Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I have a number of letters to include for the Record. One is from Tom McGee, the President and CEO of the International Council of Shopping Centers. One is from the NRF. One is from the AFL-CIO. December 10, 2015. Dear Representative: On behalf of the 70,000 members of the International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC), I am writing to urge you to oppose the conference report on H.R. 644, Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act, which contains a non-germane provision permanently extending the Internet Tax Freedom Act (PITFA). This is considered a key vote for ICSC. Because PITFA was included without being paired with long awaited remote sales tax collection legislation, the added fiscal pressure being put on states and local governments will result in less funds for first responders and infrastructure and additional pressure to increase other state and local taxes such as sales or property taxes. This will truly add insult to injury for thousands of local businesses across the country. As an organization, ICSC supports PITFA but strongly believes that a permanent restriction on states' ability to tax telecommunications services should absolutely be linked with the restoration of states' rights to collect sales taxes that are already owed in 45 states today. It is not only a missed opportunity to pursue good policy, but the manner in which this provision is being advanced certainly represents a departure from regular order. After more than 20 years, close to 40 hearings and a successful bipartisan vote in the Senate, it is time for Congress to do the right thing and update sales tax collection policy to reflect the 21st century marketplace. The shopping center industry has sales that represent 15% of U.S. GDP, employs 1 out of every 11 Americans and generates $141 billion in sales tax revenue. Our industry touches people's lives every day and is essential to the economic, civic and social vibrancy of every community. We urge you to send an important message on state tax policy and oppose H.R. 644. Please vote NO when the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act Conference report is voted on later this week. Sincerely, Tom McGee, President & CEO.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, the point I want to make is, with what you are doing, even though there is a 4-year lapse, you are grandfathering this. My own State of Texas will lose $358 million, Wisconsin $120 million, Ohio $65 million, and South Dakota will lose about $13 million. Are we going to replace those moneys from the Federal Government? What are we going to do to the retail industry that has bricks and mortar? My friends, I am going to support a CR, but I do believe we should work together to do things that impact us positively and not negatively. Get rid of the riders and help our States, which have a need to have this Internet tax provision lifted. Mr. Speaker, as a senior Member of the House Judiciary Committee; as the Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations; and as the representative from Houston, I rise in opposition to the ``Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act'' being in this bill. When originally enacted in 1998, the Internet Tax Freedom Act established a temporary moratorium on multiple and discriminatory taxation of the Internet as well as new taxes on Internet access. This moratorium, however, is due to expire on October 1st of this year. Since 1998, Congress has extended the moratorium on a temporary basis. The bill before us will make that moratorium permanent. Unfortunately, in doing so, the bill also ends the Act's grandfather protections for states that imposed such taxes prior to the Act's enactment date. Mr. Speaker, the bill is problematic for several reasons. First, Congress, instead of supporting this seriously flawed legislation, should be focusing on meaningful ways to help state and local governments, taxpayers, and local retailers. The House can do that by addressing the remote sales tax issue. In addition to extending the expiring moratorium on a temporary basis, the House should take up and send to the Senate legislation that would give states the authority to collect sales taxes from remote sellers. Such a proposal would incentivize remote sellers to collect and remit sales taxes as well as require states to simplify several procedures that would benefit retailers. Such legislation would enable states and local governments to collect more than $23 billion in estimated uncollected sales taxes each year. The measure would also help level the playing field for local retailers--who must collect sales taxes--when they compete with out-of- state businesses that do not collect these taxes. Retail competitors should be able to compete fairly with their internet counterparts at least with respect to sales tax policy. The House should do its part and address the remote sales tax disparity before the end of this Congress. Second, this legislation will severely impact the immediate revenues for the grandfather-protected states and all states progressively in the long term. The Congressional Budget Office, for example, estimates that this bill will cost certain states ``several hundred million dollars annually'' in lost revenues. Indeed, the Federation of Tax Administrators has estimated that the bill will cause the grandfather-protected states to lose at least $500 million in lost revenue annually. For my home state of Texas, enactment of this bill will result in a revenue loss of $358 million per year. Texas will not be alone in these losses, annually: Wisconsin will lose about $127 million, Ohio will lose about $65 million, and South Dakota will lose about $13 million. Should this bill become law, state and local governments will have to choose whether they will cut essential government services--such as educating our children, maintaining needed transportation infrastructure, and providing essential public health and safety services--or shift the tax burden onto other taxpayers through increased property, income, and sales taxes. Meanwhile, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has estimated that the permanent moratorium will deny the non-grandfathered states of almost $6.5 billion in potential state and local sales tax revenues each year in perpetuity. This bill will burden taxpayers, while excluding an entire industry from paying their fair share of taxes. Finally, this bill ignores the fundamental nature of the Internet. The original moratorium was intentionally made temporary to ensure that Congress, industry, and state and local governments would be able to monitor the issue and make adjustments where necessary to accommodate new technologies and market realities. The Act was intended as a temporary measure to assist and nurture the fledgling Internet that--back in 1998--was still in its commercial infancy. Yet, this bill ignores the significantly changed environment of today's internet. The bill's supporters continue to believe that the internet still is in need of extraordinary protection in the form of exemption from all state taxation. But, the internet of 2015 is drastically different from its 1998 predecessor. And, surely the internet and its attendant technology will continue to evolve. Permanently extending the tax moratorium severely limits Congress's ability to revisit and make any necessary adjustments. Simply put, a permanent moratorium is unwise. In closing, I urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 235 and I reserve the balance of my time. The bill is misguided legislation that will devastate state revenues, especially for those states currently protected by the grandfather clause, and could force state governments to eliminate essential governmental programs and services, while increasing the burden on taxpayers. For all of these reasons, I urge my colleagues to reject this flawed legislation; that makes the internet tax moratorium permanent, in part.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, this past Sunday evening, President Obama addressed the nation and detailed his four-part plan, as Commander-in-Chief, to keep the American people safe from terrorist acts committed by terrorist groups like ISIL and al Qaeda or by persons abroad or lone wolf ``franchise terrorists'' at home who are inspired by groups that profane the peaceful religion of Islam. First, the plan calls for our military to continue hunting down terrorist plotters in any country where it is necessary. In Iraq and Syria, American airpower has been used to great effect, taking out ISIL leaders, heavy weapons, oil tankers, and infrastructure. Second, the plan calls for the United States to take away safe havens for terrorists by continuing to provide training and equipment to the tens of thousands of Iraqi and Syrian forces fighting ISIL. The third part of the plan involves working with friends and allies to disrupt ISIL's operations by cutting off access to financing and disrupting recruitment efforts. Finally, the plan calls for continued American leadership, working in conjunction with the international community, to establish a process-- and timeline--to pursue ceasefires and a political resolution to the Syrian civil war. Ending the civil war in Syria will allow the Syrian people, our allies, and also Russia, to focus on the common goal of destroying ISIL. Critics have every right to disagree with the President's approach but they also have an obligation to propose realistic and practical alternatives to the President's plan, which, by the way, has been designed by American military commanders and counterterrorism experts and supported by the 65 countries that are part of the American-led coalition. Our quarrel is not with Islam so I also commend the President's appeal for calm, unity, and cooperation among all persons of goodwill both in the United States and around the world. The terrorist attacks in San Bernardino were horrific acts on innocent civilians perpetrated by depraved individuals who pledge allegiance to organizations that misuse the peaceful religion of Islam for their own misguided purposes. Such horrible and heinous acts are the responsibility of the perpetrators, and theirs alone, and for which they can be assured that they alone will be held accountable. This was one of the central messages conveyed during the Prayer Vigil and Unity Press Conference I led last Sunday afternoon in Houston, the 4th largest and most diverse city in the United States. In addition to the steps laid out by the President, I also believe there are additional steps the Congress should take, including bringing to the floor for debate and vote to pass H.R. 48, the ``No Fly for Foreign Fighters Act,'' that I introduced earlier this year. This legislation would require TSA to check the Terrorist Screening Database and the terrorist watch list used in determining whether to permit a passenger to board a U.S.-bound or domestic flight and to take appropriate steps to ensure that those who pose a threat to aviation safety or national security are included in the Terrorism Database. I ask a moment of silence for the victims killed and injured in the attacks by franchise terrorists last Wednesday in San Bernardino, California.