Fil-Am lawmaker Luz Bay responds to criticism for calling PH her ‘home country'
A Filipino American lawmaker in New Hampshire, Rep. Luz Bay, delivered a strong speech on the House floor after being asked why someone who called the Philippines her 'home country' was allowed to serve in the U.S. legislature.
Bay, a Democrat representing Strafford County District 21, made the statement a week after commemorating Philippine Independence Day during a House session.
'A week ago, I spoke at this very podium about the Independence Day celebration of my home country, the Philippines,' Bay said in the video. 'Shortly after my speech, I was asked how someone who calls the Philippines my home country is allowed to serve in this House.'
'I want to respond, not just for myself, but for the thousands of immigrants, new Americans, and children of immigrants, who contribute every day to the strength of this state of this country,' she added.
She responded, 'Let me say it clearly: I am here because I belong here,' Bay said.
'My constituents in Strafford County District 21 elected me under the same laws, with the same legitimacy, as anyone in this room,' she said. 'My birthplace does not make me less American. My accent does not disqualify me from public service. And my identity as Filipino American does not make me aghast.'
Bay highlighted America's immigrant history, adding: 'Unless you are Indigenous to this land, unless your ancestors walked here before borders, before colonization, before the concept of immigration even existed, you too are descended from immigrants.
'Some of our families came centuries ago, others came fleeing war, poverty, persecution, or simply searching for the promise that America holds. My story is part of that American story. It is not the footnote. It is a verse in the song of this nation,' Bay said.
Bay ended her speech by affirming her identity and what America stands for, saying it is 'a place where democracy is enriched by diversity, where freedom means the opportunity to serve, and where strength lies in our shared commitment to justice, not in the sameness of our origins.'
'I represent my district with pride. I serve this state with integrity, and I stand in this chamber with the full rights and responsibilities that come with my being an American,' Bay said.
'This is my home. This is my country, and I'm not going anywhere,' she concluded.
Many netizens expressed their pride for Bay's resolve: 'Luz, that was an articulate and powerful response to the unjustified insult spoken against you and all immigrants. You are a brilliant and important contribution to our legislature, our state, and our nation. We are honored to have you,' one netizen remarked.
Other netizens criticized the person who questioned Bay's right to serve in the U.S. legislature: 'Luz, nakalungkot na may mga racist na hindi nila alam kung saang lupalop sila nanggaling,' the netizen wrote. 'Ipinagmamalaki ka namin.'
The colleague who questioned her right to serve has not been publicly named.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Middle East Eye
an hour ago
- Middle East Eye
'Not our war': US lawmakers attempt to rein in potential strikes on Iran
Two US lawmakers in the House of Representatives have teamed up to introduce a bipartisan resolution that would compel President Donald Trump to seek congressional approval before ordering air strikes on Iran. US military engagement, alongside Israel against Iran, is largely assessed not only to lead to Iranian retaliation against US assets in the region, but also to potential US entanglement in yet another years-long war in the Middle East. Trump, in all three of his campaigns for the White House, ran on a no-to-war platform. Now, he is reportedly weighing whether to drop a 30,000-lb "bunker-buster" bomb on an Iranian nuclear facility. Republican Thomas Massie, a staunch anti-interventionist, and Democrat Ro Khanna, a progressive whose district encompasses Silicon Valley, are hoping to amass support from both parties for a vote on a war powers resolution next week. "The Constitution does not permit the executive branch to unilaterally commit an act of war against a sovereign nation that hasn't attacked the United States," Massie said in a statement. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters "Congress has the sole power to declare war against Iran. The ongoing war between Israel and Iran is not our war." In an interview with CNN on Thursday, Khanna said while he believes it's in the interest of US national security for Iran not to develop a nuclear weapon, "I don't believe that will be achieved by the United States getting dragged into a war with Iran." Both the United Nations' nuclear watchdog and the US intelligence community have said Iran is not close to developing a nuclear weapon. When pushed by CNN's Wolf Blitzer on why taking out a hidden nuclear facility - using a bomb no other country but the US has - would not be a good thing, Khanna pointed to a litany of unknowns. "We don't know how deep underground Iran actually has those bombs. We do not know how much - spread out - Iran has that capability, and we do not know how quickly they would be able to rebuild, given that they have the centrifuges and the know-how, [and] the estimates range from one to three years," Khanna said. "There has to be a diplomatic solution," he added. Trump was in the middle of a months-long negotiation with Iran towards a new nuclear deal, much like the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) that he pulled out of in 2018, when Israel began air strikes on Tehran one week ago. Some of the president's most famous and most loyal supporters on the Make America Great Again (MAGA) circuit have made it clear this week that they believe Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is trying to lure the US into a war that is none of Washington's business. 