Linda Sánchez

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I rise in support of the Bishop motion to reject the use of $174 billion for health savings accounts included in the Republican prescription drug bill. On June 26, I, along with many of my colleagues, voted against the Health Savings and Affordability Act, H.R. 2596. It sounds like a great bill, but in reality these health savings accounts are a $174 billion tax cut for the wealthy. Republicans tell us these accounts will help those without health insurance, but in reality these people have incomes that are far too low to take advantage of the tax breaks in this bill. The truth is they do not have the additional $2,000 to $4,000 a year to put into these savings accounts. While Americans are struggling daily, this Republican Congress is trying to give more tax cuts for the wealthy, and it is shameful to disguise it by putting it into the Medicare prescription drug bill. At a time when our country is facing record deficits and so many seniors are struggling with rising drug costs, could $174 billion not be better used? Could it not be used, as the gentleman from New York (Mr. Bishop) has suggested, to significantly close the gap in coverage found in the current prescription drug bill? Asking our seniors to pay 100 percent of their drug costs above $2,000 until catastrophic coverage kicks in is simply unacceptable. This gap in coverage is the biggest problem in the prescription drug bill, and it would have a severe impact on millions of low-income Medicare beneficiaries. That is why, instead of giving more tax cuts to the wealthy, we must help seniors cover their prescription drug costs. That is what seniors want, and that is what our seniors deserve. In fact, according to a survey conducted by AARP, four out of five seniors did not want the Republican plan that ultimately passed this Congress. Why did seniors oppose this plan? The answer is very simple: because under the current bill, 48 percent, nearly half of all seniors, would fall into the coverage gap and be forced to pay 100 percent of their drug costs. And that is in addition to the $35-per-month premium, in addition to paying the first $250 worth of drugs, and in addition to paying 20 percent of all their drug costs up to $2,000 a year. The coverage gap is unacceptable. It is no way to treat the seniors in our country. They expect more and they deserve more. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to support the Bishop motion and reject more tax cuts for the wealthy. Give our seniors the respect they deserve and the coverage that they need.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to welcome and salute the Immigrant Workers Freedom Ride. 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, Jr., these Americans refuse to believe, and I quote, that 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, Local 681. He is the 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.'' Together we can implement sensible immigration policies that bring all immigrants one step closer to the American dream.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, as co-chair of the newly formed Congressional Labor and Working Families Caucus, which now has over 75 Members of this House, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this motion to protect overtime pay. For many hardworking men and women, including cops and firefighters, nurses and first responders, overtime pay is not spare change. It helps families pay the mortgage, feed the kids, pay for college, and save for retirement. In this especially brutal economy, which has been so hard on America's working families, I urge my colleagues to not let the Bush administration shortchange our working families.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, on March 1, 2004, Master Sergeant Andrew R. Samuels, will be retiring after 20 years of active military service in the United States Air Force. Master Sergeant Andrew R. Samuels was born on January 27, 1965 in Torrance, California. After graduation from Lynwood High School in 1983, Samuels enlisted in the United States Air Force in October 1983 and served as a Non-Commissioned Officer with various police squadrons in California, Arkansas, Wyoming, Korea, Japan, Alaska, Turkey, Portugal, Saudi Arabia, and the Netherlands. During his dedicated years of service, Samuels received the Air Force Meritorious Service Medal, the Air Force Commendation Medal with 3 clusters, and the Air Force Achievement Medal with 5 clusters. Master Sergeant Andrew R. Samuels has received 30 awards and decorations during his service with the United Stated Air Force. In 1985 Samuels was honored with an early promotion as a Senior Airman Below the Zone for his excellent service. In 1996, Samuels became the Security NCO of the year commending his commitment and dedication to his position. In 2000, Master Sergeant Samuels received the 3 SPSS Most Valuable Person Award along with the PACAF, Best Anti-Terrorism/Force Protection Installation. In 2001 and 2002, he accepted the Air Force Productivity and Excellence Award and the Special Recognitions Category for the Commanders in