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in support of H.R. 3869, the State and Local Cyber Protection Act of 2015. Let me first of all thank the gentleman from Texas for his leadership in working on this legislation, to again acknowledge our chairs--Mr. McCaul and Mr. Thompson--and also to acknowledge Mr. Ratcliffe and Mr. Richmond for their leadership on this issue. Mr. Speaker, the threat of the cyber attack is growing, and the damage caused by those attacks, whether it is the theft of personally identifiable information or the disruption of operations, is becoming more costly. FEMA has identified cybersecurity as an area for national improvement in its National Preparedness Report every year since it was first published in 2012. That finding is based, in large part, on State self- assessments reflecting a lack of confidence in cybersecurity capabilities. The threat posed by criminal and terrorist hackers continues to evolve even as State and local governments work to gain a stronger footing in the cybersecurity mission area. Let me say that this country continues to grow, continues to increase its population, and continues to become dependent on the cybersecurity infrastructure. Helping to engage State and local entities by training is a crucial, crucial action, if I might applaud the gentleman, but also say it is a very important mission for both the Homeland Security Department and the Committee on Homeland Security. The Department of Homeland Security has resources and capabilities that, when shared with State and local governments, can help them step up their games. H.R. 3869, the State and Local Cyber Protection Act of 2015, would codify ongoing efforts by instructing the National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center, the NCCIC, and the Department of Homeland Security to coordinate with State and local governments and to, upon request, provide assistance to secure their information systems. Information systems run water entities in our communities. I remember visiting one that was up on the Web, if you will, that could be altered by a cyber attack. This legislation would codify DHS' ongoing coordination effort to give assurances to State and local governments that DHS stands ready to partner with them to protect their network. Under this bill, DHS is authorized to assist State and local governments to deploy technology capable of diagnosing and mitigating against cyber threats and vulnerabilities. H.R. 3869 authorizes DHS to provide training to State and local entities regarding integrating policies to protect privacy and civil liberties into their cybersecurity efforts. It is increasingly important that all levels of government be capable of identifying information system vulnerabilities and of protecting them from unauthorized access, disclosure, and disruption of data. I will say to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hurd) that we have always, as a committee, been reminded of privacy and civil liberties issues while also protecting the American people. To build that capability, the Federal Government has a role to play in assisting State and local entities by providing both technical training on cybersecurity and guidance on potential privacy and civil liberties implications. Mr. Speaker, many stakeholders throughout the country have told us this bill is a vital, much-needed step in advancing national cybersecurity capabilities. I urge all of my colleagues to support H.R. 3869. Mr. Speaker, I support H.R. 3869, the State and Local Cyber Protection Act. As a Senior Member of the Homeland Security Committee, and Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security and Investigations I am well aware of the terrorism and criminal risks to our nation's critical infrastructure, civilian and privacy computer networks. For this reason, I introduced H.R. 85, the Terrorism Prevention and Critical Infrastructure Protection Act, which directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to work with critical infrastructure owners and operators and state, local, and territorial to take proactive steps to address All Hazards that would impact: national security; economic stability; public health and safety; and/or any combination of these. This nation is presented with new challenges in confronting threats to our national security, and cybersecurity. Critical infrastructure remains an essential area that must receive the needed attention to protect it against all threats and all-hazards. Post-9/11 established the need to anticipate unexpected threats from a variety of sources. The nation must plan to be a step ahead of our enemies in order to effectively detect, deter, and defend against terrorist attacks in whatever form they may arise, including cyberattacks to our nation's critical infrastructure. It is for these reasons that I proposed H.R. 85, the Terrorism Prevention and Critical Infrastructure Protection Act of 2015. This bill should it become law would greatly assist in our nation's ability to protect critical infrastructure from the worse effects of cyber- attacks. The nation must be adequately prepared to fight cyber terrorism just as vigorously as we combat other form of terrorism carried out through physical violence. We can be prepared to meet and defeat cyber terrorism threats with legislative efforts like H.R. 85, which would offer tools to effectively address terrorist attacks against critical infrastructure. The Terrorism Prevention and Critical Infrastructure Protection Act directs the Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS) to: (1) better engage critical infrastructure owners and operators as volunteers for the purpose of coordination of communication among state, local, tribal, and territorial entities for the purpose of taking proactive steps to manage risk and strengthen the security and resilience of the nation's critical infrastructure against terrorist attacks; (2) establish terrorism prevention policy to engage with international partners to strengthen the security and resilience of domestic critical infrastructure and critical infrastructure located outside of the United States; (3) make available research findings and guidance to federal civilian agencies for the identification, prioritization, assessment, remediation, and security of their internal critical infrastructure to assist in the prevention, mediation, and recovery from terrorism events. The bill sets forth the terrorism protection responsibilities of the Department of Homeland Security as it relates to the Department's responsibility to protection and defends civilian agencies and private sector networks from cyber-attacks. H.R. 85, Terrorism Prevention and Critical Infrastructure Protection Act also provides guidance to the Secretary of Homeland Security regarding actions to be taken to: (1) facilitate the timely exchange of terrorism threat and vulnerability information as well as information that allows for the development of a situational awareness capability for federal civilian agencies during terrorist incidents; (2) implement an integration and analysis function for critical infrastructure that includes operational and strategic analysis on terrorism incidents, threats, and emerging risks; and (3) support greater terrorism cyber security information sharing by civilian federal agencies with the private sector that protects constitutional privacy and civil liberties rights. Finally the bill directs the National Research Council to evaluate how well DHS is meeting the objectives of this Act. I thank Chairman McCaul and Ranking Member Thompson for their support and collaboration in working with me to improve the bill for consideration by the Full Committee and ultimately the House of Representatives as we work to ensure safety, security, resiliency, trustworthiness of vital critical infrastructure networks, while at the same time ensuring that data used for this purpose does not undermine the privacy and civil liberties of Americans. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. In closing, I include for the Record an article dated October 19 from The Hill newspaper on boosting power grid defenses against ISIS. [From The Hill, Oct. 19, 2015] Jackson Lee Pushes To Boost Power-Grid Defenses Against ISIS (By Katie Bo Williams) Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) on Friday called for action on a bill bolstering power-grid cybersecurity after a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) official said the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) is trying to hack American electrical power companies. ``No solace should be taken in the fact that ISIS has been unsuccessful,'' Jackson Lee said. ``ISIS need only be successful once to have catastrophic impact on regional electricity supply.'' Caitlin Durkovich, assistant secretary for infrastructure protection at DHS, told energy firm executives at an industry conference in Philadelphia last week that ISIS ``is beginning to perpetrate cyberattacks.'' Law enforcement officials speaking at the same event indicated that the group's efforts have so far been unsuccessful, thanks in part to a Balkanized power grid and an unsophisticated approach. ``Strong intent. Thankfully, low capability,'' said John Riggi, a section chief at the FBI's cyber division. ``But the concern is that they'll buy that capability.'' Jackson Lee, a senior member of the House Homeland Security Committee and ranking member on the Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations, in January introduced the Terrorism Prevention and Critical Infrastructure Protection Act. The bill directs DHS to work with critical infrastructure companies to boost their cyber defenses against terrorist attacks, part of a swath of legislation that has attempted to codify the agency's responsibilities in that area. Late last year, the Senate passed its version of the House- passed National Cybersecurity and Critical Infrastructure Protection Act. The bill officially authorized an already-existing cybersecurity information-sharing hub at DHS. Although a deadly attack on power plants or the electric grid--a ``cyber Pearl Harbor''--is still only a hypothetical, experts warn critical infrastructure sites are increasingly at risk, as electric grids get smarter. National Security Agency Director Michael Rogers told lawmakers last fall that China and ``one or two'' other countries would be able to shut down portions of critical U.S. infrastructure with a cyberattack. Researchers suspect Iran to be on that list. In August, DHS announced the creation of a new subcommittee dedicated to preventing attacks on the power grid. The new panel is tasked with identifying how well the department's lifeline sectors are prepared to meet threats and recover from a significant cyber event. The committee will also provide recommendations for a more unified approach to state and local cybersecurity. ``There is a great deal that has been done and is being done now to secure our networks,'' Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson told the House Judiciary Committee in July. ``There is more to do.''

