[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 45 (Monday, March 9, 2020)]
[House]
[Pages H1542-H1543]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 MAKING TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO GUAM WORLD WAR II LOYALTY RECOGNITION 
                                  ACT

  Mr. SAN NICOLAS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur 
in the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 1365) to make technical 
corrections to the Guam World War II Loyalty Recognition Act.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the Senate amendment is as follows:
  Senate amendment:

       Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
     following:

     SECTION 1. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO GUAM WORLD WAR II LOYALTY 
                   RECOGNITION ACT.

       Title XVII of division A of Public Law 114-328 is amended--
       (1) in section 1703(e)--
       (A) by striking ``equal to'' and inserting ``not to 
     exceed''; and
       (B) by striking ``covered into the Treasury as 
     miscellaneous receipts'' and inserting ``used to reimburse 
     the applicable appropriations'';
       (2) in section 1704(a) by striking ``, subject to the 
     availability of appropriations,'' and inserting ``from the 
     Claims Fund''; and
       (3) by striking section 1707(a).

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Guam (Mr. San Nicolas) and the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Guam.


                             General Leave

  Mr. SAN NICOLAS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their 
remarks and include extraneous material on the measure under 
consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Guam?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SAN NICOLAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, at the risk of sounding melodramatic, today is a very 
historic day, particularly in the relationship between the United 
States and the people of Guam; more specifically, the Chamorro people 
of Guam, a generation, in particular, that endured the sufferings of 
World War II.
  Mr. Speaker, I was here about 8 months ago when I first brought H.R. 
1365 to the floor of this House after securing unanimous consent in the 
Committee on Natural Resources. And after bringing this measure to this 
floor 8 months ago and also securing unanimous consent, H.R. 1365 made 
its way to the Senate. And in going through the Senate, it was able to 
also receive the necessary unanimous support and receive a very minor 
change that brings us to the floor today.
  H.R. 1365 technically is making what would appear to be a minor 
change to language that was already enacted in the 2010 NDAA.

                              {time}  1615

  In my short time as a freshman Member of this House, I have learned 
that there is no such thing as a simple technicality. I have learned 
that the mere addition of a few words, or the subtraction of a few 
words, can make all the difference between the gravity of the

[[Page H1543]]

hurdles that you need to overcome in order to be able to enact 
legislation.
  I have learned that the language contained in H.R. 1365, while 
technical in nature, is incredibly significant with respect to what it 
means for the Members of this House to consider.
  In our process, Mr. Speaker, legislation that has certain language 
triggers certain events. H.R. 1365 is intended to allow for money that 
has been set aside to actually be paid out to the Chamorros, who 
suffered under the brutality of Imperial Japan during World War II.
  This was a process that was initiated over many decades and has 
finally come to a place where we now just await the ability to cut the 
checks. But it is in the ability to cut those checks that language 
actually gets very, very complicated, and it causes certain things to 
be reconsidered.
  The language in H.R. 1365 would, in effect, create what we know as a 
scoring here in this Congress, meaning that there may be an expenditure 
that the body would need to consider. The actual funding source of H.R. 
1365 was a set-aside of moneys that was already due to Guam and has 
been set aside over the past several years, with the money accumulating 
and being ready to be paid out to these war survivors.
  The reason why the United States is assuming this obligation, Mr. 
Speaker, is because, at the end of World War II, the United States 
absolved Japan of their obligations in order to be able to move the 
entire world forward after the conclusion of the war. In so doing, they 
also just so happened to absolve them of their obligation to make whole 
the war crimes that were endured by the Chamorro people who suffered 
because they were inhabiting the United States territory of Guam at the 
time. The people suffered beheadings, forced marches, rapes, and the 
loss of their infants in their arms.
  It has taken us now going on 76 years to finally come to this point. 
I say that this is historic, Mr. Speaker, because it, in a large 
respect, represents almost an original sin, in terms of the inability 
for us to reconcile our territorial relationships in a manner that 
really makes for plain and simple justice.
  I am deeply moved, Mr. Speaker, to be able to handle these 
proceedings today and to be able to see H.R. 1356 come before this 
House once more because, as we all know, in this current political 
environment, almost any hurdle that legislation faces is a hurdle too 
much.
  As we have gone through this process and have gotten to this point, 
there were many times when I was deeply concerned about whether or not 
something technical was going to actually be dead on arrival. But by 
the grace of God, Mr. Speaker, the small territory of Guam has been 
able to garner the unanimous support of this House, the unanimous 
support of the Senate. We are here again today addressing a matter that 
really triggers certain concerns but has gotten us to a point where we 
are able to see that there are some things that are bigger than the 
nuances of language, the semantics of procedure.
  So it is with a deep sense of pride that I stand here, as a Member of 
this House, nonvoting Delegate that I am, because I can stand here in 
witness to the fact that, at some point in time, justice really does 
find its way in the United States of America.
  I urge my colleagues to please support this measure. We are this 
close; we are just a hairline away. And in passing this House, this 
measure will then go before the President for signature, and we can 
finally make whole a generation that suffered because they were loyal 
to America.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  This is a problem that has been vexing representatives from our 
territory of Guam for many years now. I appreciate the gentleman from 
Guam, who has adequately explained what he is attempting to do and what 
this bill actually does. I congratulate him on this bill, which is 
finally going to recognize and compensate a very small group but a 
significant group of people who literally sacrificed for this country.
  This is the right thing to do. This House has done this before. This 
passed out of our committee on a voice vote. It has passed on the floor 
on a voice vote. It then went to the Senate, where the Senate felt 
compelled to make changes, as is their wont to do. And in lightning 
speed, the Senate, in only 8 months, was able to strike the 22 lines 
and return this bill to us.
  So, lest we vex them even further and ask them to do something else, 
I would urge everyone in here to give this another ``yes'' vote and 
send this on to the President's desk immediately from this floor.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SAN NICOLAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Guam (Mr. San Nicolas) that the House suspend the rules 
and concur in the Senate amendment to the bill, H.R. 1365.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the Senate amendment was concurred in.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________