Alcee Hastings

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I'm pleased to offer an amendment to the Transportation Security Administration authorization legislation requiring the TSA to report on the status of passenger property claims. Between 2003 and 2008, passengers filed almost $3.5 million in claims for property lost after their bags were mishandled by the TSA, including jewelry, electronics, and other personal effects. This is unacceptable. The American people already deal with numerous hassles at the airports. Worrying about theft from their luggage should not be one of them. This amendment ensures adequate oversight of the TSA's efforts to address passenger complaints and claims. This amendment requires the TSA to report on the outstanding claims, their value, and the agency's efforts to enhance our passenger property security and provide effective oversight of baggage screeners and other TSA personnel. Mr. Chairman, the TSA does an outstanding job of protecting our Nation's airports and ensuring the safety and security of the tens of millions of passengers who access our air transportation network each year. This authorization bill--and I compliment Chairman Thompson and his staff, as well as the ranking member and their staff, for offering this very good bill--but it offers us an opportunity to improve the TSA's operations and ensure that all Americans can rest assured that their property is safely cared for under the control of TSA personnel. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Madam Speaker, as Co-Chairman of the U.S. Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (commonly referred to as the Helsinki Commission), I recently returned from a meeting in Dublin, Ireland, with almost 100 parliamentarians from 30 countries where we had the opportunity to discuss responses to the global economic crisis. The meeting was organized by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe Parliamentary Assembly (OSCE PA) and the Parliament of Ireland. All countries are grappling with difficult national problems related to the economic crisis. And indeed, we are in a crisis, and for America, this is the worst economy we've experienced since the Great Depression in the 1920s. People all across America, and in my home state of Florida, are losing their homes, their jobs, and are unable to provide for their families. In addition to discussions on financial regulation, trade protectionism, good governance, and the social consequences of the crisis, I was pleased that we also discussed revenue transparency in the extractive industries as an integral part of creating more transparency in the global financial system overall. As legislators, we have a duty to find ways to relieve the suffering caused by the financial crisis through vital investments in health care, education, infrastructure, and job creation so that we can emerge from this crisis stronger and better than before. But part of the solution is looking at how we even got into this crisis. Transparency--or the lack of it--in the financial world is certainly one of the culprits. And as revenue dwindles, making the most of what we have becomes even more important. The way I see it, improvements in revenue transparency, particularly when we focus on the extractive industries, are important in at least three key ways: The first is to help alleviate poverty. 3.5 billion people live in countries that are rich in oil, gas and minerals. With good governance, the exploitation of these resources can generate large revenues to foster growth and reduce poverty. Resource revenue transparency is necessary in order for citizens--the true owners of their country's natural wealth--to be able to demand greater accountability from their governments for spending that serves the public interest. The second is to promote stable investment climates. Mandatory disclosure can help diminish the political instability caused by opaque governance. Since extractive industries are capital-intensive and dependent on long-term stability to generate returns, transparency of payments made to a government can help mitigate political and reputational risks and also allow shareholders to make better-informed assessments of opportunity costs. The third area is to enhance energy security. Opening the extractive industries sector to greater public scrutiny is key to increasing civil society participation in government. This form of transparency, in conjunction with an increasingly active civil society, can help create more stable, democratic governments, as well as stable business environments. It's a well-known, and well-bemoaned, fact that the United States is becoming more and more reliant on imported energy to fuel our economy. We are the world's largest consumer of oil--we account for an astounding 25 percent of global daily oil demand--despite having less than 3 percent of the world's proven reserves. And we source that oil from some unstable and unfriendly places in the world such as Nigeria and Venezuela. In the context of today's discussion some of you may wonder why the United States should care what is happening in Turkmenistan or Kazakhstan, when we don't rely on these countries for our energy supplies. Russia is only number eight on our list of top ten oil suppliers and Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Azerbaijan don't even make it into the top twenty. The answer is that unlike natural gas, oil is a commodity, so regardless of where we source our oil, what happens in other