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, State and local governments have been struggling to keep pace with the evolving threats posed by cyber breaches. They just cannot do it alone. We have the resources. This Department was crafted and designed to be able to reach out beyond these parameters to ensure that local governments and State governments felt that they were secure. I believe that the enactment of H.R. 3869 would send a clear message about our commitment to helping State and local governments address the perennial cybersecurity challenges that permeate their providing services for their constituents, which have been identified every year, according to the National Preparedness Report. In having formerly chaired this infrastructure committee, I know that the need still remains great and that we have an opportunity to keep building and improving on that resource. Again, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 3869. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close since I have no further speakers, and I yield myself the remaining time. One of the things that we wanted to do in the course of this legislation is to make sure that the stakeholders were fully informed and thought this would be a constructive addition to their ability to serve the public and to be on call and to be away for long periods of time from their families, which they have been called to do. As I begin to reflect, I reflected on the wildfires in the West, the enormous flooding that we have had, and certainly we cannot forget the issues dealing with terrorism. The terrorism investigations, as individuals who are victims are buried in California, the first responders, law enforcement, and others are still on the job investigating what is occurring. So, Mr. Speaker, I include a series of letters into the Record from the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives, who are indicating the importance of this legislation; a letter from the Office of the Mayor of the City of Houston, Mayor Annise Parker, who indicates that as first responders risk their lives in responding to terrorist attacks and other emergencies, they and their families are at increased risk; from the Houston Professional Fire Fighters, Association Local 341, who have written on behalf of the 3,800 men and women of the Houston Fire Department, indicating the need for this legislation to protect their families; from the National Association of State EMS Officials, the International Association of Fire Chiefs on behalf of nearly 11,000 fire service leaders for introducing this legislation that would provide adequate preparedness for their families; and an article which is entitled ``Family Versus Duty: Personal and Family Preparedness Law Enforcement Organizational Resilience.'' National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives, Alexandria, VA, December 9, 2015. Hon. Sheila Jackson Lee, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Congresswoman Jackson Lee: On behalf of the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives (NOBLE), our Executive Board, local chapters, and members, I am writing to express support for H.R. 2795, the First Responder Identification of Emergency Needs in Disaster Situations (FRIENDS) Act. Our nation's first responders risk their lives in responding to terrorist attacks, natural disasters, and other emergencies. Consequently, they and their families may be at increased risk due to exposures they face in responding to disasters. Directing the Government Accountability Office to prepare a report that examines the preparedness and protection of first responders and their families, including an assessment of the grant funding available, will serve an important function by evaluating existing resources to protect first responders and their families and the need for additional resources. NOBLE feels that it is important that we equip our first responders to protect our communities while also ensuring that their families are safe. Sincerely, Dwayne A. Crawford, Executive Director,

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in support of H.R. 2795, the First Responder Identification of Emergency Needs in Disaster Situations, or the FRIENDS Act, as we have been very happy to call it as we have crafted it. First responders are our Nation's heroes. We know that we are gathering together in these final weeks to make sure that we pass the 9/11 health bill that provided for those who stood in the face of danger during the tragedy of 9/11. We know that first responders run into burning buildings, that they rescue people trapped by dangerous floods, that they put themselves in harm's way to protect others, and that, as we well know in these times, they deal with terrorism. Just last week, in San Bernardino, we saw brave first responders heroically pursue two individuals who were fleeing from the scene of a deadly attack at an office holiday party. We also know that, at the site of that incident, we saw a massive number of first responders who were going toward the building. Not knowing the threat or whether or not the individuals who had created this massacre were still there or how many there were, they ran toward the building. To do their jobs, first responders must leave their homes and families while the rest of us cling to ours. Whether it was to deal with the aftermath of a terrorist attack, like the attacks of September 11, or to give support during a catastrophic disaster, like Hurricane Katrina, first responders bravely leave home to save others. I had firsthand experiences of both of those incidences, one, a natural disaster and, one, a terrorist act. I watched as firefighters stayed day after day after day and would not remove themselves because they were engaged in recovering their colleagues--their brothers and sisters--and those others who had perished. They stayed day after day. That was a great hardship on those families. We know the stories. We know that some of them were dealing with situations in which they may have been the only parent or the only guardian. In the situation of Katrina, I saw the Coast Guard stay in the area time after time and the National Guard and other first responders come from all over the country and from even all over the world to be able to help those who were in need, and they stayed a very long time. Unfortunately, today first responders are asked to answer the call to action without knowing whether their families will be safe as they work to rescue others. Our first responders deserve better. The FRIENDS Act directs the Government Accountability Office to conduct a comprehensive review of policies and programs designed to ensure that first responders are able to do their job safely and effectively by assessing, among other things, measures to ensure first responder families are safe and the availability of personal protective equipment is there. During committee consideration of the FRIENDS Act, my friend from New York (Mr. Higgins) offered an amendment to authorize GAO to evaluate the availability of home med kits for first responders and their families in assessing the preparedness of first responders, maybe even being able to take care of their neighborhood or their family or themselves in the course of these disasters. I am pleased to support the Higgins amendment, and I believe it adds to the bill. H.R. 2759 also directs GAO to distinguish policies available in high- risk urban areas, which may be better resourced, and rural areas where efforts to ensure preparedness for first responders and their families may require creative leveraging of resources. Many of those areas have volunteer fire departments and volunteers who need the assistance from this act. This provision will ensure that the information included in the report will be applicable and adaptable by various communities across the country as they work to better protect their protectors and to give them the support system that they need. Additionally, the FRIENDS Act directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to review GAO's findings and assess whether policies identified could be applicable to Federal first responders. The FRIENDS Act has been endorsed by the International Association of Fire Chiefs, as well as the National Association of State EMS Officials, and the International Emergency Management Society, along with others. Before I conclude, I would like to thank Ranking Member Thompson and Chairman McCaul for their help in bringing this important legislation to the floor. Let me also thank the ranking member and chairman of the emergency preparedness committee and all of jurisdictional committees that helped contribute to this. Let me also acknowledge the staffs on both sides of the aisle who were enormously effective in helping to bring about this bill. I want to thank Mr. Hoyer, who for many, many years was a co-chair of the Congressional Fire Service Caucus on which I participated with him over those years, for his stated support of this legislation. Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the Homeland Security, and the author and sponsor, I am proud to rise in strong support of H.R. 2795, the ``First Responder Identification of Emergency Needs in Disaster Situations of 2015,'' or the ``FRIENDS Act.'' I thank Chairman McCaul and Ranking Member Thompson for their cooperation, assistance, and support in shepherding this important legislation to the floor. I appreciate Congressman Payne, the Ranking Member of the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Response, and Communications, for his original co-sponsorship and strong support of the FRIENDS Act. The FRIENDS Act embodies the important and fundamental idea that we have an obligation to ensure that the first responders who protect our loved ones in emergencies have the peace of mind that comes from knowing that their loved ones are safe while they do their duty. The FRIENDS Act, which reflects stakeholder input and bipartisan collaboration with the Majority, is an example of what can be achieved for the American people when Members of Congress put the public interest ahead of partisan interests. I thank the International Association of Fire Chiefs, the National Association of State EMS Officials, and the International Emergency Management Society for their valuable assistance and input regarding the FRIENDS Act. I thank Kay Goss; the President of the International Emergency Management Society, who provided technical assistance during the bill's drafting process on the work of first responders to prepare for catastrophic events. Kay Goss was Associate FEMA Director in charge of National Preparedness, Training, and Exercises during the Clinton Administration, the first woman confirmed by the Senate to serve in that position. I am passionate about the work of those who dedicate themselves to public service. I hold in high regard the service of firefighters, law enforcement officers, emergency response technicians, nurses, emergency room doctors, and the dozens of other professionals who are the ultimate public servants. Few persons outside their ranks truly understand why and how first responders are able to do what they do every day--voluntarily and