Chief Installation Excellence Award. In 2002, Samuels received his Bachelor's of Arts degree for his completion of Security Administration at Saint Regis University. Throughout his 20-year career, Master Sergeant Samuels has continuously demonstrated his dedication to his profession, community, and family. Samuels is a loving husband to Fukuko Tenma Samuels and an honorable father to his two sons, 2-year-old Rodney Sora and 4-months- old newborn Speed Sei Samuels. Samuels plans to pursue work in the security and antiterrorism arena utilizing his 20 years of experience in the service. He looks forward to spending time coaching youth football, traveling, sight seeing, and listening to his collection of jazz music. From one public servant to another, Andrew Samuel's dedication and service will be truly missed.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Rodriguez) for yielding me this time. Throughout the United States' history of armed conflict, noncitizens have worn our military uniforms and fought in our battles. In fact, one of my uncles served in the Korean War while a legal permanent resident. Today, approximately 3 percent of our military are legal permanent residents, but not citizens. Of that 3 percent, more than 37,000 noncitizen soldiers are currently serving on active duty in the U.S. Armed Forces. Many of the U.S. casualties in Operation Iraqi Freedom and many of the soldiers who continue to risk their lives to bring stability to Iraq are noncitizens. I am a strong supporter of measures that provide opportunities for legal permanent residents serving in our military to become U.S. citizens. These individuals are making enormous sacrifices. Without being citizens and without having the protection that that status gives them, these immigrant men and women are willing to risk their own lives to defend this Nation. The least we can do is give them something in return. What this motion to instruct does is instruct the conferees to accept the Senate provisions that expedite the naturalization process for members serving in the U.S. military and the selected reserves. The Senate provision also protects spouses, children, and parents of soldiers killed in action by preserving their ability to file for permanent residence in the United States. The provisions are an effective way to show those noncitizens serving in our Armed Services that their efforts are appreciated. The provisions provide noncitizen soldiers with the opportunity to apply for citizenship after 2 years of military service instead of the 3-year requirement currently in law. The provisions waive naturalization fees and provide for naturalization proceeds to take place overseas. It also allows for the spouse, children, and parents of legal permanent resident soldiers killed in action to apply for citizenship. I am pleased that the Senate provisions deem the parents of soldiers killed in action to petition for immediate family status. When the House version of this bill was considered, I was concerned that parents of legal permanent resident soldiers killed in combat were not eligible for citizenship if they were outside the United States at the time their child was killed. Those same parents would be eligible if they were here in the United States and it made no sense. A parent is a parent whether they happen to have gone to their home country for a short time or whether they are in the process of waiting for a visa application renewal or whether some other circumstance prevented them from being in the United States when their child was killed in combat. I am pleased the Senate provision of this bill made these provisions an important part of their bill. Again, I support the motion to instruct conferees on the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation and benefit noncitizens who are serving in our Armed Services and protecting the freedoms that we hold so dear.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, for the past 40 years the President has issued a proclamation calling for the celebration of Small Business Week. This year National Small Business Week runs from September 15th through the 20th. Since the founding of our country, small businesses have contributed immeasurably to our progress and economic strength. Let us celebrate the entrepreneurial spirit in America during National Small Business Week. The approximately 23 million small businesses in the United States employ more than half of the country's private work force, create three of every four new jobs, and generate most of America's innovations. Small businesses are the backbone of this country and they are an enduring symbol of the American Dream. For example, five years ago a young couple in my district had a dream to open a grocery store in the City of Whittier, California. Their vision for the store was to specialize in fresh, ready to prepare Hispanic foods in the historic district of Whittier. Country Fresh Market has found a niche in the grocery retail market that has posted double-digit gains from last year. Subsequently, on March 27th Country Fresh Market was featured on the Food Network in a nationally broadcast segment of ``Food