Chaka Fattah

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I will not request a recorded vote on this amendment, but I did want to speak on behalf of it. Colleagues in my home State of Pennsylvania, Congressman Meehan and Congressman Brady, have been very interested in the Veterans Courts. I was originally involved in the creation of the drug courts in Pennsylvania years ago. I think this is a very important effort, particularly as it relates to our veterans, but in terms of a host of populations to help divert people, when possible, from the criminal justice system and make our communities safer at the same time, so this is a very important amendment. I disagree with the offset, and I want that to be registered, but I will not burden the House with another recorded vote. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. I have no further requests for time during general debate, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, first of all, I appreciate the majority leader. I know for certain that he has an interest, particularly in these areas that he has spoken about, because on one day, at the end of a long week, the two of us ventured over to the National Institutes of Health to sit and learn a little bit more about the merit-based selection process for investment and investigations to end diseases, and Lamar Smith, who is a great Member, led the effort on patent reform. However, I think that both are misguided in this attempt to move away from the world-renowned merit-based selection process at the National Science Foundation. All of our competitors are actually trying to mimic the merit-based selection process that the National Science Foundation utilizes, and it is critically important that the National Science Board, in the ways that these decisions are made, is not going to be influenced by politics. That was in the wisdom of the creation of this, and it has worked so well that we now lead the world. If we want to continue to lead the world, the last thing we want to do is to interject politics into the decisionmaking process of what basic scientific research should be supported. There are more proposals that come in than can be funded that are done on a peer-review, science-only basis, and I think it would be a very unwise signal for this Congress to send if we were to move in this direction. I hope that our colleagues, even though we have great respect for the majority leader, would act with more respect for basic science and for a merit-based selection process. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. That being granted, I also think it is a great amendment and from a great Member. I thank the chairman for agreeing to it. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. FATTAH. The gentleman moved back and forth from the original allegations to today's report from the inspector general, but left out some very important points, and I want to make sure the House is operating from full information. The allegation that veterans died for a lack of care was not proven by today's report. In fact, the inspector general said today they have no ability to determine this issue. The actual whistleblower who made this allegation in the first place was on FOX News on Sunday and said that he had no ability to tie the death to the delay. I think we don't want to create a situation where we don't have veterans seeking care based on misinformation. So what I want to do is just take a minute and make sure the House is aware that under every analysis, the care at the VA is good or excellent. This is from the actual veterans' care organizations and their testimony before the Congress, House, and Senate. In fact, today, I had a young woman who was a paralyzed Vietnam war veteran. She walked into my office. She is involved in a spinal cord program at the Bronx VA that has got her up and walking. It is part of the ReWalk system. She was first denied some benefits because her autoimmune deficiency was caused by agent orange, and that had been denied for many years. But under General Shinseki, they have allowed this. And now, because she had more than a 50 percent disability, a quality wheel chair and other access. I want to make this point clear. One is that no one anywhere has found that some veteran died because of a lack of service. It has not been proven. It is an allegation. There is an investigation. And we should see the investigation to its conclusion. But the one thing we don't want to do is create a situation where veterans who need care don't pursue it. And especially in spinal cord and in terms of artificial limbs and traumatic brain injury, there is no better care that our veterans can get than at the VA. So I just want to make this point that we are not dealing with the substance of the amendment, but that on the facts of this investigation the House would be well served to let us have an investigation and then let us react to what the facts are. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chairman, first of all, in terms of the previous amendment that was withdrawn, it is very important that we note that innovation is the driving force in our economy. The World Economic Forum said: America's economy is built on innovation. So I want to just add my voice in terms of that amendment, but in terms of the offering relative to the Economic Development Administration. The Speaker of the House earlier was saying that as you listen to Americans, they are concerned about jobs. Well, one entity in the Federal government has a track record of developing jobs in each of our 50 States. Just recently they announced a 300,000-mile initiative in Alaska. Now, Alaska is a little bit away from my hometown in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, but wherever you look in our country, the EDA has been working. It stitches together communities of interest, builds support in jobs. It is a program that the majority would love because it is not decisions from on high. These are decisions that are made at the local level about where to build industry, what types of industries to attract. It has a proven record decade after decade stitched throughout America, not one piece of unbroken cloth, but kind of like a quilt, many colors, many different pieces patched together. So I support the EDA, I oppose this amendment, and I hope that we give a resounding vote in support of the Economic Development Administration. If we can spend American taxpayers' money in far off places in this world building economies under the notion that that is how you strengthen democracies and provide peaceful places in the world, then we can take American taxpayers' money and invest it in communities right here at home so that Americans can go to work. