Al Green

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, and still I rise. And I rise today to call upon the Governor of the State of Texas to denounce the coverup by the pusillanimous peace officers at Robb Elementary. If you have seen that video and it does not tug at your heart, you need help. I stand with those parents who are suffering. It is time for us to get to the bottom of what happened at that elementary school. The Governor laid the foundation at his initial press conference for the coverup that has taken place. Governor, we are going to hold you accountable. You can't allow such things to happen without denouncing them, at minimum, and there may be more that you can do. Use all of your powers, Governor, to bring justice to the families who are suffering.

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, and still I rise with a message for those it may concern. At Robb Elementary School, more than 15 good guys with guns, ballistic shields, and body armor confronted a bad guy with a gun and didn't do what many expect teachers to do with a pistol. Expecting teachers to take out bad guys with guns is unreasonable, outrageous, and dumb. Let teachers teach.

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I thank Mr. Nadler and all of the hands that have made this moment possible. Madam Speaker, I have been here in this House when we have given our thoughts and prayers to many persons who have died, many as a result of an active shooter circumstance. Thoughts and prayers are important. My grandfather was a preacher. He talked about thoughts and prayers, but he also talked about doing God's work. Thoughts and prayers are important, but thoughts and prayers are not enough. Thoughts and prayers, unfortunately, are not saving lives when we can make the difference. `` . . . here on earth, God's work must truly be our own.'' These are the words of John F. Kennedy. Thoughts and prayers are not enough. There seems to be an argument today that we can give too much notice. Too much notice. We already have a system that can do this. Too much notice. Ask the loved ones of those who lost lives in the Atlanta, Georgia, area. Ask those loved ones if there was too much notice. I went there. I saw them. I saw the hurt and the pain. I saw them pleading for additional help. Thoughts and prayers are not enough. You can't give too much notice. Too much notice? Well, this shooter in Atlanta went to three different spas over a 3-hour period. Three different spas. I do believe this is an active shooter. Killed eight people--eight people--three different spas over a 3-hour period. This is an active shooter. Didn't have too much notice. I believe that we have a duty, responsibility, and obligation to do all that we can. When you can't do enough, you still have a responsibility to do all that we can. This is an opportunity for us to do more to save lives. For edification purposes, since 1968--1968--more individuals in the United States have died from gun violence than in battles during all the wars the country has fought since its inception. Since 1968, more individuals in the United States have died from gun violence than in battle during all the wars since this country's inception. Too much is not enough. Too much notice is not enough, and we don't have enough.

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, this bill requires the Secretary of HUD to develop a formula to allocate assistance to the most impacted and distressed areas resulting from a catastrophe or a major disaster. This bill requires HUD to balance the use of Federal recovery funds between rebuilding infrastructure and housing, ensuring that funds are spent proportionally between homeowners and renters unless the Secretary determines there is a compelling need to do otherwise. This bill requires HUD to ensure that States prioritize the activities that help extremely low- and moderate-income survivors recover, address pre- and post-disaster housing needs, and prepare for future disasters. This is the bill that is on the floor. The wish list is not. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1\1/2\ minutes. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in strong support of the Reforming Disaster Recovery Act which I have submitted as an amendment No. 448 to the National Defense Authorization Act. This amendment would permanently authorize the Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery Program which provides States, Tribes, and communities with flexible, long-term recovery resources needed to rebuild affordable housing and infrastructure after a disaster. The amendment also provides important safeguards and tools to help ensure that Federal disaster recovery efforts reach all impacted households, including the lowest income and most marginalized survivors who are often hardest hit by disasters and have the fewest resources to recover. The amendment also provides important safeguards and tools to help ensure that Federal disaster recovery efforts reach all impacted households in the future, including the lowest income and most marginalized survivors. These measures would help to prevent the repetition of what happened in Texas in the aftermath of Hurricane Harvey where more than 4 years after the disaster, relief funds that were appropriated by Congress have not filtered down to the hands of people who need them. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Houston, Texas (Ms. Garcia).

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I have great respect for my dear colleague and friend. I was born in New Orleans, Louisiana. I understand the rules of the State and the people. But he and I have a difference of opinion about which committee should have jurisdiction. I sit on the Financial Services Committee. HUD has jurisdiction. He sits on Transportation. He wants jurisdiction. He is not going to get it. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, how much time is remaining?

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, at this time I am very proud to have a dear friend and colleague on the floor with me. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Ocasio- Cortez).

