Al Green

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, on an issue such as this, no one should be left behind who has played a role in helping with this cause. We have mentioned that it is bipartisan, but it is also bicameral. Senators Cruz and Cornyn have played a role in helping us to get this message to the world. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank them, the 41 Members who signed on, and all others who signed on to a letter that we sent to the President. Mr. Speaker, I am grateful for the opportunity to say these words of gratitude and thanks.

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise today to seek posthumous Congressional Recognition for former Houston Police Sergeant John G. Pohlman, who passed away at the age of 77 on October 12, 2020, after a long battle with pulmonary fibrosis. Sgt. Pohlman was a dedicated father and husband, who is survived by his beloved wife of 30 years, Lenora Sorola-Pohlman; his two children, Jason Pohlman and Robbin Pohlman; his four grandchildren, Greg, Austen, Wren, and Jonathan; and his two great-grandchildren Kathrine and Max. For 49 years, Sgt. Pohlman proudly served the great city of Houston as a peace officer who never once received a complaint by a citizen he served. Sgt. Pohlman cared deeply about education; he earned both his Bachelor's and Master's Degrees in Criminal Justice from the University of Houston-Downtown. Sgt. Pohlman joined the Houston Police Department (HPD) in January 1968 and was assigned to the Radio Patrol Division. While in Radio Patrol, he worked as a criminal investigator taking crime scene photos and fingerprints. He was then promoted to Sergeant and assigned to the Narcotics Division in 1975. Eventually, he was placed in charge of investigating that division's internal complaints until his retirement in 2017. Throughout his remarkable career in law enforcement, Sgt. Pohlman was truly a respected and recognized leader. He was the first Uniform Tactical Unit officer to serve as both a patrolman and a Sergeant; the first Narcotics Division Survival School Firearms Instructor; the first supervisor of the Narcotics High Risk Arrest Team; and a supervisor in the first combined U.S. Customs, IRS and HPD Money Laundering Initiative. Even on his death bed, Sgt. Pohlman continued to exercise his civic duty. His dying wish was to vote one last time, and in his final moments before departing this world he asked his wife to bring his mail-in ballot to his hospital bed and insisted on completing it in time for the 2020 election. He then had his wife take a photo of his completed ballot hoping to inspire others to fulfill their democratic duty and vote. Moments after casting his final ballot, Sgt. Pohlman passed away. I am honored to recognize the legacy of Sgt. Pohlman, a true American hero, and his nearly five decades of service to the city of Houston and to this great nation.

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise today to ask for posthumous Congressional Recognition for Monica Katrice Roberts, a self-proclaimed proud, unapologetic Black transgender woman who spoke truth to power and told the often-neglected stories of the world around her. Monica Katrice Roberts was born on May 4, 1962, in Houston, Texas, to Mable and Rick Roberts; she is survived by her mother, one brother, two sisters, and a host of brothers, sisters, and gender nonconforming loved ones in the movement she courageously committed herself to. Monica Katrice Roberts began her career as a writer and unwavering transgender activist, launching the TransGriot in 2006 and committing herself to her life's calling as a storyteller for transgender persons who often had no voice in media. Monica Katrice Roberts was especially committed to accurately capturing the stories of Black transgender women who are disproportionately brutalized and violently killed and are overlooked or often misgendered by mainstream media. Monica Katrice Roberts received many awards for her noteworthy journalism--as Founding Managing Editor of TransGriot and her work with the Bilerico Project, Ebony, Huffington Post, and The Advocate--as well as her extraordinary activism, including the Virginia Prince Transgender Pioneer Award, the Robert Coles Call of Service Award, the Barbara Jordan Breaking Barriers Award, and the 2020 Susan J. Hyde Award for Longevity in the Movement. Monica Katrice Roberts will be greatly missed for her fierce leadership, unapologetic demeanor, storytelling, activism, and unwavering commitment to the transgender community. It is my honor to commemorate her life and legacy before this legislative body.

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, having said this, I now rise. And still I rise. Today, in the name of liberty and justice for all, I rise. And I rise to present H. Res. 1168, the original National Domestic Violence Awareness Month resolution, and I have this Special Order time to speak to the world, if you will, by and through this microphone, which takes the message far and wide, about domestic violence. I rise today in support of those who have endured, and many continue to endure, domestic violence across our country. People are suffering from the pandemic, and those who are suffering from the pandemic and they have got domestic violence to deal with, they are suffering in some ways that I probably cannot understand. But because they are suffering, those of us who have it within our power to do something about those who suffer, I believe we must do it. I believe that too often, those who suffer have to depend upon those who are comfortable to get their relief. Suffering should not be dependent upon those who decide that, ``That is not my problem.'' We all have to assume that domestic violence is our problem, because domestic violence does not discriminate. It is like the virus, in a sense, the coronavirus. It is not just something that is endemic to Democrats or Republicans or Independents. It doesn't recognize party lines. People who engage in this activity come from all walks of life. It doesn't matter whether you are rich or poor: domestic violence can be a part of your life. And it has been a part of the lives of people who have been very wealthy, very poor, and in between. It doesn't matter where you come from. It can be something that is, unfortunately, imposed upon you. And domestic violence, while it is something that happens to women much more often than men, it does happen to men as well. It happens to all persons regardless of race, creed, color, national origin, regardless of your sexuality, and it has especially been a problem for women who are trans. It has been a serious problem. Lives have been lost. So I rise today in support of all who would support efforts to end domestic violence. I am not a person who wants to see things simply get better. I think ``better'' is something that we acquire before we get to the end, but that is not the end. We are not looking to just make it better. We want to end domestic violence. I rise today with this bipartisan resolution. It is important to say this, that it is bipartisan. Members across the aisle feel as strongly about domestic violence as Members on this side of the aisle. The bipartisan resolution has the support of 21 additional Members of Congress. And my guess is we would have more than this 21 if not but for the fact that we had to drop the resolution on the 1st of the month, this is Domestic Violence Awareness Month, and people are doing so many different things now and are leaving town, so they didn't get a chance to really review it so that they could sign onto it. I do believe that there would be many more Members. But for those who have signed on, I think it appropriate to let the world know that they are part of this and that there is an anticipation that there will be others to join us in this bipartisan resolution. The resolution is cosponsored by Representative Ann Wagner, a very dear friend. She and I have worked on many things together. Representative Rick Larsen, another friend. All of these persons are persons that I have had some relationship with. Representative Pete Olson, Representative Bobby C. Scott, Representative Henry Cuellar, Representative Brian Fitzpatrick, Representative Albio Sires, Representative David Price, Representative Bobby Rush, Representative Sylvia Garcia, Representative Sanford Bishop, Representative Sean Casten, Representative Tom Malinowski, Representative Peter Welch, Representative Barbara Lee, Representative Danny Davis, Representative Susie Lee, Representative Eleanor Holmes Norton, Representative Alcee L. Hastings, Representative Dina Titus, Representative Tom O'Halleran, and Representative Raul Grijalva. Madam Speaker, I want to thank all of them for joining us for this movement, to be a part of this movement to end domestic violence. October 1 was first declared as National Domestic Violence Awareness Month 31 years ago in 1989. Since then, October has been a time to acknowledge domestic violence survivors and to be a voice for those who have been victimized by domestic violence. Domestic violence is prevalent in every community and affects all people regardless of age, socioeconomic status, sexual orientation, gender, race, religion, or national origin. I realize that I just repeated myself, but some things bear repeating. These are such things. Physical violence is often accompanied by emotional abuse and controlling behavior as part of a much larger systemic pattern of dominance and control. The people that I talk to, who are supposed to understand this much better than I, make it very clear to me that this is about control, about dominance; not always, but to the extent that we can generalize and say that this is what it is about, it is about control and dominance, one person wanting to dictate to another person, to the extent that if the person doesn't comply, there are consequences. We cannot live in a world where persons are allowed to impose their will on other people simply because they have the power to do so, they are physically capable of doing so, they are mentally situated such that they can do so. We can't allow it. Domestic violence is devastating, and the consequences of domestic violence can cross generations and last a lifetime. Crossing generations can occur when a child lives in a home where domestic violence is prevalent. Children learn from their parents; they learn from the behavior of their parents. The behavior of parents is something that children will accept, but they will also attempt to replicate it. The replication of it takes it across generations. We cannot accept the notion that our children, when they are in their formative years, will be allowed to see parents as this kind of conduct is exhibited and then adopt it, and when they grow up, unfortunately, some of them will take on the ugly habits and behavior of their parents. Women are disproportionately victims of domestic violence, as one in four women and one in seven men ages 18 and older will experience domestic violence at some point in their life. It is a very disheartening statement. On average, more than three women are murdered by their husbands or boyfriends in the United States every day. This is something that bears repeating. On average, more than three women are murdered by their husbands or boyfriends in the United States every day. This ought to shock the conscience of the Nation. This is unacceptable. Awareness is important, but we have got to do more than simply make people aware. I will say more about this, as I have now a colleague who has joined me, and I am honored to introduce him. Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. O'Halleran), my friend from Arizona's First District. Mr. O'Halleran is from the great State of Arizona. He represents Arizona 1. But something more important ought to be said: He is from across the aisle. This is the demonstration of bipartisanship that I spoke of earlier, and I want to thank him and commend him for what he is doing to help us end domestic violence. As he moves to the microphone, my hope is that those who have not had the opportunity to be here today will have the opportunity to say more in the future. This is one of the times when too much said about this will not be enough.

