thinks it will hurt hard-working people and that their parliament is reluctant to even approve it, you know that it is a bad deal. When a trade agreement is so terrible that the majority will not even bring it to the floor of the House for a vote until a year after signing, you know it is a bad deal. When a trade agreement is so terrible that the Labor Department cannot even comment, they could not even mount an effective counter-argument about CAFTA's awful labor provisions, well, then you know it is a bad deal. If Costa Rica cannot justify it, if the majority has no confidence in it, and if the U.S. Labor Department cannot even defend it, then it needs to be scrapped. There is not one single reason to support an agreement with this many problems in it. I would like to talk about a little comparison between CAFTA and NAFTA, because NAFTA was supposed to be this great free trade agreement with our partners to the south, Mexico; and, boy, did we really get the wool pulled over our eyes. With CAFTA, we have a chance to learn from the mistakes of NAFTA and not allow that to happen again. They told us that NAFTA would bring jobs, but we lost jobs. They promised that our trade would improve, but it has gotten worse with the steadily rising trade deficit. And they told us that it would elevate the middle class in Mexico. Well, guess what? I have been there, and it has not. When I visited Mexico, I went to a small town in the state of Michoacan, where 60 percent of the men have left the town because there is no work. These men used to be soybean farmers, but their farms have been wiped out since NAFTA. Were these not the people that NAFTA was supposed to help? Instead, they got nothing, and their way of life has been decimated forever. CAFTA will have the same effect. The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) has said that CAFTA will reduce illegal immigration. Well, guess what? He said the exact same thing about NAFTA. In fact, history has taught us the exact opposite. NAFTA enabled cheap U.S. imports, which pushed 1.3 million Mexican campesinos off the land. It is reasonable to think that some of them may long have since crossed the border into the U.S. seeking economic opportunity. Central America is even more dependent on agriculture than Mexico is, so the impact on illegal immigration could be even worse. We do not want another NAFTA debacle. We do not want an agreement that hurts hard-working people in the U.S. and other countries. The word needs to get out that CAFTA is a rotten deal for Central American and American workers. This agreement helps no one but big business, which makes sense, since this administration gives them a prime seat at the negotiating table. This is simply an expansion of NAFTA, which broke all the golden promises that it made to the American people. CAFTA should be more appropriately renamed The American Jobs For Sale Agreement, because that is what it does. I say to my colleagues, do not be fooled twice. For those of you who were not here then, like me, do not even allow yourself to be fooled once. I invite you to join the growing list of opposition to CAFTA.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, today, I am proud to join our nation in celebrating Asian Pacific American Heritage Month. This is a time to recognize the enormous contributions of Asian Pacific Americans to our society. The United States is a country of immigrants, known for its diversity. Asian Pacific Americans have increased that diversity, adding their unique experiences to our culture. I am proud that my home state of California has a larger population of Asian- Americans than anyplace else in the country. It is important to renew our commitment to serving the specific needs of this community. Congress must not only reflect and acknowledge the past, but also look forward to meeting the future needs of a growing population. We need to work together to make the American dream a reality. Improving access to educational opportunities, enacting comprehensive immigration reform, and reducing health disparities should be priority initiatives. The theme of this year's Asian Pacific American Heritage Month is ``Liberty and Freedom for All''. This month serves as a reminder that we should all strive to make this theme a reality for every American. We should also acknowledge the contributions of Asian Pacific Americans. My district in particular has benefited from their service and leadership. There are several prominent Asian Pacific Americans who dedicate themselves to improving our communities in southern California. They are a source of strength and inspiration to all of us. I would like to recognize someone who has provided invaluable service. Laura Lee, of Cerritos, is committed to improving her community by helping those around her. She was elected to the Cerritos City Council in March 2003. However, this barely acknowledges the extent of her public service. She has made Cerritos her home since 1979, and in that time, has built an extensive list of accomplishments. Laura has provided her service and expertise to the American Red Cross, the ABC School District Legislative/Policy Advisory Committee, the Su Casa Domestic Abuse Network, and the Southern California Chinese Woman's League. Additionally, she is very active professionally as a real estate broker. She has used this experience to take on leadership roles with the California Association of Realtors, the Rancho Southeast Association of Realtors, and the Cerritos College Real Estate Department. Laura Lee has contributed greatly to the growth or our economy, the diversity of our culture, and the quality of our education. She is someone we can all look to as a role model. This month is a wonderful opportunity to celebrate the Asian Pacific American community. They are a valuable asset to our diverse culture that should be recognized.