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for her message, and I assure her that I will be part of that fight. There are some fights that you cannot escape. I believe that women should have the right to choose. It is not my choice. It is the choice of the woman. I hope that we will see a time when the Supreme Court will realize that it has made a mistake that has to be corrected. But today I am here primarily and principally to talk about a state of affairs in Texas. Sadly, regrettably, and unfortunately, the GOP-- the Grand Old Party, the party of Lincoln--has degenerated and devolved into what I call the COT, the cult of Trump. The party of Lincoln has devolved into the cult of Trump. It is no longer the Lincolnian party firmly planted on the bedrock of the democratic principles, government of the people, by the people, and for the people. It has deteriorated into the Trumpian party firmly planted on the dubious ground of ``government of Trump, by Trump, and for Trump.'' This is best evidenced and evinced by juxtaposing the public policy stance taken by the GOP with the public policy stance codified and voted on by the Texas Republican Party--the COT, the cult of Trump--on June 18, 2022, at their party convention in Houston, Texas. And juxtaposing, the GOP, the party of Lincoln that took a stand and fought to keep the Union together, the COT, the cult of Trump, has taken a stand to secede from the Union literally. Texas now under Republican leadership desires to leave the Union. When I say Republican leadership, I mean those persons who participated in the convention. The Governor sent a message and State- elected officials were a party to it. Either directly or in some vicarious way they were all affiliated and associated. They knew about this vote that was taken, and either they voted for it, or they have acquiesced to it. The GOP, the party of Lincoln historically, accepted and participated in the peaceful transfer of Presidential power. The COT, the cult of Trump, rejects the certified results of the 2022 Presidential election and holds that President Biden was not legitimately elected by the people. This is all news that has taken place in the State of Texas recently--as of June 18, 2022--Texas wanting to leave the Union by and through the GOP. Now the cult of Trump and also the Texas Republican Party indicated that President Biden is not the President. They went so far as to say that they reject the certified results of the 2022 Presidential election that holds that President Biden was elected but they say not legitimately elected. Lastly, of the many things that I could mention--but it is something that is critical to people of color and women--the GOP, the party of Lincoln, forged the 15th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution recognizing the right of former slaves to vote. Under the hand of GOP President George W. Bush, a 25-year reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act was signed into law. On the other hand, the COT, the cult of Trump, urges that the Voting Rights Act of 1965, codified and updated in 1973, be repealed and not reauthorized. The Texas former Republican Party, now the cult of Trump, would repeal and not reauthorize the Voting Rights Act. Should this happen, the gender, complexion, and diversity of the Congress will change significantly. Here is why: In 1965, when our dear colleague and brother, John Lewis, crossed the Edmund Pettus Bridge on what we now call Bloody Sunday, when he crossed the Edmond Pettus Bridge that day, he had to sense what fate was awaiting him on the other side of the bridge. I am not sure he anticipated it would be as dastardly imposed as it was. As he approached the bridge--I have been to the bridge many times; it has a zenith, and it has crest. As you approach the crest, Mr. Speaker, you can see what awaits you on the other side. On Bloody Sunday in 1965, peaceful protesters were marching from Selma to Montgomery. They were peaceful, doing no one harm, and simply wanting to peacefully demonstrate that they were willing to walk to a city that for years had been a place where there had been persons who were being mistreated and not having the opportunity to vote as other people were voting. But in any event, they were walking, and they came upon the police and the constabulary on horses. I spoke to my friend, John Lewis, about this. He said he thought he was going to die because they started beating them. They beat them all the way back to the church where they started. It was a sad day in history. It was a sad day in the history of this country and a sad day in the history of the world. The camera's eye caught what was happening, and it was broadcast around the world. A President from Texas, Lyndon Johnson, wanted to do what he ultimately did. But he didn't have the momentum to get it done until Bloody Sunday when people saw the meanness, the hate, and just the desire to harm peaceful people. When they saw all of this, it gave him that momentum that he had been seeking. I admire him. He was able to get the Voting Rights Act of 1965 signed. That Voting Rights Act of 1965 changed the diversity in Congress, the complexion of Congress, and the agenda of Congress. This is the same Voting Rights Act, Mr. Speaker, that the cult in Texas--the COT, the cult of Trump, no longer the Grand Old Party, the GOP--they would not reauthorize, they would repeal it. President Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act. At the time he signed it in 1965 in the 89th Congress, there were four Asian Members--four. There were four Latino Members, six Black Members, and 13 women in the Congress. There were four Asians in 1965. Now, fast-forward to 2022, the 117th Congress. There are 21 Asian Members. Before the Voting Rights Act became law, there were four. In 2022, there are 21. Before the Voting Rights Act, there were four Latino Members. In 2022, there are 52. The Voting Rights Act has afforded opportunities that were not there prior to Bloody Sunday. There were six Black Members in 1965. In 2022, there are 61 Black Members. I am proud to be one of them--61. I would daresay that but for the Voting Rights Act of 1965, I would not be one of the 61. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 has made a difference in the complexion of Congress. There were thirteen women in 1965. In 2022 there are 151 women. You see, Mr. Speaker, when the Voting Rights Act of 1965 made it possible for African Americans to have these opportunities, it did open the door for others as well. It opened the door for people of color. They were not the slaves that benefited from the 13th Amendment, but they were people who benefited from the Voting Rights Act of 1965. It also provided people in my congressional district to have a ballot printed in more than one language. Houston is a polyglot city. Many languages are spoken. The ballot in the Ninth Congressional District, where I am fortunate enough to serve, is printed in four different languages: English, Spanish, Vietnamese, and Chinese. The Voting Rights Act made that possible. It has been reauthorized and amended such that language has been made a part of the Voting Rights Act giving people the opportunity to simply vote in a language that they understand. Some people would say: Well, they should all speak English. Well, there are some Native Alaskans who don't necessarily find English as their native tongue. They are citizens. They ought to be able to vote. They are people who acquired citizenship and speak another language. They speak English well enough to have the kinds of conversations that can help in your daily life, but when you are casting a vote for President of the United States or some other public office such as judgeships, it would serve people well to be able to do this with the language they are most comfortable with. Hence, we have the ballot in these four languages. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 has made, and continues to make, a difference notwithstanding the fact that a significant portion of it has been eviscerated. We still have section 2 of the Voting Rights Act to help prevent invidious discrimination that Texas is known for, by the way. Texas is the home of invidious discrimination. Texas has twice left its place in countries where slavery was not acceptable. Rather than remain, Texas has seceded. Texas left Mexico because of slavery, and Texas left the United States because of slavery. So the Voting Rights Act of 1965 has made a difference. But the State of Texas through many of its agents, and especially those associated with the cult of Trump--formerly known as the GOP, the Grand Old Party--many of those agents would repeal the Voting Rights Act which would make a great difference in who speaks at this microphone and who walks the Halls of Congress. It seems that in Texas if you can't conform with the law or you don't want to, then you just simply change the law. And that is what they seek to do now, to change the law, rather than allow the diversity to exist that we currently see. They would change the law and roll back the clock; and I assure you, the diversity that we currently experience would cease to exist. So I am here to say that the Voting Rights Act of 1965 must be reauthorized. It must be. I understand that the Supreme Court seems to be hostile to the rights of minorities, hostile to the rights of women. My dear friend, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, spoke quite eloquently on the subject. I indicated that this was my last topic, as it relates to the cult in Texas, but I do have to confess that in Texas, the former GOP, now the cult of Trump, bans abortions, or would ban abortions--this is what they codified and published--would ban abortion from the moment of fertilization. That means that there would be no legal abortions in Texas from the moment of fertilization. I do have sympathy for women who are raped. There would be no options, from the moment of fertilization. It appears, at least to some, that this would also mean, even if the mother's life is in question. This is as draconian as a law can be. Women should have the right to choose. It is their body. I can have opinions, but they have to deal with the reality. And it is not an easy reality for many women to confront. So this is something they should have the opportunity to talk about with their most trusted confidantes and make hard choices. I don't wish the choice upon anyone, but I do think that women ought to have that choice. And my hope is that, as I indicated earlier, I live long enough to see a Supreme Court that will realize that Roe v. Wade--the decision in Roe v. Wade was a decision that gave women the opportunity to make choices that only they should have the opportunity to make. Mr. Speaker, these are some very difficult times. I see many people celebrating. But I also know that when I called a friend to discuss this, there were many tears being shed. And not everybody is happy today. For many people, this is a very dark day in the life of our country. Just yesterday, or the day before--the days run together sometimes when you are up late--the Supreme Court ruled that you can carry your gun openly, notoriously. I don't want to live in a world where my safety is dependent upon my having an automatic Kalashnikov model 47, or some replica of an AR-15. I don't want my safety to depend upon my being--having the quickest draw. I don't want to resolve my disputes with a gun. I just think this is a very difficult time for us. And my prayer is that we will have persons in the Senate who will understand that there is little time left for us to make a difference. We have the House, meaning Democrats. We have the Senate, and we have the Presidency. There is just little time left. But there is enough time left for us to make a difference if we choose to. And my prayer is that those Senators will understand that either we take up our agenda now, or we risk not having the opportunity to take it up within the foreseeable future. That is what we risk. I hope that they will see that now is the time to deal with a woman's right to choose. The legislation is there. Now is the time to deal with gun safety laws that can prevent 18- year-olds from having weapons of war. Now is the time to take up voting rights, so that all persons will have an equal opportunity to serve. Now is the time to take up an agenda that will make America the beautiful a more beautiful America. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I thank my friend and colleague, Mr. Cicilline, for the opportunity. Madam Speaker, I am a proud ally and member of the Congressional LGBTQ+ Equality Caucus. Why? I will share with you a brief vignette. When I was a much younger person, I had a friend whose name was Glen. Glen was small in stature. He never bothered anybody. He was friendly, gregarious; very much outgoing. I didn't understand Glen, but I had friends who thought they understood him. My friends, Mr. Cicilline, would pick on Glen. They called him queer. They invited him to do things that were unacceptable. I never spoke up for Glen. I saw him and left. I had the opportunity to take a stand for justice and against hate. My friend, Glen, has gone on to glory, and I have allowed his memory to haunt me because of my failure to do what I could easily have done. I am an ally because I have seen the behavior of people who disrespect the humanity that every person merits by virtue of just being born. That is all. The Constitution recognizes my rights, recognizes your rights. It doesn't grant us a right, and we didn't recognize Glen's rights. As a result, I will probably do many things in life to try to make up for my failure at a time when someone needed me and I could have been there, and I wasn't. So to my friend Glen, I have introduced the LGBTQIA+ Pride Month Resolution. It encourages the celebration of the month of June as LGBTQIA+ Pride Month, and it tracks the accomplishments and milestones in the fight for LGBTQIA+ equality. It has 102 original cosponsors. I have done more than this. I have introduced H.R. 166, the Fair Lending for All Act. This piece of legislation passed the House recently, by the way, as part of the Financial Services Racial Equity, Inclusion, and Economic Justice Act. This piece of legislation would clarify and extend antidiscrimination laws to include sexual orientation and gender identity. I thank the Honorable Maxine Waters for helping to bring this legislation to the floor. In fact, but for her, it would not have been to the floor for the vote that it received. Here is the most significant aspect of the legislation. Not only does it indicate that you can't discriminate based upon sexual orientation or gender identity; it makes it a crime to do so--a crime to do so. Some things bear repeating. It can serve as a mnemonic device. It makes it a crime to do so. If the banks are defrauded, you, as a citizen, can be fined up to $1 million. Nothing comparable to this exists if a person happens to have a gender identity or sexual orientation that is unacceptable to a loan officer, and the loan officer concludes that you are not worthy of a loan that you are qualified for in all other ways. If this bill passes the Senate, not only will it be a crime, but you will do time if you are found guilty, and you will have to pay a fine. There are some things that we ought not tolerate in life, and that is invidious discrimination against anyone. We ought not tolerate it because if you tolerate it, you perpetuate it. To my friend Glen, I want you to know that I am still in the struggle that you caused me to realize was more than just a bunch of guys having fun playing pranks on another person. Finally, I am not sure where this country is going because, in the State of Texas, the Republican platform indicates that there are but two gender identities: You are either a biological male, or you are a biological female. This is in the Republican platform. I don't know where we are going, but it is not in the right direction because you are denying, by virtue of this kind of platform, the identity of transgender people. Who are you to tell other people who they are? You tried it with me. When I was born, I was a Negro. It wasn't my decision. It wasn't my mother's decision. You denied me of my cultural integrity. You are still up to your old tricks, demeaning others to somehow conclude that it is better for you. I don't know where we are going, but we are going in the wrong direction. We ought not let the State of Texas do this without some rebuff, some indication that we won't tolerate it because it is but a harbinger of things to come. This is the State of Texas where a lot of unpleasant things are born. The State of Texas also wants to repeal the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The State of Texas wants to secede from the Union. I understand these things, but I don't understand denying a person's identity. Madam Speaker, I thank Mr. Cicilline for the time. I am an ally, and I am a friend you can count on. I will not allow myself to fail to speak up ever again in life when it comes to injustice against anybody. Dr. King was right: ``Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.''

