John Conyers

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Johnson), a distinguished member of the Judiciary Committee.

Mr. CONYERS. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield the balance of my time to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Chu), a distinguished member of the Judiciary Committee, to close the debate on our side.

Mr. CONYERS. Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to announce that I have reintroduced the Humphrey-Hawkins 21st Century Full Employment and Training Act of 2013. It is my hope that with the reintroduction of this bill, Congress will begin to examine the idea that the federal government has a significant role to play in putting America back to work, especially during our current economic downturn. Noted economists have shown that the private sector alone will not be able to create a full employment economy in the foreseeable future. The Federal Government must use its full authority and powers to put Americans back to work. In our nation, we have far too many people desperately seeking a full-time job. These people are veterans, construction workers, young men and women, and those who have lost their jobs to unfair foreign competition. We know the financial pressures and personal hardships that result from being unemployed for long periods of time: the loss of one's dignity, housing and food insecurity, loss of health insurance, homelessness, marital problems, and the inability to care for one's self or family. During the Great Depression, President Roosevelt struck a New Deal that put millions of Americans back to work building roads, schools, community centers, dams, bridges, parks, and electrification systems. In this program, many women were employed constructing blankets for our nation's hospitals, and our troops who fought in World War II. President Roosevelt was resolute in the idea that every American who wanted a job should be able to have one. I also share this view. Help provide an unemployed man or woman with a job, and their lives come together, and they regain their dignity and sense of self-worth. People just do better when they are working. It is just that simple. There is no reason why America cannot have a 21st Century New Deal, where unemployed Americans become gainfully employed restoring our communities, assisting people in need, and repairing our crumbling infrastructure. This is what the Humphrey-Hawkins 21st Century Full Employment and Training Act of 2013 seeks to accomplish. Under the Act, the Department of Labor would work collaboratively with local and state governments, non-profits, and the private-sector to fund community-based ``fast track'' jobs. This work could include renovating housing and schools, weatherizing homes, fixing our aging infrastructure, expanding access to broadband and wireless Internet, neighborhood beautification projects, or other community initiatives in the health and education sectors. It is apparent to me that the next wave of significant job growth will be in the green jobs and clean energy sectors. The Humphrey- Hawkins 21st Century Full Employment and Training Act of 2013 would help pay for the training of workers to install solar panels in houses and buildings, or manufacture wind turbines, electric batteries, and electric cars. Funds could be used to train workers to build roads, bridges, levees, and clean mass transit systems such as electric bus and metro rail cars. The bill would provide cities and states with the needed funding to pay unemployed inner city youth and adults to rebuild our nation's crumbling and dilapidated schools, housing, and neighborhoods. There are so many youth whose lives are needlessly ruined, because they cannot envision a future that includes dignified work. I truly believe young people could be steered away from costly lives of crime if they believe they will be able to have a meaningful career. We need more jobs, not jails. Think about all the unemployed people in America who could be employed in the field of child care, working as preschool teachers, or assisting our nation's seniors and disabled in their own homes. Under the Humphrey-Hawkins 21st Century Full Employment and Training Act of 2013, there would be a significant increase in funding for job training programs funded under the Workforce Investment Act. Funds would go towards successful programs like the Job Corps, which would be expanded to provide additional job training and job placement opportunities. Funds would automatically continue to be disbursed from the Act's Full Employment and Training Trust Fund to cities and states, until every American worker who wants a job can find one. Additionally, the act will be fully funded by a tax on Wall Street speculation, and will not add a dime to the federal debt. I respectfully urge my fellow colleagues on both sides of the isle to consider supporting the Humphrey-Hawkins 21st Century Full Employment and Training Act of 2013. The American people need jobs now.