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I oppose the offset. I do not oppose the notion that we should have a more robust clemency approach in our country. I commend the administration for this, and I hope that we can find a way to provide more support. I don't agree with the gentleman's math, that $2 million cut from any number of other places in the Bureau of Prisons would be just fine. I know these accounts pretty well, and I have some concerns about that. I do think that in a $28 billion investment or spending in the Department of Justice in total, clearly, there are dollars that could be used so that innocent people in our country, or those who have deserved to have some relief, can appropriately apply for clemency. I will be glad to work with the gentleman on this as we go forward. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chairman, I thank my colleague from Iowa for offering his amendment. I oppose it. I would hope that we would usher in the day in which the House would take up comprehensive immigration reform. The President has acted, the Senate has acted. The people's House should vote on this matter so that we can come to some conclusion on these issues. We are not going to handle it in a piecemeal fashion, but I think that it is clear that there is enough concern in our country. The Chamber of Commerce says we need to do immigration reform. Every responsible organization has spoken out on this, all of our religious leaders have spoken out. The United States Congress has the responsibility not to run from this issue but to stand up and vote and be counted. I hope one day the gentleman from Iowa will have an opportunity to vote on comprehensive immigration reform, and I hope that the people in my district will have a chance to see me vote on this. The House should not delay any longer. This is an appropriations bill. We are not in the business of immigration reform on this bill. We are just trying to run the bare bones of the United States Government. I hope one day we will come back to this issue appropriately. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

Mr. FATTAH. I move to strike the requisite number of words.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I rise in support of this amendment.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise to offer to the House our support for the base bill. The chairman of this committee, whom I have had the honor to work with for a number of years, has laid out in some detail some of the appropriations in this bill. And as our Constitution requires, no dollar out of our Treasury shall be appropriated, except by act of Congress. So we are here in our constitutional roles. I want to thank Chairman Wolf for all of the courtesies extended to the minority. Obviously, if we were drafting a bill, we might have a different set of numbers in different areas, whether for legal services or COPS. But in the main, this is a bill that the chairman has extended himself in every effort that could be done to accommodate the minority. I want to thank him for his work with me over these many years, inasmuch as this will be the last bill that he will carry on the floor. This bill, I think, represents a set of priorities important to our Nation that he has laid a predicate for that will be carried on even by others who may assume the role that he sits in today. As for the Democrats, I want to say a number of things. One is that we are very pleased that in this bill the science accounts have been a focus of high priority. For NASA, over $17 billion. For the National Science Foundation, $7.4 billion. As has been indicated, it is the highest amount to date. The Office of Science and Technology is fully funded at the President's request. I think some of us know now that I consider the science activities in this bill to be very, very important. In particular, superior among equals in terms of science-related activities is neuroscience. Here, again, you will see an extraordinarily significant increase. It is one of the highest increases in any of the science accounts. The World Health Organization says well over a billion people are suffering from brain-related diseases and disorders. The National Institutes of Health says that 50 million Americans suffer from dementia and epilepsy and all manner of neurological-based diseases and disorders. In this bill, we continue to fund a neuroscience initiative that was crafted--and the chairman supported me in this effort--in our very first bill. We continue to lay important foundations for the effort to actually come to grips with some of these challenges. So I am very pleased about that. On the manufacturing initiatives, the manufacturing extension partnership is very important. Today, we lead the world in manufacturing. Our lead that was absolute is now relative. We see other countries who are moving aggressively in this field. The chairman led an initiative in terms of re-shoring these jobs. I have focused on trying to bring in more technology into our manufacturing plants. But the two of us share a concern that America has to be a country where we make things and where the manufacturing sector is secure in terms of being an important part of our economy's future. I want to also mention the focus here on youth mentoring. It is above the President's request. This includes groups such as the Boys & Girls Clubs of America, which is a congressionally chartered organization serving some 4 million young people; Big Brothers Big Sisters; and Girls, Inc. We could go through the list. These are national evidence-based organizations that are really making a difference in the lives of young people. And the committee is aware of the great work that these organizations are doing. So we have seen fit--and appropriately so-- with the chairman's support, to raise the appropriations in this regard even above the President's request. So there will be a number of amendments that we will debate. Democrats may have a different opinion on some of these items from our colleagues on the other team. There may even be circumstances where there will be intramural differences on some of these issues. At its base, I think the CJS bill we present today reflects the Nation's priorities. Obviously, if we had a larger allocation, we would invest even more in a variety of these priorities. I think some of the points that the chairman has pointed to in terms of human trafficking and aeronautics investments, on the manufacturing side, there are a number of areas where you can see clearly that the chairman has taken extraordinary care to make sure that a number of items get the appropriate revenues that are needed so that we can truly make a difference. So we are anxious to have the debate and to get to the amendments and have the House work its will. I want to thank the majority as we come here today. We have an open rule so the House will have an opportunity to work its will. