Anthony Brown

Mr. BROWN of Maryland

Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4257 creates a process to expedite land exchanges between the Federal Government and State land grant agencies. Currently, the primary method of eliminating State trust lands from conservation areas has been through legislative land exchanges, which can be time-consuming and complicated. This bipartisan bill, introduced by Representatives Stewart and Polis, offers a new way to speed up the process of removing State lands from Federal conservation areas. H.R. 4257 could incentivize State land agencies to be good partners and supporters of additional conservation legislation by removing an important barrier to new conservation designations and improving the management of existing conservation areas. Mr. Speaker, I support passage of this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BROWN of Maryland

Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Chair, I want to first thank Chairman Thornberry and Ranking Member Smith for bringing a solid, bipartisan defense authorization bill to the floor. As we consider one of the largest defense authorizations since World War II, we must demand responsible leadership from both the Pentagon and the Commander in Chief. Responsible leadership starts with fiscal responsibility. A larger budget doesn't guarantee a more capable force. We must spend our money wisely. Instead of spending money on parades and walls or cutting civilian jobs that support our worldwide mission, we should focus on modernization, warfighter readiness, and our technological edge. Responsible leadership, beginning with President Trump, must keep faith with those who serve and treat them fairly and justly. We are providing our troops with the largest pay raise in nearly a decade, but we must also honor the service of every American: the transgender soldier overseas, the Dreamer ready to defend the only country they know, the HBCU student aspiring to a national security career. And every member should be able to serve free from sexual harassment and assault. Responsible leadership requires our national security leadership team to be responsive to evolving challenges and make strategic choices. Our adversaries are attempting to shape the future. Russia is meddling in democratic elections worldwide and disregarding international borders and treaties. We cannot ignore this. Our competitors are deploying every tool--military, economic, information, and diplomatic--and so must the United States. While China has outlined strategies through 2050 to become the dominant global power, we must not hamstring our Defense Department or limit the diplomatic and development efforts. This bill gives our armed services the tools and resources they need to defend our homeland, promote our values abroad, and respond to security threats around the world. Congress is doing its part, and the administration must do its, to move from the vagaries of a Commander in Chief to responsible leadership within a strategic framework.

Mr. BROWN of Maryland

Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, there is a civil war in Syria and a humanitarian crisis that the United States simply cannot and should not ignore. Today there are some 2,000 U.S. soldiers and marines on the ground in Syria who have spent the past several years engaged in the fight to defeat ISIS. That fight has been largely successful, yet troops remain in Syria to prevent a resurgence of ISIS. U.S. forces are engaged in hostilities against ISIS, not in the Syrian civil war. Congress was informed in 2015 that our forces are in Syria pursuant to the AUMF enacted in 2001, in response to the attacks on 9/11. Although U.S. ground forces aren't engaged in the Syrian civil war, our forces have engaged Syrian forces and its regime. Last year, a U.S. Navy F-18 shot down a Syrian war plane in the collective self-defense of our coalition partners. The use of force in self-defense is unquestionably authorized, however risky that may be in potentially drawing the U.S. into armed conflict with Syria or into the Syrian civil war. In the fall of 2016, U.S. forces mistakenly and unintentionally killed Syrian troops in an air strike that was intended for ISIS fighters. Last year, the Syrian regime launched an aerial bombing with sarin, causing the deaths of nearly 100 civilians. In response to Assad carrying out these war crimes, the United States military, at the direction of President Trump, fired 59 cruise missiles against a Syrian air base. It was the air base from which the aircraft were launched to drop nerve gas on innocent women, children, men, and civilians. But that didn't stop Assad. Just 11 days ago, less than 10 days after President Trump instructed military leaders to withdraw U.S. troops from Syria as soon as possible, Assad again launched a chemical attack on more than 500 people. In response, and without meaningful discussion with Congress, President Trump, once again, ordered air strikes against Syrian targets associated with the Syrian chemical weapons program. Mr. Speaker, notwithstanding the U.S. presence on the ground and our air engagements in Syria since 2015, this Congress has never openly and formally debated the question of authorization for the use of military force in Syria. It is time for us to do our job. Assad is a barbaric, genocidal dictator. The use of chemical weapons is heinous, and the use of conventional weapons against civilians, which he is also guilty of doing, is equally heinous. Syria is a humanitarian disaster. 400,000 Syrians, most of whom are innocent civilians, are dead. These facts are not disputed. For more than 70 years, the United States has been an anchor of international security, and I believe we cannot look away when a dictator brazenly and repeatedly violates international law. The debate that is long overdue in Congress should not be limited to if, when, and how the United States should respond to the next chemical attack. Congress abdicated that responsibility in 2013 and in 2017, and I fear we are on course to do so again this year. Deliberations over how and when to retaliate against the next chemical weapons attack must be part of the larger debate that we must have about our country's goals, policies, and strategy in Syria and whether another solitary military strike would be effective. We should recognize that another military response will be hollow if not accompanied by a more robust, whole-of-government approach. We need to agree on a strategy that will permanently deter Assad from using chemical weapons, send a message to Moscow and Tehran, and push Assad to the negotiation table to achieve a lasting political solution to the civil war and humanitarian crisis. Will this approach require greater support of the secular opposition in Syria? Will we have to work with our NATO allies to intervene more purposefully to contain Assad? These are the things--the issues--that every Member of Congress must grapple with as we weigh the use of military force. The President cannot act unilaterally. I believe our ideals and principles, as well as our national security, are at stake in Syria, along with our leadership of an international system where we seek to ensure that weapons of mass destruction are never used. I believe our democracy is stronger when the President acts with the support of Congress. Mr. Speaker, let's debate and vote on the authorization to use military force in Syria now.