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to note the passing on February 4, 2013 of National Endowment for the Arts Jazz Master, Dr. Donald Byrd. Dr. Byrd was my dear friend, and a fellow Detroiter. He will be deeply missed by his family, friends, jazz patrons, and musicians around the world. They admired his creative musical genius, kind heart, and down to earth nature. Dr. Byrd was a master trumpeter, composer, bandleader, recording artist, educator, and a highly innovative jazz musician. He was a creative force in music for over six decades, and left his mark on several modern jazz styles and related genres including Hard Bop, Soul- Jazz, Fusion and Hip-Bop. Byrd, who was a cutting-edge academic, was also instrumental in establishing jazz as a viable course of study in several universities and colleges throughout the nation. Dr. Byrd was born Donaldson Toussaint L'Ouverture Byrd II in Detroit, Michigan on December, 9, 1932. Mr. Byrd learned to play the trumpet while growing up in Detroit, a city which produced many other accomplished jazz artists including Barry Harris, Thad and Elvin Jones, Kenny Burrell, Yusef Lateef, Paul Chambers, Tommy Flanagan and Betty Carter. Dr. Byrd attended Cass Technical High School, whose advanced musical curriculum produced a multitude of jazz stars, including renowned vocalists Geri Allen and Regina Carter. Influenced by jazz trumpet players Dizzy Gillespie and Clifford Brown, Byrd joined the Lionel Hampton Orchestra before completing his degree at Cass Tech. He went on to play in the United States Air Force Band, earn a bachelor's of music degree from Wayne State University, and earn a master's degree from The Manhattan School of Music. While at the Manhattan School, Donald Byrd joined Art Blakey's ``Jazz Messengers,'' replacing legendary jazz trumpeter Clifford Brown, and further establishing the great Messenger trumpet tradition that included Lee Morgan and Freddie Hubbard. In 1955, Donald Byrd recorded with fellow rising jazz musicians Jackie McLean and Mal Waldron. He left the Jazz Messengers in 1956, and then performed with many leading jazz musicians of the day, including John Coltrane, Sonny Rollins and Thelonious Monk. Donald Byrd also had an eye for new talent, hiring Herbie Hancock to play in his band. Byrd co-led a quintet with fellow Detroiter and baritone saxophonist Pepper Adams, from 1958 to 1961. A prolific recording artist, Byrd recorded as a leader on the Verve, Columbia, Transition, and Prestige labels. In 1959, Mr. Byrd signed with Blue Note Records, and released his first album for the Royal Flush label, where he recorded over twenty albums. These albums include ``A New Perspective,'' ``Free Form,'' ``Fancy Free and Electric Byrd''--all of which highlighted Byrd's inspired and innovative forays into the soul-jazz period of the 1960s. In 1963, Byrd studied composition with the famed classical instructor Nadia Boulanger. But it was in the late sixties and early seventies, when Miles Davis would help to launch the fusion era of Jazz, that Byrd enjoyed his most successful period as an artist. Byrd's 1973 album, ``Black Byrd,'' married jazz improvisation to R&B styles, and became the highest grossing Blue Note album of all time. This successful album was followed by ``Street Lady,'' ``Places,'' and ``Spaces,'' and ``Caricatures.'' In the 1980s, Byrd recorded on the Elektra Records label, with a new ensemble called the 125th Street Orchestra. Donald Byrd also made several contributions to higher education in his lifetime. He was the founding director of Howard University's Jazz Studies Program. Mr. Byrd also recruited several of his prize pupils to form the musical group The Blackbyrds, who enjoyed considerable success with their hits, ``Walkin' in Rhythm,'' ``Rock Creek Park,'' and ``Happy Music.'' Byrd was also instrumental in establishing highly respected jazz studies programs at a number of schools including North Carolina Central University, Rutgers University, Hampton University, Oberlin, New York University, Cornell University, Queens College, and Delaware State University. Byrd also served on the Board of the National Jazz Service Organization. He joined the distinguished ranks of NEA Jazz Masters in 2000, along with Dr. David Baker and Marian McPartland. Unlike most jazz artists who ignored the developing rap and hip-hop music scenes, Donald Byrd was a major supporter of those forms. Many of his songs have been sampled by rappers. Byrd's collaboration with rapper Keith Elam on the 1993 album ``Jazzmatazz'' provided the template for jazz and hip-hop artists to work together. Byrd also participated in another high profile, jazz-rap collaboration, the 1994 compilation, ``Stolen Moments: Red, Hot + Cool.'' In addition to his master's degree from Manhattan School of Music, Byrd earned two master's degrees from Columbia University. He received a law degree in 1976, and a doctorate from Columbia University Teachers College in 1982. He was an avid collector of African-American art, and a licensed pilot. Dr. Byrd resided in Teaneck, New Jersey. As we honor the life and career of this great artist and educator, one thing remains clear: that the pioneering work and artistry of Dr. Donald Byrd has provided a rich legacy of jazz music for our youth to build on and carry forth for future generations.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. I would now be pleased to yield to the gentlelady from Texas, Ms. Sheila Jackson Lee, as much time as she may consume.