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, and still I rise. And I rise today with an expression of gratitude and great appreciation. I thank the many persons who voted for H.R. 2543, the Financial Services Racial Equity, Inclusion, and Economic Justice Act. I rise to thank persons for this because I was fortunate enough to have the opportunity to manage the bill on the floor. The Honorable Maxine Waters is the sponsor of this piece of legislation. It is a compilation of some 13 bills that were used and packaged so that we could bring about some racial justice in this country. Racial justice that is long overdue, I might add. The Honorable Maxine Waters, but for her, I can say without reservation, hesitation, or equivocation, this bill would not have come to fruition. She has been a champion for those who have been left out, left behind, locked out, those that I label as being among the least, the last, and the lost. The least, those who don't inherit a legacy of wealth but, rather, a legacy of poverty. The least, those are persons who are still finding themselves living in the streets of life. The last, those are the last hired and the first fired. The lost, those who are lost in the richest country in the world, but lost perhaps in chemical consumption, drugs, if you will, lost because of mental issues, but they are lost in the richest country in the world. She has been a champion for them. I will always be grateful to her for working with me to help me to acquire a position on the Financial Services Committee. I think that probably but for her, I might not have the position that I have. So I know that she is not doing well today, but she will be back, and I want her to know today that I am appreciative for the many opportunities that I have acquired by virtue of her being there at the right time when these opportunities were available. I also thank the Members who had those bills, the 13 bills: Mrs. Joyce Beatty, Mr. Auchincloss, Mr. Cleaver, Mr. Meeks, Ms. Garcia of Texas, Mr. Torres, and of course, Ms. Waters, had a bill as well. I had two bills associated with this package. This package, the Financial Services Racial Equity, Inclusion, and Economic Justice Act, why is it needed? Why is it needed on this day some few days away from Juneteenth? And I celebrate Juneteenth, by the way. I commend my colleague, Ms. Jackson Lee, for her work on Juneteenth. I knew the father of Juneteenth, Al Edwards. Al Edwards was a State representative in Texas, and he was a person who was tenacious about Juneteenth. It was his legislation that passed the Texas House and Senate and was signed by the Governor of the State of Texas, making Juneteenth a holiday at a time when, quite frankly, people thought that it was impossible to get it done. Al Edwards, the father of Juneteenth, I always remember him, a dear friend. We celebrated Juneteenth together on many occasions. We traversed the State together. He was one of my supporters. I know his family. His brother was a banker, Redick Edwards. He was my banker, as a matter of fact. So I have a relationship with this family. I want the world to know that I am appreciative for what he did to lay the foundation for Juneteenth as a holiday at the national level. I also express my appreciation for what Juneteenth is all about. General Gordon Granger came into Galveston, Texas, in 1865. The Emancipation Proclamation had been signed. The war had ended, but in Texas, the slaves were not accorded their freedom. Some people say that the word hadn't reached Texas. I differ. The word reached Texas, but the slaveholders saw those slaves as personal property, and they saw no reason to give up their personal property simply because Mr. Lincoln signed an Emancipation Proclamation or simply because the war was over. That was their personal property. It is said that someone was sent, an envoy, if you will, to make it known to people in Texas that the slaves had been freed. This is prior to General Gordon Granger arriving in Galveston, Texas in 1865. Well, they said that that person didn't quite get the message across, and one can well understand why, given the behavior of Texas, a State that seceded from the Union and also seceded from Mexico because of slavery. They were recalcitrant--and that is being kind--about the desire to maintain slavery. But President Lincoln sent General Gordon Granger. To say that he sent General Gordon Granger, quite frankly, is an incomplete statement. He sent General Gordon Granger and 2,000 troops. General Gordon Granger, being the wise man that he was, brought those troops with him, but they also had some friends with them. They had Mr. Winchester, Smith & Wesson. They were well equipped to present this message to the slaveholders. When it was presented with 2,000 troops who were well armed, it was received. It was the next year that the first Juneteenth celebration took place. That was in 1866, the first celebration. This is what Al Edwards shared with me about Juneteenth, the actual moniker, the name for the holiday. It was his position that it became known as ``Juneteenth'' because there was some question about the date that General Gordon Granger arrived, within the minds of the slaves, whether it was on the 18th or the 19th. Rather than continue a debate about the actual date, it simply became ``Juneteenth,'' and folks can fill in the blank as they choose. 1866 was a big celebration of Juneteenth, a celebration of freedom. Again, I commend the father, Al Edwards, and I commend my colleague, Ms. Jackson Lee, for her stellar work here in Congress to work Juneteenth through to the point that it is now a Federal holiday. I commend both of them. I commend the many people who voted for it. Today, I thank the people who voted for that holiday, but I also thank the people who voted for H.R. 2543. I greatly appreciate the fact that you voted for the Financial Services Racial Equity, Inclusion, and Economic Justice Act because that act is needed. There has to be some question as to why it is needed more than 150 years after the end of slavery. Why would we need a Financial Services Racial Equity, Inclusion, and Economic Justice Act these many years later? Well, rather than give you my opinion about it, I am going to read to you from a report presented by the Brookings Institution. Brookings is well known and well respected. Let's just see what Brookings says. This was published on February 27, 2020. Not a lot has changed since February 27, 2020, so let's examine what they at the Brookings Institution have shared with us with reference to the Black folk in this country. It is styled, the article, ``Examining the Black-White Wealth Gap.'' Hear now the words of the Brookings Institution: ``A close examination of wealth in the U.S. finds evidence of staggering racial disparities. At $171,000, the net worth of a typical White family is nearly 10 times greater than that of a Black family, which is $17,150.'' This was in 2016. 2016, White family's worth: $171,000. This is the net worth. Black family's net worth: $17,150. Over 150 years since the end of the Civil War, more than 400 years since the first Africans were brought here as slaves in 1619, 400 years have passed, and we still have this wage gap. It goes on to read: ``Gaps in wealth between Black and White households reveal the effects of accumulated inequality and discrimination, as well as differences in power and opportunity that can be traced back to this Nation's inception.'' ``Traced back to this Nation's inception.'' This is the Brookings Institution. ``Traced back to this Nation's inception.'' ``The Black-White wealth gap reflects a society that has not and does not afford equality of opportunity to all its citizens.'' Equality of opportunity is the opportunity--these are my words--to succeed on your merits or fail on your demerits, the opportunity for you to pull yourself up by your bootstraps. The society, according to Brookings, does not afford equality of opportunity to all its citizens. It goes on to indicate: ``Efforts by Black Americans to build wealth can be traced back throughout American history. But these efforts have been impeded in a host of ways, beginning with 246 years of chattel slavery followed by congressional mismanagement of the Freedman's Savings Bank.'' This bank was established after the slaves were freed to provide them an opportunity to accumulate wealth. They were free, but they were just free to the elements. They didn't have property that they owned. They were free to have persons abuse them. They were in a hostile environment. They were among people who had held them as property, people who had no desire to see their property taken from them. So they were free, but they were free to the wind, the rains, the elements, free to starve, and free to survive if they could. But that level of freedom was supposed to be curtailed with the Freedman's Savings Bank. Well, the bank started with the best of intentions. According to the history I have read, it was the idea of Frederick Douglass and was supposed to give the freed slaves an opportunity to acquire wealth, to save money, to understand the process of saving money, by the way. For people who had