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, before I get to H. Res. 1168, I would like to say just a few words about a very pressing issue in my mind. I was approached just recently by a reporter who was very nice and very kind to me, and she wanted my statements about the President and his current circumstance. I did give her my commentary, but I would also like to indicate that, in her request, she was a little bit concerned as to whether or not people across the aisle from the President would find some degree of comfort in making statements about his condition. Well, here is what I believe: I believe that in times such as these, I believe that, when a person is ill, we have to put politics aside. I believe that we should respect the humanity of every person. I have a deep abiding affinity for every person's humanity, and I explained to her that I have said a prayer for the President as early as this morning. I especially mentioned the President, the First Lady, and Ms. Hicks. I am saddened by what has happened, to be quite candid with you. I wish no person this illness. This virus is vicious, and my prayer is that the President will get well soon. I also mentioned that there was one bit of good news as it relates to the President, and it was that his son does not have this virus. I don't think that that is the ultimate in good news. We want everybody to recover--everybody--not just the President, the First Lady, and Ms. Hicks. We want everybody to recover. I know how my mother loved me, and my mother would have assumed every illness that I had if she could have. She loved me to the extent that she made great sacrifices for me. So I would hope and I believe that the President and the First Lady had some degree and comfort in knowing that their son does not have this virus. I would hope that every person in this country will get proper treatment and every person will walk away from this virus and that our country will be able to say that we were able to unite and overcome the virus. My final comment to the reporter was I do want to see the President get well soon and my prayer is that we can unite against this virus. There are many other things that we can unite around, too, and should unite around, but this virus is vicious, and my hope is that our country will unite against the virus. National Domestic Violence Awareness Month

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I want to give the gentleman my most profound apology for my snafu. I respect the fact that he has decided to be a part of what I am a part of, but we are all a part of this House, and this House functions best when we are united and working together. So I greatly appreciate the gentleman and thank him for his commentary. Madam Speaker, let me continue with a few more facts, and then I would like to talk about the help that we can make available. Facts, statistical information: African-American women experience intimate partner violence at a rate 35 percent higher than White women and about 2.5 times the rate of other races. But African-American women are less likely than White women to use social services or battered women's programs or to go to the hospital because of domestic violence. Somehow, we must get the word to women of color and make it clear to them that they can be protected. As a lawyer, I can recall a circumstance where a victim of domestic violence came to my office for help. I, obviously, wanted to help her, recognizing her condition. She didn't have to tell me that she was a victim. It was very obvious, looking at her physicality. Her eyes were battered and swollen. Her face was bruised. You could see where someone had held her arm tightly, to the extent that there were marks on her body. She was truly a battered person, and she wanted help. Her mother was with her. Her mother begged that we do something to help her daughter, and we did. We helped her with the filing of her case. Here is something that will break your heart because it broke my heart. Within days after her case was filed, she came back to the office, and she wanted me to help her get the charges dismissed. It hurts my heart to even tell the story. No amount of pleas could change her position because she felt that somehow she had acted too quickly. She felt that somehow they should be able to work this out without intervention. She felt that he was the breadwinner for the family, and somehow, she would be denied access to the breadwinner. It was a very painful thing for her, much more painful than it was for me, I am sure. But it was still a painful incident in my life. I mention this because, with the statistical information indicating that women of color don't go to the hospital, they don't go through the various programs. I mention this because in Texas now, the law has changed, such that the woman is not forced to testify against her husband to the extent that it was the case before. The State can bring the charges now. Unfortunately, for too long, women were put in a position where they had to give the testimony. They were forced to give the testimony. The testimony had to come from some source, so it came from them. But now, the State of Texas can bring these charges, and it doesn't have to be the spouse against the spouse. I think this is an important step forward. But this is not enough. We have to assure women that they can come forward and coming forward will not cause them to be victimized to an even greater extent. We have to give them this assurance, which means that there have to be counselors available for them to visit with. They will have to have the opportunity to find a safe house, a place where they can start their lives without fear each day that something may happen. This is the kind of thing that we can do here in Congress with our legislation and that we have been doing, to be very candid, providing safe houses, making sure that the persons are taken care of. This is important. Noncitizen victims of domestic violence report heightened concerns with accessing law enforcement and services due to uncertainty arising from changing immigration policies and heightened immigration enforcement. Noncitizens must be given the same opportunity to get help as citizens. We cannot assume that somehow a noncitizen is not worthy of the same level of help as citizens. Victims are human beings. To the same extent as persons who are born in this country as those who are born outside of this country, we have to protect all victims. There are some who don't want to see us spend as much money on persons who are undocumented. There are some. But I believe that, in this House, we have people who understand that it doesn't matter where you are from, how you got here. If you are the victim of a crime, you ought to get the help that you merit by virtue of having an infraction committed against you. If you are the victim of a crime, it doesn't matter your place of origin. If you need help, we will help you. And we should help you beyond simply allowing you to file charges against a person. While you are here, we have to protect you. You ought to have a safe house available to you as well, regardless of where you are from. At least 15,500,000 children live in families in which domestic violence occurred at least once in the past year--at least once in the past year. One in 15 children are exposed to intimate partner violence each year, and 90 percent of these children are eyewitnesses to such violence. Children should not be exposed to a circumstance where one parent is harming another or where any person is harming another person. Children exposed to domestic violence are more likely to attempt suicide, abuse drugs and alcohol, run away from home, and become victims of human trafficking. One large study found that men exposed to physical abuse, sexual abuse, or adult domestic violence as children were four times more likely than other men to have perpetrated domestic violence as an adult. I spoke of this earlier. Some things bear repeating. Men who were exposed to physical abuse, sexual abuse, and domestic violence are four times more likely than other men to perpetrate domestic violence as adults. The approach to ending domestic violence has to be holistic. It has to be an approach that deals with each and every aspect of it. We cannot decide that we are going to take on a portion of it and assume that the rest will take care of itself. It doesn't take care of itself. It only gets exacerbated. We have to do more to protect persons, regardless of their gender, as it relates to domestic violence. I now would like to move to what I said I would talk about earlier, the fact that we have to do more than get the word out, the fact that it is not enough to sympathize and empathize. Sympathy and empathy are worthy of praise, but we have got to do more than sympathize and empathize. We are attempting to do more. In the Heroes Act 2, we have domestic violence grants and funding. The updated Heroes Act provides critical health and economic support to communities and families: $100 million in additional funding for family violence prevention and services is available. It will provide much- needed support for domestic violence organizations by waiving matching requirements on all Federal moneys. These funds are for the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic. And when I say Federal funds, I am talking about family violence prevention and services programs. $375 million dollars is for Violence Against Women programs, with a waiver of local match requirements, including: $100 million in grants to combat violence against women, $100 million for sexual assault victims so that they may have assistance, $50 million for assistance to Tribal governments, $40 million for transitional housing assistance grants, $25 million to enhance culturally specific services for victims of domestic violence, $25 million for outreach and services to underserved populations, $20 million for rural domestic violence and child abuse enforcement assistance, and $15 million to support families in the justice system. These are moneys in the Heroes Act for victims of domestic violence. We have $62.5 billion for administration for children and families. This will provide supportive and social services for families and children through programs, including: $100 million for family violence prevention and services, which includes $2 million for the National Domestic Violence Hotline--I will be giving that number out in just a moment; $4 billion in tenant-based rental assistance. This will allow public housing agencies to respond to coronavirus and the ability to keep over 2.2 million families stably housed even when facing a loss of income, including $1 billion for new and temporary vouchers for individuals and families who are homeless or at risk of becoming homeless or fleeing domestic violence. This will allow the PHAs to have the flexibility necessary for the safe and effective administration of these funds, while maintaining fair housing, nondiscrimination, labor standards, and other environmental protections. There are grants to assist low-income women and survivors of domestic violence in obtaining qualified domestic violence relations orders. This provision directs the Secretary of Labor, acting through the Director of the Women's Bureau in conjunction with the Assistant Secretary of the Employee Benefits Security Administration, to award grants of at least $250,000 to establish community-based organizations on a competitive basis to assist low-income women and survivors of domestic violence in obtaining qualified domestic relations orders to ensure that these women actually obtain the benefits to which they are entitled through these orders. Simply put, we are assisting women to get court orders that can protect them. As a judge in a former life, we were in a position to issue retraining orders to protect persons who were being threatened. Well, this is the money to assist in allowing people to acquire these restraining orders. The domestic violence hotline, I indicated that I would give you the number, Madam Speaker, so if you need help and you have heard of what is available and what we would like to have available, here is the number. It is a National Domestic Violence Hotline. It operates 24/7. The number is, and I shall repeat it, 1-800-799-7233. 1-800-799-7233. I would beg that, if you believe you need help, you would call this number. I would hope that we will pass the bill that will provide all of these various services that I have called to your attention. It is a crisis. It is a crisis within a crisis. But we have the power to change these things, and my hope is that we will use this power. It is not enough to be sympathetic and empathetic. We have to do more. We can be helpful. Sympathy and empathy are wonderful things, but they won't replace the money necessary to provide persons with counseling, provide them with a safe house, and provide them with healthcare that they would need as a result of domestic violence. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, and still I rise in the name of liberty and justice for all. Mr. Speaker, there is something happening in our country. It appears to me that the inescapable, irreversible winds of change are sweeping across our land. It seems to me that the people in this country have seen things that they did not anticipate they would see. They didn't expect to see what happened to George Floyd. They didn't expect to understand what has happened to Breonna Taylor. And the people in this country seem to want to see change take place. I am amazed at how one question by a moderator at an event has made a significant impact. The simple question was, and I am paraphrasing: Would you denounce white supremacy? It was a simple question. It did not get the appropriate answer. As a result, people are starting to believe that we ought not allow an answer that is inappropriate to be acceptable. I am just amazed at how persons across the aisle--and I am grateful to them--persons across the aisle have said that there should have been the appropriate answer given, which is: I condemn white supremacy; I condemn the supremacist. That is the answer, simple, easy answer. And persons across the aisle are sending a clear and perspicuous message to the Chief Executive Officer: He needs to change that response--walk it back; talk it back; crawl it back; just take it back. I don't know that he will, but I do know this: When we have my friends across the aisle making it clear that this was wrong, something is happening here, and I am grateful to my friends. I thank you for taking the bold position that you are taking, not allowing this to be just another one of the many episodes wherein inappropriate statements have been made and not challenged. I thank you for what you have done, all of you, those who have said you need to condemn white supremacy. Something strange is happening. There is a change taking place, and I am grateful to have lived long enough to see this change occur.

