Nydia Velázquez

Ms. VELAZQUEZ

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I could read it to the gentleman, but it does not say that it will require. It says that the housing authority may. That does not mean that we require them to grant an exemption, and that is precisely the difference between my amendment and the manager's amendment. Mine requires the housing authority top grant an exemption, yours gives them an option.

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. They are en bloc.

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, H.R. 2406 is the latest attack on poor families, the elderly and children. This bill includes provisions that will threaten every American's most basic and human need: Access to affordable housing. Already across this Nation 5 million households spend more than half of their income on rent. This legislation increases that burden by imposing a minimum rent of $25 to $50 a month. Although that may not seem like much, it is a fortune for many residents who have no income. My amendment ensures that needy Americans are not evicted from their homes by limiting the maximum rent to no more than $25. Additionally, my amendment provides a hardship exemption in cases where poor Americans have no income, protecting children, seniors and the disabled from being thrown out in the streets. I will urge its adoption. The faces behind my amendment are the most vulnerable members of our society. More than half are single mothers with children. They are families climbing out of homelessness and people trying to lift themselves out of a life substance abuse. They are teetering on the brink of pulling themselves up. My amendment holds out the hand that would steady them. In many States a mother and her one child may only receive $130 a month to live off of. Keeping in mind how expensive basic living necessities like diapers, toothpaste or even soap are, a $50 minimum rent is simply too high for many poor families to afford. The consequences of today's actions will create an underclass of people too poor to even live in public housing. Worse yet, with reduction for homeless shelters, the poorest of the poor will have no place to go. For a Nation that is supposed to be a leader in the industrial world, that is appealing and disgraceful. Mr. Chairman, we are asking too high a price from the poor. I call on my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote for the Velazquez amendment and end this cruel measure. parliamentary inquiry

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I offer amendments en bloc.

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Kennedy amendment. The far-right minority has inserted a shameful anti-family, anti-senior, anti-child provision into the housing bill. H.R. 2406 includes an extreme measure that would eliminate Federal preferences requiring public housing authorities to give the most needy families a place to live. As the Representative of a district with one of the highest concentration of public housing, I know firsthand how important income targeting is for the working poor. Yet this legislation will leave thousands of homeless families and seniors with no hope of finding a place to live. Without income targeting, families marking up to $40,000 a year would have access to public housing while homeless elderly, single mothers with children, and the poorest families will be left to live out in the streets. With such high stake, I cannot think of any justifiable reason to limit poor people's access to public housing. The Kennedy amendment will ensure that public housing in available for people who need it most. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to reject such harsh provisions and vote in favor of the Kennedy amendment.

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I just want to make an inquiry, in terms of the manager's amendment, where in your amendment does it state that it will require the housing authority to grant an exemption?

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds. I do agree with the chairman of the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity that everybody in public housing should pay. My amendment does not relate to that. My amendment, what it does is to protect those most vulnerable who do not have any money to pay, and we need to protect those people from being thrown out in the streets. My amendment requires the housing authority to grant an exemption. Your amendment does not provide for that, and that is why we need to protect those people who are disabled, who do not have any money, who are coming from homelessness, from being thrown out in the streets. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Jackson].

Ms. VELAZQUEZ

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, before I give my opening statement, I would like to remind Chairman Lazio that the minimum rent is not $25, to $50. That is what the gentleman is proposing in his manager's amendment. Mr. Chairman, as the representative of one of this country's largest public housing populations, I rise today to express my outrage to this bill. Many of the provisions in this legislation threaten poor families, the disabled, and seniors' most basic and human needs--safe affordable housing. Public housing in America began very differently than what it has evolved into. During the 1930's, America made the commitment that adequate housing was right, not just a privilege. To fulfill this pledge, we undertook a program that aimed to provide affordable housing for everyone who needed it. Times have changed and over the years, the Housing Act of 1937 has become antiquated and unresponsive. To address this Secretary Cisneros has undertaken changes that now allow HUD to respond to public housing's unique challenges. Mr. Chairman, repealing the Housing Act of 1937 is not that sort of change! H.R. 2406 represents a significant departure from our national commitment to the poor and needy. Gone are such safety nets as income targeting, and the Brooke amendment. Even the majority leader from the other body and the Speaker of this House have joined the bandwagon by calling public housing the last bastion of socialism and that it should be abolished. What an outrage. They should be ashamed, posturing simply for political gains at the expense of this Nation's needy is disgraceful. Decent and affordable housing is already out of reach for more than the 5 million neediest households. Let's end this charade! Housing legislation should ensure that poor people have a roof over their heads, not push seniors, children, and poor families into the street. I urge my colleagues to oppose this cruel and shameful legislation.