oil-rich countries impacts the stability of our price and our supply as well. Truly, no one country can achieve energy security without global energy security. I think we can all agree that relying on a country as a source of energy can distort a bilateral relationship. I'm sure you can imagine how drastically different our interactions with some countries would be if we did not rely so heavily on these countries' resources. I think it goes without saying that we would have more leverage to promote democracy and civil society. Clearly oil constrains, if not drives, our foreign policy. So while it is imperative that we work to limit our dependence on foreign oil and change the dynamic of supply and demand, it is just as important to create more stable and reliable sources of energy. One of the key ways the international community has sought to counteract the political and economic instability inherent in the resource curse is through programs that seek to instill transparency and accountability into the resource payment system. As legislators, there is a lot that we can do to further the cause of transparency in the extractive industries. As Co-Chairman of the U.S. Helsinki Commission, I have held hearings and briefings on energy security and transparency that call attention to problems and advocate for solutions. I have also written letters-- co-signed by a number of my congressional colleagues--on this topic to the Executive Branch to advocate for specific policy stances related to U.S. participation in EITI. Drafting and passing legislation is also important, and in 2007 we were successful in passing legislation that spells out the importance of extractive industries transparency in U.S. foreign policy and directs the U.S. State Department to actively promote EITI. I also co-sponsored legislation that would require oil, gas, and mining companies registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to publicly disclose the payments they make to foreign governments for the extraction of natural resources. The information would be included in financial statements already required by the SEC and would apply to both American and foreign companies listed with the SEC, which includes 90 percent of the world's largest oil, gas and mining companies. I'm hopeful that we will see that legislation pass in this Congress. Another tool is direct communication with the Executive Branch. One thing we have already started discussions with the Obama Administration on is how we can play a responsible role--not dominant--in EITI. I strongly believe that the best thing we can do to help boost EITI is to follow the lead of other OSCE member states such as Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Norway and become a Candidate Country with the goal of becoming fully compliant with EITI standards. Right now we think that can be accomplished without any legislative action by the Congress, but if we do need to make some legal changes, then that is something we will work on. If there is one word that has gotten us in this problem, it is greed. This needs to be said so that we as legislators can do something about it. As we are talking about hedge funds, and all these other mechanisms for moving money, we can't ignore the impact of the shadow economy. It is something that we need to address because it fuels crime and instability. Madam Speaker, in the Dublin meeting there were many opinions about the roots of the crisis and potential solutions. However, one clear message I took away from that meeting is that we must work together to find a global solution to a global crisis.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I thank my colleague from the Rules Committee for yielding me the time. And I also would like to refer to my friend, and he is my good friend from Florida, who asks the question, why would the majority, quoting him, ``block legislation.'' My friend, when he was in the majority, knows that I served on the committee with him for a number of years, and I suffered the frustration of being in the minority, and perhaps that is what you suffer. But beyond that, I have the distinct recollection of even being on the Rules Committee and not even having my amendments made in order; so it is not only the general body, even the members of the Rules Committee, it is the function and the way that the House works, and that is that the majority rules. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 915, the FAA authorization action of 2009, has been delayed for almost 3 years. This, in my opinion, is far too long for such a critical issue. Essential increases in aviation funding and safety improvement have been allowed to languish. Under the Bush Administration there was another attempt made to approve this legislation, but it was delayed yet again by the Senate. I believe the time has come for action. For years I have fought, along with colleagues, for a new tower at Palm Beach International Airport. And yet, with all their infinite wisdom, the Federal Aviation Administration approved plans for a new tower that is under construction that is in abatement at this moment, but intends to strip the state-of-the-art TRACON radar out of Palm Beach International and move it to Miami. By placing all of south Florida's major radar functions under one roof in Miami, the FAA is creating an extremely dangerous scenario, especially in light of the fact that Florida is vulnerable to hurricanes and has been designated as a high-risk urban area. If a hurricane were to