Linda Sánchez

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I have heard from a number of young people all across the United States about the burden of taking on that debt and trying to even work their way through college at the same time that they are assuming debt. It is very common now that a degree that used to take 4 years in order to complete now takes 5 or 6. I have heard of people who have actually, once they have graduated, have been so saddled with the huge debt of trying to repay their student loans. They have had to move in with their parents because the job economy and the job prospects are not bright for them. In many instances it can take several years for them to be self- sufficient, actually land a job to where they can be self-sufficient. Meanwhile, their student loan payments come due because they can only defer them for so long, and what we are finding is many young people, after they have worked to try to either get a 4-year degree or an advanced degree, meet somebody, fall in love, and marry, they are having to wait an average of 4 years longer to purchase their first home because of the staggering student loan payments that they have to make monthly, and it is a very sad thing because I was brought up with my parents telling me that education is the key to success in this country. If one gets a college degree and a good education, the world is their oyster, and that is simply not the case for many young people today.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of John Kerry, the Democratic presidential nominee, the only candidate who has a real plan to build a stronger, more secure America. John Kerry is committed to empowering our communities by creating good jobs, improving our public schools and increasing home ownership. John Kerry has the best combination of character, policymaking experience and national security credentials to get our neighborhoods and our country back on track. Back on track from what, one might ask? From a dismal GOP economic record. This administration's economic plan has created the worst job loss since President Hoover. A whopping 2.8 million jobs have disappeared since President Bush took office, including 1 million jobs that have been shipped overseas. Nevertheless, President Bush says our economy is strong. He should see how his economic plan has devastated hardworking families like in my home State of California where over 1 million Californians are looking for work. Clearly we need new leadership in the White House that has a strategy to create jobs, revitalize our economy and help all working families realize their dreams. John Kerry is the man to do this.

Ms. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. SANCHEZ of California. I would like to express my strong support for H.R. 1779, the Guardsmen and Reservists Financial Relief Act of 2003. This bill would allow penalty-free withdrawals from retirement plans during the period that a military reservist or national guardsman is called to active duty for an extended period. It is now more important than ever to work to mitigate the financial hardship we are placing on our reservists. At the outset of Operation Iraqi Freedom, both the White House and Department of Defense spoke of swiftly achieving victory in Iraq and bringing our servicemembers home within a few short months. Despite the valorous efforts of our military personnel, it is clear that we are facing a very different picture. According to DOD, stabilizing and ultimately winning the peace in Iraq will require the mobilization of at least 100,000 to 150,000 reserve component personnel annually for the next several years. Reserve component personnel comprise nearly 40 percent of our current force, whereas they only comprised 2.0 percent of the initial force used in the invasion. In light of the tragic upsurge in violence over the last month, 20,000 soldiers recently learned that their year-long deployments to Iraq had been extended for an additional 3 months. Nearly one-fourth are reservists. It is apparent that our success in Iraq and Afghanistan, and in the broader war on terrorism, is dependent on the continued commitment of our reservists. And I don't think we are doing enough right now to ensure that they are being adequately compensated for their sacrifice. According to GAO, nearly 41 percent of reservists are impacted by a pay discrepancy between his or her military and civilian salary. This is taking its toll. Not only are families racking up credit card debt, falling behind on bills, and losing businesses, but many are grappling with not re-enlisting when their service is up. And the fear of financial hardship may be hurting recruiting efforts. In 2003, every active and reserve component achieved its recruiting goals except the Army National Guard, which fell short of its recruiting goal by 7,798 (12.6 percent). We must begin to alleviate the financial burden on reservists, and I believe this bill is an important step in the right direction. However, it is not enough. Simply allowing our reservists to raid their retirement is not the answer. We must provide better re-enlistment bonuses, we must secure the extension of TRICARE benefits, we must secure the continuation of hazardous duty pay and family separation allowance, and we must continue to push for pay raises for our military families. In short, we must do everything in our power to compensate our guardsmen and reservists for their unprecedented sacrifice.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, our Nation's history is filled with heroes who, through personal sacrifice and a strong commitment to their cause, have left a mark upon society. Today, I am proud to honor the life and accomplishments of the late, talented union organizer and human rights advocate, Cesar E. Chavez. Born on March 31, 1927, to a farming family in Yuma, Arizona, Chavez learned early that life is filled with challenges, particularly for those who work the fruit and vegetable fields of this great country. Those fields nurtured Chavez's desire to create a farm workers union, which we know today as the UFW. Cesar Chavez brought dignity and respect to the farm workers and became an inspiration and a resource to other people engaged in human rights struggles throughout the world. From 1965 to the 1980s, Chavez worked tirelessly to increase wages as well as public awareness of the plight of migrant workers. Chavez defended the rights of farm workers until his death on April 23, 1993. Chavez's courage and perseverance continues to be a source of inspiration for me and many others dedicated to the interests of America's working families. Today, Chavez would have celebrated his 77th birthday. I am proud to celebrate his life and his work. May his spirit and dedication continue to be an inspiration to those engaged in human rights struggles throughout the world.