Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, those individuals need processes and they need funding. We won't even give them war funding. As a member of the Homeland Security Committee, I can tell you that the issue is that we are not bringing groups together who are fleeing persecution, which is what we are seeing in the individuals coming to the country now. They are fleeing persecution, and we want to reject-- we want to reject the funding. When I was on the Homeland Security Committee, we did not do that. We provided for the NGOs. It is shameful for us to think that we can live in this country and reject the NGOs, the nongovernmental entities, who are helping those who are in need. That is how we did our work. When we did our work, we would be able to solve the problems. Those problems would be helping NGOs. Those problems would be making sure that we gave dollars to the agencies like Catholic Charities. Can anyone believe that we don't give money to Catholic Charities anymore? The call that we have today, Mr. Speaker, and to my good friend, the whip of the House, working with our whip, the Honorable Katherine Clark----

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thought we would come here today and have a reasoned opportunity to address this question. Let me be very clear. I have been in this body long enough to say that we have had a time where Members have been here and we have had control of the border, in the interpretation that my Republicans might say. We have had a flow of immigrants. We have had processes, and we have had challenges. We have spoken to the issue of providing funding for these challenges. Here is what the issue is. The issue is that we have a past President who sees in his jurisdiction and career to block the flow of immigrants who are building and continuing to work with us in working on this Nation. They come from Ukraine. They may come from Israel. They may come from Palestine. They may come from Taiwan.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as you can see, there is just not enough time to speak on these issues. Mr. Speaker, as we go into a number of religious holidays, which brings us together around peace, faith, and harmony, I want us to recognize that racism is raising its own ugly head again. It is raising its head on DEI, something that most of us of a certain age have no clue as to diversity, inclusion, exclusiveness, and the many different terminologies that can be utilized. We know the question of race and who we are. It is important, as we take to our home districts, that we embrace the diversity that is in our districts, talk about the need for harmony and unity, and, as well, that we recognize that we are better together than we are separated. I want to offer a commitment that we stand against racism, that we acknowledge it, that we join together in supporting H.R. 40, which is a commission to study reparations and develop reparation proposals. I look forward to us ridding ourselves of the ugly face of racism as well as ensuring that we find a way to solve why we are divided instead of united. Racism is ugly, and we must rid ourselves of it.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, the Iran Counterterrorism Act would require the President to obtain a congressional resolution of approval before waiving certain sanctions on Iran. This would cause us to have greater deliberation with the President. Mr. Speaker, I rise to bring concerns but to recognize that this is an important step that we need to digest and discuss in order to make the right decision to safeguard the people in the region but also the free, democracy-wanting people of Iran.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished ranking member of the full Financial Services Committee for yielding, and I thank the chairman of the full committee as well for giving me the opportunity to raise concerns and to say that we all stand with our ally Israel and the horrors of waking up and being targeted by 300 drones and being absolutely struck by this terrorist attack. I just came from a meeting with an Iranian-American diaspora organization working for a free democratic Iran who were stunned by Israel being attacked by 300 drones. This bill has consequences which I think are extremely important and worth looking at by our constituents and our community, which is what I wish to do.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman from Virginia, the home of my alma mater, the University of Virginia School of Law, and the gentleman from Connecticut, also the home of my alma mater. To be able to find collegiality in a very important question for the American people is very much a statement that should be made. This amendment does something Congress should have done 7 years ago, as I have indicated, prohibiting the government from resuming ``abouts'' collection, a form of section 702 surveillance that poses a unique risk to Americans. It is also very disturbing, Mr. Chair, because most Americans would scratch their heads and wonder why is this relevant to the immediate investigation. ``Abouts'' collection is a collection of communications that are neither to nor from an approved target of surveillance under 702, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, FISA, but merely contain information relating to that target. That means that you become a target because it happened to be sitting around you or it happened to be going to you or from you. In the past, ``abouts'' collections focused on collecting communications that include a target's email or phone, address, Twitter handle, or something like that, but in theory ``abouts'' collection could be used to collect emails that merely mention a person who is a target of 702 surveillance. I think it is extremely important to recognize ``merely mentions'' that individual, and you could have your materials, your private information, wrapped up in a roundup or a lassoing of the extended material that is scattered around you, and you could be subject to some kind of haul, if you will, a hauling in of data about you. Nothing in the text or legislative history of 702 indicates that this type of surveillance is authorized. That is why I think this amendment with Mr. Cline is extremely important because it shows that we are working together. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of the Cline (VA)/Jackson Lee (TX) Amendment No. 3 to H.R. 7888--Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act (RISAA). This amendment does something Congress should have done seven years ago: prohibit the government from resuming ``abouts'' collection, a form of Section 702 surveillance that poses unique risks to Americans. ``Abouts'' collection is the collection of communications that are neither to nor from an approved target of surveillance under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), but merely contain information relating to that target. In the past, ``abouts'' collection focused on collecting communications that include a target's email address, or phone address, or Twitter handle, or something like that. But in theory, ``abouts'' collection could be used to collect emails that merely mention a person who is a target of Section 702 surveillance. Nothing in the text or legislative history of Section 702 indicates that this type of surveillance is authorized. Under Section 702, the surveillance must target a non-U.S. person outside the United States. The term ``target'' has a well-understood meaning. When a person is a target, it means the government can collect that person's information or other data, not the communications or data of other individuals. As we all know, ``abouts'' collection under Section 702 has a sordid history. The National Security Agency (NSA) used ``abouts'' collection when it was conducting upstream surveillance, in other words, when it was intercepting communications directly as they transited over the Internet backbone, rather than collecting stored communications from service providers. Not surprisingly, this practice resulted in the collection of tens of thousands of purely domestic communications--communications between and among Americans inside the United States. Moreover, often these Americans were not even discussing the target. Instead, their communications were lumped in with other communications, transiting over the Internet backbone as a packet. The NSA was collecting the entire packet of communications, simply because somewhere in that packet was a reference to information about a target. This was a problem from the moment Section 702 went into effect in 2008. And yet for years, the government did not disclose this problem to the FISA Court. To the contrary, the government affirmatively misrepresented how the program was working. It was not until 2011 that the court learned the government was sweeping in tens of thousands of purely domestic communications. The court was livid. It noted that the belated disclosure, and I quote, ``marks the third instance in less than three years in which the government has disclosed a substantial misrepresentation regarding the scope of a major collection program.'' At the time, the court chose not to prohibit the use of ``abouts'' collection. But it held that special minimization rules were required for upstream communications, and that without those rules, the program would violate both Section 702 and the Fourth Amendment. One of those rules was a prohibition on U.S. person queries of communications obtained through upstream surveillance. Five years later, the NSA discovered that its agents had been routinely violating this prohibition. But rather than immediately report these violations to the FISA Court, the NSA waited for several months. When it finally admitted the violations, the FISA Court chastised the NSA for its ``institutional lack of candor,'' and refused to approve the continuation of Section 702 surveillance until the NSA cleaned up its act. The NSA proved incapable of bringing its agents into compliance. The agents continued to routinely search though the upstream data in an effort to find and review Americans' communications, in violation of Section 702, the Fourth Amendment, and the FISA Court's orders. Well aware that the court would not continue to approve Section 702 surveillance under these conditions, the NSA, in 2017, made the only decision it could: it terminated ``abouts'' collection. Well, it has now been seven years since the NSA stopped ``abouts'' collection, and the government has not claimed that ending this practice has resulted in a loss of critical intelligence or had any other kind of negative impact on national security. No official has pointed to a single bad result that could have been averted through the use of ``abouts'' collection. Collecting communications that are neither to nor from an approved target of surveillance is contrary to the text and intent of Section 702. It inevitably results in the collection of wholly domestic communications, which Section 702 expressly prohibits. Over the course of a decade, the NSA proved that it was incapable of operating ``abouts'' surveillance responsibly and in accordance with the law--and the past seven years shown that ``abouts'' collection is not necessary for national security. It is time for Congress to shut the door on ``abouts'' collection. In the future, if the government can show that it needs ``abouts'' collection for national security purposes and that it can operate the program without violating the law and the Fourth Amendment, it can come to Congress and ask for authorization. But the burden should be on the government to show the need and the ability to lawfully conduct the program. For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the Cline/Jackson Lee Amendment No. 3. Mr. Chair, I include in the record a letter from Representative Cline and myself listing the groups in support