Mr. BROWN of Maryland

Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Madam Speaker, enough is enough. Congress has a huge list of urgent, overdue bipartisan priorities for the American people, and we can't keep kicking the can down the road. The short-term funding bill congressional Republicans passed yesterday ignores the pressing issues facing our Nation: funding the Children's Health Insurance Program and Community Health Centers; delivering needed resources to fight the deadly opioid epidemic; protecting our DREAMers from deportation; and providing disaster relief for Americans ravaged by hurricanes, mudslides, and wildfires. These issues aren't going away. We must work together to address them immediately. Yet House Republicans have passed a fourth short-term funding measure in 4 months. This month-by-month approach is reckless and dangerous for the entire Nation. It hinders our military, medical research, and infrastructure investments. It hurts seniors who depend on Social Security and Medicare and veterans getting care at the VA. We need to stop the gimmicks and the cycle of delay. This is no way to run the government. Madam Speaker, let's stop putting off for tomorrow the things we need to do today. Let's get to work.

Mr. BROWN of Maryland

Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, every day, 122 DREAMers lose their protections from deportation. Every day, 122 young people in this country still consider whether they should go to class, whether they should show up for work, whether they should put on the uniform of our military in service to our country, because every day that Congress delays and does nothing means more bright, hardworking young people who know no other home than the United States are being asked to leave or risk being arrested. Our inaction is creating an impending crisis for workforces, families, and communities around the country. We must pass a permanent, bipartisan solution to enable DREAMers to continue to live, work, and contribute to this country and that provides a pathway to full citizenship. We have seen time and time again that the overwhelming majority of Americans on both sides of the aisle in both parties agree that we should protect our DREAMers. Yesterday, 115 business leaders, including CEOs from Amazon, Facebook, General Motors, and Verizon, asked Congress to act immediately. DREAMers don't have the luxury of time. Hundreds of thousands of deserving young people are counting on us. We can't wait until March to make sure that our DREAMers are protected and included and welcomed. Mr. Speaker, the time to act is now.