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Republican budget because it provides virtually no hope for the 20 million women without health insurance in this country.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, today Chairman Manzullo and Ranking Member Velazquez held an important hearing for the small business. The hearing focused on the increase in steel prices. Consumers of Steel expected that the removal of the tariffs by President Bush in December would decrease the price of steel and increase steel imports. However, this did not happen. For the past 2 months the price of steel has increased approximately by 30 percent. The continuing increase in steel prices affects many parts of the economy, but particularly small manufacturing companies who buy their steel at market price. These small companies have not only been dealing with the increase in steel prices, they are now facing shortages in steel products. With these factors combined, it is virtually impossible for small manufacturers to survive. I would like to share a story of a constituent of mine who has been dealing with this crisis. Argo Springs Manufacturing Company, located in Norwalk, CA, is a family company that has been in business for almost 40 years. They produce numerous products from springs to compression coils. Their customers range from the commercial and aerospace industry to military agencies. Argo Springs currently employs 70 people, but with the sudden increase in prices and shortages in steel, it has become difficult for the company to compete in the manufacturing market. Randy Fox, vice president of Argo, told me and I quote, On February 15, I bought steel at 34 cents a pound, but by March 2 the price of steel had increased by 59 cents. I am worried that the company will have to start laying-off workers and eventually go out of business. I'm not sure the company will outlast the crisis. This story highlights the true impact of this crisis on small business owners. I am worried that if this crisis is not resolved, many small manufacturing companies like Argo Springs will not be able to continue doing business. This is unacceptable. After talking to my constituent, Randy Fox, one thing is apparent to me--we need to do something about this crisis in the steel industry. Small businesses are the economic backbone of our Nation. It is imperative that we create a viable and reasonable economic environment for them to maintain their businesses and grow.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, nearly 75 years ago, farmers gathered beneath the soaring camphor and depending on the weather and production level, set the price of hay around the world. The Hay Tree, a 50-foot-high camphor, thought to be more than 100 years old--is considered one of the few remnants of the once-thriving dairy and hay industry that ruled southeastern Los Angeles County and Northwestern Orange County. From the 1920s through the 1950s this area was called ``The Hay Capital of the World.'' The Paramount Hay Tree has recently been named the latest historical landmark in California by the State Historical Resources Commission. It was the first awarding of landmark status in southeast Los Angeles County in 10 years. The Hay Tree joins 1,100 landmarks throughout California, only 11 of which are also trees. According to the Office of Historic Preservation, an object must meet one of the following criteria to be eligible for landmark status: It must be considered the first, last or only one of its kind in the state or region, or it must be connected to a person or group having a significant influence in California history. The towns of Hynes and Clearwater--which would later incorporate together as Paramount--were the hub of the southern California dairy country and became the world's largest hay market. The alfalfa was shipped in from as far away as Arizona and Montana. Each day's median hay price was quoted in major newspapers as the national and international standard. It was under the Hay Tree--an informal gathering place for truckers, farmers and workers--that the representatives from the area lots would compare notes and come up with the composite price figure. The Hay Tree still holds sway over Paramount's newest addition--Civic Center Plaza, and will be the focal point of the new Plaza and Botanical Garden. A small park, set aside as open space in perpetuity, will surround the graceful camphor, signifying its sentimental and historical standing in town. Paramount's oldest banner, the Hay Tree, is one of California's finest monuments--it speaks praise without boasting and will be a blessing to all for years to come.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, due to illness, I was absent for rollcall vote No. 34 on H. Res. 530 and rollcall vote No. 38 on H.R. 1561. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on each of these rollcall votes.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the Unborn Victims of Violence Act and in support of the substitute bill offered by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren), the Motherhood Protection Act. I believe very strongly that violence against pregnant women is one of the most morally reprehensible crimes. Any act of violence against pregnant women should be condemned, and I support legislation that protects women and their unborn fetuses from violence. However, I have to rise and oppose the Unborn Victims of Violence Act that we are considering on the floor today because it jeopardizes a woman's right to choose and fails to protect women from violence. This bill is a blatant attempt to undermine a woman's right to choose, disguised, sadly, as an effort to protect women from violence. Under the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, for the first time anywhere in Federal law, an unborn fetus at any stage of development will be treated as a person that can be an independent victim of a crime. It is not that hard to figure out that it is a direct attack on a woman's right to choose as established in Roe v. Wade. The Unborn Victims of Violence Act is also inadequate for protecting women from violence. If the proponents of this bill were, in fact, sincere in their desire to prevent harm to unborn fetuses, they would start by preventing harm to pregnant women. It is very telling that the Unborn Victims of Violence Act is silent on the issue of preventing and punishing violent crimes against women and that the proponents of this bill will not accept the substitute bill offered by Ms. Lofgren, the Motherhood Protection Act. The gentlewoman from California's (Ms. Lofgren) substitute provides women and fetuses with the protections they need. It creates a separate Federal crime. It is not merely an enhancement. It is a separate Federal crime for harm to pregnant women and imposes a penalty of up to 20 years in prison for injury to embryos or fetuses. If a woman's pregnancy is terminated in an attack, the penalty can be up to life in prison. The Lofgren substitute is a far better bill than the Unborn Victims of Violence Act because it protects women, it protects fetuses, and it still preserves a woman's right to choose. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to show women in this country that we will protect them from violence by voting no on the Unborn Victims of Violence Act and voting yes on the superior Lofgren substitute.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I am here this evening to highlight one of the most important issues facing this country and this Congress: how to make our immigration system work for us, not against us. First of all, I think it is a positive sign that President Bush has put forward his proposal to get this debate started again. I wish he was as concerned for employees in this country as he is for employers. But whatever his motivation, his involvement does put pressure on his Republican colleagues in Congress to at least consider taking action to address our failed immigration system. The Democrats have also put forward their immigration reform principles outlining the changes necessary to shape immigration policy in this country. The Democratic plan is much more comprehensive, compassionate, and concrete. Our principles put a face to the immigrant who is trying to build a better life for himself and his family while making a better America for all of us. These 8 million workers are an integral part of our society, and reality dictates that we recognize that and find a fair way to integrate them fully into our society. We can do this while still protecting the labor standards in this country by wage and hour enforcements. We need to take our failing immigration system and turn it into something that can work for all Americans. And failing it is. We have a huge, and I mean a huge, backlog of visa applications pending that are preventing husbands from being with their wives and parents from being with their children. The current delay in reunifying families from the Philippines is 22 years. Is this a humane system? That is outrageous. Not only do we have to speed up the process; we have to make more family and employment visas available. This bottleneck needs to be opened up. The first and foremost action we should take to fix our immigration system is to bring families back together and allow them to be reunified. Sadly, however, the Bush proposal does nothing to help solve the problem of family reunification. Secondly, we need to offer a future to those immigrants who have been working in this country for years, have paid their taxes, abided by our laws, and contributed to their communities all over this Nation. The fact is that they are here now, and they have earned their right to stay. While some may not have come through the proper channels, they should not be condemned outright for leaving despair and poverty behind for a better life. These workers have had a positive impact on this country through their contributions, and a guest-worker program alone does not even begin to acknowledge this reality. Not only does earned legalization take this hidden work force out of the shadows, but it provides certainty for employers and hope for the employees that they can work towards a meaningful goal: legitimate acceptance in the United States. Another reality is that the immigrant children of these workers also deserve a place in our society. It is only to our benefit that they have access to a good education. They should be granted a vehicle for obtaining lawful permanent status and qualify for in-state educational benefits and financial aid. Again, the Democrats take this into account in the overall debate on immigration reform, but the Republican Party chooses to ignore this quick and easy change that could go forward right away without further delay. The Bush administration and the Republican leadership also ignore the fact that legislation already exists to expand the current guest-worker program. If President Bush is serious about moving forward on immigration reform and not just playing election-year politics, he should call on the Republican majority in the House to pass the Berman Ag Jobs bill. We can get this done now. Finally, let us focus our national security efforts on protecting this Nation against real terrorist threats instead of using it as an excuse to round up 8 million law-abiding workers and kicking them out of this country. I do not know about other Members, but I would much rather have the Department of Homeland Security knowing the identities of the people living here because they are no longer hiding from authorities for fear of deportation. Let us get real about the immigration dilemma in this country, real about the kind of hard-working, sincere people these immigrants are, how they have benefited this country, and what it would take to put the immigration system back in working order. Let us take our heads out of the sand and get to work on real immigration reform. I am serious about the work ahead, and I challenge my colleagues in the House to give more than lip service to the idea of meaningful immigration reform.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, due to the inclement weather my flight was cancelled yesterday and I was absent for rollcall vote No. 6 on H.R. 3493, and rollcall vote No. 7 on H.R. 1385. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on each of these rollcall votes.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks about this sham Medicare proposal that I oppose.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, in order to deal with the recent floods that struck the Lynwood, South Gate, Watts, and Willowbrook areas of my district, I was absent for rollcall vote 620 on S.J. Res. 22, recognizing the Agricultural Research Service; rollcall vote 621 on S.J. Res. 18, commending the service of Inspectors General; rollcall vote 622 on H. Con. Res. 299, honoring Sargent Shriver; and rollcall vote 623 on the motion to change the meeting times for Tuesday, November 18, 2003, to 10 a.m. for Morning Hour and 11 a.m. for legislative business. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on each of these rollcall votes.