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I resemble some of the remarks that have been made as of late on the floor. I want to say a couple of things. One is that a lot of us like to hold onto things, but, you know, life moves on and the country moves on. There is a point in time in which the country made a decision around alcohol and put it in a different category than other things, and, seemingly, the public is making a decision about marijuana. Now, it may have something to do with the last few Presidents we have had, who all agreed that they smoked marijuana, or it may have something to do with medical marijuana and the notion that it can help in terms of dealing with the pain that people feel when they have chronic pain and diseases. Whatever is going on, the truth of the matter is that the Congress, we are probably the last to hear of it. But the Nation has kind of moved on, and you see this in the State actions. You see it in my hometown, where the district attorney got elected 4 years ago and decided he was not prosecuting any more marijuana cases, where the people had just possession for use. And now, 4 years later, the city council has finally decided, well, maybe the police shouldn't lock people up since the DA is not going to prosecute them. So sometimes those of us who are in political office, we get dragged along a little slower. But it doesn't matter what we decide on this issue. There are decisions being made, and the country is moving in a different direction, very similar to the decision that was made on the prohibition in terms of alcohol. So the point here is that we will vote however we may vote. It will not be the deciding issue in this regard, because local communities are deciding. Just like in Kentucky now, you have Mitch McConnell and others talking about what we are going to do about hemp. There is going to be some movement here on some of these issues, and those of us who have got a few gray hairs, we might just have to hold on and know that the country has made changes on some of these social issues. But there is still the reality that when we made the change on alcohol, we went from shooting up and down the street during prohibition over it, with Eliot Ness and crew, to a point where we have accepted it as part of, as you said, our culture. Now, it is still not healthy; it is still addictive; it is still a drug; but it is not criminalized in our Nation. And that might be where America is headed on the question of marijuana. And some of us, at times, have to accept change for what it is. It is a change because people have grown to a different point of view or, as the President has said, you evolve on some of these issues. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chairman, I rise again in support of this amendment. I join with the chairman. I do note that this review has taken place at a number of universities, but none of these investigations have concluded and we don't know the exact facts. But we do know that young people on college campuses and in other circumstances are victimized. It is important that this program receive additional support. I thank the gentlewoman for bringing this amendment to our attention, and I thank the chairman for accepting it. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I also rise in support of the amendment. This is a crisis any way you look at it in my home State of Pennsylvania whether it is in the Pocono Mountains area or in the city of Philadelphia. All throughout the country, we see this epidemic. People are losing their lives, and extraordinary action needs to be taken. I do want to say that our side, even though we support this particular amendment, is concerned about the offset. Just so that we can start to make sure that everyone understands that we are concerned about it, we will want a recorded vote on this, and I will vote in favor of it as we do have a responsibility at some point to think about funding the census. So I will stop there. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I thank the chairman for agreeing to accept it. I want to spend a second on this. There is no more important an issue facing our country in terms of national security than this question of cybersecurity, and Chairman Wolf has been at the very forefront of this. We have seen the unfortunate circumstance, for instance, with a corporation like Target. Target has invested over a billion dollars in revitalizing libraries in our schools in our country. They have done a lot of great work. They were victimized by cyber criminals emanating from, apparently, Ukraine. I think that whatever assistance we are providing to the new government there should be contingent on making sure that the cyber threat emanating from Ukraine visited upon our companies here should be part of the considerations. The chairman has also pointed out what has now become obvious, given the DOJ's action, that China is also quite active in this realm. We have seen this problem in places like Nigeria. We can go around the globe. If we are going to protect ourselves, we are going to have to take action. I thank the chairman for accepting this amendment. I think this is an appropriate improvement to the base bill, and I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chairman, I rise in the first instance in support of the focus of the gentlelady's amendment, but I have to oppose the amendment because of the offset. One of the prison guards that was murdered was from my home State of Pennsylvania, and I think that depleting $3 million from this account at a time when we have a situation where we have far too many people in prison--and hopefully through our criminal justice reform efforts, we will do something about that--but while we have people in prison, we have a responsibility to administer these prisons safely, and I think it will be unwise. Now, I support wholeheartedly export initiatives. We have increased this account each year. I have visited and spent time focused on this. And the chairman had mentioned a number of initiatives. We also fund the SelectUSA and the other parts of the President's export initiative. But I am opposed to this amendment solely on the basis of the offset as offered. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I move to strike the requisite number of words.