Finds,'' hosted by Sandra Pinkney. Country Fresh Market is a business success story, and they make many contributions to their local community, including the local Boys and Girls Club and YMCA's Annual Pancake Breakfast. Since its inception, Country Fresh Market has also had four employees graduate from college and helped many of its employees purchase homes. Country Fresh Market prides itself in its employees' success, because its employees are its ``familia'' (family). Country Fresh Market is a true business success in my district. As a member of the small business community, I'm working to increase the SBA's microloan program from $35,000 to $50,000. By helping small businesses gain access to capital, I hope to bolster the number of small businesses that succeed each year. Today, let us honor small businesses, like Country Fresh Market. By celebrating America's small businesses, we are keeping the American Dream alive and well for today, and for future generations.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, on September 11, the world watched in horror as nearly 3,000 Americans lost their lives in the terrorist attacks on World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and on Flight 93, that crashed in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. September 11 is one of the defining events of an entire generation. Each of us vividly remembers where we were and how we heard the news of the attacks. Like so many others, I watched as the second plane slammed into the World Trade Center, and then as the two towers came crashing down. I heard the reports of the attack on the Pentagon, then the news that the last plane had crashed in Pennsylvania. And like all Americans, I sat in shock and horror worrying about the safety of my loved ones. I was lucky enough to find out that everyone I knew was safe. Many were not so lucky. The events of September 11 helped me to take stock in my life and to appreciate the enormous sacrifice of ordinary Americans. This tragic moment in our history produced a new definition of the word ``hero.'' You could see this exemplified on Halloween in 2001 when children across America traded in their Superman and Spiderman costumes for those of fireman, policeman and paramedics. On September 11th children witnessed real heroes--the firemen who rushed into the burning Twin Towers, the police who did everything possible to rescue those in need, and the medical personnel who tirelessly worked to save lives. It has been said before, but should be remembered everyday--these ordinary people did extraordinary things without hesitation and with enormous sacrifice. There were also heroes in the sky that day. The brave passengers of Flight 93 saved the lives of others by forcing their plane to the ground. What an incredible act of self-sacrifice! And let's not forget the workers who came to ground zero day after day to sift through the rubble, looking for survivors, and eventually looking for the remains of the victims. They are heroes. On the 2nd Anniversary of September 11th, I think again of my loved ones and I want to say to all the families and friends who lost someone on this heartbreaking day--you are heroes. You have endured an unthinkable loss and yet everyday find the strength to go on. I admire your courage and resilience. You are a great inspiration to all Americans. Let us honor the valor and sacrifice of these heroes by living life to the fullest. Let us reflect on their actions and lives and be inspired to build a better America.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ. Mr. Speaker, on August 16, 2003, the La Mirada Junior League baseball team won in its first appearance in the Junior League World Series by defeating Santiago, Panama 8-7 for the title of 2003 Junior League World Champions. La Mirada, located 18 miles southeast of Los Angeles, is the fourth Junior League baseball team from California to win the World Championship. The La Mirada team, also the California state champions, started the four-team Western Regional Tournament with a 5-3 loss to Scottsdale, Arizona, but came back with four straight victories to win the title. La Mirada eliminated Aiea, Hawaii, which won the Junior League World Series in 2000 and 2001, then beat hosting Union City, California and won two straight games over Arizona to arrive at the Junior League World Series with a 17-2 overall record. Founded in 1981, the Junior League World Series is the older brother of the Little League World Series. The Junior League World Series is a spectacular weeklong international tournament for the best teams of 13- and 14-year-old baseball players from around the world and is played every year in beautiful Heritage Park in Taylor, Michigan. It has blossomed to include teams from around the globe: from Europe, Latin America, the Asia-Pacific region, Canada, and the United States. To date, participating teams have come from 27 different states in the U.S., four Canadian provinces, Mexico, Puerto Rico, Belgium, Saudi Arabia, the Czech Republic, Germany, Guam, Poland, Venezuela, Saipan and, for the first time in 2003, Russia. La Mirada's all-star roster included: Chris