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to join in this Special Order, a bipartisan one, in which I thank my judiciary colleague and former chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Jim Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin, for joining me in this discussion, as well as Congressman Bobby Scott of Virginia, also a distinguished member of the Judiciary Committee and former chairman of the Subcommittee on Crime. Members of the House, just days before the anniversary of the Edmund Pettus Bridge march from Montgomery to Selma--and by the way, our colleague, Congressman John Lewis, was the only Member of Congress who was in that march--the Supreme Court will review Congress' authority under the Constitution to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act, specifically section 5 of that act. I believe and I am confident the Supreme Court will and should uphold the constitutionality of Congress' authorization of section 5 for three reasons. The first: Protecting minority voting rights is a constitutional imperative that Congress is required to enforce. When Congress acts under the 15th Amendment to the Constitution, it acts at the zenith of its constitutional authority. The Supreme Court has consistently upheld Congress' authority under the 15th Amendment. The 15th Amendment gives Congress a mandate to eliminate racial discrimination in voting by appropriate legislation. After almost a century of ineffective protection for minorities, and in the long wake of the Civil War, Congress took action to pass the 15th Amendment, and almost a hundred years later passed the Voting Rights Act, which included section 5. Protecting minority voting rights is something Congress can do, and this authority has been repeatedly affirmed by the United States Supreme Court. For almost 50 years, the Supreme Court consistently affirmed Congress' authority to protect minority voting rights under section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Legal challenges to section 5 are nothing new to Congress, and are nothing new to the Court. Legal challenges to section 5 of the Voting Rights Act have routinely been made after Congress has reauthorized temporary provisions. The Supreme Court first affirmed the constitutionality of section 5 in 1966. In the case of South Carolina v. Katzenbach, the Supreme Court upheld the Voting Rights Act, including section 5. The Court in that decision cited Congress' careful study and the voluminous legislative history underlying the Voting Rights Act as the basis for upholding it. During Congress' most recent authorization of section 5 in 2006, both the Senate and the House studied the continued need for section 5 by amassing an extensive record that totaled over 15,000 pages, spanned 20 hearings, and included testimony from a total of 96 witnesses representing interests ranging from Federal and State executive officials to civil rights leaders and others. Those 15,000 pages were amassed by the House Judiciary Committee and the Senate Judiciary Committee as well. Congress paid careful attention to the Court's decisions throughout the reauthorization process and acted consistent with them to the extent of the law, and only after commencing the evidence, strongly suggested widespread violations of the 15th Amendment, which led to ample justification for congressional action. The result, on July 13, 2006, was the largest bipartisan vote in Voting Rights Act history, with a vote of 390-33 in the House and unanimous passage in the Senate, 98-0. Although dicta from the Court's Namundo decision in 2009 suggested that the burdens of section 5 may be unnecessary because times have changed, Congress found that the evidence strongly suggests otherwise. While we have made progress, Congress continues to find that racial discrimination in voting is still present and remains concentrated in those places covered by section 5. Unfortunately, the methods of discrimination have also become more sophisticated. I believe that the Court will recognize what Congress found in 2006--that the work of section 5 is not yet complete. The protections in section 5 don't solely impact our Federal voting processes, but rather the breadth of section 5 extends to the smallest cities and most centralized local governments. When a voting change discriminates against local citizens even at the local level, section 5 has the ability to halt the impact of discrimination. Without section 5's strength to arrest the discrimination at the outset, the burden of remedying the discrimination would be on these local citizens. The facts in Shelby County v. Holder further magnify the importance of section 5 to protect the voting rights of minorities. In the Shelby case, the Justice Department rejected an electoral map drawn by a city in Shelby County which would have decreased the number of black voters from 70.9 percent to 29.5 percent. In this instance, section 5 preserved the ability of the African American community in the city to elect their candidate of choice to the city council. Shelby County, along with many examples examined by Congress in 2006, highlights the importance of reauthorization of section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. The constitutionality of the Voting Rights Act is an important matter for the Court to consider and continue to review, and is important to the democratic ideals of this country. We believe the Supreme Court owes much deference to the considered judgment of the people's elected representatives since Congress continues to find that racial discrimination in voting is present and remains concentrated in many of the places covered by section 5. We expect the United States Supreme Court to continue to declare that section 5 of the Voting Rights Act is critical to protecting minority voting rights--all voting rights--well into the 21st century. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner).