Ms. VELAZQUEZ

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 2715, the Paperwork Elimination Act of 1996, and to commend Chairwoman Myers for her work on this issue. In this age of growing technology, we should encourage and offer even more opportunities for small businesses to improve productivity through technology. H.R. 2715 will make it easier for many small businesses to provide information electronically to the Government, resulting in a reduced paperwork burden. I would caution though, this legislation is not the answer to all small business problems. As the use of information technology flourishes, a gap is growing larger between the technology haves and the have-nots. It is true that a great many Americans send and receive electronic mail with their personal computers. Many conduct bank transactions online, from home. The Internal Revenue Service reported that at least 11 million Americans filed their Federal income taxes electronically. But the whole truth is, the technology users I just described do not live in the lower-income communities, like mine. Most of my constituents do not have access to technology. This means many of the small businesses in my community are quickly falling into the widening technology gap. These businesses cannot afford to hire experts to develop software applications. They will not be taking advantage of the electronic option provided by this bill--let alone afford the expensive initial investment in computer equipment. Although I encourage my colleagues to support this legislation--keep in mind that we need to take this bill a step further. We must continue to look for ways that will help small, disadvantaged businesses again access to information technology. If we fail to do so, we may very well lose one of the most vibrant sectors of our economy.

Ms. VELAZQUEZ

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, the American people have spoken. The latest polls show that 85 percent of Americans are in favor of raising the minimum wage. I will say to my Republican colleagues, they have lost the battle in the court of public opinion. So what does the Republican leadership now plan to do? Instead of following the will of the American people, they are following the will of corporate America and the fat cats who have funded their campaigns. That is immoral. The latest Republican shell game will eliminate the earned income tax credit and then exclude workers without children from getting a raise. The rationale is to save $15 billion and give more breaks to big, big business. This ridiculous proposal takes working families one step forward and knocks them two steps back. My colleagues, if we want to help working families, we must insist on a clean minimum wage bill with no strings attached, and vote to raise the minimum wage without delay.

Ms. VELAZQUEZ

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, rushing this bill to the floor just to meet a publicity deadline is irresponsible. Once again we are sacrificing our people to play election year politics. Americans and their civil rights are too important to allow this. The right of habeas corpus is a national treasure. It is fundamental for all Americans--black and white; liberal and conservative. This conference report severely limits that right--all to fuel a national frenzy. My colleagues, the Constitution says we are all entitled to equal protection under the law, but in today's society some of us are more equal than others. The reality is, if you have the money to hire a good lawyer, you can make it through our legal system. But, if you are a poor minority, lacking those resources, you will lose and not have the opportunity to prove you are innocent. By severely limiting this ultimate right to appeal more innocent Americans will unfairly die. Their blood will be on your hands. I encourage a ``no'' vote on this conference report.

Ms. VELAZQUEZ

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, domestic violence is an epidemic in our country. The statistics on family violence are staggering. Each year 4 million women are severely assaulted by their current or former partners. In fact, domestic violence is the leading cause of injury to women aged 15 to 44. This national tragedy affects women from all social economic groups. However, poor immigrant women with children face unique challenges and bureaucratic hurdles. Under current law, legal residents who are in abusive relationships are not entitled to AFDC benefits or food stamps if they flee their homes to escape domestic violence. As a result, many women are forced to choose between feeding their children or being battered. The current system has failed to provide protection and equity for battered immigrant women. This unfortunate situation had led me to introduce the Fairness to Minority Womens Health Act as part of the womens caucus' Womens Health Eqauity Act. My legislation would ensure that AFDC benefits and food stamps are granted to women and their children who escape domestic violent situations. At times it is difficult for battered women to talk about domestic violence. This is especially true for language minority women who may feel intimated by counselors who do not speak their language. My bill provides bilingual family planning and counseling services. This legislation also calls for a study on violence in the lives of Latino women and their children. Gathering factual data on the causes and effects must be a priority if the true extent of the problem of violence is to be addressed. Every women should be able to escape domestic violence. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in sponsoring this historic piece of legislation. We must work to ensure that all women seeking safety for themselves and their children get the help they desperately need. It's an investment worth making.