cheerfully risk placing their lives in harm's way to save a stranger. First responders, whether as law enforcement officers, fire fighters, search and rescue workers, or emergency medical technicians make our lives safer, often at considerable risk to their personal safety. H.R. 2795 provides Congress an opportunity to let our first responders know that we do recognize and understand that they have families and loved ones who they must leave behind when they are called to duty. The GAO study that will be provided as a result of this bill will shed light on what is being done by local and state governments to address the needs of first responder families when threats like Hurricanes Sandy, Hugo, and Katrina hit communities, or when a terrorist attack like the ones seen in New York and Boston occur. The report called for by the FRIENDS Act will also provide information on the availability of personal protective equipment for first responders. The issue of personal protective equipment was an acute problem for front line first responders during last year's Ebola crisis. First responders including EMTs, emergency room doctors and nurses, as well as law enforcement and fire department professionals who responded to emergencies were in need of guidance on how to effectively treat a person with Ebola without becoming infected. I joined members of the House Committee on Homeland Security in a Full Committee field hearing last year in Dallas, Texas, shortly after the first case of Ebola was diagnosed in the United States. That patient, Eric Duncan, lived in the Dallas area and was treated at a local hospital, but died of the illness. As a result of coming in contact with Mr. Duncan two nurses at the hospital where he was treated became ill with the disease. During the Dallas field hearing, I brought to the attention of the House Homeland Security Committee a letter from National Nurses United transmitting the results of a survey of nurses, which found that: 1. Nearly 80 percent of respondents agreed that their hospital had not communicated to them any policy regarding potential admission of patients infected by Ebola; 2. 85 percent of respondents agreed that their hospital had not provided education on Ebola to enable nurses to interact with patients safely; 3. One-third of respondents reported that their hospital had insufficient supplies of eye protection (face shields or side shields with goggles) and fluid resistant/impermeable gowns; and 4. Nearly 40 percent of respondents agreed that their hospital did not have plans to equip isolation rooms with plastic covered mattresses and pillows and to discard all linens after use; fewer than 1 in 10 respondents reported that they were aware their hospital had such a plan in place. The Centers for Disease Control and a few hospitals around the country with infectious disease units knew the right protocols and had the right protective gear to be used when treating an Ebola patient. Ebola in the United States was a frightening thought for many, but I think we saw the best of what first responders do each day--our doctors and nurses went to work and treated the sick and did what they always do--take care of those in need. In unanimously reported the FRIENDS Act favorably to the House, the Homeland Security Committee voted to support first responders and the people who love them and need them most, their families. The FRIENDS Act will help ensure that our healthcare workers, EMTs, firefighters, law enforcement, and other local, state, and federal first responders can answer the call of duty secure in the knowledge that they will have what they need in the way of health kits or an emergency response plan to enable them to perform their duty and return home safely to their families and loved ones. The GAO's comprehensive review of the range of policies and programs in place at the State level to address the preparedness and protection of first responders will also delineate high risk urban areas from rural communities; and the degree to which selected state policies were developed or executed with funding from the DHS Grant Programs or Urban Area Security Initiative authorized by the Homeland Security Act. The GAO Report's focus on the presence of the family of first responders in an area affected by a terrorist attack and the availability of personal protective equipment is essential. This will be the first report that focuses on the family as a critical factor that should be considered in the work of first responders during times of crisis such as a terrorist attack or public emergency. The issue of families in areas that may be impacted by terrorist attack or other crisis was highlighted by the Ebola crisis in Dallas, Texas last year. According to Dallas County Judge Clay Jenkins, who managed the crisis, one of the chief concerns of first responders was keeping their families safe. Judge Jenkins recounted that discrimination against first responders and their families was a real concern because it was known that EMTs and the firefighters accompanying them responded to the home of the first known Ebola victim in the United States, Eric Duncan. People were so fearful for themselves and their children's health regarding possible means of contracting Ebola they did not want their children attending a school with the child of first responders who might come into contact with Ebola victims. For this reason, Judge Jenkins requested the Commissioner of Public Health, the top Ebola expert in the United States, and the Dallas County Medical Society explain to the public that there was a zero percent chance of transmission of Ebola in that scenario. In Dallas County and around the nation first responders expressed concerns regarding their lack of knowledge about the disease, as well as not having the right type of protective equipment to ensure their safety in managing the care of possible Ebola victims. These are certainly factors that one would expect to weigh on a first responder called to respond to a terrorist attack or unprecedented emergency. The bravery or dedication of first responders is not in question-- they are the people who run into burning buildings to save people whom they may never have met. The FRIENDS Act is a small token of the nation's gratitude and appreciation for all first responders do keep us safe. Finally, Mr. Speaker, I wish to acknowledge and thank Natalie Matson and her colleagues on the Homeland Security Committee's majority staff, Moira Bergin and her colleagues with the Minority staff, and Lillie Coney of my personal staff for their technical expertise and great work on H.R. 2795. I urge all Members to support the nation's first responders and vote to pass H.R. 2795, the FRIENDS Act. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as I began, let me thank the first responders of this Nation and thank their families for the sacrifice that they make. Our first responders rush into dangerous conditions to protect us. They deserve to have the peace of mind that their families are safe as they courageously help others and other families during disaster and crisis. Now, their plate is enhanced. It is fuller dealing with not only these disasters, but the potential of a terrorist act. So I want to extend my gratitude to all of those who have offered their support, again, in particular, the International Association of Fire Chiefs for their support in working with us. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2795. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule for H.R. 2130, the ``Red River Private Property Protection Act.'' The President has announced that this bill will be vetoed in the event it reaches his desk. With just one legislative day before the current continuing resolution expires on December 11, we should be focusing all of our time and attention on matters that address the real problems and major concerns of the American people. And right now the American people are very concerned about the harm and threat posed by ``lone wolf'' and ``franchise terrorists'' that we saw in Paris last month and just last week in San Bernardino, California. These tragedies follow on the heels of mass shootings in Tucson, Aurora, Sandy Hook, Charleston, Chattanooga, Roseburg, Colorado Springs, and now, most recently, in San Bernardino, California. These senseless mass shootings remind us of the imperative of ending gun violence in our country. It is past time that we come together united by our common humanity and with this simple message: the violence must stop. And there are actions that can be taken to reduce gun violence beginning with the enactment of the bipartisan ``Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Public Act of 2015'' (H.R. 1076). This bipartisan legislation, which I am proud to co-sponsor, would close the dangerous loophole that allows terrorist suspects to legally buy deadly weapons. H.R. 1076 would bar the sale or distribution of firearms to any individual whom the Attorney General has determined to be engaged in terrorist activities. Mr. Speaker, if a person is considered by the federal government too dangerous to board an airplane or to enter the United States, he or she surely is too dangerous to be permitted to purchase or obtain a firearm. It is unconscionable that we have not acted to close the loophole in federal law that permits a terrorist lawfully to obtain and carry firearms. Mr. Speaker, according to a report by the Government Accountability Office, since 2004 more than 2,000 suspects on the FBI's Terrorist Watchlist have successfully purchased weapons in the United States. It is simply intolerable that more than 90 percent of all suspected terrorists who attempted to purchase guns in the last 11 years walked away with the weapon they wanted, with just 190 rejected despite their ominous histories. To close this loophole, I call upon Speaker Ryan to bring H.R. 1076 to the floor immediately. H.R. 1076 grants the Attorney General the authority to deny a firearms license to individuals for whom there is a reasonable belief that the individual may use a firearm or explosive in connection with terrorist activity. This legislation was originally crafted in 2007 and endorsed by President Bush's Justice Department, has bipartisan support in the House, and is supported by prominent Republicans and counter-terrorism & law enforcement experts. H.R. 1076 greatly reduces the likelihood that a terrorists can obtain some of the most lethal weapons in America. Right now a terrorist can buy a firearm in the parking lot of a gun show, over the internet, or through a newspaper ad without needing a background check. Mr. Speaker, you cannot be against criminals, terrorists and the dangerously mentally ill getting guns and be against H.R. 1076. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1076 will save lives and strengthen the rights of law-abiding gun owners. It deserves a vote in the House.