Mr. CONYERS. I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin for his observations and his continuing support of this very important act from the beginning. He was there when it started, and he's still with it. I congratulate you, sir.

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased now to yield as much time as he may consume to the distinguished gentleman from Virginia, Bobby Scott, a senior member of the House Judiciary Committee.

Mr. CONYERS. I thank the gentleman from Virginia for his very astute and precise evaluation of the continuing importance of section 5 to the Voting Rights Act. Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleagues, Mr. Sensenbrenner, Mr. Scott, and Ms. Jackson Lee, for their contributions. We have no further requests for time. Under those circumstances, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to bring attention to one of the single most important environmental crises facing our Nation and the global family: the threat of global warming. This past Tuesday, President Obama spoke in this chamber about the necessity of addressing global warming in order to avoid imminent, disastrous consequences. The science of global warming is clear and empirical: the earth's atmosphere is getting warmer, due to an increase in carbon emissions from burning fossil fuels. As a result, we are experiencing more violent and turbulent storms, longer drought seasons, and dangerous and costly wild fires in our nation's wooded areas and forests. Now is not the time to debate whether global warming is real or not, but to begin bringing together elected officials, the scientific, business, environmental, and NGO communities to come up with a comprehensive and sustainable clean energy road map for America. I strongly agree with President Obama that Congress must take immediate action to address climate change. America is one of the most technologically advanced, innovative, and wealthiest nations in the history of the world. We already have the scientific expertise and resources needed to reduce our carbon emissions and quickly transition to clean sources of energy that can power our homes, factories, and automobiles. The good news is that by quickly transitioning away from fossil fuels towards renewable sources of energy, we can create scores of new good paying jobs, while at the same time, reducing the threat of climate change--before it is too late. There were those who once said that we couldn't increase the fuel efficiency of our vehicles--but we did. They said we couldn't reduce our dependence on coal--but we did. When I was just a child, there were those who said that our nation could not build the Hoover Dam and provide power to millions in the Southwest--but we did. The cries of impossibility are nothing new; I have heard them my whole life. They are just as misguided now, as they were then. The Earth is getting warmer. Our best scientists having been telling us for decades that we need to address the problem, but we have not paid sufficient attention to them. We are literally at a do or die moment in our history. We've taken important steps to address climate change, but they aren't nearly enough, given the catastrophic implications of continued foot dragging. America cannot afford storms like Hurricane Katrina or a Hurricane Sandy every year. Our farmers and our family tables cannot afford droughts year after year. Our children and grandchildren cannot afford a New York City flooded by higher sea levels, or a breadbasket that is too scorched to feed the country, or more frequent heat waves that place thousands of low-income and elderly persons in peril. We must act now to speed up the transition to renewable resources, reduce carbon pollution, and usher in a new era of technological development. Remember--our automotive industry was on the brink of collapse. Yet, thanks to timely government investment and the efforts of our greatest asset--the American worker--we are now manufacturing the best cars in history. We need to address our transportation concerns in an environmentally friendly way. There should be more electrically augmented automobiles filling America's garages and our roads. We need more Chevy Volts and Ford Energi's coming off the assembly lines in Michigan and other states. Auto emissions need to be even lower. We must invest in clean public transportation systems, such as light rail and electric bus transportation. America can, and should, be the envy of clean energy enthusiasts around the world. We need to modernize our power grid to leverage wind and solar. Our rivers and tides are resources that we need to utilize. By creating clean energy through these technologies, we can ensure a stable future for our nation. We will ensure that our rivers are full, not dry. We will preserve thousands of miles of coastlines for our next generation. We will keep our farms green, our supermarkets well-stocked, and our families well-fed. I encourage my fellow members to heed the President's call to action and pass bipartisan reforms that will lead to a future safe from the climate calamities.