Amezquita, Jordyn Baldwin, Jason Dovel, Frankie Fichera, George Gonzalez, Jacob Johnson, Stephen Kaupang, Michael Le Blanc, Brandon Pesante, Kevin Platzer, A.J. Rodriguez and Taylor Seimens with coaches Larry Kaupang and Gary Bouchard, and Manager Jim Gordon. La Mirada braved rain delays and lack of electricity caused by the Nation's largest power outage during the week-long tournament to win against regional champions Mansfield, Massachusetts (East); Urbandale, Iowa (Central); Bridgewater, Virginia (South); and Sugar Land, Texas (Southwest) to become the United States champion. The final game of the international tournament between La Mirada and Panama may have been the most dramatic with the lead changing hands five times. La Mirada won the championship game with exceptional pitching, an explosive offense and an excellent defense. La Mirada took the lead in the 6th inning with a three-run homer and fended off a final inning, two-run rally. According to everyone involved, the trip to the Junior League World Series will be remembered by the players, coaches and their 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 rise in support of H.R. 2309, the Stephen Horn Post Office Building Designation Act. This bill honors a former distinguished Member of Congress, Steve Horn. For years, Mr. Horn fought to have the City of Signal Hill get its own Zip Code. In honor of his accomplishment it is appropriate that we designate the Signal Hill Post Office after Mr. Horn. This is just one of many examples that illustrate Steve Horn's commitment and willingness to fight for his constituents. With the same vigor, it is an honor for me to be representing some of his constituents. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this bill to honor Steve Horn's commitment to public service.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2210 will dismantle Head Start and take thousands of beloved Head Start teachers from the children who depend on them.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, let me just begin first by saying that I take umbrage to comments that were made earlier from the gentleman from Florida that the female Democratic Members of the House were ``a parade of mediocrity.'' These are amazing, talented women who are not mediocre, but extraordinary women as evidenced by their passion on this issue. Having said that, I rise in opposition to this flawed rule. We are considering a bad bill, the so-called School Readiness Act, H.R. 2210, without any options for improvement. There are so many things wrong with this bill that I cannot even begin to count them. A fair rule would have allowed us to fix some of those things, like providing adequate funding to expand Head Start, especially migrant and seasonal Head Start programs, and providing scholarships for Head Start teachers. H.R. 2210 begins an irreversible process of dismantling Head Start by promoting religious discrimination in hiring, shortchanging teachers by increasing requirements and denying services to eligible children by continuing to underfund Head Start. Worst of all, H.R. 2210 puts in danger years of proven success. For what? An experiment, a so-called pilot program that does not require States to even abide by national Head Start standards or have a sound preschool infrastructure. Nearly four decades of research have established that Head Start delivers the intended services and improves the lives and the development of children and families that it serves. Head Start is about preparing children for school like Pablo Robles, a constituent of mine. It is about helping parents become better parents and advocates for their children and involved in their school work. Ultimately, Head Start is about giving low-income children an opportunity to succeed in life. Republicans are just like scam artists trying to sell us an oceanfront property in the desert, but now they are trying to sell us a phony Head Start bill. We must not fall for it, especially when it is gambling with the lives of children. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the rule for H.R. 2210 and on the underlying bill. Let us not play with the future of our most vulnerable children, like Pablo Robles.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule and to the Chile and Singapore trade agreements. I oppose these bills because of the inadequate labor provisions embodied in both. These agreements yet again point to the fact that the Bush administration is determined to undermine not only worker protections here in the United States but also abroad as well. Under the current language of these bills, only one workers' rights provision is enforceable through dispute settlement, the obligation that a country enforce its own labor laws no matter how weak these labor laws may be. These FTAs give each country involved the option to gut their current labor laws to gain a trade advantage and face no consequences at all. The FTA with Jordan proved that a trade agreement could win the support of labor, but to do so it needs to contain a commitment that each country follow the guidelines set forth in the International Labor Organization's core labor