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, the past few months have been marked by senseless violence and tragedy across the globe and in our own country from Tuscon, Aurora, Sandy Hook, Charleston, Chattanooga, Roseburg, and now most recently in San Bernardino, California. It is past time that we come together united by our common humanity and with this simple message: the violence must stop. The senseless mass shooting in San Bernardino reminds us of the imperative of ending gun violence in our country. And there are actions that can be taken to reduce gun violence beginning with the enactment of the bipartisan ``Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act of 2015'' (H.R. 1217). This bipartisan legislation, which I am proud to be an original co- sponsor, will help prevent guns from falling into the hands of criminals and reinforce the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding gun owners. Expanding the existing background check system to cover all commercial firearm sales, the Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act of 2015 ensures that criminals and the dangerously mentally ill cannot slip through background check loopholes that endanger the safety and rights of every American. H.R. 1217 greatly reduces the number of places where a criminal can buy a gun. Right now a criminal can buy a firearm in the parking lot of a gun show, over the internet, or through a newspaper ad without needing a background check. The bill closes these loopholes while ensuring that background checks are conducted in the same way federally licensed dealers have for more than 40 years. The legislation also strengthens the Second Amendment rights of law- abiding gun owners by banning the government from creating a federal registry and makes the misuse of records a felony, punishable by up to 15 years in prison. It provides reasonable exceptions for family and friend transfers and allows active military personnel to buy guns in the state they are stationed. It lets gun owners use a state concealed carry permit issued within the last five years in lieu of a background check and permits interstate handgun sales from licensed dealers. The bill also improves the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) by incentivizing states to improve reporting of criminals and the dangerously mentally ill and by directing future grant funds toward better record-sharing systems. H.R. 1217 will also reduce federal funds to states that do not comply. Mr. Speaker, you cannot be against criminals, terrorists and the dangerously mentally ill getting guns and be against background checks. I thank Congressmen Peter King (R-NY) and Mike Thompson (D-CA) for introducing this bipartisan legislation (H.R. 1217), which is the House companion to an identical bipartisan bill introduced previously by Senators Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Pat Toomey (R-PA). Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1217 is anti-crime, pro-lawful gun owner and pro- Second Amendment. It will save lives and strengthen the rights of law-abiding gun owners. It deserves a vote in the House.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, the past few months have been marked by senseless violence across the globe and in our own country from Tuscon, Aurora, Sandy Hook, Charleston, Chattanooga, Roseburg, and now most recently in San Bernardino, California. It is past time that we come together united by our common humanity and with this simple message: the violence must stop! The senseless mass shootings in Paris and San Bernardino remind us of the imperative of ending gun violence in our country. And there are actions that can be taken to reduce gun violence beginning with the enactment of the bipartisan ``Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Public Act of 2015'' (H.R. 1076). This bipartisan legislation, which I am proud to co-sponsor, would close the dangerous loophole that allows terrorist suspects to legally buy deadly weapons. H.R. 1076 would bar the sale or distribution of firearms to any individual whom the Attorney General has determined to be engaged in terrorist activities. It also would grant the Attorney General the authority to deny a firearms license to individuals for whom there is a reasonable belief that the individual may use a firearm or explosive in connection with terrorist activity. Mr. Speaker, according to a report by the Government Accountability Office, since 2004 more than 2,000 suspects on the FBI's Terrorist Watchlist have successfully purchased weapons in the United States. It is simply intolerable that more than 90 percent of all suspected terrorists who attempted to purchase guns in the last 11 years walked away with the weapon they wanted, with just 190 rejected despite their ominous histories. This legislation was originally crafted in 2007 and endorsed by President Bush's Justice Department, has bipartisan support in the House, and is supported by prominent Republicans and counter-terrorism & law enforcement experts. H.R. 1076 greatly reduces the likelihood that terrorists can obtain some of the most lethal weapons in America. Right now a terrorist can buy a firearm in the parking lot of a gun show, over the internet, or through a newspaper ad without needing a background check. Mr. Speaker, you cannot be against criminals, terrorists and the dangerously mentally ill getting guns and be against H.R. 1076. I thank Congressmen Peter King (R-NY) and Mike Thompson (D-CA) for introducing this bipartisan legislation (H.R. 1076). Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1076 will save lives and strengthen the rights of law-abiding gun owners. It deserves a vote in the House.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3875, the Department of Homeland Security CBRNE Defense Act of 2015. Mr. Speaker, we were here 2 days ago, and I said that the American people are looking for the homeland to be safe. As I stand here today in the backdrop of a recent classified briefing for many Members, I again say that the issue of homeland security is not a partisan issue. I am very grateful to Mr. McCaul and Mr. Thompson of Mississippi, the ranking member, for their bipartisanship and the bipartisanship of this committee. Working alongside the other jurisdictional committees--that includes my other committee, Judiciary, that has, as their ranking member, Mr. Conyers, and chairman, Mr. Goodlatte, and many other committees--our commitment should be to secure the American people. So, in this instance, pursuant to the fiscal year 2013 Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, the Department of Homeland Security was directed to evaluate its activities related to preventing and responding to threats posed by chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosive, CBRNE, weapons and to determine whether there were ways to improve coordination of those activities. Nearly 2 years later, DHS submitted its report to Congress and requested that certain activities and offices within the Department be consolidated to create a center of gravity for the DHS CBRNE activities. H.R. 3875 seeks to implement much of the Department's proposal. In particular, the bill would bring the Office of Health Affairs, the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, the Office of Bombing Prevention, the chemical and biological risk assessment activities Science and Technology Directorate, and staff from the Office of Policy and Office of Coordination Operations together in a single office, headed by a new assistant secretary. I distinctly remember being in some of the meetings and hearings that drew about some of these coordinated activities, and I believe the new assistant secretary will be a very effective tool for making America safer. During committee consideration of the measure, the committee accepted an amendment authored by Ranking Member Thompson to protect the missions of the offices brought together and prevent some of the disruption that could be caused by this kind of reorganization. The amendment acknowledges that this reorganization will likely necessitate new expenditures. For instance, DHS may need to utilize retention bonuses to retain highly skilled, much-sought-after nuclear and biodefense experts who otherwise would leave DHS because of their lowered position and reduced prospects for advancement. I believe we should do that. Ranking Member Thompson's amendment also protects the role of the Chief Medical Officer as a leader within the Department on public health and medical issues by preserving the CMO's direct line to the Secretary. The amendment allows for the establishment of a health division within the new office which could serve as a base of operations for the Chief Medical Officer's public health activities. I might comment very briefly further on this. We have found that we live in a situation where, whether it is a natural disaster, but in this instance a terrorist situation that comes about, there is certainly major need for coordinated health activities that a person briefed, informed, and trained under DHS, with the expertise, can give to local entities and States. For example, a hospital in my community, St. Joseph Medical Center, is the only hospital in a very intense downtown urban center. We would be interested in making sure that all of those health systems work. As a nation, we cannot afford to have focus and attention toward the CBRNE mission diminished as a result of the unavoidable staff upheaval and infighting associated within any organization of this order. Accordingly, I am pleased that H.R. 3875, as amended, will help bolster the Department's ability to carry out this reorganization without diminishing its ability to continue to carry out its CBRNE mission. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak in support of H.R. 3875, the ``Department of Homeland Security CBRNE Defense Act of 2015.'' As a Senior Member of the Homeland Security Committee, I served as Ranking Member of the Border and Maritime Subcommittee during the last Congress and in a previous Congress chaired the Subcommittee on Transportation Security. It is important that the House take up the issue of how the WMD programs within the Department of Homeland Security are managed, which is why I am an original sponsor of the bill. Events over the last Congress make it clear that Congress should be even more vigilant in providing for the protection of the United States. Congress should be mindful of the: United States' leadership in the effort to forge an enforceable and verifiable nuclear agreement with Iran; deadliness of chemical weapons when they were used during the Syrian conflict against unarmed men, women, and children; and arrival of Ebola in Dallas, Texas and the cases that were treated around the nation. The bill authorizes an Office of Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosives (CBRNE) Defense within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Departments and agencies across the U.S. government have centralized their weapons of mass destruction (WMD) defense programs to provide clear focal points for dealing with this threat. However, DHS responsibilities in the chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosives areas continue to be spread across many offices in the Department with varying authorities and functions, affecting strategic direction as well as interdepartmental and interagency coordination. This bill will bring DHS into line with the Defense Department, State