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to oppose H.R. 273. This legislation is wrongheaded, unnecessarily antagonistic to federal workers, and it creates consequences which will be felt much longer than the 0.5 percent pay raise due to Federal employees starting in April. There are multiple problems with this legislation--here are a few that anyone can understand: First, federal employees have contributed their fair share to reduce our deficit and debt. Through the pay freeze and increased contributions to their pensions, they have cut $103 billion over ten years--that is roughly $50,000 per employee. The 0.5 percent increase in their pay that they have been given after two years of stagnant wages only costs $11 billion over ten years. That is not what is driving our nation's National debt. Second, federal employees have not only seen their wages stagnate, they have also seen their compensation--their wages and benefits--go down, even as the private sector has seen wage growth of 3.3 percent and compensation growth of 4.1 percent. Third, the proposed savings H.R. 273 promises are likely to never be realized. The best federal employees will leave for greener passages, and the most qualified candidates will seek opportunities elsewhere. The deficit reduction this bill promises will require increased training in the short term and may lead to a less efficient, and therefore more expensive Federal government for decades to come. I oppose this bill, H.R. 273, because our country simply cannot afford to drive our best federal employees out of our country's service. Instead, I have cosponsored and I urge the passage of a bill offered by Mr. Connolly of Virginia, which freezes Members of Congress' pay at current levels. I do not want a pay raise; I do not need a pay raise. However, our federal employees have paid far more than their fair share and do not deserve this additional unnecessary and punitive treatment from this Congress. I urge my colleagues to oppose the bill.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, in the early 30's the Turkish Embassy began a journey to heal racial integration through jazz in our Nation's Capital. Today, I wish to pay tribute to the continuing efforts of Turkish Ambassador Namik Tan and the Turkish Embassy for proudly telling this great story of racial integration in Washington, DC's history. This story involves an intriguing combination of jazz music, a foreign embassy, and race relations in the Nation's Capital in the 1930s and 1940s. In 1934, Mehmet Munir Ertegun was named Turkish Ambassador to the United States. He moved to Washington with his family, including his sons Ahmet and Nesuhi, who were then 17 and 11 years old, respectively. Ahmet would eventually become the founder of Atlantic Records, while Nesuhi would run the Atlantic Records jazz department, producing albums for such legendary figures as John Coltrane, Ray Charles, Bobby Darin, and Roberta Flack. In those early years after moving to the District of Columbia, the Ertegun brothers became active in the local jazz scene and eventually invited local performers to the Embassy for what would later be described by a 1943 Newspaper article as ``Washington's most famous private jam sessions.'' In a 1979 interview with the Washington Post, Nesuhi described the mindset behind these sessions, ``You can't imagine how segregated Washington was at that time. Blacks and whites couldn't sit together in most places. So we put on concerts . . . Jazz was our weapon for social action.'' Despite the complaints from certain ``outraged southern senators'' to the Turkish Ambassador, the jam sessions at the Embassy continued for several years, playing to a racially diverse audience and featuring such performers as Johnny Hodges, Harry Carney, and Barney Bigard from the Duke Ellington Band, Lester Young, Benny Carter, Meade Lux Lewis, Leadbelly, members of the Count Basie band, and many others. To commemorate this tradition, the Turkish Embassy initiated the Ertegun Jazz Series in March, 2011, and has hosted ten performances since that time that have featured both up-and-coming artists and well- established performers such as Roy Hargrove and Jonathan Batiste. This series will continue in 2013 with a concert on February 26th at the Embassy. As we celebrate Black History Month, I wish to congratulate Ambassador Tan and the Turkish Embassy for recognizing the important role that Ahmet and Nesuhi Ertegun played in advancing racial integration and bringing jazz music to the world.