standards. The trade agreements before us today are a gigantic step backwards and are vehemently opposed by labor groups. Why in our current economic situation are we putting American workers at risk? Is it not enough that the unemployment rate has skyrocketed to 6.4 percent? Is it not enough that the Bush administration has presided over the loss of 3 million private sector jobs, has failed to raise the minimum wage, allowing millions of older workers to lose half of their private pension benefits, and has denied unemployment benefits to millions of workers who exhausted their Federal unemployment workers benefits? One would think so but apparently that is not the case. My other concern is that these FTAs create new immigration policy in the context of a free trade agreement. This is a step into unchartered territory. The fact is there is no specific authority in the Trade Act of 2002 to negotiate new visa categories or impose new requirements on the current temporary entry system, but that is exactly what has been done in the negotiations of these two agreements. I urge my colleagues to vote no on both agreements.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the motion to instruct conferees on the child tax credit. Time is running out for House Republicans to fix this mess. The GOP's irresponsible tax law leaves millions of working Americans out in the cold. It tells them quite frankly that they are simply not a priority for this administration. I am calling upon the conferees to immediately adopt the major aspects of the bipartisan Senate-passed child tax bill. Working and military families need real tax relief, not lip service. Particularly this is the case with the rising unemployment rate and our sluggish economy. The simple fact is that the economy continues to remain stagnant. The national deficit continues to rise at an astronomical rate and the unemployment rate remains at a high 6.4 percent. There seems to be no end in sight to these economic problems. Yet the Republicans continue to give tax cuts and child tax credits to the very wealthy in this country. I support the Senate-passed child tax credit bill. The bill would immediately help 6.5 million hardworking families, including many military families. In California, for example, expanding the child tax credit would help an additional 21 percent of families. One of the 4 million families that would greatly benefit from the expansion of the child tax credit lives in my district. The Ramirezes are like many families across the country that work hard to make ends meet every day and play by the rules. Mrs. Ramirez works full-time as a teacher's assistant and her husband is a mechanic. Both of them work full-time. They are raising five children on an income of $24,000 a year. I spoke to Mrs. Ramirez and she told me, quote, that any additional money that they would receive through the child tax credit that right now does not apply to them would allow her to buy clothes, school supplies and food for her five children. Times are hard for her family, she told me, so any money that they would receive back in the form of a child tax credit would greatly help them make ends meet. We must act now to enact the Senate child tax credit bill. Families like the Ramirezes need and deserve our help. They need to be a priority for this administration. Conferees must adopt the Senate- passed child tax credit bill to help these families. Republicans should stop refusing to provide hardworking families like the Ramirezes with any tax relief whatsoever. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the motion to instruct conferees on the child tax credit. Let us for once show families like the Ramirezes that they matter to this country just as much as the millionaire families do.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the motion to instruct conferees on the Child Tax Credit proposed by my colleague, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bell). Mr. Speaker, I am calling on the conferees to immediately adopt the major aspect of the bipartisan Senate-passed child tax bill. Working families need real relief, especially in these difficult economic times when we are experiencing an unemployment rate that has jumped to 6.4 percent. Amazingly, despite the sluggish economy and our moral responsibility to help working families, House Republicans continue to stall the Senate-passed Child Tax Credit bill in conference. House Republicans got us into this mess in the first place since they deliberately chose to drop the Child Tax Credit from their millionaire tax cut bill, and they should get us out of it. Starting on July 25, millionaires will be getting their rebate checks. However, 4 million families across the country will not get a single dime, even though they are in the greatest need of a tax break. One of those 4 million families lives in my district. The Wolfalks are like many families across the country that play by the rules. Mrs. Wolfalk works full time as an administrative assistant, and her husband is disabled. They are raising five children on an annual income of $25,000. Mrs. Wolfalk told me that any additional money means that her son will not have to wear shoes with holes in the soles. It means that she will be able to buy additional uniforms for her children who currently wear hand-me-downs. With this extra money her children will be able to have new uniforms for school, school supplies and books. Things are tight for her family right now, so she assures me that any additional help would make a huge difference in her family. It breaks my heart to know that Congress can do something to help these families and Republicans are refusing to provide for families just like the Wolfalks. I urge my colleagues to vote yes on the motion to instruct conferees on the Child Tax Credit. Let us show families like the Wolfalks that they matter as much as millionaires.