never had money--imagine this--never had money, what do you do with it if you acquire some? Many of them were working for the Union Army, and they were getting paid. So what do you do with this thing called money? Well, this bank was a place where they were supposed to be able to save. Unfortunately, there was mismanagement. Congress did not put in the proper safeguards so that it could continue to exist in perpetuity, and it left some 61,144 depositors with losses of nearly $3 million in 1874. Then, there were persons who sought to move ahead, notwithstanding circumstances, and there was this area in Tulsa, Oklahoma, Tulsa's Greenwood District. Here is what is said by Brookings with reference to Greenwood. It reads: ``The violent massacre decimating Tulsa's Greenwood District in 1921, a population of 10,000 that thrived as the epicenter of African- American business and culture, commonly referred to as `Black Wall Street,' ''--Black Wall Street was decimated. This was an opportunity for people to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, to find a means by which they could have commerce among themselves. They were of no threat to the broader community, but they had Black Wall Street taken away from them, literally destroyed. Thereafter, we had the discriminatory policies throughout the 20th century, including Jim Crow-era Black codes, laws that applied specifically to Black people. If you weren't working, you could be incarcerated if you were Black. This is not contained here, but you had the convict leasing that took place, which was another form of slavery. A person would be arrested for some minor offense and then placed in the hands of a landowner to work--leased, as it were, from the State. Some of these persons would work for the rest of their lives for some minor offense. They became slaves by another name, leased convicts. So, we had Black codes limiting opportunities in many Southern States. Along came the GI Bill. We are fast-forwarding now, and this is part of the article that I am reading. The GI Bill benefited and still benefits--a good many people who are right here in this Congress benefited from the GI Bill. Few Black people did. Very few Black people benefited from the GI Bill. The statistical information is overwhelming in terms of the number that did not, small numbers. Of the thousands that initially benefited from it, numbers less than 10 were Black. Thousands, with 10 maybe, or less, that were Black. There are some people who give a specific number on it at less than 10. But let's just leave it with the fact that there were less than 10 who benefited from it among thousands. Here is why they didn't benefit. They didn't benefit because if you wanted to get a mortgage to buy property, which is what the GI Bill would afford you, the banks wouldn't lend money in Black neighborhoods. If you were Black and you walked into the bank, that in and of itself was a denial of the loan. Your presence, your skin complexion, that was the denial of your loan because banks were not lending to people living in Black neighborhoods. Well, someone would say: But, Al, how did they know they were living in a Black neighborhood? Because you couldn't live in a White neighborhood. You couldn't live among people who could get loans. There were restrictive covenants. The law said they couldn't live there, and they were denied the opportunity to acquire land, which was another means of amassing wealth. By the way, this was not the first time people of color were denied the opportunity to acquire land. In the early years in this country, if you could fence in land and you could protect it, you could squat. It became yours. All you had to do was fence it in and protect it. Black people were not afforded that opportunity. So, here we are, a few days away from Juneteenth, which I will celebrate and appreciate, but I want you to understand why there was a need for H.R. 2543, the Financial Services Racial Equity, Inclusion, and Economic Justice Act. There was a need for it. There is a need for it, and it passed this Congress. So we find ourselves now with the GI Bill and other circumstances that did not inure to the benefit of Black people. According to this article, another circumstance was redlining. Redlining is where literally a red line was drawn around certain areas, and those who were in the business of selling and buying real estate, they rarely wanted to buy that land, so it became a place where people of color lived and the people of color could not get loans to upgrade their property, they could not get the loans needed to improve their lives because the banks were not lending. So this wealth that many people have, the wealth that they have is something that they acquired in ways that were associated with the government that locked Black people out. This--according to the article now--history matters for contemporary inequality, in part, because its legacy is passed down generation to generation. Repeat. This history matters for contemporary inequality, meaning the inequality we see today, in part, because its legacy is passed down generation to generation through unequal monetary inheritances which make up a great deal of current wealth, meaning a good many of the people who have the current wealth they acquired this wealth by being born. A good many people make their first million dollars by being born, just coming into the world, coming into the world in the right family. And these inheritances are passed down from generation to generation through unequal monetary inheritances, which make up a good deal of the current wealth. Interesting fact: In 2020 Americans are projected to inherit about $765 billion in gifts. In 2020, Americans are projected to inherit about $765 billion in gifts and bequests. I assure you only a marginal amount of this will be inherited by Black people. Excluding wealth transfers to spouses and transfers that support minor children, inheritances account for roughly 4 percent of annual household income. Black people have little to pass on, therefore, there is very little that is inherited. And as a result there is no transfer of wealth from one generation to the next to speak of. It is really a sad state of affairs when you really think about it. We have been so conditioned to accept our circumstances in life that this sad state of affairs is just normal to us. It is just as we have embraced it almost. It is just the way things are. Things don't have to be this way. That is why H.R. 2543 is needed. Let me remind you one more time that Black people in this country have wealth that is about one-tenth of what White people have, about one-tenth of what they have. That, my friends, is something that is unacceptable. And it is not because Black people won't work hard. It is not because they don't have good work ethics. No, it is because a system that we exist within has been so structured that not only did we fail to acquire wealth, couldn't acquire it early on in the history of the country, but this system still prevents Black people from acquiring wealth. I come to the floor and talk about these issues quite regularly, and there are some people who have asked me why am I so passionate about these issues? Well, why do I persist when I could easily just go on with my life? And I have had people tell me: You are doing all right. You are doing well. You have all of the trappings of a middle-class person. Why would you do this? Because I haven't always been where I am now, and because I have a memory. I know what it is like to live in poverty. I know what it is like to be discriminated against. I am a son of the segregated south. Those rights that the Constitution recognized as belonging to me, my friends and neighbors took them away. They denied them. I know what it is like to drink from a colored water fountain. I know what it is like to go to a back door to get your food. And I know what it is like for the law to say that you have to go to that back door to get your food. I know what it is like to stand in a separate line in the supermarket and have to wait until all of the persons who are White are served before you can be served. I know what it is like to be born in a racist society. Believe me. I was born into the south. I am 74 years old. I know what racism smells like. I know what it looks like, I know what it tastes like, I know what it sounds like, and I know what it hurts like. So my passion emanates from the suffering and the understanding of what it is like to live in a hostile environment. My friends, Black people are still living in a hostile environment. We don't like to acknowledge it, we want to believe otherwise, but it is a hostile environment. It is a hostile environment. When you go in to get a loan and you are qualified, and you cannot get the same loan that a person of a different hue can acquire who is equally as qualified as you, you are equally as qualified as that person, that is hostile to you in terms of your economic status. H.R. 2543 seeks to remedy that. H.R. 2543 makes it a crime to discriminate against a person in lending. I must tell you, the Honorable Maxine Waters has more courage than we can measure. There is no way