Ms. VELAZQUEZ

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes. Mr. Chairman, today every Member of this body has a chance to show their support for our children, not just immigrant children but U.S.- born children who are U.S. citizens. In a rush to show our constituents that this Congress can be tough on illegal immigration, something much worse has been achieved. This body is about to prove how harsh it can be, not on illegal immigration, but on American children. These antichild provisions are contained in section 607, whose supposed purpose is to bar illegal immigrants from receiving benefits. I would like to remind my colleagues that illegal immigrants are already barred from receiving benefits by current law. The only law this provision can claim to change is the 14th amendment of the Constitution. The actual effect of section 607 would be to keep over 100,000 U.S.- born children from having full access to public aid programs. And as Republican Mayor Rudolph Giuliani of New York has stated, this section is ``punitive and will result in enormous costs to State and local governments.'' Mr. Chairman, our amendment fixes this problem by striking these provisions from the bill and allowing all U.S.-born children full access to benefits. If Members care about our children and about their constitutional rights, then vote ``yes'' on this amendment. This section of the bill makes it virtually impossible for many American children to receive public benefits. It creates a two-tier caste system where U.S.-born children of immigrants are treated differently from the children of U.S. citizens. This ignores the premise of equal protection, a blatant violation of these children's constitutional rights. This provision affects far more than just the children of undocumented parents. It also affects the U.S.-born children of legal permanent residents. These are American children of parents who work hard and pay taxes, who start businesses and create jobs. Under these provisions, they too would be unable to file for benefits on behalf of their U.S. citizen children. If these provisions are not removed, Congress will create a costly and overburdened administrative system. Our children will be forced to choose between a bureaucratic nightmare or relying on the kindness of strangers. This surely is a recipe for disaster. I am sure that everyone will agree that our No. 1 priority should be keeping children healthy and safe. But by preventing parents from filing for assistance on behalf of their U.S.-born children, we will be victimizing the most vulnerable members of society, our kids. By doing so, we will be devastating the future of our Nation. Let us fix one of the worst problems of this legislation. Vote ``yes'' for the Velazquez/Roybal-Allard amendment and show that this Congress truly cares about protecting the constitutional rights and welfare of our children. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to my good friend, the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Roybal-Allard], the cosponsor of this amendment.

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California [Mr. Becerra].

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote and, pending that, I make a point of order that a quorum is not present.

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 15 seconds to respond to some of the gentleman's remarks. My amendment is not about letting undocumented immigrants receive benefits. It is about keeping the U.S. Congress from creating a two- tier system that puts U.S.-born children of immigrant parents in another category and children born to U.S. citizens in another category. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California [Mr. Campbell].

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. We have heard the opposition claim that section 607 of the bill will keep illegal immigrants from receiving benefits. But current law already does that. The only thing that this section can claim to do is violate the Constitution and hurt children. If what Members want to do is to deny benefits to kids, then amend the Constitution, then say that. If we here in Congress are concerned about our children and committed to protecting family values, then vote yes on this amendment and protect the right of American children.

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 10 seconds. Mr. Chairman, this is not about undocumented aliens, this is about children. How do we value American children? Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California, Mr. Berman.

Ms. VELAZQUEZ

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my strong opposition to the conference report, not just because this is the wrong bill, but it is the wrong bill at the wrong time. No one will deny that last week's tragedy is truly regrettable, but I will urge my colleagues to respond in a level-headed manner, not with a reflex policy for the moment. Tightening a 35-year embargo will only cause more pain to these innocent people. Under the current embargo the human cost has already been too high. Cubans cannot even get basic necessities like food and medicine. How much more pain do we have to inflict on these people before it is enough? After more than 3 decades, we should be ready to admit that this embargo has failed miserably. The Castro government has survived the storm. The average Cuban looks at Fidel as a hero, and the United States Government as the enemy. Nobody wants a repeat of last week, but today's action will further isolate and deprive the Cuban people, increasing tensions and setting the stage for another violent crisis. As world leaders, we should extend a peaceful hand and keep dialog between our two countries open. It is time we live by our humanitarian ideals and stop playing the bully. If we are serious about democracy, then more dialog, not an embargo, is the answer. Mr. Speaker, we must not allow heated passion to blind us. This bill leads us down the same wrong path we have followed for 3 decades. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this conference report. We must learn to look before we legislate.