barrel through Miami-Dade County and damage MIA's control tower and subsequent radar system, as Hurricane Andrew did, then it's highly possible, indeed likely, that emergency efforts in Palm Beach and south Florida could be dramatically hindered. The FAA's contingency plan would require that controllers in Jacksonville, an airport more than 350 miles away, direct approaching aircraft, not only in their assigned region, but throughout all of south Florida and virtually the entire State, without additional staff and technology. For my constituents, H.R. 915 contains a provision that I consider very important, and worked hard to make sure that it was included. I thank Chairman Oberstar and Subcommittee Chair Costello and especially their staffs for the extraordinary work that they have done on this overall bill, and I'm deeply appreciative that they included this language, and I hope the FAA gets it. The administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall take such actions as may be necessary to ensure that any air traffic control tower or facility placed into operation at Palm Beach International Airport after September 30, 2009, to replace an air traffic control tower or facility placed into operation before September 30, 2009, includes an operating Terminal Radar Approach Control. It creates a process to ensure that these realignment efforts are properly reviewed and evaluated, and that stakeholders are involved throughout the entire process. This will help ensure that realignment decisions are not arbitrary nor are they made with only financial considerations taken into account.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Throughout my career, rarely have I seen a Federal agency as dysfunctional, unorganized, or downright incompetent, certainly totally irresponsible as it pertains to this issue, and unresponsive to my and the efforts of others to see to it that this matter is concluded in a positive manner. The way that they functioned under the Bush administration certainly is not to be admired. For years, I've been fighting the FAA to stop the consolidation and the realignment of south Florida air traffic control facilities, and the same holds for other areas of the country where appropriate studies are needed before such decisions are taken. As my constituents know, I take this very personally. Simply put, the lives of millions of people all across this country are in the hands of air traffic controllers every single day. I'm sorry, but we can't play politics with one's personal safety. My good friend from Florida referenced the air traffic controllers. On Monday, I received, as before did Mr. Oberstar and Mr. Costello, the Sentinel of Safety Award. I thank my friends that are National Air Traffic Controllers Association members, particularly those who have worked with me on this project--Mitch and Shane and others in the area--and my former staff person, David Goldenberg. I would like to shout out to him and thank him and Alex Johnson on my staff for the extraordinary work that they have done. I urge the adoption of this rule and the passage of this underlying legislation. I would ask my friend from Florida, since he, like me, is a fan of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, if he supports their quality of life issues and their increase in appropriate pay.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Madam Speaker, I rise to honor the City of Hollywood, Florida City Commission, and in particular, City Manager Cameron D. Benson and Grants Manager Renee Jean, for their instrumental support in the realization of the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Multicultural Art Project. On May 21, 2009, the City of Hollywood, Florida City Commission will dedicate a bronze bust of Dr. King in ArtsPark at Young Circle in Historic Downtown Hollywood, FL, in honor of Dr. King's life and legacy. This project would not have been possible without the hard work and dedication of City Manager Benson and Grants Manager Jean, who, faced with a challenging fiscal year and budget cuts, were committed to the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Multicultural Art Project from its inception to its completion. In 2008, Benson proposed the project in response to a community recommendation to the City Commission to create an initiative to honor Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Determined to find a way to finance the project without using General Fund monies, Jean successfully secured a $50,000 grant from the W.K. Kellogg Foundation for the construction and implementation of the project. After issuing a national ``Call to Artists'' and evaluating proposals, the City Artist Selection Committee selected Steven Whyte of Steven Whyte Studios in California to create the original art piece. Whyte's hand-sculpted bronze bust of Dr. King weighs approximately 200 pounds and sits upon a large base that will be inscribed with the immortal words of Dr. King's famous ``I Have a Dream'' speech. This lasting tribute to Dr. King's dream and courage will become a permanent fixture in regionally acclaimed ArtsPark at Young Circle, a public venue for arts, education, recreation and entertainment, and in the Hollywood community. Madam Speaker, the realization and completion of the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Multicultural Art Project is a celebration of diversity in the City of Hollywood and a reminder to all visitors to continue working to realize Dr. King's dream of equality for all. Once again, I would like to recognize and thank Mr. Benson, Ms. Jean, and the City of Hollywood, Florida City Commission for their support of this project and for their commitment to the community.