Mr. BROWN of Maryland

Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, today in Israel and Palestine-- it's hard to see fertile ground for peace. Peace is cultivated by tolerance and mutual understanding; when we work to move beyond hatreds and accept paths of compromise. I'm disappointed that the Palestinian Authority has continued to fund further bloodshed and hatred by tolerating, encouraging, and even glorifying violence. They do so by making payments to those who kill in the name of hatred. This year alone, the Palestinian Authority has devoted hundreds of millions of dollars in its budget to provide payments to Palestinians in prison for terrorist attacks, and to the families of those who died while carrying out such attacks. The Palestinian system provides more money to those who serve longer sentences, meaning the more heinous the attack--the greater the financial compensation. These payments are higher than the assistance provided to Palestinians living in poverty, and is four times higher than the average salary in the West Bank. There is no question that this policy of financially rewarding convicted terrorists is abhorrent and must stop. We've heard a lot about Captain Taylor Force--a U.S. citizen, a West Point graduate, and U.S. Army veteran who had survived combat in Iraq and was studying entrepreneurship at Vanderbilt University. Like the men and women with whom I served during my 30 years in the Army, Taylor was an American patriot whose future was bright. Yet his life was stolen from him by a knife-wielding terrorist. Shortly after the murder of Taylor, Fatah--the political party of President Mahmoud Abbas-- posted a statement online praising Captain Force's attacker as a hero and ``martyr.'' Taylor wasn't murdered by a single assailant, but by a political cultural and political system that foments hatred and rewards terror. Yes, I understand the opposing arguments that seek to justify these payments or attempt to explain the context of the historic and political relationship between Israel and the Palestinians. Yet, the violence is unacceptable and cannot be supported by payments to those who commit violence. There is no reason to believe these payments will end, without strong external pressure--and year after year, the United States is the largest donor to the Palestinian Authority. The United States government is right to seek a way to convince President Abbas to end this horrible behavior that incentivizes violence against civilians and who sees this as ``an integral part of the weave of Arab Palestinian society.'' Conditioning our Economic Support Funds might finally convince President Abbas to end financial support for terrorists and their families. It's important to note that the House version of this bill preserves humanitarian democracy assistance, that has a direct impact on the daily lives of Palestinians--it will keep a network of hospitals running in East Jerusalem, allow for investments in wastewater infrastructure projects, and continue childhood vaccinations. While the Taylor Force Act aims to push the Palestinian Authority to stop rewarding hate, violence, and terrorism, we need to do more to change the underlying culture of intolerance between the Israelis and Palestinians. Congress should consider increasing alternative forms of assistance outside of our traditional programs--assistance that could counter the influence of incitements and support civil society. USAID oversees a $26 million people-to-people reconciliation fund--of which $10 million is allocated annually for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict--through its Conflict Management and Mitigation program. These grants provide funding for Israeli and Palestinian NGOs that bring people together to change attitudes and build bridges, like the Center for Shared Society that goes into schools to increase dialogue between Israeli-Arab and Israeli-Jewish youth. When I visited Israel in August, I heard directly from prominent Arab Israelis who described to me how effective these programs are. We should also support economic partnerships that promote the least ideological and most pragmatic elements of Palestinian society--like tech companies and startups--that will increase economic opportunities and improve the quality of life for Palestinians. These include the ``Peace for Profits'' initiatives. Directing U.S. taxpayer dollars towards these program, would send a loud and powerful signal that we remain invested in Palestinians and are choosing those who promote reconciliation and peace over those who support violence. The Taylor Force Act gives us an opportunity to reassess our assistance to the Palestinians. And we must do it in a way that brings us closer to peace between Israel and the Palestinians.

Mr. BROWN of Maryland

Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, the American people do not support the GOP tax plan being considered today. After promising a simple and fair tax system, Republicans offer a complicated mess. Their tax plan picks winners: the rich, and big corporations, getting nearly $1 trillion in tax cuts. They create losers, like teachers, seniors, students, people with disabilities, and working families who will pay more. This GOP tax scam also targets our Nation's veterans. More than 300,000 veterans have benefited from the work opportunity tax credit, most of whom served after 9/11. Yet this bill eliminates the tax credit and abandons our servicemembers when they return home and transition to civilian life. Today, one of every three veterans is underemployed, and 1.8 million veterans are stuck in low-wage jobs. Every single veteran should be able to get a family-supporting job at home after serving our Nation. This tax bill asks our veterans and their families to again sacrifice, this time so billionaires and big corporations get a huge tax cut. Mr. Speaker, veterans deserve a better deal and so do American working families.

Mr. BROWN of Maryland

Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of every immigrant who has been granted temporary protective status in my district and across the Nation. We have nearly 23,000 in Maryland, the sixth highest in the country, and 4,000 in my district, one of the top five districts in the country. Many people with TPS fled countries such as Haiti, El Salvador, Somalia, and Syria, ravaged by armed conflict or environmental disasters. For over 20 years, they have raised their families here in the United States. They are our neighbors and our coworkers. Their kids attend our schools. TPS holders have been woven into the fabric of our communities. Earlier this week, those from Nicaragua were told they will be deported. Those from Honduras are next. Deporting people and giving them mere months to pack their bags after 20 years in the United States is cruel and isn't who we are as Americans. Mr. Speaker, as the Trump administration puts the lives of thousands in legal limbo, I urge my colleagues to ensure TPS holders can stay and pursue an earned path to citizenship.