Ms. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend Chairman Shays and Ranking Member Kucinich for calling this important hearing on Public Safety Interoperability. Earlier this year, I met with Fire Stations and Police Departments in my district. Each one of them highlighted the need for a communications system that would allow law enforcement, fire fighters, and other first responders to talk to one another. To this end, the Los Angeles County Fire Department with minimal resources and funds initiated an interoperability communications pilot program, known as the Los Angeles Regional Tactical Communication System (LARTCS). This system enables various agencies to directly speak to another on one channel for both short-term and long-term incidents. The pilot program only serves a portion of the County, while the Los Angeles County Fire Department provides services to 58 municipalities and spans a 3,000-mile radius. This includes dense, rural, and remote suburban areas. The LARTCS has already proven to be a success, particularly in the southern California wildfires. According to the Los Angeles County Assistant Fire Chief, Eric Ekeberg, ``the fires hit the region really hard, but it could have been a lot worse if the communication system was not in place.'' I commend the foresight and dedication of the Los Angeles County Fire Department and all participating agencies that includes law enforcement, EMS, and other first responders for establishing this pilot program. Amazingly, this system was put in with minimal funds. This successful pilot program proves that Congress needs to do more to fund interoperability systems, whether it is through additional FEMA grants or cutting the red tape, so that the first responders of LA County, and multiple counties throughout California and the nation, can talk to one another. We need to do more to protect our public servants as well as the general population. Therefore, I look forward to the testimonies of the witnesses who might shed some light on this salient issue, not just for first responders, but all Americans. Again, I would like to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for holding this very important hearing.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Madam Speaker, due to a death in the family, I was unavoidably absent and missed rollcall votes on October 30, 2003. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on rollcall vote Nos. 580-585; ``no'' on rollcall votes 586 and 587; ``aye'' on rollcall votes 588-591. Furthermore, I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 592 because the FAA Reauthorization Act, H.R. 2115, still privatizes our air traffic control system, does not mandate terrorist training for flight attendants, and jeopardizes our air space when greater security is needed. Had I been present I would have voted ``aye'' on rollcall votes 593 and 594; ``no'' on rollcall vote 595; ``aye'' on rollcall vote 596; ``no'' on rollcall vote 597; and ``aye'' on rollcall vote Nos. 598-600. I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 601 because although I support our troops, the Iraq Supplemental Appropriations bill diverts billions of dollars to reconstructing Iraq, while working families in America are struggling to pay their bills. Finally, I would have voted ``no'' on the voice vote to H. Res. 424.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, today, the House of Representatives is making a procedural vote on whether not to recommit the FAA Reauthorization bill to conference. What this is really is an attempt to circumvent the real legislative process--an up or down vote on the merits of their proposal. Why is the Republican leadership doing this? Because they are trying to sneak through provisions that are seriously flawed and pose a major risk to flight safety and national security. As a cochair of the newly created Congressional Labor and Working Families Caucus, I find it appalling that Congress would consider privatizing air traffic controllers when our security is at a greater risk that ever. This and two other provisions in this bill would do less--not more--to protect us from terrorism, and seriously undermine the airline industry in our country and jeopardize the safety of our personal air travel. First, this bill opens the door for private companies to purchase air traffic control towers from the Government. This means our Government will no longer be in control of the safety of our airspace. Privatizing the Nation's air traffic control system is a risky and dangerous experiment at a time when public safety is of the highest importance. Also, under this bill flight attendants are no longer required to receive antiterrorism training. Following the events of 9/11, flight attendants want to be properly trained; passengers want them to be trained; and as a frequent flyer I personally want them to be trained. Lastly, it would allow international airlines to carry cargo throughout the United States without it being properly screened or tracked. The proposed changes would affect national security as well as jeopardize the livelihood of our domestic industry. Ironically, after 9/11, airport screeners were federalized because we realized that our safety depended on the individuals working those posts to be under Federal supervision. It is same with air traffic controllers. Look at it this way . . . the price of a plane ticket--$235, the price of airport parking for a week--$75, and the expertise and experience of air traffic controllers to land your airplane, priceless. There is no price tag to our safety. For the safety for all Americans, I strongly urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' to recommit the FAA Conference Report and take out these heinous provisions. Let's put safety first.