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce this resolution observing the 100th birthday of civil rights icon Rosa Parks. Through her quiet courage, Mrs. Parks came to symbolize all that is vital about nonviolent protests, enduring threats, yet persisting as an advocate for the basic values of human rights and dignity. Her act of civil disobedience in refusing to give up her seat on a bus in Alabama is credited by historians with sparking the modern day civil rights movement, earning her the title ``mother of the freedom movement.'' After she left Alabama in 1957, she and her husband Raymond moved to Michigan. I was honored to have her play a significant role in my first election for Congress. Many of you know that Mrs. Parks went on to serve on my congressional staff for more than 20 years. Her presence in my office embodied a tireless spirit of commitment to public service and served as a constant reminder of the power of a single act of courage. Though she led a more private life in Detroit, her commitment to public service remained strong. In 1987, along with her close associate Elaine Steele, she co-founded the Rosa and Raymond Parks Institute for Self Development, pursuing the mission of motivating and directing young people to achieve their highest potential. Grounded in her philosophy of quiet strength, the Institute continues to build upon the Parks legacy by sponsoring youth programs that teach life skills and promote a cross-cultural perspective. For her role as the First Lady of Civil Rights, Rosa Parks was the recipient of numerous awards and accolades. This list includes the Congressional Gold Medal, the Spingarn Award for civil rights contributions, the highest honor of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, and the Presidential Medal of Freedom, which is the highest civilian honor in the United States. She was even named one of the 20 most influential and iconic figures of the 20th century. When she died in October 2005, the outpouring of grief and respect was worldwide. In recognition of her historic contributions, this Congress voted to allow Mrs. Parks to lie in honor in the Capitol rotunda so that the people of the United States could pay their last respects to a great American. In this spirit of honoring her legacy, yesterday the Henry Ford Museum in Dearborn, Michigan, sponsored a program to highlight her contributions to the civil rights movement. The program was designed to reflect on the spirit of Mrs. Parks' commitment, calling for a National Day of Courage. The day-long event, both virtual and on-site at the museum, featured nationally-recognized speakers, music and dramatic interpretations to commemorate her extraordinary life and accomplishments. I believe that this program will serve as an opportunity to reflect on the value of individual contributions to the struggle for equality and, through reflection on her example, inspire all Americans to stand up for freedom and the principles enshrined in the Constitution. By refusing to give up her seat and standing for equal rights, Rosa Parks inspired a movement and became a legendary example of the value of a single courageous act. At a time when our nation faces challenges, both domestic and global, I believe that the example of Rosa Parks remains relevant every citizen. We should always use her birthday to reflect on how each of us can contribute to our nation's promise of freedom and equality to ensure that the American dream remains within reach for all who believe.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Madam Speaker, I am very quick to thank the former chairman of the Subcommittee on Crime, Bobby Scott of Virginia, and of course Mr. Trey Gowdy of South Carolina for his very great contribution to H.R. 2076, as amended, that the House originally passed in 2011 by a vote of 358-9. H.R. 2076 gives the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security the specific statutory authority to respond to requests from State and local law enforcement agencies for assistance in the investigation of violent acts and shootings occurring in public places, and in the investigation of mass killings and attempted mass killings. It's very appropriate, of course, under the recent circumstances that the leaders on both sides of the aisle have mentioned. So this bill, unfortunately, due to the tragic shooting in Newtown, the consideration of this bill is appropriately timely. Of course we should pass the bill today so that the President may sign it into law, but it is unfortunate that we're not also sending the President even more urgently needed legislation to protect us from gun violence. While we must take steps to assist in the investigation of such incidents, it is critical that we prevent them from occurring in the first place. We're simply not doing all we can do to protect our citizens, but we celebrate that we have come this far. So I urge my colleagues to support the Senate amendment to H.R. 2076.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Members of the House, I rise in support, as well, of H.R. 6621 because it's a measure that improves the America Invents Act--the most significant reform to the Patent Act law since 1952--that was signed by President Obama last year. As many of my colleagues may recall, I had concerns about the act as to whether it would benefit large multinationals at the expense of independent inventors, and thereby harm job creation in our Nation. For this reason, I opposed the version of the patent bill that was considered by the House last year; but given the fact that this bill is now law, our focus should be on how it can be improved. That's why I support it presently, because it accomplishes that very goal in several respects. To begin with, this law clarifies