Mr. BROWN of Maryland

Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, I rise today against the GOP tax plan that benefits the top 1 percent by raising taxes on millions of working families. It eliminates important tax incentives for middle class families and those who strive to join the middle class. This bill would no longer allow Americans to deduct interest on student loans, making college even more expensive. By capping the mortgage deduction, it keeps the American Dream of owning your home in economically vibrant areas of my State out of reach. The bill ransacks Medicare and Medicaid by $1.5 trillion, and if you have a sick child or a family member with disabilities or long-term medical needs, you will struggle just to make ends meet. While the tax cuts for billionaires and corporations are permanent, the help for working families would disappear over time. Raising taxes on middle class families isn't the kind of tax reform our country needs. This isn't the relief they were promised. This isn't the relief they deserve. Working moms and dads can't simply hope that corporate tax cuts turn into profits that trickle down to them. Mr. Speaker, we need to invest in economic growth, not in hurting working families across America.

Mr. BROWN of Maryland

Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, 20 years ago, Congress enacted with strong, bipartisan support the Children's Health Insurance Program. It fulfilled one of the highest responsibilities we have, which is to ensure the health and well-being of our Nation's children. Children without health insurance are less healthy, they go to the emergency room for chronic conditions like asthma and diabetes, and they do worse in school. The program is extremely successful, increasing insurance coverage for children to 95 percent nationwide. Because of this, 138,000 Maryland children--and more than 8 million around the country--have received routine checkups, vaccinations, sick visits, prescriptions, dental and vision care, and emergency services. We should not only reauthorize CHIP but work together to ensure every child in America has insurance. Instead, the Republican Party is breaking the history of bipartisanship that CHIP has long enjoyed. Republicans are forcing us to choose between insuring kids and taking away coverage from 700,000 low-income Americans, raising premiums on seniors, and cutting the Prevention and Public Health Fund. Mr. Speaker, let's stop playing politics with the healthcare of our children.

Mr. BROWN of Maryland

Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, I regrettably voted incorrectly on November 1, 2017 during Roll Call No. 596, the Pearce Amendment No. 7 to H.R. 2936. I inadvertently voted AYE when I meant to vote NAY on Roll Call No. 596.

Mr. BROWN of Maryland

Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Reverend Dr. Jonathan L. Weaver on his 30th pastoral anniversary. As the pastor of the Greater Mt. Nebo African Methodist Episcopal Church, which was founded 140 years ago, Reverend Weaver provides outstanding spiritual leadership in Maryland's Fourth Congressional District and the entire region. Pastor Weaver has a deep and active faith, and lives that faith not just with words, but with deeds. He has committed his life to lifting up people--to feeding the hungry and caring for the poor, comforting the afflicted and making peace--where there is strife. He has overseen not only the church's growth, but the charitable works of more than 50 ministries that serve its members and the wider community. Pastor Weaver has led missions to Africa, serves as national president of a 500-church ecumenical association, and board chairman of the oldest and largest African-American community bank in the national capital region. Mr. Speaker, as Reverend Weaver continues his service to our community, I am confident that he will continue ``to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with our God.''