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Madam Speaker, Taiwan's President Ma Ying- jeou will mark his first year anniversary in office on May 20, 2009. Under President Ma's leadership, Taiwan has become an observer at the World Health Assembly (WHA) in Geneva, Switzerland. By enabling Taiwan to participate in this part of the World Health Organization (WHO), the health of 23 million Taiwanese people can benefit from what will be learned at the WHA. Historically, China has blocked Taiwan's access to this very important forum, and through President Ma's effective diplomacy, Taiwan has ended a 38 year absence from the WHA. Madam Speaker, President Ma has also taken great strides in improving Taiwan's relationship with China. Taiwan and China now have direct flights back and forth to each country. This was unheard of before President Ma took office and travelers were previously required to make an inconvenient stop at another airport and switch planes before these direct flights were available. Furthermore, China has given Taiwan two of its prized Pandas. Pandas are extremely rare and very important to the Chinese culture, and the amicable trade between the two countries is a positive indication for building a cordial relationship between the two nations. These and other efforts by President Ma are helping the two neighbors enter a time of peace, security and stability. Madam Speaker, the United States and Taiwan continue to share a strong bilateral relationship. As a member of the Congressional Taiwan Caucus, I congratulate President Ma on a very successful first year in office and look forward to continuing to work in making sure that our relations are preserved and strengthened.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I thank my colleague for yielding. As the cochair of the Florida delegation, I echo the sentiments that he has expressed and say to Bill Young, who I refer to all the time as Dean because he is the dean of the Florida delegation, to say to him my congratulations, and I am sure from all of us, recognizing the extraordinariness of having had that opportunity here in this body to cast that many votes. It reminds me, Bill, of Mr. Natcher who instructed me when I first came here, as he may have others. Mr. Natcher, as you know, had the longest running streak of consecutive votes. And I talked with Dale Kildee, who has been here with you, Bill. He has 26,000 at this time. But Mr. Natcher said to me, ``Miss a vote and get that albatross off from around your neck.'' I'm glad you have kept that albatross around your neck, and it's a proud day for all of us that you have cast your 20,000 votes.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I want to state my strong support for House Resolution 171, expressing our support for constitutional reform in Bosnia-Herzegovina, as well as for U.S. engagement in the Western Balkans region. I want to thank our colleague from California and the Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Mr. Berman, for introducing this resolution, inviting me to be an original co-sponsor, and working the text through the committee. This resolution is timely and important. The international community, under U.S. leadership, has invested heavily in Bosnia-Herzegovina. We did so not just for that country's sake, nor just to end the tremendous suffering faced by its people. We did so because the threat it faced in the mid-1990s constituted war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. To have acquiesced to the realities presented on the ground in 1995 would have been to abandon the very principles on which the world is expected to operate. We had the ability to stop that from happening in the Balkans and to make a difference, so we did, through NATO intervention and the negotiation of the Dayton Agreement. Bosnia's considerable recovery a decade after the conflict has been stalled in recent years, as the additional reforms necessary for Bosnia's European integration are perceived to be a threat to the outdated notions of ethnic exclusivity which were resurrected during the war. It is also a threat to some who currently rely on these notions as the basis for their power and authority. I believe this resolution makes clear that all the people of Bosnia- Herzegovina--Bosniaks, Serbs, Croats and others--must find a common agreement on how to move forward, but it opposes efforts to block a broad consensus in order to maintain the status quo. The reforms supported by this resolution are critical to making Bosnia a functional, modern, European state. This resolution also calls for greater U.S. engagement in Bosnia and throughout the Balkans. European integration is the goal for Bosnia and all the countries of the region. It is not enough, however, to say ``here's your goal now find your own way to it.'' The European Union has done tremendous work in the Balkans, but its own lack of decisiveness leads to mixed signals in the region and undercuts more vigorous efforts to resolve outstanding issues. The United States has a high degree of credibility in the Balkans that can help influence developments in the region but we also must make sure the EU itself stays on course. This does not mean going back to the days of a heavy U.S. troop presence in the Balkans and significant aid to the countries