that the Advice of Counsel section applies to civil actions commenced on or after the date of this legislation's enactment. Why is that important? Well, because the America Invents Act created a new section that prevents use of evidence of an accused infringer's failure to obtain advice of counsel, or his failure to waive privilege and introduce such opinion, to prove either willfulness or intent to induce infringement. This provision, however, failed to specify when the new authority would go into effect, and it makes a series of other technical clarifications to the act. In addition, we find that this bill is necessary and has made the necessary commonsense technical corrections and involves including any substantive revisions to the act. So it's my hope that the Judiciary Committee will continue its oversight of the act into the next Congress and consider ways in which it can be further improved. I commend the chairman of the committee for his moving this bill forward, and I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to recognize the ranking member of our Intellectual Property Subcommittee, Mel Watt of North Carolina. I yield him as much time as he may consume.

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield back any time remaining on our side.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Thank you, Ranking Member Scott. This is an unusual circumstance in which the Fourth Amendment, which protects individual privacy from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government, has hardly been mentioned. Another thing that is curious about this measure is that there hasn't been a hearing on the bill, not a single hearing. Now, I suppose we should just skip over that. Oh, by the way, the Supreme Court of the United States has a case which is testing the issue of the appropriateness of collecting the DNA of arrestees, which will soon reasonably be decided. As one who supports the goals of this legislation--its objectives to apprehend offenders and provide relief to victims--it seems like, in our haste, we've tossed procedure into the waste basket. I just can't understand why we can't examine the constitutionality of the practice of DNA in an appropriate manner, and that's what Maryland v. King would do. I know it's being used in other places, but I have never participated in legislation that attempts to become law while the matter is still in the Supreme Court, about to be decided. Maybe if I looked hard enough, we could find some cases in which that may have happened. When you combine all of these unusual circumstances, as a former chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, I would urge that we follow the recommendations of our ranking member and have this matter brought before the committee in a more proper and orderly way. I hope that we can ensure the constitutionality of H.R. 6014 since that test is about to be submitted before the Supreme Court of the United States. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 6014, the ``Katie Sepich Enhanced DNA Collection Act of 2012,'' or ``Katie's Law.'' I want to begin by noting that I support the important goals of this legislation, which are to apprehend offenders and provide relief to victims. But we must not allow our criminal justice system to circumvent the protections of the Constitution so that criminal offenders are caught at all costs. It is critical that we adhere to the Constitution and consider any measure that possibly conflicts with it through a deliberate process. Unfortunately, there has not been nearly enough process to ensure that H.R. 6014 is constitutional. For example, there has neither been a single hearing on this bill, nor has the Judiciary Committee marked up this measure. As many of you know, the constitutionality of collecting DNA from arrestees is an unresolved question under the Fourth Amendment, which protects individuals' privacy from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. In fact, the constitutionality of the practice of DNA testing upon arrest is currently before the Supreme Court in Maryland v. King. We should at least wait until the Court decides this issue before we rush to pass this legislation. I voted for Katie's law in the last Congress, and I support the goals of Katie's law, but right now is not the time to pass this measure.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. I would like to let everyone know that the gentleman from North Carolina, who's worked on this and has pledged to continue to work on it, has my support for the new ideas. Well, they're not new. They're old ideas that just didn't get into this bill. And we're going to work on it together. I congratulate, of course, the chairman-elect of the Judiciary Committee, Mr. Goodlatte, for his long work and service on that committee and look forward to joining with him to continue the kind of bipartisanship that frequently is worked out in our committee. I believe this amended version of H.R. 6671 is a distinct improvement over its predecessor and urge that we continue the kind of vigilance that the gentleman from North Carolina, Mel Watt, has demonstrated in his zeal to protecting consumer privacy. Technology is constantly evolving. Each new development presents new opportunities and challenges to improve our lives. This bill is a good step toward addressing this technological development, and we must continue to monitor it to ensure consumer privacy continues to be protected. The language added by the Senate, the other body, improved the bill for consumers, and so I, too, urge my colleagues to support its passage today.