Mr. BROWN of Maryland

Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, it is hard to tell where and in what direction Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands are heading today. There is not enough food, millions are struggling to live without drinking water and electricity, and only 8 percent of the roads are open to traffic. Containers with supplies, medical supplies, and food and other commodities are sitting in containers on the docks in the Port of San Juan and are not moving towards the people and the communities that need them the most. Struggles in the Virgin Islands are less heard about but no less real. The question is whether we, as a nation, are doing all we can for the citizens of this Nation. Let's compare. After an earthquake hit Haiti in 2010, where the infrastructure was severely damaged, the U.S. military mobilized as if we were going to war. The very next morning, after the earthquake hit, an Army unit was airborne. Within 2 weeks, 33 ships and 22,000 soldiers had arrived, and more than 300 helicopters were delivering millions of pounds of food and water, not just to the port, but the people of Haiti. By contrast, today, there are fewer than 14,000 military personnel assisting in relief efforts in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, and there are only 88 helicopters and only 4 naval ships, one of them the USNS Comfort that are aiding 3.5 million Americans--3.4 million Americans in Puerto Rico, 100,000 Americans in the Virgin Islands. In Haiti, Mr. Speaker, we airlifted 15,000 U.S. citizens in 2010 after the earthquake, but in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, we are unwilling to evacuate a single American, even those who have relatives and friends in the many communities across the 50 States of this great country. As Americans are starving and Americans are desperate, our response needs to be more vigorous. Now, let's be sure, the military is doing what we are asking them to do. This is not a criticism of the military not doing what we are asking them to do, but the White House is not asking the military to do enough. Mr. Speaker, the President must lead on this issue. We have got dedicated members of the Army, Air Force, Navy, Marines, and Coast Guard who are willing, ready, and able to be in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands to deliver the relief to our neighbors and our citizens. We need to ask the Department of Defense to send more engineers, more transportation companies, and expeditionary sustainment battalions. Yesterday, I asked a senior military leader: How many pontoon bridges have been erected in Puerto Rico to cross those washed out roads? Zero. How many miles of power transmission lines have been reestablished to get electricity out to more communities? The answer is zero. We have military engineers on the ground, but they have not been asked to do that. We need to direct our military to provide the direct services on the local or, in military parlance, on the tactical level. I am not talking about long-term rebuilding of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands by the United States military. I am talking about directing the Department of Defense to establish the minimum infrastructure necessary to do the job that we should be asking them to do, which is to provide relief to 3.5 million Americans in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. Strategic movements are good, military assessments and evaluations help, but what is needed is no less than what was done 7 years ago in Haiti. Mr. Speaker, the President must lead on this issue, and the President must ask our military to do more.

Mr. BROWN of Maryland

Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, 3 days after Congress allowed the Children's Health Insurance Program to expire, this House once again passed a bill that restricts women's health and reproductive rights. This should not be the time to prioritize politics. Women should be able to make their own choices about their bodies and their healthcare. Over the past 40 years, the Supreme Court has affirmed a woman's constitutional right to privacy, including the right to choose. Not only is the 20-week ban imposed by this Congress not based on accepted science, but this ban disregards the role doctors play in making health decisions. In States that have already passed this ban, young people, women of color, low-income women, and immigrant women are the ones who are most impacted by the ban. If we care about women's health, we should work to reduce unintended pregnancies, expand access to contraception, and support maternal and children's health. Instead, the majority is slashing Medicaid, attacking Planned Parenthood, and passing bans. Not me. I will remain committed to protecting women's health and supporting the constitutional right to choose.

Mr. BROWN of Maryland

Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend from Virginia for yielding. I rise in strong support of the Congressional Black Caucus budget, which is a more responsible alternative than the GOP budget. A nation's budget reflects its priorities, but the GOP budget continues to push the wrong ones, catering to the wealthy and the special interests. The GOP likes to say that a rising tide lifts every boat, but that is only if every vessel is seaworthy. The GOP budget leaves too many Americans in dinghies, rubber rafts, and rowboats, subject to being capsized. It includes trillions of dollars in irresponsible cuts, such as $5.4 trillion slashed from job-creating programs; $2 trillion cut from Medicaid and Medicare; $5 billion eliminated from investments in education, research, and infrastructure that will prevent us from competing globally. The GOP budget would devastate our economy by balancing the budget on the backs of students, workers, seniors, the disabled, and vulnerable communities in Maryland and across our country. And for what? To provide tax cuts to the top 1 percent--people who make at least $900,000 every year. In stark contrast, the CBC would create a fairer Tax Code and provide for much-needed investments in our communities. Our budget would boost our GDP by $329 billion. I, too, Mr. Chairman, served on the House Armed Services Committee, and I stand here to say that the CBC's budget would end sequestration for our military so that we can improve military readiness and, at the same time, restore critical domestic programs that support working families and revitalize our neighborhoods. Rather than giving the top 1 percent a $6 trillion tax cut, our budget would call for major investments here at home. We invest $665 billion to modernize highways and infrastructure, $120 billion in job- creating programs, $80 billion so that every child learns in a modern classroom, and $15 billion to rebuild our VA. Perhaps, most importantly, Mr. Chairman, we invest $300 billion over the next decade to eradicate poverty and provide basic standard of living to all Americans. Mr. Chairman, our budget responsibly pays for all of our investments. Our budget is a credible alternative and a real plan for America, and I urge my colleagues to support the CBC budget.