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take my time out of order.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the so-called School Readiness Act of 2003, H.R. 2210. This bill does not provide the adequate funding for Head Start or for the much- needed expansion of early Head Start and migrant and seasonal Head Start programs. H.R. 2210 begins an irreversible process of dismantling Head Start by promoting religious discrimination in hiring, shortchanging teachers, and denying services to eligible children by continuing to underfund Head Start. Nearly 4 decades of research have established that Head Start delivers the intended services and improves the lives and development of the children and families that it serves. To illustrate how effective Head Start can be, let me tell you about one of my constituents. Ms. Robles is a single mother with three children. She works full time while her children attend school. Pablo, the youngest of her three children, has been fortunate enough to participate and be enrolled in the Head Start program. Before Pablo started Head Start, he was quiet and withdrawn, a very shy boy who was very much dependent upon his mother. Pablo is now a confident and expressive little boy. He wants to do things independently and enjoys playing puzzles and building blocks. Ms. Robles told me, ``The transformation in Pablo is amazing. I see the difference in Pablo and my other two children who were not lucky enough to participate in Head Start.'' In addition, Ms. Robles is grateful to Head Start because of the services it provides. She receives help from the social workers, including the emotional support she needed ever since leaving her family and friends behind in her country to make a new start in the United States. The nurses and teachers who participate in Head Start are also attentive and helpful to her and her children. Ms. Robles now feels she is a better mother to her children at home and a more prepared parent advocate to her children in school. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill that skimps on children, H.R. 2210. As the old saying goes, if it ain't broke, why fix it. Let us not play with the future of our most vulnerable children like Pablo Robles.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to stand before the Members today in support of H.R. 2396. This legislation designates the post office located at 1210 Highland Avenue in Duarte, California, after a courageous young marine, Lance Corporal Francisco Martinez Flores. Lance Corporal Flores was killed in the line of duty near Nasiriyah, Iraq, on March 25, 2003, protecting the rights, beliefs, and values of a Nation that he could not yet call his own. He was just 2 weeks away from gaining his U.S. citizenship, which was granted posthumously on April 6, 2003. According to the Department of Defense, an estimated 37,000 legal permanent residents are currently serving on Active Duty in our Armed Forces. These young men and women have willingly volunteered to carry out one of the most solemn duties any nation can ask of its people, and they have more than earned the right to become citizens of the Nation they have sworn to uphold and protect. Their contributions should always be remembered. Naming the post office after Lance Corporal Flores is not just a way to honor his memory, but also a small way to show appreciation and respect to the other 200 soldiers who have made the ultimate sacrifice. Each day when a person walks through the Highland Avenue Post Office located in Duarte, California, they will be able to read about this hero and remember that it is the people in their community who contribute to the freedoms that we all enjoy as Americans. I would like to thank every man and woman currently serving in the U.S. military. I hope they stay safe, and I wish them a speedy return, and I sleep better at night knowing that they are doing such a tremendous job, and I sleep better at night knowing that people like Francisco Martinez Flores are there serving our country. I urge all my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 2396.