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez) for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H. Res. 22, the so-called Small Business Bill of Rights. There is nothing that is right about this resolution since it does not recognize the right of small businesses to have access to capital that meets their needs. Last night I offered an amendment to the Committee on Rules that recognized the right of small businesses to have access to capital; and I am extremely disappointed that, despite valiant efforts on the part of Democrats, this amendment was not made in order. Small businesses need the 7(a) loan program, the microloan program, and other SBA access to capital programs that help them maintain and expand their businesses. My amendment would have also recognized the importance of the microloan program, which provides small loans to startups that are not served by traditional lenders. I know for a fact that access to capital programs are vitally important to small businesses in my district because when I held a small business roundtable meeting, access to capital was the number one issue each business brought forward as being an obstacle; and I know that this is the number one issue across the country. Why are we not helping small businesses? They produce two-thirds to three-quarters of all the new jobs in this country, and they are the backbone of our economy. Unfortunately, many small businesses continue to face barriers to accessing the capital they need. And I believe that Congress needs to take a stand today and strengthen these programs. It is time for Congress to go on the record in support of access to capital programs, like the microloan program, like the 7(a) loan program. Small businesses need more than just rhetoric and good intentions. They need action by this Congress. So I urge my colleagues to oppose this resolution because it leaves out this critical priority.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong opposition to the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act. This is simply another example of anti-woman and anti-choice legislation that jeopardizes a young woman's health and is at odds with the United States Constitution. This bill will leave young girls like Spring Adams completely unprotected. Spring was a 13-year-old sixth grade student from Idaho who became pregnant as a result of her father's shameful actions. When Spring's father became aware that she planned to terminate the pregnancy, he shot and killed her. If H.R. 748 were law, girls in Spring's tragic circumstances would be more vulnerable to harm since young women will be forced to notify the same parent that sexually abuses them of their plan to seek medical care. Is that the dangerous situation we want to put an abused girl in? What is worse is that H.R. 748 does not contain a health exception which is dangerous to a young woman's health. Under this bill, doctors will be guilty of a crime if they do not wait 24 hours before performing an abortion, a medical procedure, on a young girl even if the girl is at risk for serious injury. This means that in some circumstances conscientious doctors must sit on their hands and wait for 24 hours as young female patients suffer from complications and risk permanent injury. Mr. Chairman, 24-hour delays are not always an option when a young girl is pregnant and experiencing medical complications. And if these victimized girls ask a caring grandparent or aunt to drive them to another State for an abortion, even if the girl is at risk for serious injury or has been sexually abused by a parent, their family members will be guilty of a crime and may wind up in prison. That is a heavy price to pay for trying to help and protect a loved one. Doctors and grandparents should not have to make the unthinkable choice between protecting a patient or granddaughter from serious physical injury and going to jail. This bill forces them to make that impossible choice. For this reason, I urge every Member of this body to stand up for women's health, stand up for the U.S. Constitution, and vote ``no'' on this bill.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in opposition to the Central American Free Trade Agreement, otherwise known as CAFTA. As many of my colleagues here know, CAFTA is nothing more than a green light for corporations to outsource American jobs. I am appalled by some of the awful provisions in this shameful trade agreement. When you look at the restrictions on Central American workers and the outsourcing of American jobs, you will quickly realize that there is nothing free about the Central American Free Trade Agreement. My friends, make no mistake, if we ratify this agreement there will be no jobs left in this country to outsource. Did we not learn anything as a body from the NAFTA agreement? The lesson we should have learned from NAFTA was that not all free trade agreements give us fair trade. For instance, NAFTA, which was supposed to be this great jobs creator, middle class creator in Mexico, failed to create the middle class that it promised. Since NAFTA, the rich are getting richer in Mexico while poverty and income disparity are more prevalent than ever. As NAFTA failed to protect the middle class, so will CAFTA. Congress needs to step up and tell the administration that worker protections matter. We need to do what is right and support trade policy that is fair and balanced. We need to do what is right and make agreements that strengthen labor protections, not overlook them. We need to do what is right for safeguarding the environment. We need to do what is right for all working people and scrap this terrible agreement. We have a moral obligation to make trade fair for all Americans and the rest of the world.