'De-escalatory vehicle' Massie and Khanna's resolution follows a similar move in the Senate by Democrat Tim Kaine, who ran for the vice presidency on the Hillary Clinton ticket in 2016. That resolution, also utilising the War Powers Act, demands a debate in the upper chamber and a vote on any US military engagement in Iran. Both votes are likely happening next week. On Thursday, Trump announced that he could take up to two weeks to decide on direct US engagement in Israel's war, but many suspect strikes could come as early as this weekend. 'We want to put every single member of Congress on public record of where they stand specifically on war with Iran' - Cavan Kharrazian, Senior policy advisor, Demand Progress The 1973 War Powers Act allows any senator to introduce a resolution to withdraw US armed forces from a conflict not authorised by Congress. The legislative branch, which acts as the country's purse, is also supposed to be the one that declares war, not the executive. But since the 9/11 attacks in particular, the foggy nature of the so-called "war on terror" has enabled the White House to call the shots, especially as Washington has carried out air strikes in countries from Somalia to Pakistan without an official declaration of war. "Presidents have consistently said that the War Powers Act is an unconstitutional infringement on the executive branch's powers," Hassan El-Tayyab, legislative director for Middle East policy with the Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL), told Middle East Eye. "What we've seen on the congressional side is really an unwillingness to force these votes in debates [and] use the mechanisms and procedural tools inside the War Powers Act, because it's just a little bit easier... these [lawmakers] would rather just let the executive branch do what it does and not have to be on the record," he added. Congress has recently twice been able to successfully push through a war powers motion - during the first Trump administration on Yemen in 2018, and again on Iran in 2020 - but the president vetoed the resolutions. So what's the point? "What's important with these resolutions is that we want to put every single member of Congress on public record of where they stand specifically on war with Iran," Cavan Kharrazian, senior policy advisor with Demand Progress, told MEE. Demand Progress, as well as FCNL, have been lobbying lawmakers on Capitol Hill to publicly take an anti-war stance along with other civil society organisations. "It's become extremely popular to criticise past disasters like the Iraq War... [and this vote] will now be an opportunity to show whether they're willing to act when it counts," Kharrazian said. And in spite of Trump's past vetoes, there was in fact no further escalation with Yemen or Iran at the time, making a war powers resolution a "de-escalatory vehicle that can help pump the brakes and prevent full escalation and full US involvement in a war of choice," Tayyab told MEE. Pressure A survey conducted by YouGov, an international online research data and analytics technology group, asked on 17 June whether US strikes on Iran would make America safer. The largest portion, 37 percent of the 3,471 US adults polled, said the country would be "less safe". Around a quarter of respondents each said they are "not sure" or that the country would "neither" feel safer or less safe. Only 14 percent said the US would be safer if the US joined Israel's war. Another poll published by The Washington Post on Wednesday found that almost half of the 1,008 Americans it surveyed oppose US strikes on Iran, with that figure dwarfing the number of people who do support military action. Trump is not looking at a green light from the public. Trump promised not to go to war. His most ardent supporters want him to keep his word Read More » That said, there is an undeniably influential pro-war bloc in Washington that has been pervasive regardless of the president and party affiliation. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (Aipac) and Christians United For Israel (Cufi) are among the leaders in this regard. Since Israel attacked Iran, Aipac has pushed for House Democrats, some of whom have shown scepticism, to issue statements saying that they stand with Israel. It has also shown particular animosity toward one Republican, Massie, who put forward the resolution of the war powers in the House. Earlier this year, an Aipac affiliate group proclaimed that 'Israel, the Holy Land, [is] under attack by Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah and Congressman Tom Massie" for his numerous votes against US military aid packages for Israel. "I mean, the pressure is real. We know neoconservatives, the pro-Israel lobby, they're leaning incredibly hard in this moment. They've leaned incredibly hard on every single moment this has come up," Kharrazian told MEE. "We're not naive on the pressures that are against us [but] from [this] past election, we've seen a tidal shift in the narrative and opposition to endless wars in a way that we haven't seen before. So we're really excited for this," to build anti-war momentum, he said. Advocacy groups are also contending with Trump's billionaire donors. Among the top five is Israeli-born Miriam Adelson, whose Adelson Foundation has also bankrolled organisations such as Birthright Israel and Friends of the IDF. "One thing that's not talked about enough is just the forces of Christian Zionism," Tayyab told MEE. "I think some of those groups believe that this is part of just some end times prophecy, which, despite how you know how off the wall it seems, it is a driving force for a lot of the decisions that are being made." That sentiment was perhaps most famously on display earlier this week when former Fox News pundit Tucker Carlson asked Republican Senator Ted Cruz about why he supports Israel. "I was taught from the Bible, those who bless Israel will be blessed, and those who curse Israel will be cursed. And from my perspective, I want to be on the blessing side of things," Cruz said. Cufi is holding its annual summit in the US capital at the end of June.