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, how can one say you love the police but you won't fund the municipality that pays the police? How can you say that you want your children to be taught well in a safe environment, but you won't fund the bill that would fund the school system so that they can be taught well and be in a safe environment? How can you say you want your fires to be fought but you won't protect firefighters? This bill does that. Here is why you can't say you protect firefighters and would fund the police: It is because Senator McConnell has said, openly and notoriously, he would have the States go bankrupt. Bankruptcy is not the way to go for heroes, for firefighters, for police officers, for teachers. It is time to compromise. This is the bill to be voted on, not the one that is in your mind. Compromise, not the mind.

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman, Ms. Wexton, for bringing this legislation before the House. To be very candid with you, upon reviewing the materials that have been submitted to me, I was absolutely amazed that this kind of activity is taking place. Forced labor. Is that what they are calling it now when you force people to work, when you separate families, when you have persons denounce their religion, when you put them in reeducation centers? Is that what this is all about, forced labor? I have a history that requires me to speak up and speak out on these issues. Forced labor is how I got to this country. If you understand my history, you have to understand why I am absolutely, totally, and completely opposed to what is happening to the Uyghurs. This is unconscionable, and it is unacceptable. I am proud to be a person who will strongly recommend to my colleagues that we not allow this to continue. It is one thing to have the forced labor, and then to compound it by having American companies benefit from the forced labor, that is sinful. It is criminal in international courts, but it is also just sinful that American companies would participate in this kind of activity. I think this notion that they should be audited, their supply chains should be audited, is more than reasonable. Why would we not want to know whether American companies are participating in this kind of behavior? We need to know. How do we find out? Audit the supply chain. It just makes sense that we would do this. I don't understand how we can oppose trying to find out if this kind of activity is being engaged in by American companies. Finally, this: I don't understand how we consistently find people opposed to making inquiries about the suffering of other people. At some point, the people who are suffering have to be given some opportunity to have their suffering addressed. And it doesn't matter where they are in the world. Suffering has to be addressed. We cannot allow it to happen there because, if we do, it can happen here. I am absolutely supportive of H.R. 6270, and I strongly encourage my colleagues to help us end the suffering of the Uyghur people. I just spoke to a constituent who is of Chinese ancestry who said to me that she believes all of this to be true. I just don't understand how we can oppose this piece of legislation, and I strongly urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. And still I rise, Mr. Speaker, in the name of liberty and justice for all. I rise to call to our attention that we saw last night evidence of what happens when one party comes to debate and another party comes to disrupt. We saw a President who did any and everything that he could to avoid debating. And we saw a Vice President who did any and everything that he could to debate. But something more important happened than the disruption. We saw a President who refused to denounce white supremacy and the supremacists. This is not the first time this has happened. A President who refuses to denounce white supremacy and white supremacists should not hold office. Mr. Speaker, I was proud of the Vice President. He indicated that the President of the United States is a racist. Some things bear repeating: The Vice President, former Vice President, indicated that the current President is a racist. By the way, he is not the first person to say so. Many members of the leadership of the House have said so. Other prominent Americans have said so. So it should not surprise anyone that the Record should reflect what has been said. The Vice President went on to say that he wants to do something about racism in this country. That, if elected, he will convene a meeting of persons, prominent persons, law enforcement, and others, to do something about racism, and I am going to add systemic racism. I believe that the Vice President's heart is in the right place, but I also know that convening is not enough. Mr. Vice President, whom I happen to like very much, convening is not enough. It is time for us to turn the talking points associated with racism into action items, and we have done much of that here on the Hill. But there is one thing that we need to do that we have not done in this country that goes back to 1619, and that is, we have not reconciled. We have not reconciled the differences that we have, the racial differences. It is time for reconciliation. To turn this talking point into an action item, Mr. Vice President, I beg that you would establish a department of reconciliation with a secretary of reconciliation who wakes up every morning with the job of eliminating invidious discrimination in all of its forms in this country. It is time for us to deal forthrightly, to deal in an open and notorious manner, with racism and invidious discrimination in this country in all of its various forms. It is time, Mr. Vice President. You are the man. You are the man in the sense that you are the man running for President as the nominee of the Democratic Party. In that sense, you are the person to be more appropriate who can make this happen. We saw a President declare a war on poverty, President Johnson. It is time to declare a war on racism. It is time to end what we are seeing occurring almost on a weekly basis in this country to African Americans, minorities, and women. It is time to have a department of reconciliation. To this end, I will send the Vice President a letter asking him to consider a department of reconciliation. To talk about it is not enough. We have to have the action item. There are many other things that can be done. I don't oppose a task force. I don't oppose opportunities to look at other forms of reconciliation. But a department of reconciliation is the means by which we can formalize and actualize reconciliation in this country. It won't be easy, and it won't happen right away, which is why we need the department of reconciliation. Call it anything that you want, as long as it is about reconciliation. I will contact you, Mr. President.