Department, CIA, and FBI, which each have a lead office or bureau charged with defending America against chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosives (CBRNE) threats. This is the result of many years of oversight by the Committee on Homeland Security on the Department's management of CBRNE activities. The bill authorizes a CBRNE Office, led by a Presidentially-appointed Assistant Secretary. The bill directs the Secretary to include within the new CBRNE Office: the Office of Health Affairs; the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office; risk assessment activities and personnel of the Science and Technology Directorate; CBRNE activities and personnel of the Office of Policy and Operations Coordination and Planning; and the Office for Bombing Prevention. The bill provides specific responsibilities of the Assistant Secretary and needed structure for the management of CBRNE activities. DHS provided its proposal for consolidation of CBRNE activities to the Committee in June. The Subcommittees on Emergency Preparedness, Response, and Communications; and Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and Security Technologies held a hearing in July on the Department's proposal. I urge my colleagues on in the House to join me in supporting this important step forward. Our work is not yet done, but we are creating the groundwork for a safer and more resilient WMD deterrent, detection, and remediation federal homeland effort. I appreciate the Homeland Security Committee's interest in my bill H.R. 85, Terrorism Prevention and Critical Infrastructure Protection Act. Like Chairman McCaul, and Ranking Member Thompson, I regard securing our nation's critical infrastructure from terrorist threats as a top national and homeland security priority. I share the understanding regarding how important it is to draft legislation that addresses the cyber threat posed by computer viruses and worms designed to destroy or cripple industrial control systems that sustain critical infrastructure is a serious challenge. recommendation: support Fixing a Broken Bureaucracy--H.R. 3875 increases transparency and accountability at DHS by bringing the Department's fragmented WMD defense programs under one roof and putting a lead official in charge. Most security agencies (the Defense Department, State Department, CIA, and FBI) have a lead office or bureau charged with using their resources to defend America against chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosives (CBRNE) threats. But DHS does not--its WMD defense programs are scattered across multiple offices, a fractured approach that weakens our ability to confront these dangers on the frontlines. The disorganization creates inefficiency, generates confusion about who is in charge at DHS, makes interagency collaboration more difficult, and drives away top talent. The CBRNE Defense Act combines six separate offices and programs into one central CBRNE Office at DHS headquarters, led by a senior official who reports directly to the Secretary. Elevating a Critical Mission--H.R. 3875 creates a stronger, unified office equipped to keep the nation safe from WMD threats, and it ensures these issues will always stay on the Department's ``front burner.'' America faces persistent risk from terrorists and rogue states that want to threaten our people with weapons of mass destruction. But under the current structure at DHS, important WMD defense efforts can get lost in the bureaucratic noise. By consolidating these programs, the legislation will keep WMD challenges on the radar of top officials. It will also allow DHS to conduct its CBRNE activities more strategically and effectively. Streamlining Government--H.R. 3875 helps prevent taxpayer dollars from being wasted--and aims to reduce overlap and duplication wherever possible. Hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars have been spent on failed CBRNE programs at DHS that were ill-planned and lacked effective oversight and management. This legislation ensures DHS programs for combating WMD threats will be better coordinated and more closely monitored at the highest levels of the Department. The bill simplifies the Secretary's ability to oversee the Department's WMD defense activities by consolidating standalone offices and streamlining the reporting structure. I also creates the possibility of long-term savings by allowing the merged offices to combine their administrative functions. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman very much for his leadership. I do not have any further speakers, but I would like to close and thank the committee as well for considering a bill that is now being reviewed--I want to thank the committee--H.R. 85, Terrorism Prevention and Critical Infrastructure Protection Act, which I hope contributes to all of our discussions about securing America. This bill, Mr. Speaker, in particular, H.R. 3875, would consolidate important CBRNE activities within the Department of Homeland Security. I am hopeful that this reorganization will improve DHS' ability to carry out its mission in this space. Today, Mr. Speaker, the diversity in the terrorist landscape is unprecedented. There are actors with aspirations to hit Western targets with deadly conventional weapons. There are also actors that are actively seeking to secure radiological and other nonconventional weaponry to exact maximum death, destruction, and chaos. The Department of Homeland Security, first established after 9/11, has been designated and dictated to by the American people to keep them safe. It has an important role to play to address these threats. It is my great hope that this reorganization will help DHS take its CBRNE efforts to the next level. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to support this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise to support H.R. 3578, the Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology Reform and Improvement Act of 2015. First, I want to say to the gentleman from Texas, thank you so very much for your leadership. Again, we have a great opportunity working together, along with your ranking member, Mr. Richmond, and the chairman of the full committee, Mr. McCaul, and, as well, Mr. Thompson. I believe we are continuously building blocks of security for the American people. Research and development is a key component of the Department of Homeland Security's mission to make America more secure and better able to prevent, respond to, and recover from natural disasters and terrorist acts. In the constantly evolving threat landscape, technology-based force multipliers are essential for managing our borders, safeguarding cyberspace, and making sure we are resilient in the face of disasters. H.R. 3578 will improve the way the Science and Technology Directorate serves its customers within the Department in the first responder community in three ways. Before I say that, let me indicate to the chairman, we understand that we are looking at generational gaps. Terrorists are young. People who wish to undermine the landscape of cybersecurity can use, if I might say, these young minds, these technocrats, to do things that we may have never heard of, so our system must be resilient. First, this bill requires S&T to engage in strategic planning and priority-setting exercises that will assist Congress in measuring the management effectiveness and utility of the research and technologies it funds. This kind of self-assessment will make S&T a more effective partner to its customers and will help make its program more efficient. Second, H.R. 3578 directs S&T to evaluate its university programs and collaborative agreements and assess its efforts to broaden outreach to diverse institutions, which may have a unique expertise to add to S&T's ongoing work. Given the current fiscal challenges, it is critical that we maximize the way we leverage the capabilities of knowledge-rich universities, and this provision will help S&T do just that. In fact, I believe that the universities are our richest source of talent, and not only for the researchers and the professors, but certainly the students who are young, who are there to do good, of whom we can utilize both their talents, their approach, and their intellect. Finally, the bill encourages carefully targeted venture capital investments in the homeland security enterprise that can accelerate product development and add mission critical capabilities quickly and efficiently. These targeted investments will help put better technologies into the hands of DHS boots-on-the-ground State and local first responders soon. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3578 codifies existing practices at S&T that are working and will make S&T a stronger, more reliable partner in the homeland security mission. I encourage my colleagues to support this important bipartisan legislation, and, as well, I continue to look forward to working with this subcommittee, among others, to begin to look at the cyber space and the cybersecurity infrastructure. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. In order to meet the needs of those on the front line of homeland security activities from Customs and Border Protection and the Transportation Security to local first responders, the Science and Technology Directorate must rapidly develop and deliver innovative solutions that advance DHS' mission. I am convinced that the whole matter of cyber technology are the new frontier of terrorism and that this Department must be, as it has been, very well prepared with human personnel being on the front lines of the first responders, and must give them extra tools through S&T to help to further the mission of the security of this Nation. It is a complex and difficult mission. H.R. 3578 puts S&T on a pathway to making smarter and quicker R&D investment in technology and tools that help our first responders do their jobs better and more effectively. With that, I ask my colleagues to support H.R. 3578, and I thank the proponent of this legislation. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as I have said today on the floor and yesterday, the American people expect us to keep them safe. Let me thank my colleagues for the support they have given the Homeland Security Committee on a number of bills and particularly note the legislation that I introduced, the FRIENDS Act, the sole purpose of which is to ensure that those who are first responders who have to be away for a period of time, that their families are protected. I also think it is an important moment for bridging and building on law enforcement and community. I have had the opportunity to meet with a number of police chiefs of major cities. We have introduced--John Conyers and myself, along with a number of Members--the Law Enforcement Trust and Integrity Act, which really is an opportunity and a bridge to be able to provide an accreditation pathway for the law enforcement agencies to build upon the improvement and the best practices that they may have, including a medallion for those who have fallen in duty. It is also important, as we look forward to the security of this Nation, to recognize the tragedy of San Bernardino. I offer to those families my deepest sympathy. There was a major failure which we need to correct. Members of Congress need to come together so that we are not behind the terrorist act, but in front of it, to protect the American people.