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the so-called Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005. Contrary to its name, this bill does not protect consumers and it certainly does not help honest, hard-working families with financial problems. The only thing that this bill does is distort our bankruptcy laws so that working families are treated more like criminals than people in need of relief. Our bankruptcy laws must strike a fair and practical balance between debtors and creditors. This means that honest people with financial troubles can make a fresh start by getting creditors off their backs. But this bill does the exact opposite of that. Instead of helping struggling families in debt, this bill erects harsh legal and monetary roadblocks for people who are trying to file bankruptcy. The vast majority of people who file for bankruptcy, 9 out of 10, do so because they have either lost their job, suffered a medical emergency, or there has been a divorce or separation in their family. These are not people who are abusing the bankruptcy system. We are talking about recently divorced, single working mothers trying to support their children who may not be getting their child support. We are talking about young men and women in our Armed Forces returning home after serving their country in Iraq. We are talking about some of the 1.6 million families who have lost their private-sector jobs since 2001 when a Republican administration took over the White House. These are honest, hard-working families who have resorted to bankruptcy to find some relief for their debts and a chance to start their lives anew. This is a terrible bill. It is harmful to struggling families and goes against the basic policy of our bankruptcy laws, helping families in financial trouble get a fresh start. I urge every Member of the House to stand by America's working families by voting no for passage of S. 256.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to H.R. 1268, the Emergency Supplemental Wartime Appropriations Act for FY 2005. My opposition to this bill does not mean that I do not support our troops. I wholeheartedly support our troops and believe that we should fully fund our troops so that they have the necessary equipment to ensure their safety. Also incorporated into this bill is funding for Tsunami relief efforts for affected Southeast Asian countries. Having gone to Sri Lanka and personally seen the devastation, I know how important our relief efforts are for these countries. Sadly, I'm opposing H.R. 1268 because it includes the REAL ID Act of 2005. The REAL ID Act of 2005 would deny drivers' licenses to immigrants, and slam the doors on refugees seeking asylum from persecution. The REAL, bad, ID Act has nothing to do with supporting our troops, let alone national security. It is such a shame that Republicans had to incorporate the REAL ID Act in the Iraq Supplemental and Tsunami Relief when it has nothing to do with these two pressing issues. This is an unprecedented move on the part of the Republican leadership and this concerns me. The REAL ID Act, H.R. 418 will not make us safer. What H.R. 418 will do is undermine several key security features that were dealt with responsibly in the Intelligence Reform legislation which was based on the 9-11 Commission Recommendations. If the Republicans and this administration really want to strengthen national security, they should start by providing full funding for the Department of Homeland Security, particularly the security improvements authorized in the Intelligence Reform bill. Yet the President's 2006 budget did not include funding for 10,000 new border guards, 40,000 new detention beds to hold people awaiting deportation, and 4,000 new immigration inspectors as the bill dictates. The administration merely funds 210 new border patrol agents. As the proud daughter of immigrants, I am pleased to be serving my country as a Member of Congress. It is a great honor to be giving back to America, a country that has given my family so much. Like millions of immigrants, my parents came here in search of the American Dream and to give their children the opportunity to secure a promising future. Again, I am outraged and saddened that Republicans are using the pretext of national security to attack immigrants who pose no real threat to our safety. America is a country built by immigrants, and we should remain a country that is open and welcoming to those seeking freedom. The U.S. has always been a beacon of hope and we must continue to guard the light of liberty for those who are oppressed or displaced.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. I rise in support of the Maloney-Sanchez-Crowley amendment. Let me tell my colleagues a little bit about what this amendment is about, and I will try to be brief. It is about providing women with hygiene kits that include soap, aspirin, sanitary napkins. I, like some of my colleagues before me, had a chance to travel there and see what the UNFPA is doing there, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the Sanchez-Crowley amendment. This is what the UN Population Fund distributes to women devastated by the tsunami. By voting for this amendment, you. will affirm your support for women and children in dire need of our help. The Maloney Amendment will aid the tsunami recovery effort by providing UNFPA with much-needed funding. It's a shame that the U.S. Government has not offered their support to this organization. I've traveled to some of the areas hardest hit by the tsunami, and I can attest to their tremendous work. Our support for the UN Population Fund should be a top priority, because it's one of the few organizations that provides resources for the care of women and newborn children. Again, we're talking about soap, toothpaste, and sanitary napkins--basic needs. UNFPA also distributes birthing kits, which are vital. Nearly half of all women give birth without a skilled attendant present, or any medical care whatsoever. These kits are sometimes all that's available to birthing women. For women who have no access to hospitals, we must support organizations that provide these kits. It's a matter of protecting life. UNFPA provides the bare essentials. These supplies are critical to stopping the spread of diseases, like malaria. Today, Congress can make a, statement to those hit hardest by the tsunami. We can show our commitment to the recovery effort by supporting UNFPA funding. Today we have a chance to put politics aside and support the' work of an organization that is pro-mother and pro- child care. Helping those in need is the right thing to do. This shouldn't be a political issue, this is a moral issue. I urge you to vote yes on the Maloney/Sanchez/Crowley Amendment to help the victims of the tsunami.