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, and still I rise. And still I rise in the name of liberty and justice for all. And still I rise in the name of justice for Breonna Taylor. Mr. Speaker, there are many questions to be answered, critical questions to be answered. In this case there has been no indictment, nor arrest. There are unanswered questions. Who killed Breonna Taylor? Was the warrant properly executed? But there are some more questions that are quite critical. Is the system of justice in this Nation broken, or is it doing what it was designed to do? Was Breonna Taylor's death a tragedy, as has been announced and published far and wide? Or was her death a tragedy that was, in fact, a crime? And still I rise to address the issues associated with Breonna Taylor's death. First, let me simply say this: Breonna Taylor was a young woman. She was loved by many, especially those who were very close, such as her mom, who thought she was easy to love. She was a person who finished high school and attended college. We have heard none of the things that one might hear in cases such as these, because it is usually immediately published, the things about the person that are newsworthy with reference to their character. Her character has not been displayed in a negative way. So I rise today because Breonna Taylor was a 26-year-old African- American woman. Breonna Taylor was an innocent person in her home at the midnight hour. She was unarmed. She committed no crime. Breonna Taylor was doing what most people in this country do at the midnight hour. Yet, Breonna Taylor is no longer with us. And the question that I posed earlier and I pose now is this, Breonna Taylor was a Black woman, but the question is: If Breonna Taylor were a 26-year-old innocent, unarmed White woman who was killed in the middle of the night when Black police officers intruded into her home, would her death be a simple tragedy or would it be a crime to be prosecuted? To answer this question, I think we have to examine the color of crime. The color of crime dates back to the arrival of Africans in the Americas. At one time when Africans were first brought to this country, they were slaves, and as slaves the White masters had the right to hold them in bondage. But the slave committed a crime if the slave sought freedom. To seek freedom, to seek the liberty and the justice that we hold so near and dear, was a crime for the slave. The slave was Black. That crime was relegated to the Black slaves. Slavery was a crime that had color associated with it. Let us move forward. After slavery was abolished with the 13th Amendment--the Emancipation Proclamation was a great document, but it was the 13th Amendment that freed the slaves. And after the 13th Amendment was passed, the slaves were left to privation. They were left without the necessities of life. They were dependent on the very people that enslaved them. And as such, being dependent on the very people that enslaved them, they had few choices when it came to employment. But employing them was not enough for the slave masters, they used the color of crime to keep them in bondage. They employed the use of Black codes. They made it a crime to be a vagrant. To have no job was a crime. The people who enslaved them were the people who denied them jobs, and the people who inculcated, passed laws, that made it possible for them to be arrested for not having a job. This was a Black code. The color of crime was Black. The Black codes also saw something else come into being, something that Texas has had some dealings with as of late. Convict leasing. A person who was caught and accused of a minor crime, they had something called Pig Laws. Steal a pig, some minor crime, they would be punished, found guilty and punished, and required to be leased to another person. Just another form of bondage. Just another form of slavery. In Houston, we had 95 such persons found near a school in Sugar Land, Texas. The Sugar Land 95. They were persons who were slaves by another name. They were leased. There was a color associated with crime. And we move forward, if we may, to today. We find that we have this question before us. If Breonna Taylor were a White woman, would she be alive today, or would the persons who perpetrated this crime against her be punished? Would they have to be held accountable? And I ask you, if, in your mind, you conclude that a White woman under the same circumstances, with three Black officers associated with her demise, would there be more than a tragedy? Would it be a crime? And, if, in your mind you say, yes, then you understand now some of what the color of crime is all about, because we are looking at two people, same facts, one with a darker hue than the other. And as a result, there are a good many people, and I am among them, who believe that her color had much to do with her demise and the lack of accountability. Her color was something that does not receive the same level of respect that persons of a lighter hue receive. She had no gun. She didn't fire on the officers. She was in her home. Yet, the officers fired and the bullets hit her multiple times. In this society, the lack of the same respect for people of color as is given people who are of a lighter hue is evident. It is evident in the financial services industry. It is evident in banking. Persons who are of African ancestry, who are more qualified than persons who are what we refer to as White in this country, of European ancestry, they can apply for loans. Black people, more qualified, will get less in a loan, or have a higher interest rate. It has been documented. There is a color associated with lending in this country. And this color allows people to steal the future of Black people. Their futures are dependent upon what we call bootstraps. Bootstraps are loans. People buy homes with loans. People go into businesses with loans. Black people are being denied loans to a greater extent than some White people who are less qualified for the loans that they eventually get. So the color of crime is in the financial services industry. But the color of crime is also in policing. Not all police officers are bad. I absolutely deplore what happened to the police officers in Kentucky recently who were shot. The people who committed these crimes, if there were multiple people, they should be arrested, they should be prosecuted. And there is a good likelihood that they will be arrested and prosecuted. And there is a good likelihood that their arrest will take place rather quickly, and the prosecution will proceed with deliberate speed. There is a good likelihood that if you hurt a police officer, you are going to receive swift justice. But in policing, the color of one's skin has consistently demonstrated that there is a different standard of behavior that emanates from some police officers, not all. But because some do it, and not all are involved in this, we cannot allow ourselves to say that all police officers are bad. I don't agree with this. But I also think that we cannot be put in a position such that we can't talk about the police officers who are bad, because somehow people will conclude you are talking about those who are good. I'm not. I want to talk about the officers who do dastardly deeds under the color of the law. And these officers understand, many of them that do these things, without having been told in the academy, without having to discuss it among themselves, they understand that Black people in this society do not get the same level of respect as White people. And as a result of not getting the same level of respect, as a result of not having the same consequences accorded people who hurt Black people as those who would hurt a White person, it is understood within the psyche that White officers, Black officers, regardless of their color, they can do things to Black people and escape the level of punishment that they would get if they performed these same insidious acts on White people. If officers were properly punished, George Floyd would still be alive. If officers were properly punished, I believe that Breonna Taylor would be alive. And if, by chance, she had lost her life, as she has, if they were properly punished, there would be something more to be accorded in this case other than a simple indication that it was a tragedy. It was a tragedy because she was Black. It was a tragedy because she was born of a different hue, a darker hue. If she had been born a White woman in this society, the rules would be different. Not the rules that had been codified, but the rules that have been inculcated into the psyche, into the minds of people who happen to wear a badge and carry a gun. Let's just talk about whether the system is broken or whether it is functioning as created. The system employs the grand jury. It is said that the prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich. But what is not said is this: That same prosecutor can exonerate a ham sandwich. The prosecutor can present a case without any defense lawyer being present, present a case and decide which witnesses will be called, generally speaking. In so doing, the prosecutor frames the case, and the prosecutor leads the grand jury. When the prosecutor wants an indictment and believes that an indictment should be had, an indictment is generally had in the case. The prosecutor has the ability to lead a grand jury. This system, while it has great benefits, also has its flaws because the prosecutors will tell you what happens within the grand jury room cannot be discussed. You can't talk about it. It is secreted. That is a means by which the truth doesn't always get out. So, the prosecutor can use the grand jury as a means of allowing a guilty person to go free by contending that the grand jury decided that the person should not be indicted. It is the prosecutor who can indict the ham sandwich, and it is the prosecutor who can exonerate the ham sandwich. I believe that we have a challenge in this country, the challenge probably of our time for these seminal moments in time. The challenge has to do with whether we are going to do something about this color of crime and this systemic racism that exists. Are we going to simply talk about it and decry it when each case arises, silo the case, and then move on to the next? Or are we going to commit ourselves to eliminating invidious discrimination in all of its forms as it relates to anti-Semitism, as it relates to racism, as it relates to xenophobia and Islamophobia, as it relates to transphobia, all the invidious phobias? Are we going to commit ourselves? The way to commit ourselves, to have the public know we are committed, and to move us forward so that the color of one's skin will not determine your worth when it comes to the behavior of some people in this society as they interact with you, if we are going to do this, then we have to have a reconciliation. We have not reconciled in this country. We have not reconciled. We have not settled the differences that were created as a result of people being held in human bondage. We haven't reconciled. We haven't made it such that those persons who were enslaved can now have equal opportunities within this society. Equal opportunity is something I strive for, but it doesn't exist for people of color. It doesn't exist for some other people as well, not just people of color. One of the things that we learned at my committee was that LGBTQ persons, if they go in for a loan, they, too, are discriminated against. Two gay people, a man who is married to another man, they are discriminated against. Discrimination of this type has to be eliminated. The way to commit ourselves to the elimination of all forms of invidious discrimination is with a department, a department of reconciliation, a department with a secretary of reconciliation, a secretary of reconciliation who reports directly to the President of the United States of America. We can do this. The question is, do we have the will to do it, a department of reconciliation with a budget, a budget that will allow persons to become a part of this department as under secretaries? This department can take up the issue of reparations. This department can take up the issue of a truth commission so as to gather all the necessary truths and facts about what has happened to African Americans in the United States of America. We need a department of reconciliation. This challenge is something that is applicable to you, regardless of your party. It doesn't matter whether you are a Democrat or a Republican. What matters is, will we move forward with a department of reconciliation? It doesn't matter which President we are talking about or which candidate we are talking about. Every candidate ought to be held responsible for answering the question: Will you agree to a department of reconciliation? Every candidate, it doesn't matter whether you are liberal or conservative, the question is: Will you agree to a department of reconciliation? I say to you, the candidate who says this is going to find that there are many people who are going to have favor bestowed upon this candidate such that the candidate will benefit greatly in November. But there must be reconciliation, and the best way is through a department of reconciliation. Now, to the family of Ms. Taylor, I have never met you, but I assure you that I will not let her death go unnoticed. This House of Representatives is going to have it called to their attention on multiple occasions. We cannot tolerate this kind of behavior. If we tolerate it, we perpetuate it. I plan to go to Kentucky. I want to see what happened in this place where she resided. I want to see the facility. This is important. We cannot allow her name to be a momentary announcement and then go on to the next thing that causes a good deal of shame. We can't do it. To these officers who were shot and their families, I want you to know that I stand against people who shoot police officers simply because of who they are, who commit crimes against police officers. Innocent peace officers, police officers, deserve the same level of respect that other citizens who are innocent deserve. Officers ought not be assaulted simply because they are members of a police force. I absolutely oppose it, and I absolutely support peaceful protest, not these protesters who believe that they have to destroy things. I believe you can be disruptive without being destructive. Peaceful protest is about being disruptive, yes. Sometimes, people go to jail. Dr. King went to jail for peaceful protest. John Lewis went to jail for peaceful protest. I have been to jail many times for peaceful protest, being disruptive without being destructive. I want the families of the officers to know that I stand with you. I want you to know that I want justice for those who have hurt these officers. Officers, I want you to know this, as well. My uncle was a deputy sheriff. I understand a lot about law enforcement. I was a judge of a justice court. I am a lawyer. So, I appreciate law enforcement. What I don't appreciate is what happened to Breonna Taylor. I don't appreciate a system that allows a prosecutor to lay the blame for lack of justice at the feet, at the hands, of a grand jury. The grand jury system has to be reevaluated. This notion that it is secreted and that we will never know what happened before the grand jury--there are ways to find out, I am sure. In fact, I know that there are, but in most cases, you can't or you don't. The system has to be reevaluated because the lack of transparency causes people to believe that this system is hiding something that is a part of covering up the wrongs that are being perpetrated against Black people and others, as well. We have to examine the system. That doesn't mean that we have to eliminate the police departments. I don't want to eliminate police departments. I would never agree to eliminating the police departments. I believe you have to have policing in your community, so I am for policing. But I am for people being treated with dignity and respect at all times, even when you are performing the act of policing. Tonight, I believe that on March 13, 2020, when Ms. Taylor lost her life, a 26-year-old Black woman, I believe that if she had been a 26- year-old White woman with the same circumstances, my belief is that she would probably not have lost her life. But let's assume that she would have. Then, I believe that there would be accountability because I believe there is color associated with crime and that people who enforce the laws don't give the same level of attention to a Black person who is the victim of a crime as they do to White people. Not all the time, by the way. Not all the time. But in critical circumstances, it happens far too often, and we have to do something about it. I am committed to bringing about this level of change. I don't know whether it will happen on my watch, but I do know this: On my watch, I will not be silent. On my watch, I will stand even if I have to stand alone because it is better to stand alone than not stand at all. We have some difficult days ahead. Dr. King reminded us of this. But we are seeing the difficulties manifest themselves before us on a daily basis--difficult days ahead. I spoke about the color of crime. Let's talk about it just one more time as it relates to voting. It is intuitively obvious to even the most casual observer that there are efforts to suppress the vote, and these efforts to suppress the vote have a greater impact on Black people than they do a good many others. Black people and brown people, minorities, this effort to suppress their vote is evident, self-evident. I believe that we who hold public trust must do something to prevent what is about to happen, to the extent that we can. I don't know that we can do what really should be done because of the tug of war between the parties, but I do know that we have to try. We have to make every person's vote count in this country and give every person the opportunity to get registered to vote. There are people who are doing their very best to circumvent the registration and participation of minorities in this system of voting. This system of voting is something that we cherish and that we have to exercise. As my dear friend John Lewis put it, it is something that you must use, and, he intimated, if not, you may lose this precious right to vote. So we have to exercise this right, but let us be realistic and acknowledge that there are people who are doing their best to suppress the rights of minorities when it comes to voting. Remember, this is a country that had to pass the 13th Amendment to free people who were held in bondage. This is a country that had to pass a constitutional amendment to accord people who were held in bondage this right of citizenship and then the right to vote. The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments are important to people of color. So I say to everyone, there is color associated with criminality in the sense that people who are charged with enforcing the laws don't provide equal protection under the laws to all of the people in this country. Mr. Speaker, I want to say to my friends who are charged with the responsibility of enforcing the laws in Houston, Texas, I want to say to them, in Houston, Texas, there was a case that is still pending. This is the case of Joshua Johnson. Joshua Johnson lost his life under questionable circumstances. The case is still being investigated, and the lack of transparency is something that concerns me as it relates to Joshua Johnson. Joshua Johnson lived in the Ninth Congressional District. I happen to represent the Ninth Congressional District. Joshua Johnson: killed under questionable circumstances. We have the same system in place where there is a grand jury and a prosecutor, that I have great respect for, but we still have this same system. But Texas has a solution that is different from any other State in the country. There is no other State that has the solution that we have in Texas for these kinds of questionable killings. In Texas, we have the opportunity to take such a case and move it through a justice system that has a court involved in it, as opposed to the grand jury, in the initial aspects of it, or it can be after the grand jury has given a ruling. In Texas, we have the opportunity to go to a district court judge and present probable cause, and if that judge concludes that there is probable cause, that judge goes to an administrative judge, and the administrative judge can then appoint a judge to have a court of review to review what happened in this case. It is time for us to look at something similar to this on the national level for our Nation. I believe that a court of inquiry--which is what it is called in Texas. It reviews evidence. But a court of inquiry can make a difference on the national level, and, as a result, I plan to introduce legislation for us to have courts of inquiry at the national level so that we don't have to depend on prosecutors and grand juries. A court of inquiry in Texas allows any citizen who knows that a crime has been committed to present this evidence to a district court judge. I believe a similar circumstance--maybe not the same--ought to exist for people when it comes to Federal crimes. So I will introduce legislation calling for courts of inquiry across the length and breadth of this country so that we may have transparency in this process. I will not seek to eliminate the grand juries, but I will seek to give an alternative for citizens who are concerned about transparency when there are questionable circumstances, when you don't have body cameras, when you have persons who are committing no crimes yet find themselves losing their lives at the hands of the constabulary. I hope to have this legislation ready for this Congress, but if not, it will definitely be introduced for the next Congress. We need courts of inquiry or something similar to what we have in Texas. I love my country. It means something to me to say that I am a part of this great country. I love it, and I do everything out of love for country and a belief that there should be liberty and justice for all, regardless of who you happen to be, regardless of your race, creed, color, or national origin. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the time. I thank the leadership for giving me the opportunity to have this time on the floor. I promise that I am going to do as much as I can to eliminate invidious discrimination in all of its forms. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, and still I rise. Mr. Speaker, and still I rise in the name of justice for Breonna Taylor. Mr. Speaker, it has been widely reported that the death of Breonna Taylor is a tragedy. Her death is being reported as a tragedy: a tragedy because she was innocent, she committed no crime; a tragedy because it happened in her home in the midnight hour; a tragedy because she was unarmed. It has been reported that her death was a tragedy. But there is a question, Mr. Speaker, about her death that we have to ask that few want to hear, because few want to consider the answer. But this is the preeminent question as it relates to her death, a question that will haunt us because of the history that we have with race relations in this country. We have to ask the question. It is a question that the status quo doesn't want to hear, because the status quo is concerned about the answer. It is a question that deals with systemic discrimination. Today I ask the question: If Breonna Taylor were a 26-year-old innocent White woman--innocent White woman, innocent White woman--who was killed in the middle of the night when Black police officers intruded into her home, would her death be a tragedy or a crime?