Mr. BROWN of Maryland

Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, by ending DACA, President Trump made our immigration system less fair and just for our young people. These DREAMers study in our schools and work on our Main Streets. They are Americans, and the United States is their home. It makes no sense to deport them simply because of the actions of their parents. This decision is so contrary to our American values that even business leaders and faith leaders called on the President not to do it. My grandmother came to this country from Jamaica as a domestic worker and, for a period of time, was undocumented. She did this so that my father could become the first member of our family to go to college. He repaid his mother and this country by becoming a doctor and working in some of the poorest neighborhoods near where I grew up. My father pursued the American Dream and, in turn, contributed to the greatness that is America. Kicking these DREAMers out won't create jobs or make our neighborhoods safer. That is why we must pass the Dream Act. It is the right thing to do for our economic competitiveness, military readiness, and public safety. We have legitimate disagreements on how to fix our immigration system, but let's not hold our DREAMers hostage. It is time for Congress to pass the Dream Act now.

Mr. BROWN of Maryland

Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Chair, during rollcall Vote No. 493 on H.R. 3354, I mistakenly recorded my vote as ``yes'' when I should have voted ``no.'' Amendment No. 105 Offered by Mr. Grothman

Mr. BROWN of Maryland

Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, President Trump's immigration policies are unpopular. They don't protect our national security and don't promote our ideals as a nation. Nowhere is that more apparent than his repeated calls for a border wall. This wall is so unpopular and nonsensical that the House has now resorted to funding it without even a straight up-or-down vote. Why are they doing this? Not only to give the President a much-needed win, but to fool the American taxpayer who was repeatedly promised that Mexico would pay for this wall. The border wall is expensive and unnecessary. It is opposed not only by a huge majority of Americans, but also by those living on the border. Now, Members of Congress are being forced to choose between voting for the wall and voting to fund our military. I support our servicemembers. I spent 30 years in Active and Reserve Duty. I am a member of the House Armed Services Committee. I want to improve the readiness of our Armed Forces, but I cannot and will not support a multi-billion dollar wall that Members of both sides of the aisle now know is unnecessary and ineffective. I will not throw away $1.6 billion to feed the President's ego. On this issue, the American people deserve to know exactly where their representatives stand.

Mr. BROWN of Maryland

Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this House discriminating against transgender Americans and restricting their ability to serve our country, saying now is not the time for a social experiment. I firmly believe that the privilege and responsibility to defend our country should not be denied to anyone based on gender identification. Prior to the 1950s, the ``not a social experiment'' argument was used to deny African Americans from fully participating in our military. Today there is a long history of service and heroism by African Americans, including Generals Colin Powell and Vincent Brooks. Prior to 2010, the ``not a social experiment'' argument was used to keep gays and lesbians from full participation in our military. Today there is a long line of distinguished service by gay and lesbian servicemembers, including Generals Randy Taylor and Tammy Smith. Today there is a long line of transgender servicemembers who are ready to distinguish themselves. I welcome their service and appreciate their willingness to sacrifice for our Nation. As a Member of Congress, I will never deny that privilege and responsibility to those who want to serve.

Mr. BROWN of Maryland

Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Chairman, first, let me start by thanking Chairman Thornberry and Ranking Member Smith not only for their leadership but the bipartisan collaborative approach to the work of the committee. Certainly as a new member of the 115th Congress, I find that very refreshing. From what I have seen, it is no surprise that 50-plus years in a row we have successfully passed the NDAA. Mr. Chairman, the United States faces serious security threats: aggression from North Korea and Russia, long and costly campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq, and new battlefields in cyberspace and in outer space. After years of sequestration, there is consensus certainly in the House Armed Services Committee that Congress must address readiness shortfalls and modernization challenges facing our military. So in the NDAA, we made greater investments in training and equipping the forces and prioritized projects that extend our technological and warfighting edge. But increasing defense authorizations and appropriations, absent a clear national security strategy, will not make our country safer. We need a smart, strategic approach to national security that provides clear goals and objectives and that incorporates an all-of-government approach. That means not only increasing defense spending, but also ensuring funding for the State Department and USAID and reversing proposed cuts to nondefense programs that make the world more stable and secure. We owe it to our servicemen and -women to provide them with both the resources to accomplish their mission abroad and to pursue the American Dream when they return home, and that is good schools, family- supporting jobs, and safe neighborhoods. We cannot do one at the expense of the other. The long-term success of our country depends on that.