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to The Basic Pilot Extension Act of 2003 (H.R. 2359) and urge all of my colleagues to vote against this bill. The Basic Pilot Program is a new, more reliable way for employers to verify that employees are legally eligible to work in the United States. I support the Basic Pilot Program and I support an extension of the program for an additional five years. However, I oppose the Basic Pilot Extension Act because this bill goes well beyond just extending the program for an additional five years. This bill makes the Basic Pilot Program a national employee verification system available in all 50 states. Currently, the Basic Pilot Program is being tested in only 6 states so that flaws in the program can be addressed. Those flaws were detailed in a report by the Institute for Survey Research at Temple University. The report concluded that the Basic Pilot Program is not ready for larger-scale implementation at this time, and that the Program should remain available in only 6 states until the many problems with the program are addressed. The problems described in the report include inaccurate and outdated information in the INS databases used to verify employment eligibility. The report also describes problems with the reliability of the training and system software, hardware, and telephone systems used in the Basic Pilot Program. The report also described how employees had their privacy violated, were not fully informed of their rights under the Basic Pilot Program, and that employers failed to submit forms in the required time deadlines. Despite these problems and despite the explicit recommendation of the Institute for Survey Research for needed improvements, this bill expands the Basic Pilot nationwide and includes provisions that go well beyond merely verifying employment eligibility. This bill adds a new provision that allows federal, state, or local governments, not employers, to use the pilot program to access the databases to obtain citizenship and immigration status information on anyone for any reason they wish. This includes both citizens and non- citizens, and unlike other regulations that control the use of federal databases, there are no limitations that protect the employees against discrimination, privacy violations, or other misuse. This new provision is very close to the establishment of a national register of all immigrants or a national identification card program. Madam Speaker, the Basic Pilot Extension Act should be opposed for all of the reasons I have described. Another serious concern is that the Judiciary Committee did not hold any hearings on the changes to the information sharing provisions of this bill, and the Subcommittee on Immigration did not consider this bill at all. The Basic Pilot Extension Act of 2003 will threaten the privacy of all Americans and is riddled with flaws. I urge all of my colleagues to oppose this bill.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, on August 3, 2003, the La Mirada Girl All Stars won the Girls 16-Under ``Class B'' Fast Pitch West Finals by defeating the Bullets from Idaho 7-2 for the title of 2003 Amateur Softball Association National Champions. The La Mirada Girl All Stars, also the California state champions, in their respective age bracket, started the four-term Western Pool Playoff with a 7-2 win over Blue Thunder from Florissant, Missouri and a 9-2 victory over the Waverly Heat from Lincoln, Nebraska. Founded in 1933, the Amateur Softball Association is a nationwide, volunteer driven, non-profit organization that has evolved in the largest softball organization in the country. The Amateur Softball Association has grown from a few hundred teams to over 250,000 teams, representing a membership of more than four million athletes. The goal of the Amateur Softball Association's youth program is to help aspiring young softball athletes learn a sport they can enjoy for a lifetime in a positive, safe and supportive environment. The Amateur Softball Association National Championships begin at the local level with league championships, state championships and eventually culminates with national qualifiers from around the country. The La Mirada Girl All-Star Team was made up of players from eight teams from La Mirada's 16-under division, who played a three-week season prior to their selection. The La Mirada Girl All-Star roster included: Andrea Belluz, Amanda Fernandez, Nikki Johansen, Tiffany Johnson, Keena Levert, Jaimee Montanez, Nicole Morales, Sara Randall, Jayme Smith and Meghan Thorpe with coaches Steve Randall and Randy Tyler, and manager Laurie Montanez. La Mirada fought its way to the National Championship by defeating teams from Overland Park, Kansas; Kirksville, Missouri; Coachella, California; Omaha, Nebraska; Augusta, Kansas; and Parma, Idaho. La Mirada outscored its competition 60-11 and went undefeated at 7-0, during the course of the tournament. La Mirada won the championship tournament with brilliant pitching, an explosive offense and an unmatched defense. The National Champion La Mirada Girl All-Star Team will be celebrated by the players, coaches and family members not only for the games played, but also for their shared memories of their time together.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend Chairman Davis and Ranking Member Waxman for calling this important hearing on Internet vulnerabilities and security threats. One such vulnerability is computer viruses and I know first hand how tedious and cumbersome computer infections can be. In the past year, I have had several computer viruses and they are costly and time consuming to fix. Through my Washington Update, I regularly email my constituents about what's happening in DC. When I wrote to my constituents about today's hearing and requested that they share with me some of their experiences with computer viruses, the response was immediate and resounding. I was immediately inundated with e-mails about the economic, social, and personal toll computer viruses have on the lives of my constituents. Let me share a sample of these stories with you today to highlight the impact viruses can have on our daily lives. Mark Patton, Vice President of American Remedial Technology, a small company in my community, wrote in and said: Our business was victimized by a number of computer viruses on one occasion. We had hired an IT consultant to provide maintenance of our network, but unfortunately they were not keeping up with our virus protection. As a result we had to replace our server, upgrade our system, and subsequently fire our IT consultant. This episode cost our small business over $10,000 without considering the lost time we incurred. Viruses are a threat to all businesses. . . . The lesson is buyers beware when hiring an IT consultant, but more importantly as businesses become more dependant on the Internet, Internet security becomes a very important issue. Mission Hills Mortgage Bankers/Gateway Business Bank wrote in and said: During the height of the virus-infected e-mail, Mission Hills Mortgage Bankers/Gateway Business Bank webmail site was swamped with thousands