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, this week marks Stop Violence Against Women Week. I rise to show my support for victims of domestic violence. I grew up in a large family. I am the sixth of seven children, and my family has always supported me. Nothing can replace the strength you draw from those that you love and trust. Tragically, it is even more devastating if family members or significant others violate this trust and become abusive. Domestic violence is an enormous problem in this country, one that deserves immediate attention. According to the American College of Emergency Physicians, domestic violence is the largest cause of injury to women between the ages of 15 and 44 in the United States, more than car accidents, muggings and rapes combined. Each year, between 2 million and 4 million women are battered, and 2,000 of those women will die from their injuries. Nearly one-third of American women will experience intimate partner violence in their lifetime. We can no longer afford to ignore this issue. This year is especially important because 2005 marks the tenth anniversary of the Violence Against Women Act. Later this year, VAWA will come up for reauthorization. I urge my colleagues to do their part to support VAWA and support the efforts of women's advocates and to end the cycle of violence.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to S. 5. The sponsors of this bill call it the Class Action Fairness Act, but nothing about this bill is fair, especially for the victims of corporate wrongdoing. This bill erects a nearly insurmountable barrier for everyday Americans, who have been hurt or wronged, to have their day in court. Thanks to the so-called Class Action Fairness Act, people who have had their civil rights trampled on will no longer be able to bring their claims to State court. It does not matter if the laws of their home State provide better civil rights protections or that it may be more convenient for the victims of discrimination to seek justice in a court where they live. With S. 5 they must go to Federal court. The same burden is put on the backs of hourly wage workers who sue for back pay that they are owed. These folks are struggling to put food on their family's table, and they almost certainly cannot afford the high cost of multistate litigation. With S. 5 they, too, must bring their claims to a Federal court that may not even be in their State just so that they can get the back pay that they do. I ask all the proponents of this bill, is that their idea of fairness? Let us be real. S. 5 is not about reducing venue shopping. It is not about the mythical scourge of predatory plaintiffs' lawyers, and it is not about the fabricated economic drain of excessive jury awards. What this bill really is about is doing a favor for unscrupulous, negligent corporations by making it harder for their victims to sue them. It is protecting big businesses who are guilty of wrongdoing from liability. I am a lawyer and I acknowledge that there are some members of my profession who file frivolous suits. But if the lawyers are the ones that they claim are ruining this legal system, why are the sponsors of this bill making it harder for the victims? This bill makes about as much sense as locking the door of a hospital in order to lower health care costs. Kicking people out of the system does not solve the problem, and that is exactly what S. 5 does. It penalizes the victims of wrongdoing without doing anything to improve our legal system, and it shields bad actors from having to face the consequences of their action. Where is the personal responsibility? That is why I oppose this bill. I urge all of my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the final passage and to vote ``yes'' on the Conyers substitute.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Chairman, I am a proud daughter of immigrants who is honored to serve my country. I consider it a privilege to be able to give something back to this country that has given so much opportunity to generations of immigrants over the years. Like millions of immigrants here today, my family came to this country in search of the American Dream: a better life for their children so that their children could receive a quality education, some day own a home, and earn a fair wage. I stand before my colleagues today angered and outraged that under the guise of national security, the Republican Party is trying to punish those seeking the same dreams that my parents sought. If the Republicans and this administration really want to strengthen national security, they should start, I would think, by providing full funding for the Department of Homeland Security. Instead, the administration's budget slashes funding for the COPS program by $480 million and guts funding for local firefighters by $215 million. This leaves our first responders without the critical resources they need. The administration's budget also breaks the promise of putting an additional 2,000 border patrol agents on the job in 2006 as promised in landmark intelligence reforms passed last year and endorsed by the 9/11 Commission. Instead, the President's budget provides funding for a mere 210 agents, a 90 percent cut over the 9/11 Commission recommendations. The truth of the matter is that Republicans are using national security as a facade to alienate law-abiding, hard-working, and tax- paying immigrants. There are 8 million undocumented immigrants in this country who are cleaning our offices, caring for our children and elderly, and picking the fruits and vegetables that we consume. Most of these jobs most Americans do not want. Without these immigrants, our economy would falter. What we should be doing is allowing immigrants a path to citizenship and access to driver's licenses so they become a part of our American system. This will make our country safer, and it will strengthen our national security. We need comprehensive reform that supports our economy and values our immigrants. If the REAL ID Act is passed today, it will deny driver's licenses to those immigrants and slam the door shut on refugees seeking asylum from blood-thirsty regimes. America is a country built by immigrants, and we should remain a country that is opening and welcoming to those who seek freedom. It is a sad day when Republicans use the pretext of national security to attack immigrants who pose no real threat to our security. Americans deserve better, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on H.R. 418.