Ms. VELAZQUEZ

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, it pleases me to congratulate one of the leading multi-service organizations in the 12th Congressional District, the Brooklyn Chinese American Association [BCA] on its eighth anniversary. The Brooklyn Chinese America Association serves the vibrant Asian American community in Brooklyn through a multitude of programs including a senior citizens center, and confidential police information hot line, adult literacy and citizenship programs, employment and skills training programs, leadership training and academic tutoring for youth as well as an Asian Youth Orchestra. The Brooklyn Chinese American Association serves more than 400 clients daily in these and other programs such as through case management services and a program for the mentally retarded and developmentally disabled. These services are an invaluable contribution to the Asian American community of Sunset part, Brooklyn and to New York City as a whole. Through Brooklyn Chinese American Association's efforts, Chinese American's of Brooklyn have been able to access the information and resources needed to succeed in their new homes. Simultaneously, the tremendous talents, enterprise, and energy that immigrants have always brought to America, especially to our cities, has been untapped for all to enjoy. In the 8 years that the Brooklyn Chinese American Association has developed from a one person service project in the corner of a surrounding Asian American community of Brooklyn has revitalized Eight Avenue, opening up more than 50 new businesses. All along the way, Brooklyn Chinese American Association has been there growing with and serving the needs of this dynamic community. A year ago, Brooklyn Chinese American Association celebrated the grand opening of its community service center which houses its day care center, computer for employment skills training, classrooms for English as a second language [ESL] and citizenship classes as well as space for social services provision. Through this and other centers which are readily accessible, the Brooklyn Chinese American Association is able to accommodate the educational, employment training and social service needs of the Chinese American community in a culturally competent manner. In closing, I'd like to say that as a country of immigrants, the United States has always welcomed and encouraged immigrants to fulfill their hopes and dreams as active and contributing members of our society. Hard work and enterprise by our Nation's immigrants should be applauded and it is in that spirit, Mr. Speaker, that I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating the Brooklyn Chinese American Association and wish it much success as it works to empower the Asian American community of Brooklyn and of New York City.

Ms. VELAZQUEZ

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to the welfare conference agreement. I implore my colleagues on both sides of the isle to reject the mean-spirited provisions in this bill that will allow States to deny SSI and food stamps to immigrants living in the United States legally. This conference agreement is an insult to millions of hard-working immigrants. it is not only unfair, unjust, discriminatory, and prejudicial--it is unconstitutional. Furthermore, It is a shameful and vicious attempt to single out and penalize immigrants for the wrongs of society. In the past when the majority of immigrants looked like most of my Republican colleagues--immigration was good. Now that the majority of immigrants look like me--the radicals are pushing for laws that serve to punish those whose only crime is that they came to this country for a better life. I ask my colleagues have we forgotten that this is a Nation of immigrants? Let's not create laws that will discriminate against people who work hard, pay taxes, and serve in the military. Vote against this shameful welfare conference agreement.

Ms. VELAZQUEZ

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, today the Government is in the midst of its second shutdown. Not because Congress and the President cannot decide when and why to balance the budget. But because a radical minority does not care about the rest of America. Speaker Gingrich and company have chosen to inflict the maximum amount of pain on the American people, rather than offer solutions. Last fall Republicans talked about a contract with the American people. I ask you, what about the contract with the elderly, the children, and the Americans in need? These people will not be receiving the benefits checks that they were promised for food, shelter, and medicine--because this arrogant minority decided that it should be their way not the American way. My colleagues, these contracts with the American people were in place well before any of us came to Congress. There is so much at stake for so many Americans. We cannot allow this extreme minority to keep stalling. Stop this irresponsible governing. Let us do our job and fund the Government.