Mr. BROWN of Maryland

Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3003, a partisan bill that seeks to punish so-called sanctuary cities, strikes at the heart of community-based policing efforts vital to public safety. Under this bill, States and counties where local police focus on community priorities rather than immigration enforcement would be punished, losing millions of dollars that could be used to build up communities, improve our Nation's infrastructure, and strengthen local government. Moreover, this bill would jeopardize public safety by discouraging people from trusting law enforcement, sharing information, or reporting crime. Across the country, most police chiefs have expressed serious concerns about policies that may lead to racial profiling or requiring their officers to break up families. They have said that immigration enforcement should remain a Federal responsibility. Instead of forcing local police to act as immigration officers, we should work on passing comprehensive immigration reform that includes a pathway to citizenship for aspiring Americans. And if we truly want to makes the streets of America safer, Congress should act to strengthen bonds between community and police, invest in mental health and substance abuse services, reduce gun violence, and reform the criminal justice system.

Mr. BROWN of Maryland

Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, last year's Presidential election was the first in 50 years without the full protections of the Voting Rights Act. What was the result? Fourteen States had new voting restrictions, including strict voter ID, cuts to same-day registration and early voting, and fewer polling places. This suppressed the vote, particularly among voters of color and in poor communities, and had a major impact in close races in North Carolina, Virginia, and Florida, according to the Brennan Center for Justice. The Voting Rights Act once enjoyed bipartisan support, and Congress should, once again, come together to modernize the law and respond to the Supreme Court's objections. Yet despite calls to pass legislation for the past 4 years, nothing has happened. Voting is a right, not a privilege, and there is no debating that point. The Founders in Philadelphia, women at Seneca Falls, and marchers in Selma all recognized the power of the vote. When we protect the rights of voters to make their choices, whatever they may be, we do our part to build a more perfect union. We can't wait for the next election. Congress must restore the full protections of the Voting Rights Act now.

Mr. BROWN of Maryland

Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, I take to the floor of the House today in opposition to H.R. 10, the so-called Financial CHOICE Act, which is more appropriately called the ``Wrongful'' CHOICE Act. Nearly a decade since the beginning of the financial crisis, my district is still dealing with the consequences of irresponsible, underregulated financial institutions targeting toxic subprime loans to unsuspecting borrowers. In Prince George's County, one-quarter of all mortgages were subprime. Nationally, Black homeowners were disproportionately affected by the foreclosure crisis, 80 percent more likely to lose their homes compared to other families with similar incomes and lifestyles. We later learned that several big banks had deliberately given people of color subprime mortgages. One such scandal-ridden bank, Wells Fargo, offered cash incentives for loan officers to peddle these, what they called ghetto loans to who they called mud people; in other words, Black customers, often single mothers. For families in my district, it wasn't just about losing your home. An entire generation of wealth was wiped out. The financial foundation for future generations collapsed and may never be rebuilt. Families can't start a family, save for college, or set aside for their own retirement. In the wake of the crisis, Democrats in Congress said, never again, and we took needed action to ensure that this sort of abusive behavior would never be repeated. We passed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to protect American consumers from the types of practices that led to this crisis. Now, even as the big banks, the creators of the financial crisis, are making record profits, the Financial CHOICE Act would once again give Wall Street permission to swindle working families and destroy the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. This would be extremely harmful for hardworking Americans across the country. Since its founding, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has been a powerful ally of the little guy. It has delivered nearly $12 billion in relief to more than 29 million consumers harmed by predatory lenders, big banks, abusive debt collectors, and outright scammers. Our Nation's veterans and military families have been some of the major beneficiaries of the agency's work. The agency worked with state attorneys general to secure debt relief for 17,000 servicemembers tricked into taking out high-cost loans. It ordered Navy Federal Credit Union to pay $28.5 million for using illegal debt collection practices. It is suing Navient, the Nation's largest student loan company, for illegal practices against millions of borrowers, including severely injured veterans. The Bureau has also addressed the discriminatory practices that impact communities of color in the financial system head-on. The agency acted against Ally Bank, Honda, and Toyota for charging higher interest rates for African-American, Latino, and Asian borrowers regardless of their credit score. It strengthened protections for families who depend on prepaid debit cards for their wages and often fall into a spiral of debt from payday and auto title loans. The Bureau continues to target banks who are denying loans to qualified borrowers of color across the country. Let's be clear: the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is truly living up to its name. Mr. Speaker, nobody should want to return to a system that failed us and produced the financial crisis that damaged so many lives. Too many families and communities still carry the devastating scars of 2008, but that is exactly what the Financial CHOICE Act is trying to do. A rigged system is what led to the financial crisis, big banks got bailouts and sweetheart deals, and ordinary people suffered. That is why I am determined to oppose the Financial CHOICE Act, which seeks to roll back Wall Street reform and eliminate the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Voting against this bill is the right thing to do for my district and it is the right thing for America.