to measure the amount of courage this woman has to bring this kind of legislation to this floor. And I have to acknowledge that the other leadership in the House, it was pretty courageous of them, too, to let this kind of bill come to the floor for a vote. And I congratulate and thank every person that voted for it. Because it ought to be a crime to defraud a person out of a loan. For edification purposes, if you defraud the bank, you can face a fine of up to $1 million, up to a $1 million fine. And you can be imprisoned. There is no such fine if the bank denies you a loan, defrauds you of your loan that you are entitled to. That changed with the passage of H.R. 2543. This is historic. You are not going to read about it in the newspapers. But you are going to hear about it from me right here on this floor of the House. I didn't come here to hide the good news. We want to let the world know about the good news. The challenge would be, of course, to get it through the Senate. I believe this President will sign it but getting it through the Senate will be a challenge. But back to where we were. So we find ourselves acclimating to the hostile environment we have. We find ourselves accepting our circumstance. And there are others who would say that you are free, you can just make your way as others have made their way, pull yourself up by your bootstraps. Well, let's see where we are with bootstraps. Bootstraps would first require that you have boots. Black folk don't have the boots. The boots are at the banks. People in this country who have little acquire some things with their hard work and then they are in a position to borrow money. If we are not given a fair opportunity to borrow money, which would give us the boots, and then we can have straps added to the boots, you are not going to be able to pull yourself up by the bootstraps when you don't have boots. It just doesn't happen. And that is the circumstance we find ourselves in. There are many people who will say that by doing what I am doing I am just making excuses. Well, tell that to the people at the Brookings Institution. Convince them. They compile this statistical information, the empirical evidence I have shared with you. This is not Al Green speaking in the sense of Al Green compiled the information that you have heard. No. This is the Brookings Institution. I am just the messenger. They compiled the message. So we find ourselves in this hostile environment as it relates to the economy. It is a hostile environment in many other ways, as well. It is a hostile environment just in terms of our living. Still discriminated against when it comes to housing. Still discriminated against. And it took the death of Dr. King to get the Fair Housing Act through Congress. It is amazing how many of the seminal pieces of legislation that impact the lives of people of color are signed in ink, but they were written with the blood of people who made great sacrifices, Dr. King's life, John Lewis and the Edmund Pettus Bridge. But for John Lewis and the Edmund Pettus Bridge, additional civil rights laws would not have been signed into law. It took blood on the bridge to bring about the Civil Rights Act of 1965. So my dear friends, we are in a hostile environment. People don't like to talk about the hostile environment. When people say Jews will not replace us--when they say Jews will not replace us--my friends, many of those people work in restaurants. One can but only imagine what happens to the food of a Jewish person when you have a person working in the restaurant who says Jews will not replace us. Given that this theory--this fake theory, this myth--there are some other words that can be used that my mother taught me not to use, but these prevarications are associated with this myth. Friends, the myth is that Jews are going to use Black people to replace White people--which is ridiculous. But that means that there are some people that are very hostile to Black people since they think Black people are going to take over--and minorities and immigrants. Just imagine what it can be like to go into a restaurant, and you have persons who don't find favor with treating us fairly. We have to be careful where we eat--we do--if you understand the environment you are living in. Hostile environment. Can you imagine some of these persons--Jews will not replace us-- persons who are up in Idaho dressed in this military regalia, can you imagine one of them being a physician? You have got to go into this office, you need help, maybe you are going into the emergency room. It is a hostile environment. You can't appreciate it if you don't understand the consequences that can emanate from people who scream Jews will not replace us, people who burn crosses, people who say that they are a part of a superior race. You don't think it is a hostile environment? Ask the ghosts of the people who went into the Tops Food Store. Ask the ghosts if it is a hostile environment. He went there to kill Black people. If you don't think it is a hostile environment, ask the spirits of the people who were in the Walmart store in Texas. It is a hostile environment. It is hostile if you understand and appreciate what is going on around you. I don't say it is hostile to the extent that we can't overcome it. I don't say it is hostile to the extent that we should simply surrender and throw up our hands. That is why we have H.R. 2543, and there are other aspects of it requiring transparency. We need to know who is integrating their business. Sometimes when people have to announce their circumstance, they change that condition. H.R. 2543 will provide a lot of transparency. This is needed when you are in a hostile environment. I would say to you, my dear friends--as Brookings puts it--just how large and persistent are these racial wealth gaps? Brookings has made it very clear that at least $17,150 for a Black family in terms of wealth is about one-tenth of the $171,000 net worth of a White family. My hope is that we will remember yesterday as a moment in time that will hopefully accelerate the time that we will need to bring about a closing of this wealth gap. I think that what happened yesterday is a great step in that direction. It is not the last step. It is really not the first, there are other things that have been done, but it is a step in that direction. We need to close the wealth gap. Madam Speaker, I pledge to do all that I can to close it. I want to let you know that in doing all of these things and saying what I am saying to you, explaining it in terms that many people will find uncomfortable, I still say that I love my country. I still say I love my country. I still say I salute the flag. I am not some person who hates America. I am the guy who wants America to become America for all Americans. I want equality of opportunity. I want America to live up to its promise. As I celebrate Juneteenth, I assure you, I will do the things that are customarily done in terms of the food and the drink and just having a great time celebrating freedom. It does not mean that I am going to forget the need for more work to be done. I have great respect for and appreciation for Mr. Hoyer. I can't tell you how much I appreciate and respect him. He has said things here on this floor that I appreciate with reference to discrimination. Others have said things, too, that I greatly appreciate, it is just that I have sort of built a relationship with him. I appreciate his indicating that Slavery Remembrance Day is something that is on his agenda. I am going to celebrate Juneteenth, but that doesn't mean that I won't commemorate August and Slavery Remembrance Day, that is a day of commemoration. Madam Speaker, I am going to enjoy Juneteenth, but remembering that there is still great work to be done. I remember as a child my grandfather reminding me that I would have to be willing to make sacrifices that others would not have to make if I wanted to succeed in life in this country. Sacrifices that others would not have to make. I assumed that we all make the same sacrifices, but my grandfather taught my differently--that is not the case. While I celebrate, I still have some appreciation for the sacrifices that have been made and have to be made. I understand that we need the Maxine Waters of the world who work hard to make sure that while she has the gavel that the change that she can bring about will take place. I appreciate the Sheila Jackson Lees of the world who worked hard to make Juneteenth a holiday. It is a holiday and it is a time to celebrate. I also think we need a day to commemorate because in Texas there is a desire to not allow slavery to be taught--the history of African Americans as it relates to slavery to be taught in the schools. You can't teach it if Texas has its way. Madam Speaker, I celebrate and commemorate. I thank God for the opportunity to serve in this House. I thank those persons who voted for the bill that we brought to the floor, H.R. 2543. I appreciate you, each of you, and I will be sending you a written thank you, but I didn't want too much time to pass without saying it to the world. I appreciate it. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GREEN of Texas