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, and still I rise, and I rise today, Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the many persons who are peacefully protesting and demanding justice for Breonna Taylor; peacefully protesting and demanding justice. But I also rise, Mr. Speaker, for the many persons who may never protest, but believe that Breonna Taylor deserves justice. I rise, Mr. Speaker, because my heart is heavy. It is difficult to comprehend some of the things that are happening in this country. It is expected that there will be some announcement in the near future as to the fate of the officers who were engaged in the no-knock intrusion; a no-knock intrusion. Mr. Speaker, I want to tell you and the world what justice for Breonna Taylor would look like. Justice for Breonna Taylor would look the same as it would if Breonna Taylor were of a different hue. She was an African-American female. She was in her apartment. She was not breaking the law. Justice for Breonna Taylor would look the same way it would look for Breonna Taylor if she was were a White woman; a White woman in her apartment; a White woman not breaking the law; a White woman who had the police intrude into her home, as it were, with a no-knock warrant. This is what justice would look like for Breonna Taylor. And at some point in this country we have to acknowledge that there is a perception that there is a system of justice that is not blind, a system of justice that sees the color. And when the color of the person is known, justice can sometimes turn a blind eye. So today I rise, and I demand justice for Breonna Taylor, the same justice that she would get if she were a different hue, in her home, 26 years old, committing no crime; the same justice. And, finally, if we continue to allow the perception to exist that injustice can be justified, it will not bode well for our country. I stand for peaceful protest, and I denounce any form of protest other than peaceful protest. I demand justice for Breonna Taylor.

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding the time. Madam Speaker, on this Constitution Day we will do well to heed the words of Dr. King when he reminded us that the ultimate measure of the person is not where the person stands in times of comfort and convenience, but where do you stand in times of challenge and controversy? Where do you stand when racism and anti-Semitism and anti-Asian sentiments are emanating from the highest office in the land? Where do you stand? I stand with the business owner who is losing business, and some have gone out of business because of this kind of hateful violence emanating from words. I stand with the mother who has to console her child who comes home from school and who has been bullied. I stand with the child who has been bullied who comes home crying. I stand with the people of my congressional district and across this land who happen to be of Asian ancestry. I stand against racism. It is easy to say: ``I am against racism. I condemn racism.'' But when will you condemn the racist? When will you condemn the racist when it is emanating from the highest office in the land? This is Constitution Day. I close with these words from Emily Dickinson. The truest measure of the person, I have reminded you, but Dickinson reminded us that: ``A word is dead when it is said, some say. I say it just begins to live that day.'' These words live; they take on meanings; they impact people; and they cause harms. It is time for us to take a stand.