of the region. The resolution does not call for going back to the 1990s. Instead, the resolution reflects what seems to be an obvious piece of wisdom--namely that a bit more attention now can actually preclude a situation where greater involvement might become a necessity later. This will allow the United States to maintain its strong focus on other regions of the world, as it should, while Europe and its full integration moves forward. I think the Vice President's current plans to visit Sarajevo, Pristina and Belgrade reflect this wisdom, and I wish his trip to be a successful one that will lead to additional efforts in the future. As the Co-Chairman of the U.S. Helsinki Commission, I have continued to follow the situation in the Western Balkans closely. In early April, the Commission held a hearing on the challenges to the United States and Europe in the region. I would commend to my colleagues the transcript of that hearing, which can be found on the Commission's website, because it makes clear the challenges we face in the Balkans today. While there is little chance of going back to the days of horrific conflict in the Balkans that we saw in the 1990s, there continues to be a need for the peoples of the region to find a way to put the 1990s behind them. That's easier said than done, and we cannot expect people to erase what was obviously such a traumatic period in their lives just because we tell them to do so. With U.S. and European support, however, we can give them the confidence and hope that will enable them to move forward. That benefits everyone. For this reason, I support this resolution.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Madam Speaker, as Co-Chairman of the Helsinki Commission I can attest to the fact that freedom of the press is only a cherished dream for many today in the OSCE region. Vibrant independent media are an essential element of any democracy. Leaders the world over who are determined to remain in office by any means necessary understand perfectly the power of the press. That is precisely why they and their associates strive so vigorously to control the media. Indeed, there are a variety of means commonly used by those attempting to harass or intimidate journalists. Physical attacks on journalists have become commonplace in many part of the OSCE region along with police raids, spurious court cases, arrests, and forcible psychiatric hospitalization. In recent days those attacked included Argishti Kivirian, editor of the independent news Web site Armenia Today, Vyacheslav Yaroshenko, editor of Corruption and Crime, a weekly in the southwestern Russian city of Rostov-na-Donu, and Anastasia Akopyan, a young journalist assaulted following circulation of an interview she did with an opposition mayoral candidate in the Russian city of Sochi. The situation in several other OSCE countries remains mixed. While the Belarusian regime allowed two independent newspapers to distribute through state-controlled outlets, the overall media environment remains repressive. Independent journalists continue to be harassed. A new media law entered into force in February contains provisions that toughen state control over the media as the Belarusian government seeks to maintain a virtual monopoly over the country's information space, especially television. In Armenia, the independent A1+ television station, forced off the air by the authorities, remains silent despite a ruling on the case by the European Court of Human Rights nearly a year ago. While the release of some imprisoned journalists in Azerbaijan is a positive development, the authorities have yet to repeal criminal defamation provisions. In Georgia, the government should take decisive action on promised reforms on media liberalization. In the Balkans, media outlets are commonly targeted for harassment and occasional violence. In Serbia, several journalists were reportedly attacked earlier this year by a radical group organizing a commemoration of the 10-year anniversary of NATO bombing. Investigative media in Kosovo have come under pressure for their attempts to expose corruption. Independent media in Montenegro are frequently the target of trumped-up defamation and libel charges. In Albania, the magazine Tema was reportedly forced to cease operations under government pressure, while TV News 24 was apparently assessed a large fine for ridiculing another station's promotion of the country's prime minister. This year marks the tenth anniversary of the murder of Serbian journalist and editor, Slavko Curuvija, who testified before the Helsinki Commission shortly before his death, a case which authorities have yet to resolve. Meanwhile, in Kazakhstan, the opposition weekly Taszharghan has reportedly been forced to cease publication following the imposition of a $200,000 fine for damaging the honor and dignity of a member of the Kazakh parliament. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, at least half a dozen independent outlets and their staffers faced more than 60 such defamation lawsuits in 2008 alone, with many involving claims by senior government officials. Madam Speaker, nearly two decades after the breakup of the U.S.S.R., Soviet-era censorship survives in places like Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan, which, not coincidentally, ban all political opposition.