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1170, I call up the bill (H.R. 2543) to amend the Federal Reserve Act to add additional demographic reporting requirements, to modify the goals of the Federal Reserve System, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 2543 and to insert extraneous material thereon.

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2543, the Financial Services Racial Equity, Inclusion, and Economic Justice Act, landmark legislation focused on promoting racial and economic justice. This bill was introduced by Financial Services Committee Chairwoman, the Honorable Maxine Waters, and it includes several provisions authored by members of the committee. Unfortunately, Chairwoman Waters couldn't be here today, but I would like the Record to reflect not only her authorship of this bill but also her unwavering commitment to achieving equity and inclusion on behalf of communities of color. Today's House consideration of H.R. 2543 is historic in that for the first time in our Nation's history, the U.S. House of Representatives is voting on a comprehensive package of legislation to finally address inequity with equity and inclusion in terms of financial access, economic mobility, and fair treatment. Today, I boldly and proudly say that this would not have been possible without the Honorable Chairwoman Waters' leadership. This bill is needed because racial disparities in lending, homeownership, and wealth creation are all too real. For some, invidious discrimination, Mr. Speaker, is only a phrase. However, for too many others, it is a fact of life. According to the Brookings Institution, the racial wealth gap between White and Black households is more than $10 trillion. The onerous wealth gap is perpetuated by the toleration of ongoing discrimination, redlining, and systemic barriers to accessing financial credit and services. Some of my colleagues across the aisle may say that the House shouldn't address this important issue. They may say that the House should ignore these very real, well-documented disparities and focus on getting inflation under control, to which I say, this bill deals with the very real inflationary pressures that people of color experience in their daily lives. Too often, Mr. Speaker, consumers and businesses from low-income communities and communities of color suffer invidious discrimination as they struggle to access capital and credit. Chairwoman Waters said it best, and I was there to hear her say it, when she spoke before the Rules Committee this week. She noted that this type of discrimination is a form of inflation in communities of color. She indicated that when you add up inflated fees in tandem with inflated interest rates, simple loans cost more for people of color than others taking out the same loan in a different community. This, of course, assumes that you are lucky enough to qualify for the loan in the first place. If you are not, then your options to build wealth are severely limited because you can't buy a home or start a small business. In fact, your only option for credit might be an inflated predatory payday loan that leaves you worse off, not better. This is inflation that people of color experience each day, and we should be just as outraged and concerned about these needlessly inflated high costs as we are about the general inflation we are experiencing during the pandemic. And I would further argue that addressing this form of inflation will bring down costs for everyone because, as my colleagues across the aisle are fond of saying, a rising tide lifts all boats. We also know that general inflation disproportionately hurts people of color, which is why this bill directs the Federal Reserve, as it carries out its duties to rein inflation in and promote full employment, to also consider racial disparities so that all people--all people--will benefit from the Fed's dual mandate. Members of the LGBTQIA-plus community also face discrimination in lending. This is why it leads to higher costs for them as well. We shouldn't stand for this during any time of the year, but I am pleased to be among those fighting for LGBTQIA-plus justice during Pride Month. This is why H.R. 2543 includes my bill H.R. 166, the Fair Lending for All Act, which furthers fair lending by clarifying that lending discrimination is prohibited not only on the basis of race, Mr. Speaker, but also on the basis of gender identity, sexual orientation, and geography. This bill enhances supervision and establishes criminal penalties for fair lending violations. Let's take a closer look at fair lending at this time. Every person who purchases a home should be able to read and understand their mortgage documents. This is why common sense should prevail. However, that is not the reality for many home buyers in our country today. This is why the bill includes robust language, robust language to access the requirements for a mortgage, and these mortgage conditions should be made clear in languages that people understand. It requires servicers to expand and preserve the dream of homeownership for borrowers with limited English proficiency. Chairwoman Waters' bill will also support the efforts of community development financial institutions, or CDFIs, and minority depository institutions, or MDIs, that fill a historic lending gap in underserved communities across this country. And it would mitigate banking deserts by allowing credit unions to serve areas that banks have ignored or abandoned. Moreover, this legislation includes another bill of mine, H.R. 2516, the Promoting Diversity and Inclusion in Banking Act, which would require Federal banking regulators to evaluate policies and procedures banks and credit unions have to promote diversity and inclusion. I thank Chairwoman Waters for her continued leadership, her bold leadership, as well as my colleagues and members of the Financial Services Committee for their tireless work, including Representatives Meeks, Cleaver, Beatty, Garcia of Texas, Torres, and Auchincloss. Mr. Speaker, the pandemic has exacerbated and exposed many truths about our Nation's inequitable housing and financial systems, as well as its outsized impact on low-income families and communities of color. It is incumbent on this Congress to finally address these disparities, and that is precisely what Chairwoman Waters' bill will do. Hence, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 2543, the Financial Services Racial Equity, Inclusion, and Economic Justice Act. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks), my dear friend.