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, as the grandson of a Methodist preacher, and I would also add, whose wife--my grandmother--was a missionary, I am proud to rise today to present H. Res. 1090, recognizing Islam as one of the great religions of the world. I am proud to acknowledge that this resolution was introduced on August 21, 2020, with three original cosponsors: The honorable Rashida Tlaib, the honorable Ilhan Omar, and my friend who is with me today, the honorable Andre Carson. I will say much more about the resolution, but I do want to at this time acknowledge my friend who's present from the Seventh Congressional District of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Carson), a wordsmith par excellence.

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his very kind words. He is more than generous. I also thank him for his service in Congress. He and I started out together on the Financial Services Committee. He has since moved on to the Intelligence Committee and is doing an outstanding job serving his country as an American Muslim. Mr. Speaker, I indicated that I am the grandson of a Methodist preacher, but I am also a very proud Baptist. My grandfather would not hold it against me. Religion is something that each person has to make decisions about for himself or herself. It is not something that we impose on people. This is a free country, a country wherein you have the right to be whatever you choose to be, within the spirit of what the law allows. This is the case with religion. You can be whatever you choose to be, be associated with whichever religion you choose to, within the spirit of what the law allows. I want to just say a few words about why I have brought this resolution. I have lived in this country all of my life. I love my country. It means something to me. I respect the words ``liberty and justice for all'' in the Pledge of Allegiance. I respect the concept in the Gettysburg Address: ``government of the people, by the people, for the people.'' It means something to me to know that a person who came from what I consider humble beginnings has had the opportunity to stand in the well of the House of Representatives. So, I love my country. But it doesn't mean that I overlook some of the things that have happened to me along life's way that were not so pleasant. I had persons who called themselves Christians to burn a cross in my yard. I don't consider them Christians. They called themselves Christians. I have had persons who called themselves Christians to say some very ugly things to me and do some very ugly things to me. But let me tell you what it did not do to me. Those persons who wore the hoods, who came to my yard, burned the cross, it did not cause me to conclude that Christianity was represented in what they did. The people who said ugly things and did ugly things to me in the name of Christianity, they did not cause me to conclude that that is what Christianity is all about. I am mentioning this because, quite candidly, I want other people to understand that Islam is a peaceful religion, that there are people who abuse others in the name of religion, but that doesn't mean that the religion is about the abuse that is being perpetrated. I am honored today to present this resolution, and I rise in solidarity with my Muslim brothers and sisters around the world. I do so because I have seen them in action. In Houston, Texas, we have storms. When these storms have come through our city--Hurricane Harvey being one example--the Muslim community was right there to do all that was necessary to help others. One of the greatest callings that you have in any religion is to help somebody. They have adhered to the call for justice. They have been there to march in protest for freedom and justice for other people. This community has been there with aid and comfort for people who have been left homeless. They have been there with aid and comfort for people who have suffered harm by way of their physical well-being. Muslim doctors have helped people, and I have seen the evidence of it. There is a clinic in Houston, the Ibn Sina Clinic, and they have been assisting people with the COVID virus. Free tests are being administered. This community has been helpful in my city. Persons from the community have served in public office, on city council. We have persons who are serving as precinct judges. The community is there and a part of the greater Houston community. Houston is a very diverse city. The Muslim community enhances the diversity of the city of Houston. This religion is a complete system of strong moral convictions that promotes peace, equality, and social justice. Islam is the second largest and fastest growing religion in the world. America is home to one of the most diverse Muslim populations. It has within it almost every ethnicity, country, and school of thought. There are approximately 3.45 million Muslims of all ages living in the United States of America. This is as of 2016; this is the last information available to me. In an overwhelming measure, Muslims make a significant, positive, and growing contribution to our Nation. We have successful Muslims in all areas of our national life. Names that come to mind, for a good many Americans, would include Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, would include one who was known as Cassius Clay but became Muhammad Ali. There are Muslims in all areas of life, including business, sport, media, culture, medicine, law, and politics. Although American Muslims make up approximately 1 percent of the U.S. population, most Americans can name some of these prominent Muslims that I have called to your attention. Another is Malcolm X. Many persons don't revere Malcolm X, but I am proud to say that the United States of America has had Malcolm X on a postage stamp. Of course, his name moved from X to Shabazz. The Nation has honored many American Muslims for their service and sacrifice, including Salman Hamdani. Mr. Hamdani was there for 9/11. He made sacrifices on 9/11 as a first responder. Many American Muslims are also civically engaged, working with their neighbors to better their communities. They are members of the Rotary Club, the Veterans of Foreign Wars. Yes, Muslims served in the military of the United States of America. They are members of school boards, and they volunteer in our communities. They actively engage in charitable giving. And I say this with some understanding of it, as I have seen it in action. I have seen the Muslim community not only give their in-kind services but their American dollars to worthy causes. In short, American Muslims and the organizations they create are a part of the fiber and fabric of the great country that I love. Today, during this pandemic, many Muslims work on the front lines, as was said by my dear brother, Andre Carson, Congressman Carson. They work on the front lines. They work as essential workers. They put their lives on the line to help others through the pain of the pandemic. I believe that we must acknowledge and appreciate that Muslims further the diversity and success of our great country. To this end, I trust that persons will join me in demonstrating solidarity with and support for Muslim members of the community throughout the world by recognizing Islam as one of the great religions of the world. I hold in my hand the actual resolution that has been filed. I will not go through the whereases, but I do want to go to the be it resolved: `` . . . be it resolved . . . to demonstrate solidarity and support for members of the community of Islam in the United States and throughout the world, the House of Representatives recognizes the Islamic faith as one of the great religions of the world.'' Mr. Speaker, I thank you for the time, but I also want to thank the House leadership for the time. I do so because there was a time in the history of this country when a person who was born into poverty, who had to suffer the slings and arrows of invidious discrimination, would not be allowed to stand in the House of Representatives and present a resolution honoring Islam. We have come a long way. I would like to acknowledge the fact that we have come a long way, because too many proclaim the notion that nothing has changed. The mere fact that I am standing here bringing this resolution means that things have changed. Many may not agree, but things have changed to the extent that I have got the freedom to speak my mind with this resolution on the floor of the House of Representatives. So I thank all of the leadership for acknowledging the change and allowing the resolution to be presented. With this said, I kindly and respectfully yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, and still I rise, as a liberated Democrat to say that the moral movement for justice everywhere cannot condone injustice anywhere. We cannot allow ourselves to be induced to believe that there is a binary choice, that we must choose either peace officers or peaceful protesters. No, there is a righteous choice. And the righteous choice will cause us to conclude that we must choose justice for the police just as we choose justice for the protestors. Crimes committed against the police must be punished and crimes committed by the police must be punished. We are a Nation of laws, and if the law is to prevail, all criminals must be punished. But not only must they be punished; they must be punished expeditiously against those who commit crimes against people just as we would have them be punished expeditiously against those who commit crimes against the police. ``Injustice anywhere,'' as Dr. King put it, ``is a threat to justice everywhere.'' Mr. Speaker, I stand and I rise as a liberated Democrat to say we cannot condone crimes against the police nor can we condone crimes committed by the police.

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman, Ms. Fudge, for allowing me the time. I acknowledge Mr. Scott for the outstanding work that he has done on this legislation, among many other pieces of legislation. I have an amendment that speaks for itself. This amendment deals with the entry exams that fail the diversity test at many elite schools-- elite schools, by the way, that are funded with tax dollars that come from poor communities, elite schools that can accept tax dollars but cannot accept the students who are from communities that are affording the schools the tax dollars. The amendment reads: If applicable--meaning if you haven't done it already--develop an implementation plan to replace entrance exams or other competitive application procedures with methods of student assignments to promote racial and socioeconomic diversity. This amendment does deal with minorities, but it also deals with other persons who happen to be disadvantaged. Mr. Speaker, that is another way of saying poor White people. They, too, suffer from disadvantages associated with the elite tests that can fail even some of the best that come from schools that have little resources. I believe that if this amendment is passed, this amendment is going to encourage schools to do what John Lewis would call the right thing, the just thing, the fair thing. Mr. Speaker, I support the amendment and beg that my colleagues would support it as well.

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, it is shameful and sinful that history will record that, on the great issues of our time, many of them, the Senate failed to act. On issues concerning life and death, the Senate of the United States of America refused to act. On the great issue of the HEROES Act, which has lifesaving implications--some 86,000 have died since it was passed--the Senate has failed to act. On the issue of delivering lifesaving medications by way of the Postal Service, when the Postal Service needs our help, the Senate has refused to act. And a Senate that refuses to act puts the actions of the House at risk, because the truth is this: It takes an act of Congress to help these entities; it takes an act of Congress to help the people of the United States of America; and you cannot get an act of Congress if the Senate refuses to act.