Middle East Eye
5 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
Israeli strikes on Iran: ‘You can't bomb people into a revolution' Hoda Katebi
'You can't bomb people into a revolution.' That's how Iranian-American activist Hoda Katebi describes the escalating war between Israel and Iran, following a surprise large-scale Israeli strike, and the calls for regime change emerging. She reflects on the 'disgusting irony' of those who once supported Iranian women now cheering on Israeli strikes, and how narratives like 'liberation through bombing' only strengthen authoritarian governments. In this Real Talk interview, Hoda also opens up about what she's hearing from family on the ground inside Iran, as millions are told to evacuate the capital. Middle East Eye delivers independent and unrivalled coverage and analysis of the Middle East, North Africa and beyond. To learn more about republishing this content and the associated fees, please fill out this form . More about MEE can be found here .
Middle East Eye
6 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
Times publishes column by Israeli wanted by ICC urging Trump to bomb Iran
A former Israeli defence minister with an international warrant out for his arrest has co-written a column with prominent British-American historian Niall Ferguson for The Times of London newspaper urging the US to enter Israel's conflict against Iran. Ferguson and Yoav Gallant, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for alleged war crimes in Gaza, write in the column - which was published on Friday morning - that only the US air force "has the power to finish off Fordow", the site that holds the core of Iran's remaining nuclear enrichment capability. "Israel has done most of the job - now Trump can finish it," reads the piece's headline. The Times is one of Britain's oldest and most prestigious newspapers. Since Friday, when Israel launched its assault on Iran, Israel has repeatedly targeted the country's military and nuclear facilities, as well as assassinated high-profile security, intelligence and military commanders, along with prominent scientists. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters The attacks, which have also targeted residential areas, have killed more 500 people and wounded at least 1,300, many of them civilians. In response, Iran has fired barrages of missiles towards Haifa, Tel Aviv and other major Israeli cities, killing dozens. "We both salute the extraordinary skill with which the Israel Defence Forces and Mossad have executed Israel's war plan," Ferguson and Gallant write. "Much of Iran's nuclear weapons programme now lies in ruins, and many of the scientists who ran it are dead. But one key site remains, at Fordow." 'Only America can do this' The column stresses that it is not realistic for Israel to "finish off Fordow". "Only America can do this. Only President Trump can order it." Ferguson and Gallant point to the title of Primo Levi's 1982 novel If Not Now, When?, which is "about a group of Jewish resistance fighters who desperately defy the might of the Wehrmacht on the Eastern Front in the Second World War". Could David Cameron be prosecuted for threatening the ICC? Read More » On 5 November 2024, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, also wanted by the ICC, fired Gallant from his post as defence minister, citing a lack of mutual trust between them. Gallant was the defence chief at the time of the 7 October Hamas-led attack on Israel. He led the military's response, which began as an indiscriminate aerial bombardment campaign that eventually led to a full-scale ground invasion of Gaza. At the beginning of the war, Gallant described Palestinians as "human animals" and announced the imposition of a complete siege on Gaza, cutting off all electricity, fuel and food to the enclave. Ferguson is a historian and the author of Empire: How Britain Made the Modern World (2003) and Civilisation: the West and the Rest (2011). He was a strong supporter of the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003. "A nuclear-armed Iran would pose more than a threat to the Israeli people and their state," he and Gallant say in their column on Friday. "Its missiles could reach Gulf capitals and Europe." They conclude that "with a single exertion of its unmatched military strength, the US can shorten the war, prevent wider escalation and end the principal threat to Middle Eastern stability". The White House said on Thursday that US President Donald Trump would decide within the next two weeks whether the US would get directly involved in the conflict.