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds. Mr. Speaker, this is not another mandate. This is simply a requirement that the Fed fulfill its two mandates, the dual mandates to all of its people, to make sure that all people have price stability. This is what it is about. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez).

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, we are witnessing now why we have the invidious discrimination that exists in this country. Not one word has been said about the invidious discrimination, the high cost in loans that people of color suffer. Not one word is being said about it. Rather, there is always an effort to deflect. This has been going on for centuries, but not today. It ends today. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Beatty).

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I will read from an article entitled: ``Examining the Black-White wealth gap'' from the Brookings Institution dated February 27, 2020. ``A close examination of wealth in the U.S. finds evidence of staggering racial disparities. At $171,000, the net worth of a typical White family is nearly 10 times greater than that of a Black family ($17,150) in 2016. Gaps in wealth between Black and White households reveal the effects of accumulated inequality and discrimination, as well as differences in power and opportunity that can be traced back to this Nation's inception.'' And this is why it continues, because people on that side of the aisle are willing to tolerate invidious discrimination. They will talk about anything but invidious discrimination. They have no remedies. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Cleaver), my friend.

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, inflation does care about your race if you happen to be a person of color and you are applying for a loan. Inflation does care about your race if you happen to have fees added on that you shouldn't have simply because you are a person of color. People of color have to deal with general inflation and the specific inflation associated with invidious discrimination, and it is the intolerance by my colleagues across the aisle through the centuries that has perpetuated this level of inflation.

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Garcia).

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 20 seconds to the gentlewoman.

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. People of color are constituents. People of color are Americans. People of color deserve the opportunity to have equality of opportunity. Hundreds of years have gone by, and this is what we are getting as a result of those who would ignore the concerns of Americans of color. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Auchincloss), a member of the Financial Services Committee.