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Madam Speaker, as today is National Children's Mental Health Awareness Day, I rise to introduce a resolution highlighting the importance of identifying and nurturing the factors that contribute to the healthy development of African American youth, and their ability to achieve equal levels of physical and mental development enjoyed by their peers. Throughout my life and tenure in Congress, I have always advocated protecting the rights of minorities. I stand before you today to promote the strength, health and well-being of African American youth, who are faced with many adversities. African American youth are disproportionately exposed to many risk factors such as poverty, neighborhood violence, and a wide range of health conditions. These risk factors coupled with continued cultural oppression limit resilience in African American youth. Resilience is a dynamic, multidimensional practice involving the interaction between individuals and their environments within the context of family, peers, school, community, and society, across space and time. It is our responsibility to acknowledge and understand the legacy of cultural oppression and racial discrimination that African American youth encounter in their daily lives. In doing so, we must also research how these components relate to resilience and various types of behavioral and emotional development. Madam Speaker, this resolution is not only meant to seek support in this matter but also to generate awareness and collaboration toward resilience research among federal agencies and non-governmental organizations, such as the American Psychological Association, American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, and Mental Health America which have endorsed this resolution. It is vital that we provide the necessary tools to chart a path to success for African American youth. I urge my colleagues to join with me in taking a stand against the cultural oppression and racial discrimination that many African American youth encounter by supporting this resolution.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce a bill to address two matters that are critically important to the future of this country: health care and the health of our local economies. In almost all states, an inmate in a county jail or juvenile detention facility loses their Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP or SSI benefits during their incarceration--even if they have not been convicted of a crime. The United States leads the world in the number of people who are incarcerated and federal law requires government entities to provide medical services to all inmates. High incarceration rates, chronic conditions, substance abuse treatment, mental illness, and aging prison populations have contributed to the rise in health care costs for inmates. Madam Speaker, providing health care for inmates constitutes a major portion of local jail operating costs. Nearly two thirds of all jail inmates are awaiting court action or have not been convicted of the crime they have been charged with. Over half of jail inmates who receive financial support from government agencies prior to their arrest have physical and/or mental health problems. Requiring county governments to cover health care costs for inmates who have not been convicted. This places an unnecessary burden on local governments, which have been negatively impacted by recession, widespread budget deficits, and cuts to safety-net programs and other essential services. Stripping inmates of Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP and SSI benefits also violates the presumption of innocence which is at the heart of our criminal justice system. The failure to distinguish between persons who are awaiting disposition of charges and persons who have been duly convicted goes against the foundational tenets of our justice system. Disadvantaged populations are further harmed by this situation. Low- income and minority populations are often unable to post bond, which would allow them to continue to receive benefits from the federal government. The facts are clear and all too familiar. Black men are three times more likely than Hispanics and five times more likely than whites to be in jail. Black women are more than twice as likely as Hispanic females and over 3.5 times more likely than white females to have been incarcerated. Madam Speaker, this issue hits close to home. Florida's local economy has been devastated. Further, Florida has one of the highest levels of uninsured persons in the nation, and the majority of these people reside in South Florida. Passage of this bill will rectify this inequality by restoring the partnership between federal and local governments. The bipartisan Restoring the Partnership for County Health Care Costs Act of 2009 ensures that the federal and local governments share in these health care costs, and that no side is unnecessarily burdened with financing medical services. I urge you to join Representative Burgess, Representative Holt and myself in supporting a bill that is designed to provide relief to local county budgets and defend those values which are at the core of our nation's criminal justice system.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 3 minutes to my good friend and former member of the Rules Committee, and my fellow Floridian, Ms. Castor.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the question on the resolution.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased at this time to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee), a member of the Judiciary Committee. (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased at this time to yield 2 minutes to my good friend the distinguished Congressional Black Caucus Chair, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished chairman of the Judiciary Committee and the author of this legislation, my good friend, Mr. Conyers.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased at this time to yield 2 minutes to my good friend the distinguished gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps).