of virus-laden e-mails a day in August and September. Fortunately, our firewall and virus software caught and cleaned up the e-mail, but the sanitized e-mail was passed through to the individuals to whom it was addressed. Personally, I was deleting 30 to 50 e-mails a day, both annoying and time consuming. What I didn't know was how vulnerable a home computer with DSL or cable access is without a firewall even with virus- checker software. I wasn't aware that viruses can come thru to your computer in ways other than on an e-mail until I got one. That was a month ago. I purchased and installed a firewall right away. But I am still experiencing a problem with my computer. Apparently, the damage to files can remain after the virus is cleaned up. This problem has not only affected businesses. Rio Hondo College wrote in and said: We were hit hard by the ``worm'' at Rio Hondo College during the first week of our semester this Fall. Our mainframe computer and every desktop computer on campus were unusable for a week. We could not register students, certify athletic eligibility of athletes, process financial aid requests, conduct many classes, or function in any capacity for a whole week. Eight weeks later we are still trying to get computers and printers and e-mail functioning for every one. Diane Schumacher wrote in and said: I had a virus in September of this year. It was the SO/BIG Virus. I got it when I purchased an item over the Internet that came with an attachment. I have been laid-off. The last thing I needed was to be out of contact with not only EDD, the Employment Development Department, but also with my job search and support groups. Not to mention the expense of repair. If the stories could not get any worst, this particular antidote affected me the most, Mark Calt wrote in and said: I'd like to take pictures of my daughter who currently is 2 years old. I used my digital camera to take a picture of her from the moment she was born and every single month until she reached her first birthday. I stored all those pictures in my hard drive so when I am ready, I'll sort them all out and have them developed and make a nice album that I can show to my daughter when she grows up and maybe play a slide show during her debut (18th Birthday Party). But my computer was hit by the virus just before I got them developed . . . my one year worth of project, my dream, and my gift to my daughter are all gone together with the pictures. I would pay--no matter what the price--if I could retrieve all those pictures . . . they were priceless . . . you cannot bring back the hands of time! The stories I've shared with you today underscore the prevalence of computer infections. Furthermore, computer viruses are a ``real problem'' not just for businesses, but home users are also affected by this costly burden. An unemployed constituent, a community college, a bank and a father, all have been victimized by computer viruses. Computer viruses affect all of us. There is much work ahead of us to eradicate threat, so I thank each of the witnesses for being here today to discuss this important topic and I look forward to your testimony. Again, I would like to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for having this hearing.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, on October 19, 2003, Mother Teresa will be beatified by Pope John Paul II. In the Catholic canonization process, beatification is the last step before sainthood. This step formalizes what much of the world has known for years: That Mother Teresa selflessly gave her life, her energy, and her love to those most in need. The name Mother Teresa has become synonymous with charity and commitment to the poor the world over. Born in 1910 in Albania to middle class parents, Mother Teresa realized early on that she would dedicate her life to serving God and her fellow man. She joined the Loreto Sisters of Dublin, Ireland and trained to be a teacher. She taught History and Geography in Calcutta, India for 15 years. Though she loved teaching, Mother Teresa felt she was destined for a different calling. With the blessing of Pope Pius XII, Mother Teresa began serving the poor and neglected in the slums of Calcutta, India. She taught the illiterate children of the area to read and write, but soon realized that her energies were desperately needed elsewhere. With so many homeless people dying in filth and indignity, she put her efforts toward caring for the poor and afflicted of the community, many of whom were near death. She took in the patients that nobody else wanted. Mother Teresa cared for and loved people dying of leprosy, AIDS, cancer, and many other deadly diseases. She brought comfort and human dignity to the final weeks, days, and hours of so many suffering people. Mother Teresa found her true calling in helping the poorest of the poor. She loved the people that no one else would love. People with no families, no homes, no access to medical care, and no place to go to die in peace, with dignity. In 1950, Mother Teresa started her own Order, the Missionaries of Charity. The goal of Missionaries of Charity is to look after those who have no one to love and care for them. The Missionaries of Charity now have thousands of nuns serving the poor in 125 countries around the world. This is truly a remarkable legacy. Mother Teresa has been recognized internationally for her contributions to humanity. She received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979 and the Congressional Gold Medal, one of our country's highest honors, in 1997. After Mother Teresa's death in 1997, Pope John Paul II waived the customary five-year waiting period to begin the process of her becoming a saint. This unprecedented consideration for this well-deserved honor confirms the importance and greatness of Mother Teresa. 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.'' Mother Teresa serves as a shining example of the profound impact one person can have in the world. She is a model for selflessness and eternal optimism. Mother Teresa is a role model and a hero to us all.