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 1, the Medicare Prescription Drug and Modernization Act. I want to thank Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey for her hard work in bringing Democratic women together to speak against the Republican's shameful Prescription Drug bill. As a freshman Member of Congress, I came here with a tremendous sense of optimism. By nature, I am an eternal optimist. But I am no fool, and the American people shouldn't be fooled either. Unfortunately, that is exactly what the Republicans are trying to do with their sham Prescription drug bill. If you believe the Republican bill solves the prescription drug crisis facing our seniors . . . If you think that seniors will get the medications they need, at a price they can afford . . . If you believe private insurance companies--the same people who brought you HMOs--will provide better coverage for seniors than a reformed Medicare system . . . or if you think you can get all the drugs your doctor prescribed, including the most expensive, at your local pharmacy. . . . Then you should be listening to that old country song by George Strait called ``Ocean Front Property.'' It goes something like this: I've got some ocean front property in Arizona from my front porch you can see the sea. I've got some ocean front property in Arizona and if you'll buy that I'll throw the Golden Gate in free. Republicans are just like scam artists trying to sell you an ocean front property in the desert. But now they are trying to sell you a phony prescription drug package. We must not fall for it, especially when this is not what seniors want. I say to my Republican colleagues, it is time to stop this heinous scam on seniors! It is time to show the greatest generation in our country the respect they deserve. After all, they are the people who served us in times of war, got us through the Great Depression, raised their children and made countless contributions to this country. Worst of all, the Republican bill ignores the reality of older women, the face of Medicare. Women constitute 58 percent of the Medicare population at 65 and 71 percent at the age of 85. Since women normally outlive their male counterparts and many women spend time out of the workforce, caring for their children and sometimes, their own parents, Medicare beneficiaries are disproportionately female. We need to make sure that every prescription is covered without a gap. Seniors, particularly women, must retain their right to see their doctor of choice. We must empower seniors to make the right choices, not insurance companies. This is exactly what the democratic plan does and exactly what seniors want. In fact, according to a survey conducted by AARP: 4 out of 5 seniors don't want the GOP proposal. Today, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues not to support H.R. 1. Let's tell the Republicans don't try to sell seniors something they don't want.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, this sham Republican prescription bill provides elderly women with nothing more than a false sense of security.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak in support of this amendment. I agree that there are some problems with our class action system, but the so-called Class Action Fairness Act is not the solution. I am particularly concerned because the bill intrudes on a specific provision of California law, one which allows State laws to be enforced by district and city attorneys as well as private attorneys general. This California law has been used successfully to protect the public from false advertising, predatory lending, fake cures for cancer and other shameful scams perpetrated by out-of-State business. For example, in People v. Life Alert, California's district attorney stopped Life Alert, the purveyors of the ``I have fallen and cannot get up'' advertisements from aggressive door-to-door sales tactics. Those tactics included refusing to leave elderly people's homes until they bought the product, and refusing to issue refunds to consumers who complained about such tactics. Unfortunately, the Class Action Fairness Act takes away California's ability to protect consumers in this way. It does so by defining private attorney general actions as class actions and removing them to Federal court. Why does this matter? Because private attorney general lawsuits are less likely to proceed if they are deemed class action lawsuits. That would force the private attorney general to certify a class when in fact he or she is bringing the suit to protect consumers from harm. In addition, Federal court is more expensive and time consuming for plaintiffs, especially when it involves greater travel. This bill is also an insult to States' rights. It usurps decisions made by States regarding their court system and their class action system. Some members of Congress talk about the importance of States' rights, but in the end it appears that that is only true when it is convenient for their purposes. Apparently federalism is not as important when consumer protections are at stake. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and to oppose the underlying bill. Voting for H.R. 1115 is like trying to address automobile fatalities by dumping gasoline into the ocean. It fails to do anything about the first problem while creating a second one. If we are going to fix the class action system, then let us do it right. This bill is not the way to do it.