Mr. BROWN of Maryland

Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Madam Speaker, Richard Wilbur Collins III was ready to graduate from Bowie State University yesterday. He just finished Army ROTC, was airborne qualified, and was just commissioned a second lieutenant in the United States Army's intelligence branch. His father is a Navy veteran, and Richard wanted to follow in his footsteps and commit his life to serving our Nation. He was ambitious and driven. His calling was to protect our country and to do what is right and just. He loved soccer and lacrosse. He was the top runner in his ROTC unit. His Facebook page was filled with selfies with his friends. He was active in his church. His friends and family said that he had a loving and giving heart and would go out of his way to try and help others. On Saturday morning, while waiting for an Uber ride with two friends at the University of Maryland, he was approached by another student who demanded that he ``Step left. Step left if you know what is best for you.'' Richard simply replied, ``no.'' The other student stabbed him in the chest and fled. Richard died in the hospital. His bright future was stolen. His parents were robbed of their son. Our hearts are broken. This tragedy exposes a dangerous rising tide. This incident was not some random act of violence. It was a heinous, despicable, and unprovoked crime of hate. Richard Collins' murderer--who was from a middle class family, who hung out at the student union and library--was a member of a racist neo-Nazi group called Alt-Reich Nation. He was not some outsider. He was a homegrown terrorist who was radicalized on the university campus. What is most troubling is this isn't the first incident of hate at the University of Maryland. This academic year alone, there have been anti-immigrant chalkings, racist fliers, threats, and, less than a month ago, there was a noose found inside a campus fraternity house. But this isn't just a troubling trend at the University of Maryland. There has been an unprecedented spike in racist and hate activity on campuses since November. Posters at the University of Texas implored students to report any and all illegal aliens, that America is a White nation. Another flier, with swastikas, at UCLA read, in part: ``the hordes of our enemies from the Blacks to the Jews are deserving of fates of violence.'' Hate watch groups have tracked 150 racist incidents on college campuses in 33 States since the fall. Just a year ago, it was such a rarity that no one was even counting. Peddlers of hate are specifically targeting college campuses, declaring that their time has come, and trying to lure students with slogans like ``serve your people'' and ``our destiny is ours.'' They are working to translate their online activism to real-world action, and young people are prime targets, in part, because they are still figuring out who they are and what they believe. One would have to be purposefully obtuse to not see a direct line from the recent elections to the emboldening of these perpetrators across the country. Longtime White supremacist Jared Taylor described the November election result as a ``sign of rising White consciousness'' and that ``now is the time to press our advantage in every way possible.'' So, today, I am calling on the administration--that has repeatedly failed to denounce the hate crimes directed at Jews, members of the LGBT community, or immigrants--to denounce the hate-fueled killing of a Black soldier, Second Lieutenant Richard Collins. The reaction to Collins' murder is often formulaic. We extend our condolences and sympathies, call the killing a senseless tragedy, and proclaim that we won't tolerate these incidents. That is not good enough. If this escalation of hate is going to end in Maryland and across the country, it will be because all of us take a stand not only against the hard right and hate festering on campus, but to leaders who have been too content to remain silent and look the other way. Hate speech is not protected. Encouraging open academic debate cannot lead to inaction that creates a breeding ground for prejudice, discrimination, and violent hatred on our college campuses or anywhere. Campuses should adopt successful strategies: Consider zero-tolerance policies for hateful speech and acts of racism. Maybe if students know that they will be expelled for spreading racial slurs online, they will think twice; Replicate the University of Massachusetts. They have a hate SWAT team that counters hateful messages through an early alert system, a counter-messaging response team, and counselors on call; Or promote more diverse voices in the faculty and staff. Pretending that the murder of Richard Collins in cold blood is an isolated incident will only make the situation worse. Diversity and unity--that American melting pot that is the foundation of our Nation-- can only happen when the country does a better job confronting hate in all forms. We cannot simply start when students arrive on campus. In the absence of real change, we take to the streets; we protest; we hold vigils. But Richard Collins deserves better. Our children deserve better. Let us work together, and let's not wait for another tragedy. Farewell and Godspeed, Lieutenant Collins.