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of time. Mr. Speaker, I have been on the Rules Committee a considerable amount of time, both in the minority and in the majority, and I have seen things come to the Rules Committee that I thought were trivializing the process, but yesterday took the cake for me. We had an amendment offered by one of our colleagues to this particular legislation. I guess it was done in a creative fashion, and certainly the author of it did spend some time looking in the dictionary or creating new terms. And I apologize to our transcriber, but I am going to put in the Record what we have to put up with in the Rules Committee. ``The term sexual orientation,'' this proposed amendment said, ``as used in this act, or any amendments made by this act, does not include apotemnophilia, asphyxophilia, autogynephilia, coprophilia, exhibitionism, fetishism, frotteurism, gerontosexuality, incest, kleptophilia, klismaphilia, necrophilia, partialism, pedophilia, sexual masochism, sexual sadism, telephone scatalogia, toucherism, transgenderism, transsexual, transvestite, transvestic fetishism, urophilia, voyeurism, or zoophilia.'' All I can say is the late-night comedians need to come up there with me sometime so that they can get into the spirit of spuriousness that comes there on certain occasions. This is serious business. Mr. Speaker, we can't legislate love, but we can legislate against hate. This legislation may not rid us of the intolerance and prejudices that continue to taint our society, but it will provide an added deterrent to those for whom these feelings manifest themselves into acts of violence. They will be fully aware that, should they commit a hate crime, there will be no lenience and they will not slip through the cracks of the American legal system. Further, passage of this Hate Crimes bill will increase public education and awareness and encourage Americans to report hate crimes that all too often are silent. Mr. Speaker, this bill addresses our resolve to end violence based on prejudice, and to guarantee that all Americans, regardless of race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability--or all of these philias and fetishes and isms that were put forward--need not live in fear because of who they are. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this rule so that we continue to move this country toward fully achieving its promise of justice and liberty for all Americans. I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 372 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman, my friend from North Carolina, Dr. Foxx. All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only. General Leave

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and to insert extraneous materials into the Record.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 372 provides a closed rule for consideration of H.R. 1913, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009. This legislation is a vital step towards bringing the full protection of the law to those targeted for violent, bias-motivated crimes simply because of who they are. This bill expands the Federal hate crimes law to include protections for crimes directed at individuals because of their gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, or disability. These crimes are designed to intimidate entire communities on the basis of personal and immutable characteristics. All of us in this Chamber know that hate crimes tear the fabric of our society and fragment communities because they target an entire community or group of people, not just the individual victim. This legislation makes important new changes to Federal civil rights law by providing new Federal authority for investigating and prosecuting criminal civil rights violations. It authorizes the Attorney General to provide assistance in the criminal investigation or prosecution of violent crimes motivated by prejudice based on the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability of the victim. This bill spans interstate lines by establishing uniform Federal protections against hate crimes as a backdrop to existing laws in every State. It directs the Attorney General to give priority for assistance to cases in which offenders have committed crimes in more than one State and to rural jurisdictions that have difficulty covering the extraordinary expenses associated with investigations and prosecutions. This bill makes it a Federal criminal offense to cause or attempt to cause bodily harm through the use of fire, firearms, or explosive devices against a person due to bias-driven violence. These provisions enhance our country's 233-year tradition of protecting liberty, freedom, and acceptance by protecting and recognizing the human dignity of every person. No person should live in fear of violence because of who they are. Some have criticized this legislation by claiming that the hate crimes bill will infringe upon free speech, somehow turning Federal authorities into ``thought police.'' In my view, this is simply