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today and join my colleagues in our continuing desire to establish peace in the Middle East. I joined several of my Democratic colleagues this past August in a trip to Israel to see firsthand the impact that violence has had on the people of the Middle East. It seems that almost daily we turn on our television sets and read newspapers and learn about another bombing or missile attack in the Middle East. Just this past Saturday 19 people were killed and 50 people were injured when a suicide bomber set off an explosion in a packed restaurant in Israel. My trip to Israel in August impacted me profoundly. One cannot begin to understand what it is like for the people of Israel to try to live under such conditions until one have traveled to the country and has seen it firsthand. There is a difference between understanding their situation by reading about it in the newspaper and actually being there, living it and seeing it with your own eyes. Israel is a tiny country and is practically surrounded by countries that consider Israel and Western-style democracy an enemy. Israel lives with the fear of attack every day, and Israeli citizens need to protect themselves and defend their homes. There are many regions of the country that the Israeli government holds on to simply because they improve the security and safety of their citizens. While I was in Israel I and my colleagues saw firsthand the construction of an enormous security fence to prevent violent attacks. Once completed, this barrier will stretch for approximately 150 miles. It is a combination of ditches, barbed wire, and electric sensors. Many people have spoken out against the fence and say that it is an obstacle to achieving peace in the region. But until you have been to Israel, you cannot possibly understand what that fence means in terms of the safety and security of women and children and civilians. I also recall during our trip being taken to border regions and being shown security footage of people trespassing over the security barriers and entering Israel without authorization. These constant dangers impact the people of Israel every day, and I was impressed with how committed the Israeli people were to protecting their country and their families in the face of so many threats. In fact, many citizens carried guns with them, ready to defend their country at a moment's notice. It is easy for people outside of Israel to criticize them for carrying guns and constructing a security fence. But the fear and the danger that faces the people of Israel is real, and they must be allowed to protect themselves. Because of this danger, they alone know the best way to protect their citizens and secure their communities. Mr. Speaker, I hope that our country continues to support the government and the people of Israel. I hope that we recognize Israel's right to be a sovereign nation and Israel's right to protect itself. Most of all, I hope that peace comes to the people of Israel and all of the citizens of the Middle East.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time, and I rise in support of her motion to reject the use of the $174 billion for Health Savings Security Accounts included in the Republicans' prescription drug bill. On June 26, I voted against the Health Savings and Affordability Act, H.R. 2595. While it sounds like a great idea to let folks save for their out-of-pocket costs, in reality these Health Savings Accounts are a $174 billion tax cut for the wealthy. Republicans tell us that these accounts will help those without health insurance, but in reality those without health insurance have incomes that are too low to take advantage of the tax breaks in this bill. The truth is these folks do not have the additional $2,000 to $4,000 a year to put into these savings accounts. When America is experiencing record deficits, this Republican Congress' highest priority remains increased tax cuts, and I am outraged that they are placing them into the Medicare prescription drug bill. When is this type of deception going to stop? All I ask is that my colleagues be honest with the American people. I do not think it is asking a lot for them to really be honest and level with Americans about what they are really getting in this bill. I ask this Congress if $174 billion could not be better used? At a time when retirees are struggling with rising prescription drug costs, could the $174 billion not be used to increase incentives for employers not to drop prescription drug coverage for their retirees? If passed as is, the Medicare prescription drug bill will make those receiving employee retirement plans worse off. Currently, this is the largest source of prescription drug coverage for Medicare beneficiaries, and these plans are significantly better than anything that they would receive under the Republican bill. Under the Republican bill, the likelihood that employers will drop prescription drug coverage is great because retirees will not be able to use their health plans towards the gap in coverage. Therefore, these higher costs do not provide an incentive for employers to make prescription drug coverage available to their retirees. The Congressional Budget Office projects that approximately one-third of employers who are currently providing retiree prescription drug benefits would drop the coverage if the Republican prescription drug bill becomes law, making some 4 million retirees worse off. In fact, this possibility of losing drug benefits from former employers is the biggest fear currently facing retirees. Already we are seeing a decline in retiree coverage due to increased prescription drug costs, which accounts for 40 to 60 percent of an employer's retiree health care costs. We cannot stand here and allow the Republican bill to expedite this process. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to support the Schakowsky motion and reject more tax cuts for the wealthy. Instead, why not be honest and do something that is right for the American people and use the $174 billion for employer subsidies to help ensure that employers do not drop their current prescription drug plans for their retirees.