-9999

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HEINRICH. I am extremely grateful to the women who have courageously stepped forward. Many, like Dolores Huerta, feared that speaking up would enable those who had always opposed the workers movement to erase it, along with Cesar Chavez, and I stand here today to ensure that is never the case.

The movement Dolores Huerta and so many others fought for was bigger than any one man, and when we learn shocking or terrible things about our history, the right answer is to tell the truth, never to hide it.

I am concerned that what my colleague from Texas is proposing could do just that--hide the truth about Cesar Chavez and, unfortunately, the incredible farmworkers movement with it.

The legislation that Senator Cornyn is asking us to approve today would not only abolish the Cesar Chavez National Monument, it could erase the foundational history of the farmworkers movement in the process. It would follow through on the threat that silenced the survivors of Chavez's abuse.

Let me be clear. I agree unequivocally that we should no longer have a monument named after Cesar Chavez, but we absolutely should not erase the monument's telling of the story of the farm labor movement. That is a story that belongs to many people, including the survivors of Chavez's violence.

Abolishing the monument would serve only to sweep his violence under the rug, and it would sweep the stories of Americans involved in the farmworkers movement under the rug with it. This is a movement that wasn't just founded by a single man; it was a movement because it was propelled by the many. Among those leading it was Dolores Huerta, a native New Mexican and a hero to an entire generation of Hispanic and Latino men and women alike. If we erase this monument, we also erase her work, her legacy, and the countless other leaders in this photo from the monument.

The monument may be named after one man, but we can change that, and we can change that without erasing the history of tens of thousands of American farmworkers across decades, including the history of his victims. That is an effort that is, in fact, already underway-- expanding the mission and scope of the monument to encompass more of the histories of the farmworkers themselves. This includes incorporating the stories of Filipino Americans in California whose long history of advocacy and activism for farmworkers' rights deserves to be remembered and lifted up.

The rich legacy of farmworkers in building and sustaining this country is proof that a national monument dedicated to their story and their movement for fair labor practices should persist.

The question is, What should happen to this monument? What should happen to it next should include input from survivors and from other Americans involved in the farmworkers movement. I do not know, frankly, what they will say, but I do know what I have already heard.

Yesterday, I received a letter from multiple organizations that included the Hispanic Access Fund and the Asian and Pacific Islander Americans in Historic Preservation. What those groups made clear is that they do not support abolishing this national monument, saying that it would ``erase the nationally significant story of the broader Farmworker Movement, including the many leaders, activists, and workers who fought for dignity and fair wages.''

These groups just want a voice in what happens next, and they point out quite clearly that the legislation being considered now was crafted without having that conversation with all the affected communities.

That is why I will ask to amend my colleague's proposal to instead temporarily close the monument and require the National Park Service to complete a new special resource study for the monument in consultation with all of those who are part of the farm labor movement, including the survivors of Chavez's violence.

The study should consider what sites and properties are appropriate to include in a farm labor movement monument. This is what we need to ensure that the monument is focused on honoring and reflecting the full story of the farmworkers movement, not Cesar Chavez.

I would ask unanimous consent that the Senator modify his request to include my amendments at the desk; further, that the bill, as amended, be considered read three times and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

I also think we should tell that story, not sweep it under the rug, and more importantly, tell the stories of the victims and the stories of the people who made that movement successful in standing up for human dignity. We should engage the survivors. We should engage all the communities that were part of that movement. And we should take this as an opportunity to tell that story fundamental to the American experience.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source