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, this morning I was at the Supreme Court observing the oral arguments in the case of Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, No. 14-981. The issue to be decided in the Fisher case is whether the undergraduate admissions policy of the University of Texas at Austin complies with the principles established by the Supreme Court in Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003). In Grutter, the Court held that ``obtaining the educational benefits of `student body diversity is a compelling state interest that can justify the use of race in university admissions.' '' 539 U.S. at 325. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be a representative from a state that has played a pivotal role in the Supreme Court's educational equity jurisprudence, beginning with the landmark case of Sweatt v. Painter, 339 U.S. 629 (1950), won by Thurgood Marshall and which held that segregated law schools violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and laid the foundation for the landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954). Mr. Speaker, I would urge the Supreme Court to uphold the admissions policy of the University of Texas at Austin because affirmative action is needed to ensure the diversity on college campuses that will yield diversity in the ranks of America's future leaders. In a globalized and increasingly interconnected world, the nation that succeeds is the one best positioned to adapt to a world of differences--cultural, religious, economic, social, racial, and political. The key to success in a diverse global economy is learning to adapt and thrive in diverse communities where the next generation and its leader are educated and trained. And that is why it is critical that the Court uphold the principle it established in Grutter v. Bollinger in 2002 that diversity in higher education is such a compelling governmental interest that race- conscious admission policies are permissible if other alternatives are found to be inadequate. This is the situation presented by the facts in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, which was reargued before the Court today. Although the University of Texas's consideration of race is very narrow--just one of many factors in the admissions process--its impact has been significant in advancing educational benefits flowing from a diverse student body. From 1997 to 2004, affirmative action in admissions at the University of Texas was barred by the infamous Fifth Circuit decision in Hopwood v. Texas, 78 F.3d 932 (5th. Cir. 1996). As a result of the University of Texas's inability to consider a qualified applicant's race in the admissions process, between 1997 and 2004 African-American students never comprised more than 4.5% of the entering class--far below the 13% of Texas high school graduates who are African Americans. Worse yet, for the students attending the University of Texas, during that period, 4 out of every 5 of classes (79%) at the University had zero, or only one, African-American student. Mr. Speaker, this is not the way to produce a generation of leaders for the 21st century. With the Supreme Court decision in Grutter, the University of Texas could add race to other criteria considered in its individualized admissions policy. And behold the results--28% of African Americans enrolled at the University were admitted at this stage of admissions process, a stark contrast to the 4.5% of the student body represented by African Americans in the preceding 7 years. Mr. Speaker, affirmative action works; it is the right thing to do for our country. Fostering educational diversity and greater opportunity is critical to our nation's future in a global economy and an increasingly interconnected world. That is why diversity is supported by a broad cross-section of American society, including military leaders, major corporations, small business owners, educators, and students from all backgrounds. An America that celebrates diversity in higher education will! produce the leaders, inventors, entrepreneurs, diplomats, public servants, and teachers that will serve our nation well in the global economy of the 21st century. And of the most important things that can be done to ensure this bright future is for the Supreme Court to affirm the judgment of the 5th Circuit and uphold the admissions policy of the University of Texas.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I think most Americans think it is important for the Constitution to be protected. The Second Amendment is protected. We have the right to bear arms. But most Americans would find our actions and inactions questionable at best because, after the 353rd mass murder, this Congress cannot come together and vote on one simple bill, that is, that individuals on the no-fly and terrorist watch lists would not be able to purchase guns. Yes, my colleagues, today, as we stand here, they can purchase guns. They can purchase guns without imprisonment, without charges. In memory of San Bernardino, among the other failures that caused their deaths, the one we know of was the utilization of automatic weapons that shot thousands or hundreds of rounds--many rounds--killing these innocent persons. I rise today to say that we should not move from this place without passing the Peter King bill, which keeps guns--automatic weapons--out of the hands of terrorists. How simple a question. How simple an answer. Vote ``yes'' for the American people.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Let me thank the gentlewoman for her leadership. As well, I thank the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson), the chairman of the Border and Maritime Security Subcommittee, of which I am a member--Chairman Miller--and Messrs. McCaul and Goodlatte. Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated, in my having been on the floor today, America is looking for the homeland to be secure, and they are looking for it to be done in a thoughtful manner. Just a week ago, I did not vote for a bill that would have stopped innocent refugees who had been in camps for 2 years or more--mothers and fathers and seniors and children--because I knew there was a 21- list vetting system that would ensure that those refugees who had languished in refugee camps and who had been suffering would be a small number--an infinitesimal number--coming into the United States. We heard debate earlier today about another loophole that could be ended, and that is to stop terrorists from getting guns--a thoughtful proposal. Most Americans didn't realize the loophole existed. Now we come to a program that is, likewise, a thoughtful program. It has nothing to do with refugees. It has nothing to do with ending the Visa Waiver Program of 38 nations. What it has to do with is, if you have been in the areas where the caliphate is, where the fight has been taken to, Syria and Iraq, we just ask for an added interview. I might imagine that, in the course of that, there will be human rights activists and journalists. I would imagine, as well, that our officials who will be doing the interviews will be sensitive to the fact of legitimate journalists who have gone to do their reporting. I think it is very important that the American people know that we are working to craft a thoughtful approach. This is a thoughtful approach. It simply asks for individuals to go for an interview who are part of the Visa Waiver Program in the countries that they have them or who are dual nationals. Likewise, I have introduced legislation, H.R. 48, No Fly for Foreign Fighters, that asks for an added vetting for the terrorist watch list to make sure that no one on that list who is coming from overseas gets on an airplane. This will protect the American people. In the course of trying to be constructive, I think the hearings that we had in Homeland Security indicated another layer, another level, of just making sure that those who are trying to use the Visa Waiver Program are not abusing the Visa Waiver Program. That is our effort here today, that they not abuse it and, by some ill fate, allow someone who comes to this Nation to do us harm. Homeland security, protecting the national security, is a layer that is constructive and constitutional. This is constructive, and it is constitutional. I ask my colleagues to support the underlying legislation. Mr. Speaker, this has been a stressful year in our country and our world with past senseless gun violence and terroristic acts against Americans and citizens the world over. I rise in support of H.R. 158--the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act'' because it facilitates a rigorous vetting of tourists seeking to enter into our country. In addition to the steps laid out by the President, I also believe there are additional steps the Congress should take, including bringing to the floor for debate and vote H.R. 48, the ``No Fly for Foreign Fighters Act,'' that I introduced earlier this year. My legislation would require the TSA to check the Terrorist Screening Database and the terrorist watch list used in determining whether to permit a passenger to board a U.S.-bound or domestic flight and to take appropriate steps to ensure that those who pose a threat to aviation safety or national security are included in the Terrorism Database. From San Bernardino to Paris, to Nigeria, to Mali, to Beirut, the carnage of violence has been perpetrated on the human family by those who should never be in possession of violent weapons or power. But we cannot allow these atrocities to dissuade us from interacting with and welcoming those interested in traveling to and learning more about our country. Mr. Speaker, as a Member of Congress and senior member on the homeland security and ranking member on the Judiciary subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland, my top priority is the safety of the American people. In times of conflict and stress and trauma, our natural inclination is to point fingers and seek to cast blame as we have seen Mr. Donald Trump do. But we all know that deep down, this does us no good and that it runs afoul of our American ideals. What we must do is focus our efforts on the most likely security threats to our homeland and not scapegoat the thoroughly screened individuals who seek to come to the U.S. through the Waiver Program. We cannot throw a net of suspicion over an entire nation, even as the United States accepts more refugees--including Syrians. Our system facilitates the most rigorous screening and security vetting of ANY category of traveler or immigrant to the United States before the refugee sets foot on U.S. soil. Indeed, the Republican bill, H.R. 4038, that passed the House in November would immediately shut down refugee resettlement from the Syria and Iraq region and severely handicap refugee resettlement in the future. To date, there is no reliable evidence that the individuals who committed the heinous attacks in Paris on November 13th were refugees. Currently, the