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. And still I rise, Mr. Speaker. It is my honor to stand here in the House of Representatives. It is my honor to be a Member of this Congress, and I am grateful to the many persons who made great sacrifices so that I would have this opportunity. Today I would like to use this opportunity to make an appeal to my colleagues, to my friends, and to people who are within the sound of my voice. I want to make an appeal to persons to please take the coronavirus seriously. I ask that you take it seriously because it is not a joke. It is not a laughing matter. People are dying. We have had over 150,000 deaths in this country. It is not a laughing matter. We have had over 4 million cases in this country. It is not a hoax. It is real. I am asking my friends, my colleagues, and those who are within the sound of my voice, please, let's do what we can to protect ourselves and others. I beg that we would please wear the face mask. Let us wash our hands. Let us maintain the distancing. I know that it won't happen all of the time. We can have a memory lapse. We might just rush out of the house and not have our mask on. But let's not, with intentionality, leave home without it. Let's not, with intentionality, mix and mingle with the persons around us without a mask on. Let us, with intentionality, do all that we can to protect ourselves and others. This virus is not relenting at this time. It is relentless. Hospital ICU beds in many places in hot spots around the country are at capacity. We see evidence that this virus is going to continue for a while longer. I don't know how long. I am not sure anybody does. But I do know that we ought not take it lightly, that we ought not allow persons who are within our space, our personal space, if you will, to catch it from us. I don't want to give it to someone, and I would trust that no one would want to give it to me. So let's be sensible. Let's be responsible. Let's honor the protocols that we have set here in the House of Representatives. Let's honor the protocols to social distance. I know it is difficult. I won't pretend that I keep the social distancing as properly as I should. I understand. I make mistakes. But I don't do it intentionally. I am not going to intentionally take off my mask and communicate with persons. I am not going to try in any way to demonstrate that somehow I am invulnerable, I am invincible, this is a joke, this is a hoax, and that we need not try to protect ourselves from this virus. I am not going to do it, and I am going to ask that others would not do it. Let's love each other and protect each other. This is a matter of life and death. Finally, on this topic of the virus, we have had some persons who contract the virus who are associated with the House. I want you to know, Mr. Speaker, that I care about them. I pray for them. And I want you to know that I am asking that we all make sure that this doesn't become a means by which we distance ourselves from other people simply because they have had the virus. My hope is that persons who contract it will heal and they will be back at work and we will treat them with the same love and respect that we have always treated them, show them that they are welcome back to the House of Representatives. This is something that we can do to show each other how much we appreciate the persons who have survived this virus. I hope that every person who contracts it will survive it. I don't want to see anybody lose life or become chronically injured in some way because of this virus. It ought not be that way, and my hope is that we won't allow it to happen in the sense that people will contract it and we will find ourselves distancing ourselves from them. As I am about to leave now, I want to mention one additional item that is important. I am still concerned about invidious discrimination, and I am concerned that we are reaching a plateau now as it relates to the movement that had as a part of its genesis the death of George Floyd. I am concerned that I don't see the movement continuing with the amount of momentum that it richly and justly deserves. I am concerned that we are slowly getting back to bigotry as usual, we are slowly getting back to a point where we will do more talking about bigotry and discrimination than acting on the elimination of bigotry and discrimination. It really is a major issue in the country, and we should not allow ourselves to slip back into making it more about what we think ought to happen than doing what we can do to prevent this sort of discrimination from continuing to happen. So I am concerned, and because I am concerned, when we return, I hope to take some measures, some steps, if you will, to help us to remember that it doesn't just go away because we don't have a front-page issue. The front-page issues heighten our awareness, but it is still there after it is no longer on the front page, this invidious discrimination, this homophobia, Islamophobia, and xenophobia, all of the various phobias that harm people--that other people produce to harm people, I might add. So I am concerned, and I refuse to allow this issue to simply become another incident and we get back to bigotry as usual. At some point, we do need a department of reconciliation in this country so that people can depend on our government doing all that it can to eliminate discrimination and hate in the country. At some point, we need to have this department functioning at the highest level, with a secretary who reports to the President of the United States and that is funded properly so that we don't find ourselves siloing each circumstance that involves invidious discrimination and dealing with each one individually as opposed to dealing with all of this collectively. We have come a long way in this country, no question about it, but we dearly and truly have a long way that we have to go. What better way to get there than to say to the world that we are drawing this line, a bright line, and that we are going to have a department that is dedicated to the elimination of segregation to the extent that it exists--and it does exist in some places in our country--but also to eliminate this invidious discrimination wherever it exists in our country and against whomever it is perpetrated. Is it systemic? Yes, it is systemic. Just recently, a very prominent person in our country, the Attorney General, had some problem acknowledging that systemic racism exists. It does. I have no problems acknowledging it, nor should anyone else, because the empirical evidence is there to support the fact that it exists. So my hope is that we won't get back to bigotry as usual, and when we come back from this opportunity to work in our districts that we will take up issues associated with racism and invidious discrimination here in the Congress of the United States of America. This is where people expect us to act. And if we act, we can lead the Nation as opposed to reacting to what the Nation is doing. It is time for us to take a lead and get rid of this scourge on our society. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for this opportunity, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Madam Speaker, I am 72 years old. I have no children. But if I had a daughter, I would name her Alexandria, because my name is Alexander. If I had a daughter, I would want her to be bold; I would want her to be courageous; I would want her to speak truth to power; I would want her to be just like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. The name means helper of humankind, and that is what she is about the business of doing. Madam Speaker, I salute Ms. Ocasio-Cortez for the positions that she has taken. Madam Speaker, this is not the first time we have heard this ``b'' word used by people in positions of authority. A higher office in this country has corrupted the discourse. It came from a higher office, and we all took it for granted. We just assumed, well, that is just a person saying something. ``SOB": You are talking about the mother. This is unacceptable. It is absolutely unacceptable. I believe that we must change the tide of discourse in the country, and I believe that what Ms. Ocasio-Cortez has said is something that all of us should take notice of. She spoke from her heart, as she usually does, by the way--a brilliant head with a compassionate heart. Madam Speaker, I am proud of Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. I will stand with her not only today, but in the future. I don't have to agree with everything she says to respect her dignity, to respect her humanity. And finally this. I grew up in a home where scatology was commonplace. I don't think ``scatologist'' is a word, but if such a word existed, there were many scatologists in my home. ``Scatology'' is a word. I learned early on how that impacts the psyche of people. We cannot allow what happened to go unnoticed, which is why I am here today. Madam Speaker, this scatology with the ``b'' word is something that demeans every woman when it is used. I will stand against it, and I will stand with the Honorable Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise to say thank you to a friend and a great warrior. I thank you, dear brother, for being the sermon you preached. You walked your talk. It is said that a great person will always rise to the occasion, but it is also said that the greater person makes the occasion. He was an occasion-maker, and he rose to the occasion on the Edmond Pettus Bridge. And for this, many of us who are here tonight are here because he marched into brutality. So tonight, I thank you, dear brother, for being able to withstand what many of us could not and would not. I rise to just say thank you and to let you know that we will never forget you, and we will always make it perspicuously clear that we are here because you were there.