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, on October 1, 2003, the Immigrant Workers Freedom Ride arrived to Washington, DC. I welcome and salute the Immigrant Workers Freedom Riders. Inspired by the 1961 freedom rides that sought to integrate bus terminals in the South, today's riders are visiting cities and towns across the country. They are raising awareness about the plight of immigrant workers and advocating for comprehensive change to our immigration system. Like Dr. Martin Luther King, these Americans, refuse to believe and I quote, ``there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity in this great nation.'' Let me share the story of one of those Americans. Salvador Guillen is the proud leader of the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees International Union (HERE) Local 681. He is a father of three children and has worked as a housekeeper at Disneyland's Paradise Pier Hotel for over 15 years. Salvador was born in Zamora, Michoacan, and has lived in the United States for 18 years. He is now a proud citizen of the United States. In his own words, Salvador states: I want workers like my two sisters who have not been able to legalize and who are forced to work jobs where they are abused, overworked, and underpaid to have the same opportunity. I don't want my two sisters to suffer anymore like the time when our father was very sick. I remember they cried every night because they could not see him. Our father recovered, but to this day they still have not seen him since they left Mexico years ago. I want all immigrants who work everyday and pay taxes to have the same opportunity I had for a better life, that is why I took time off my work, without pay, to ride across our country in support of immigration reform. Salvador's journey exemplifies our democratic principles that all men and women are guaranteed the inalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. May God bless all riders for embarking on this courageous and noble journey. I wish them all the best in New York City. Together, we can implement sensible immigration policies that bring all immigrants one-step closer to the American Dream. For my part, I will continue to fight to defend our democratic values and make justice a reality for all of God's children. Juntos, podemos promover leyes mas justas de inmigracion, que ayuden a todos los inmigrantes en su lucha por conseguir el Sueno Americano.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, on September 22nd, the Long Beach Unified School District received the Broad Prize for Urban Education, which is awarded to the most outstanding school district in the country. This year the Long Beach Unified School District is America's Best Urban School System. The Long Beach Unified School District was selected from five national finalists by a panel of 12 national leaders in the education, government, business and nonprofit sectors, including Boeing CEO Phil Condit, Florida Governor Jeb Bush and former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Henry Cisneros. The Broad Prize for Urban Education is the largest national education award and is synonymous with the Nobel Prize for schools. The Prize is awarded annually to urban school districts making the greatest overall improvement in student achievement while at the same time reducing achievement gaps across ethnic groups and between various incomes. The winning district receives a cash award of $500,000 that goes towards scholarships for students to attend college or other post-secondary training. Throughout the year, the Long Beach Unified School District will be highlighted and used as a model so that districts across the country can learn from their success. This will allow other school districts to replicate Long Beach's innovative teaching and educational strategies, thus extending their example and impact. Long Beach's strength comes from their ability to evaluate and adapt its programs to meet the needs of specific students. This is no easy feat, considering that the Long Beach Unified School District is the third largest school district in California, serving 96,000 students. It also serves, according to U.S. Census, the most ethnically diverse city in the Nation with 46 different languages spoken by local students. I commend the hard working teachers and school administrators of Long Beach for their contributions and commitment to our young people. I also would like to recognize the parents and our community for supporting the Long Beach Unified School District's efforts to help every child reach its full potential. Education has always been tied to the promise of equality and opportunity for all and Long Beach Unified School District is an institution that gives every student an equal chance to succeed. Congratulations to the Long Beach Unified School District for this incredible achievement!

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the conference report on S. 3, in opposition to the underlying bill, the so-called Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003, and in strong opposition to passing legislation that endangers the health of women and violates the U.S. Constitution. Make no mistake about it, S. 3 endangers the health and safety of women. If this bill is signed into law, Congress will take the extraordinary step of banning a medical procedure that many physicians have concluded is safe for women. In fact, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists concluded in their September, 2000, statement of policy that the procedure banned under S. 3 may be ``the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular circumstance to save the life or preserve the health of a woman.'' Congress should not second-guess the expertise of physicians. Likewise, Congress should not interfere with the doctor-patient relationship and limit the options available to women to protect their health. But this is exactly what the so-called Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 does. It endangers women's health by making a procedure that is the safest option for many women illegal and unavailable. However, the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act does not stop at endangering a woman's health. This bill also blatantly violates the Constitution of the United States. In the Stenberg decision, the Supreme Court struck down a Nebraska statute that is practically identical to the legislation we are talking about today. The Supreme Court struck down the Nebraska statute as unconstitutional because it failed to contain a provision that would provide an exception to the ban when the procedure is necessary to preserve the life or the health of the woman. Despite the Supreme Court's clear and explicit ruling that a law banning partial-birth abortion procedures must have an exception to protect the life or health of the mother, the drafters of S. 3 have refused to include the exception when the procedure is necessary to protect the health of the mother. By failing to include this health exception, the law is unconstitutional. I oppose this conference report and urge my colleagues to do the same.