Visa Waiver Program allows citizens from 38 countries from around the world, including the United Kingdom, France, Belgium and Japan, to enter the United States without a visa. One of the main intents of the Visa Waiver Program is to stimulate the U.S.' economy by encouraging tourism, cultural exchange, business, and job growth between the United States and our international partners. The travel industry estimates that the VWP contributed $190 billion to our economy in 2014. It should be noted that Visa waiver travelers cannot simply grab their passports and hop on the next flight to the United States. Rather, under current law, citizens from participating Visa Waiver Program countries are required to complete a U.S government online security screening form prior to their admission to the United States. These participants also undergo an additional level of screening at the port of entry by a Customs and Border Patrol official. This bipartisan bill provides for specific, concrete changes that will ensure better information-sharing among intelligence and law enforcement agencies. The Program requires screening of all travelers against INTERPOL databases to identify high-risk travelers. The Program makes it challenging for extremists to falsify their identities by requiring fraud-resistant e-passports that contain biometric information. The Program compels U.S. security agencies to conduct more frequent threat assessments of VWP countries. The bill also requires nationals of Iraq, Syria, and other designated countries, or those who have visited such countries, to have an in- person interview with a U.S. Department of State Consular official and undergo more lengthy screenings prior to travel to the United States. This bill employs intelligent measures to enhance the security of the American people by improving information sharing between VWP country partners and the United States, including a requirement that WP countries report theft/loss of their citizens' passports to the United States within 24 hrs. This bill is a more appropriate response than the Republican drafted the ``American SAFE Act of 2015.'' It deserves a vote in the House.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, in a conversation that I had recently, speaking about the other body, it was mentioned that that body is the deliberative body. There are opportunities for collaboration between Members, Democrat and Republican. But I am in the people's House, and I believe that Members also have the duty and commitment to collaborate and to be deliberative and thoughtful. This morning, I would like to offer just a number of points about our wonderful Constitution. I first want to begin by saying this is Restore the Vote Tuesday, and I am wearing a pin that highlights the importance of voting and the responsibilities of our civic constituency. My colleague from Alabama (Ms. Sewell) is on the floor, and I join her in recognizing how special this right is and to know that many of us--I attempted to register sharecroppers in South Carolina, North Carolina, and Georgia in my college days, people who were still frightened about voting. I saw what the 1965 Voting Rights Act did, and we need to restore it. We have an election coming up in Houston on Saturday, and I want to say to my constituents that we will do all that we can to prevent any prohibitive barriers from voting, from your voting. That is a right, Mr. Speaker, just as it is the right to have the right to freedom of expression, freedom of speech, and freedom of religion. Mr. Speaker, one of our Presidential candidates took to the airwaves in the last 24 hours to pronounce or announce or demagogue, saying that no Muslims should be allowed in this country. Mr. Speaker, I believe that we, as Members of Congress, should be empathetic and sympathetic to the concern of the American people. Maybe some are frightened. I do not make light of that. I have been on the Homeland Security Committee since 9/11, and I now serve as the ranking member of the Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations Subcommittee. I take these obligations very seriously. For any of us who have been to Ground Zero even at that time and since that time, it is seared in our minds. I know the people in San Bernardino, those of us reflecting on Paris, but now our own brothers and sisters realize that government must act in a way for Americans to feel safe and secure. But I would say that having met and stood with the Muslim community in my district on Sunday, late in the afternoon, we stood in front of the Mickey Leland Federal building with Christians alike. Arm in arm we prayed. But I just stood back and listened to one Muslim representative after another come and proclaim their patriotism and denouncing the violence and distortion of their faith. A young imam who had just moved from New Jersey just moved me. He began to articulate the elements of the Koran: benevolence and love. As a 25-year-old, he stood up to denounce this violence. That is the kind of American partnership that we need. When we concluded that meeting, we had a press conference and vigil. We said that we would form a task force. I encourage Members throughout this body to have task forces on this very issue: How can we help? Then as the President spoke--I want to thank him, for maybe people were not listening--the President was very clear that he is going to take the hunt and hunt down terrorist plotters to any country where they are. The President also indicated he will continue to provide training and equipment to Iraqi and Syrian forces and work with friends and allies to stop ISIL's operations; and with American leadership, the international community has begun to establish a process and timeline to pursue cease-fires and a political resolution to the Syrian war. Our President is focused. The Congress needs to be focused. Yes, we need to be able to put forward legislative ideas, not contentious. No terrorist should have the ability to get a gun. Therefore, we should pass this bill that indicates that any terrorist on the terrorist watch list should not be able to buy a gun in the United States of America. I have legislation in the Judiciary Committee that we are preparing to come to the floor: no-fly for foreign terrorists, stopping them in their tracks, from wherever they come from, from getting on any plane coming to the United States of America. That is not hostility. That is saying to the American people we care. As they say in the community: We have got your back. Then we must go back to the alert system, Mr. Speaker. We did it after 9/11. We understand the Secretary is offering that thought, the red alert. It is interesting that I thought about that, to give the American people some sense. But let me finish, Mr. Speaker, by simply saying that I love this country. What a wonderful set of principles in the Constitution. And I want to say to the American people that, with our God, with our faith vested in a higher power, and the knowledge of democracy, we are going to withstand, survive, fight, and have a better nation. I know that that is the better way, not demagoguery and condemnation of a faith. I would never do that.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in support of H.R. 3859, the HSA Technical Corrections Act of 2015. Let me, first of all, thank the chairperson and ranking member of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee on H.R. 3859 and thank the ranking member, Mr. Thompson, and the chairman of the full committee. The American people are looking for homeland security. They are looking for us to be secure. Before I briefly discuss H.R. 3859, let me applaud the Carter-Torres bill, which was just passed, giving further authority to train law enforcement all over America. As we can see, law enforcement is a part of our first responders on homeland security. H.R. 3859 is a technical corrections bill. It updates and revises the Homeland Security Act of 2002 by, among other things, eliminating onetime reporting requirements, removing antiquated positions that no longer exist or have evolved, and striking provisions that were inserted in 2002 before the Department of Homeland Security was officially constituted in 2003. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to note that during the Homeland Security Committee's November 4 markup of H.R. 3859, members favorably and unanimously reported this bill. I acknowledge Mr. Perry for his leadership on these issues as well as the collaboration we have on this committee. With this in mind, I commend this bill for House consideration. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Speier).

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Let me just say this: I am not sure if the gentleman from Texas, a dear friend, was asking us to get rid of the no-fly list or the watch list. Our point today, Mr. Speaker, is very narrow. We are just asking that terrorists not be able to walk into a gun shop and buy a gun. This is a loophole that is most glaring. Eighty percent of the American people believe that this is impossible; it must not be true. We are trying to prevent suspected terrorists from walking into a gun store and buying a deadly weapon. The investigation, tragically, in California is not yet finished, so we don't have the final answer as to what would have prevented that. But it is astonishing that the loophole has allowed more than 2,000 suspects on the FBI terrorist watch list to buy guns in the U.S. over the past 11 years. When I started this debate, I was happy that we had come to the floor to deal with Homeland Security bills. The American people want the homeland safe and secure. They don't want demagoguery. They want safety and security. Legislation blocking terrorists from getting guns makes America no more safer and secure than apple pie. This is a time when more than 90 percent of all suspected terrorists who tried to buy guns in America walked away and bought them. They got the weapon they wanted. This is not criminals, gangs, or others. We are dealing with those individuals who are terrorists. They have the right to get a gun. Can we do something this week, Mr. Speaker? Can we add to the safety and security of the American people? As we pass this bill, H.R. 3859, which I applaud its correcting technicalities, can we join together and can we pass closing the gun loophole that allows terrorists to go and buy a gun to terrorize innocent Americans? I think we can do better. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I started by saying that the American people are looking to us to secure the homeland. As we look at these series of bills that we have on the floor, H.R. 3859 is a technical corrections bill. This is a bill that should be passed. Americans expect clarity from this body. Clarity from this body means that at the same time as we pass H.R. 3859, we should also be concerned about making sure that we close gun show loopholes so as to avoid having terrorists buy guns. I believe that that is the appropriate and direct way to handle this question of securing the Nation. Do the obvious to secure the Nation: stop terrorists from getting guns. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.