not true. The hate crime bill adds no new classes of crime. This legislation is not about thinking or believing, but acting and harming. This legislation strengthens, not weakens, the First Amendment freedom of speech protections. It prohibits for use as evidence a defendant's speech or association unless specifically related to the crime, and this legislation does not disturb constitutionally protected speech or associations. It is preposterous to argue that this bill criminalizes thoughts and beliefs. The bill does not criminalize those who hate or disagree with other people or groups of people. It criminalizes acts of violence against people based on the victim's characteristics. Under current law, the Federal Government's involvement is only authorized in those cases in which the victim was targeted because of race, color, religion, or national origin. The current protection is neither uniform nor comprehensive, and this has important practical and symbolic consequences. It is vital that the Federal Government send a message to the American people that hate crimes committed because of one's sexual orientation, gender identity, gender, or disability are as intolerable as those motivated by race, ethnicity, national origin, or religion. Some also argue that we're federalizing crimes already illegal under State laws, providing limited jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute bias-motivated crimes. However, Congress has rejected this argument repeatedly by passing hundreds of bills that give the Federal Government jurisdiction over crimes that States already consider illegal. From 1995 to 2006, my friends on the other side controlled Congress and enacted nearly 100 public laws imposing new Federal criminal penalties for conduct that was already under State law and creating over 600 new Federal crimes. Hate crimes are destructive and divisive. A random act of violence resulting in injury or even death is a tragic event that devastates the lives of the victim and their family. But the intentional selection and beating or murder of an individual because of who they are terrorizes an entire community--and sometimes, the Nation. It is easy to recognize the difference between the arson of an office building versus the intentional torching of a church or synagogue. The church or synagogue or mosque burning has a profound impact on the congregation, the faith community, the local community, and the Nation. We're all affected by violent acts of hatred, and there is ample evidence that violent, bias-motivated crimes continue to be a widespread and serious problem in our Nation. In my home State, the most recent Florida Hate Crimes Report published by the Florida Attorney General reported a total of 193 hate crimes, 14.5 percent of which were motivated by sexual orientation. Additionally, poll after poll continues to show that the American public supports hate crimes legislation inclusive of sexual orientation. FBI data show 1,265 hate crime incidents directed at gays and lesbians in the year 2007 alone, the third most frequent victims and over 16 percent of all hate crimes reported that year. And 79 hate crime incidents directed at disabled victims were also reported that year. And, unfortunately, we know it is widely accepted that hate crimes specifically against those with disabilities remain vastly underreported. Mr. Speaker, this is clearly a problem that merits the passage of an expanded hate crimes law. Furthermore, this legislation is endorsed by over 300 law enforcement, civil rights, civic and religious organizations including the National Sheriffs Association, the International Association of Chiefs of Police, National District Attorneys Association, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Human Rights Campaign, the Presbyterian Church, the Episcopal Church, the NAACP, and the National Disability Rights Network. Mr. Speaker, this measure would give local law enforcement officials important tools to combat violent, bias-motivated crime. Federal support, through training and direct assistance, will help ensure that bias-motivated violence is effectively investigated and prosecuted. The legislation would also facilitate Federal investigations and prosecutions when local authorities are unwilling or unable to achieve a just result. As we consider H.R. 1913 today, let us remember that this hate crimes bill is also known as the Matthew Shepard Act, in memory of the 21- year-old University of Wyoming student who was brutally tortured and murdered in 1998 just because he was gay. At the time of his murder just a few years ago, no criminal statute existed in Wyoming to charge his killers with a hate crime nor was there Federal financial assistance available to aid the local authorities in Laramie, Wyoming, with investigating and prosecuting his murder. The fact of the matter is hate crimes happen every day and we should not wait for another Matthew Shepard to ensure justice. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased at this time to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Colorado, my good friend and member of the Rules Committee, Mr. Polis.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. That is all I need to respond, just very briefly, to my good friend from Savannah/Brunswick when he asked and says that too much money was what the previous President vetoed. I wonder how much, Madam Speaker, is too much money to care for sick children in America or to ensure that children do not get sick in America?