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, and still I rise. I rise here in the House of Representatives because many persons made great sacrifices so that I would have this opportunity to stand and speak today. Many of these persons were the persons who protested. They faced Bull Connor's dogs and Jim Crow's laws. They know what a billy club hurts like. They know what losing a loved one to a cause feels like. These were the protestors that made it possible. I can only imagine what would have happened had the Honorable John Lewis, Hosea Williams, and Jimmy Lee Jackson, those persons who protested--Jimmy Lee Jackson lost his life; Reverend C. T. Vivian was there on the Edmund Pettus Bridge--if they had assaulted the police, if they had confronted the police and met them with force, would I be standing here today? I think not. I believe that peaceful protest has made it possible for a good many Members of Congress to be here. Not all of us are here because we are so smart. A good many of us are here because others made great sacrifice so that we would have these opportunities. This is why I stand here today to say that we can peacefully protest; we can be disruptive without being destructive. If you are being destructive, you are not helping the cause. Peaceful protest is the best protest. It is what has made a difference for so many of us in so many ways: We have integrated facilities because of peaceful protest; labor laws have been changed because of peaceful protest; persons have the right to vote because of peaceful protest. Peaceful protest is the best protest, and it has made a difference in the lives of a good many people in this country. So I absolutely salute those who peacefully protest, and I do not condone those who protest otherwise. Now, with reference to the constabulary, there have been unidentified persons, Federal agents, who have been policing the streets of American cities. They do not have the right to pick people up indiscriminately. They do not have the right to take people away and hold them and then drop them off at some location. They are not within the law when they do this, and officers of the law should not break the law. These are unidentified Federal agents, and they must be stopped. This is not the American way. I support the law as it relates to the protestors; I support the law as it relates to the Federal agents. All should obey the law. Now, you say to me: ``Well, how is it that you went to jail?'' Well, I went to jail, and I was willing to suffer the consequences. I was protesting. I was in the middle of the street, as a matter of fact, here in Washington, D.C., when I went to jail once. I was there, and I suffered my consequences. Dr. King wrote his ``Letter from Birmingham Jail'' from the Birmingham Jail. It is disruptive action, not destructive action. This was a disruption that we created in the streets. It was a disruption that caused Dr. King to go to jail. It was not destruction. If you destroy things, you are not within the law. Do not break the law in the sense that you are going to destroy things. Destruction is not the way to protest. Disruption is how we get it done. And with reference to the constabulary: follow the law. We cannot have law enforcement officers breaking the law under the guise of trying to protect statues and other things from destruction. Neither of these two groups can bring about the kind of justice that we are looking for. We are protesting now because of the brutality that many people have suffered, and some have lost their lives at the hands of the constabulary. But we are also protesting because we are being discriminated as it relates to lending. When people don't get the loans that they qualify for, their livelihoods are being stolen from them, their opportunities are being stolen from them. So we are protesting discrimination in lending. We are protesting discrimination in hiring and promotions. There is this notion that we should have kitchen table issues discussed. Well, discrimination in hiring is a kitchen table issue. Those who believe that jobs without discrimination as a conversation is not a kitchen table issue, you are wrong. People discuss these things, and we should. We have to make sure that every person is treated equally under the law in the United States of America. Peaceful protest is the best protest. Law enforcement officers must follow the law. The protestation exceeds what is happening with the constabulary. It moves into the banks; it moves into our homes; it moves into our lives.

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, it is my preeminent privilege to rise today to pay tribute to a great and noble American, a dear friend, a Member of this House until his transition. Mr. Speaker, of course I speak of none other than the Honorable John Lewis. I want to recognize and say words about him today, because he took to heart the words of Gandhi that we should be the change that we seek. He was the sermon that he preached. He did what he said he would do and inspired others to do likewise. It is said that a great person will always rise to the occasion, but it is also said that the greater person makes the occasion. Well, when it came to the Edmund Pettus Bridge, not only did he rise to the occasion by marching across that bridge, he made the occasion by helping to organize the march that left Brown Chapel and went to that bridge. Knowing that they were facing the constabulary with clubs, they marched on. Knowing that they were marching into brutality, they marched on. He was a person who understood that the cause of justice will sometimes require some harm to be suffered, yet he marched on. And for this reason, the world had an opportunity to see the horrors of invidious discrimination, and in so seeing, a President, Lyndon Johnson, was put in a position such that he could pass the Voting Rights Act. And after the passage of that act, many of us who are in Congress today are here because he marched across that bridge. So I would say to you, Mr. Speaker, because of his courage, because he walked the talk, because he was there for us at the Edmund Pettus Bridge, and because the Voting Rights Act was passed as a result thereof, it seems to me that it would be proper, appropriate, and befitting of this body and all of Congress to now pass the reformation of the Voting Rights Act so that we can show the world that voting is still important to all people in this country. The Honorable John Lewis was there on Bloody Sunday. Why not have the irony of history allow him to be the spark that will ignite the passage of this reformation of the Voting Rights Act in the Congress of the United States of America. And finally this: I had conversations with him, some of them in jail. He got me in good trouble. We went to jail in 2006 protesting at the Sudanese Embassy. We went to jail in 2013 protesting out in the streets of Washington, D.C., for immigration reform. Yes, it was good trouble, and I am proud to say I was there in good trouble. But one of the things we discussed was Jimmie Lee Jackson. We ought not forget Jimmie Lee Jackson. Jimmie Lee Jackson was the person who had just lost his life prior to marching across the Edmund Pettus Bridge. In fact, there are many who would contend that he was the spark that ignited much of that movement. So let us move forward together recognizing the Honorable John Lewis. But let us not forget C.T. Vivian; let us not forget Hosea Williams; let us not forget the many nameless, faceless persons who were there with him on Bloody Sunday. Let us do this: Let us pass the Voting Rights Act, the reformation thereof, in his honor.

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, and still I rise. And I rise tonight to express my support for H.R. 2, the Moving Forward Act. I have supported this legislation because it is not only good for my congressional district, it is also good for the country. This legislation will allow us to do something that I think is quite important. I sit on the Financial Services Committee, and it allows us to address housing as a part of our Nation's infrastructure. The Honorable Maxine Waters has worked tirelessly to get housing included in this legislation. I believe it will benefit many people, especially those people who may find themselves with rent due and an inability to pay their bills. I also am proud to say that it will help our ports. We have the Port of Houston, and that is a port that is very significant as it relates not only to Houston but to the country. It will help with our schools, and it will help with broadband. It is a very good piece of legislation. But there is one additional thing in this legislation that I think would be of benefit, not only to the young people in this country but also to our police officers. This is H. Res. 169 which is a piece of legislation that emanated in my office. This would have a driver and an officer safety education component. We talk about the conversations that African American parents have with their children. This is a conversation that takes place because of a history that we too well understand. This legislation addresses that conversation, but it addresses it not only as it relates to the young person, the person who is going to be driving the car, it also addresses it as it relates to the officer. It would grant States moneys for grants such that they would be able to train officers about the interactions with civilians and train civilians, give them the education that they need so that they will understand how to properly interact with officers. Understanding can change the course of history. It can make a difference in the lives of people. My hope is that with this legislation in H.R. 2 it will cause somebody to benefit from just knowing how to interact with a person who happens to be a police officer or a police officer getting a better understanding of how to interact with someone from a given community. As important as this piece of legislation is, I do understand that if we are to have the kind of change that we seek, we will probably have to have another piece of legislation that I am proud to offer. This is a piece of legislation calling for a department of reconciliation. A lot of what is happening in our country is systemic. It is institutionalized. If we want to deal with systemic and institutionalized problems, especially as they relate to race, then we need to have a department so that we can approach these systemic issues not only in the short term but over the years and over the decades. This department of reconciliation will, of course, have a secretary of reconciliation. This secretary will have the responsibility of devising the strategy and implementing a strategy to eliminate racism and invidious discrimination in our country. This department will be properly funded. We would like to see it funded with a minimum of 10 percent of what the Department of Justice receives. This would be the equivalent--the money would not come from the Department of Justice--but the equivalent of 10 percent of what the Department of Justice receives as a minimum in funding. This department would be one that would give us the opportunity to look into the future and devise a means by which we can avoid some of the systemic problems that we currently have. Madam Speaker, my hope is that this resolution will get the support of my colleagues. It has gained support every day, and I look forward to getting the continued support of my colleagues for the resolution. The resolution, of course, is the forerunner to a bill, a bill that will actually develop this department of reconciliation. We found that there is a Labor Department, and this Labor Department, of course, deals with issues associated with labor. We have other departments that are specialties. They specialize in dealing with certain issues. Well, why not a department of reconciliation so that we can do something that has long been needed since the Emancipation Proclamation? While we had the invidious discrimination known as segregation, through the years, we have not done what we need to do, and that is reconcile, settle our differences, come to a conclusion as to what is appropriate when it comes to some of the icons that we have in this country with reference to Civil War memorabilia and where it can be placed. These kinds of things can be resolved through the department of reconciliation. Madam Speaker, my hope is that we will have the department available to us in the near future. My hope is that this is something that Presidential candidates will embrace and want to talk about. I will surely put it before candidates when given the opportunity because the secretary will report directly to the President of the United States. This will give us the insight that we need into the Office of the Presidency. And the President can, of course, provide legislation by and through the secretary. It is a good piece of legislation, and my hope is that we will get it passed. Finally, this: I am honored to say that I, too, support law enforcement. My uncle was a deputy sheriff. He had a great amount of influence on my life. I believe that I am in Congress today because of some things that he said and urged me to do. Madam Speaker, I support law enforcement. I don't paint all law enforcement officers with the same brush, just as I don't want all protesters to be painted with the same brush. I support the right to peacefully protest. I believe that if we who support the protest movements and support peace officers, if we would actually let people know that there are some persons who are in the police forces that are not acceptable because of their behavior, and there are some people who are associating themselves with the protest movement who are not acceptable because of their behavior--persons who do things that are inappropriate, persons who would burn buildings, this is inappropriate. I don't support that. Officers who would put their knees on the necks of persons, that is inappropriate. No one would support that, I would hope. Madam Speaker, I just think that, as we move forward, let's not conclude that there is something wrong with the protest movement because of some of the people who associate themselves with the movement, just as I don't conclude that there is something wrong with all police officers because of the actions and behavior of some police officers. There are people within both of these entities that I speak of who are good, and the bad ones, we, of course, should eliminate. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.