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my appreciation to my colleague, Mr. Peters of Michigan, for joining as a cosponsor of my resolution, H. Res. 832, observing the 100th birthday of civil rights icon Rosa Parks and commemorating her legacy. Due to an error by my staff, Mr. Peters was not added as an original cosponsor of the resolution.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I was saddened to learn of the passing of my friend and former colleague Jack Brooks. As long-time members of the House Judiciary Committee and the Government Reform Committee, Jack Brooks and I worked closely together. I saw firsthand his dedication to serving our nation and his constituents in Texas. Through his leadership as a senior member of the Judiciary Committee in the 1960s, both the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act made their way through the committee and ultimately passed into law. Less than a decade later, he led the effort to hold President Nixon accountable to the public, and helped draft the articles of impeachment against Nixon. As Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee from 1989 to 1995, Jack Brooks oversaw the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Violence Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, and the modernization of the Civil Rights Act. Chairman Brooks was also a longstanding champion of competition, antitrust and government accountability. Jack Brooks will be remembered by many. His lasting contributions will continue to be felt in our civil rights laws across the country.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Ladies and gentlemen, H.R. 6620 is a commonsense bill that will ensure the continued safety of our Presidents after they leave the White House by extending the ability of the Secret Service to protect former Presidents; and I'm proud to join with the chairman, Mr. Smith, of Judiciary, in support of this bill. For Presidents who didn't serve prior to 1997, current Federal law provides that the Secret Service's protection terminates 10 years after the President leaves office. The 10-year limitation was enacted in 1994, when the nature of threats to former Presidents was more limited. But times have changed, and it's an unfortunate fact that former Presidents will require Secret Service protection for the rest of their lives. Therefore, this bill would simply restore the law to its prior form. When a President of the United States completes his term, he remains a symbol of our Nation. Sadly, our Presidents who've worked hard to protect us from those who would harm our Nation may, themselves, continue to be in harm's way even after they complete their terms in office. Most former Presidents remain prominently in the public eye, continuing to represent our country in significant ways and providing leadership on important issues. We should recognize and encourage their continued service by providing them with the protection they need. This bill would also expand the Secret Service's authorization to protect the children of former Presidents until they reach 16 years of age. This also makes good sense under the current circumstances. I want to recognize the Secret Service for their excellent and tireless job that they perform in protecting our national leaders. The men and women of the Secret Service conduct themselves with valor, while carrying out the protective function of their agency. They provide protection for a variety of people and events, including the President and special national security events as well. The Secret Service has other important functions which also deserve recognition. For example, the investigative role of the Secret Service has expanded greatly, from protecting the currency against counterfeiting, to investigating a wide variety of crimes related to this country's financial institutions and credit systems. I, too, join in commending the gentleman from South Carolina, a member of our committee, Trey Gowdy, for his special work on this bill; and I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 6620. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, before I yield to the distinguished gentlelady from Texas, I would like to observe the great relationship that has been formed on Judiciary between myself and the distinguished gentleman from San Antonio, Texas. For 4 years he was the ranking member on his side, while I was chair. We worked together. And for the 2 years he served as chair, I worked as his ranking member. We had a cordial and, I think, important relationship in framing and putting forward the issues for the Committee on the Judiciary, and I thank him.