Ms. LINDA SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand here and support this bill, but I just want to bring people's attention to one part of the bill in particular I am concerned about, and that is parents of legal permanent resident soldiers killed in combat who are not eligible for citizenship if they were outside the United States at the time their child was killed. Those same parents would be eligible for citizenship if they are here in the United States. It makes no sense to differentiate between the two. A parent is a parent, whether or not they happen to have gone to their home country for a short time, or whether they are in the process of waiting for a visa application renewal, or whether some other circumstances have forced them to be outside the U.S. when their child was killed. I urge the other body to correct this aspect of the bill, but I rise in support of the bill and urge my colleagues to do the same. In this country, non-citizens have worn our military uniforms and fought in our battles throughout our history. One of my uncles served in the military as a legal permanent resident during the Korean War. Now, approximately 3 percent of our military are legal permanent residents. I am a strong supporter of measures that provide opportunities for legal permanent residents serving in our military to become U.S. citizens. These individuals are making enormous sacrifices. Without being citizens, and without having the protections that status would give them, these immigrant men and women are willing to risk their own lives to defend this nation. The least we can do is give them something in return. What this bill does is to provide them the opportunity to apply for citizenship after 2 years of military service, instead of the 3 years requirement in current law. It also allows for the spouse and children of legal permanent resident soldiers, killed in action, to apply for citizenship. I commend Chairman Sensenbrenner, and other Members of the House, for introducing legislation to address this issue. I appreciate Chairman Sensenbrenner's willingness and diligence in working closely with Democrats to produce a bill that we can support. I still have some concerns with aspects of this bill, however, and hope that we are able to work out these issues. In particular, I am concerned that parents of legal permanent resident soldiers killed in combat and not eligible for citizenship if they were outside the U.S. at the time their child was killed. Those same parents would be eligible if they are here in the U.S. It makes no sense. A parent is a parent, whether or not they happen to have gone to their home country for a short time, or whether they are in the process of waiting for a visa application renewal, or whether some other circumstance has forced them to be outside the U.S. when their child was killed. I urge the other body to correct this aspect of the bill. In addition, during consideration of this bill in the Judiciary Committee, I joined with Mr. Berman in offering an amendment to provide a discretionary waiver to the Secretary of Homeland Security for three categories of people. Unfortunately, that amendment failed. I will work with Mr. Berman to encourage the other Body to include this provision in their version. Again, I applaud Chairman Sensenbrenner and other Members who have worked so diligently on this issue. I hope that, with continued work in conference with the other Body, we can produce a bill that truly honors our legal permanent resident soldiers.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this rule and to the underlying bill. For 30 years, women in this country have had the right to make reproductive choices over their bodies. H.R. 760 is a horrifying attempt to seize those hard-earned rights away from women. What this legislation claims to do is ban a medical procedure used in late term pregnancies, but it does not. Instead, this bill is drafted in such a way as to effectively ban a woman's right to choose at any point in her pregnancy. Let us be clear: this bill opens the door to outlawing all abortions, regardless of the circumstances. Furthermore, this bill makes no exception for cases when a woman's health is in grave danger or when carrying a no-longer viable fetus to term would jeopardize a woman's ability to conceive children in the future. Equally disturbing is the fact that this bill is blatantly unconstitutional. The Supreme Court has consistently ruled that, when dealing with restriction on reproductive procedures, an exception must always be made to protect both the life and the health of the mother. I cannot support a blatantly unconstitutional bill that tells women that their health or future reproductive health must be sacrificed, nor can I support a bill that has a clear ulterior motive of banning a woman's right to make choices over her own body. I am pro-choice and believe that the government should stay out of people's private, personal decisions. I will protect a woman's right to choose, and so I will vote against this unconstitutional, anti-woman's rights bill. I strongly urge my colleagues to do the same and to not slam the door on a fundamental right that women have had in this country for 30 years. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the rule and to vote ``no'' on H.R. 760.

Ms. LINDA SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, yesterday afternoon, May 21, 2003, I was not able to cast my vote on Roll Call Vote 204. That vote was on a motion to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 1911, to amend title 38, United States Code, to enhance cooperation and the sharing of resources between the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department of Defense. Had I been present for the vote, I would have voted Aye.

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California

Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to give my Special Order at this time.