of this amendment. Congress of the United States, Washington, DC, April 12, 2024. Dear Colleague: Please join us in supporting our amendment to H.R. 7888, the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act. Rules Amendment No. 5 would end what is known as ``abouts'' collection, which involves the capturing of massive amounts of communications by government agencies such as the National Security Agency (NSA) in which the selector, for example, an email address, of a target appears somewhere in communications, even if that target is not a party to the communications. It has long been controversial. The FISA Court previously discovered that the government had misrepresented its activities and held that handling this type of data was of significant concern and a violation of the Fourth Amendment. Although the NSA abandoned the practice of ``abouts'' collection in 2017, Congress in 2018 amended FISA to prohibit this type of collection unless the AG and DNI notify the House and Senate Intelligence and Judiciary Committees of its plans to resume such collection. But that only means that if the NSA notifies Congress, they can resume ``abouts'' collection at any time. Our amendment would proactively end the practice for good. The following groups support this important amendment: Freedom Works--Key Vote; Due Process Institute; Americans for Prosperity; Project for Privacy and Surveillance Accountability; Reform Government Surveillance; Center for Democracy and Technology; American Civil Liberties Union; Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC); Restore the Fourth; Defending Rights & Dissent; Brennan Center for Justice; Wikimedia Foundation. Demand Progress; Electronic Frontier Foundation; Project on Government Oversight; United We Dream; Asian Americans Advancing Justice; Muslim Advocates; Free Press Action; National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers; Freedom of the Press Foundation; New America's Open Technology Institute; Fight for the Future; Stop AAPI Hate. We urge you to vote in favor of Amendment No. 5. Sincerely, Ben Cline, Member of Congress. Sheila Jackson Lee, Member of Congress.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. I have the time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman very much. I am delighted to be able to work with the gentleman from Virginia on what I think is crucial to codify, because as you said, the FBI had stopped doing it, but here we are again. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Himes), the ranking member on the Intelligence Committee.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. He had yielded to me, but I will be happy to yield back so he can get his time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. I have yielded a minute to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Himes).

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of the Cline (VA)/Jackson Lee (TX) Amendment [#3] to H.R. 7888--Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act (RISAA). This amendment does something Congress should have done seven years ago: prohibit the government from resuming ``abouts'' collection, a form of Section 702 surveillance that poses unique risks to Americans. ``Abouts'' collection is the collection of communications that are neither To nor From an approved target of surveillance under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), but merely contain information relating to that target. In the past, ``abouts'' collection focused on collecting communications that include a target's email address, or phone address, or Twitter handle, or something like that. But in theory, ``abouts'' collection could be used to collect emails that merely mention a person who is a target of Section 702 surveillance. Nothing in the text or legislative history of Section 702 indicates that this type of surveillance is authorized. Under Section 702, the surveillance must target a non-U.S. person outside the United States. The term ``target'' has a well-understood meaning. When a person is a target, it means the government can collect that person's information or other data, not the communications or data of other individuals. As we all know, ``abouts'' collection under Section 702 has a sordid history. The National Security Agency (NSA) used ``abouts'' collection when it was conducting upstream surveillance, in other words, when it was intercepting communications directly as they transited over the Internet backbone, rather than collecting stored communications from service providers. Not surprisingly, this practice resulted in the collection of tens of thousands of purely domestic communications--communications between and among Americans inside the United States. Moreover, often these Americans were not even discussing the target. Instead, their communications were lumped in with other communications, transiting over the Internet backbone as a packet. The NSA was collecting the entire packet of communications, simply because somewhere in that packet was a reference to information about a target. This was a problem from the moment Section 702 went into effect in 2008. And yet for years, the government did not disclose this problem to the FISA Court. To the contrary, the government affirmatively misrepresented how the program was working. It was not until 2011 that the court learned the government was sweeping in tens of thousands of purely domestic communications. The court was livid. It noted that the belated disclosure, and I quote, ``marks the third instance in less than three years in which the government has disclosed a substantial misrepresentation regarding the scope of a major collection program.'' At the time, the court chose not to prohibit the use of ``abouts'' collection. But it held that special minimization rules were required for upstream communications, and that without those rules, the program would violate both Section 702 and the Fourth Amendment. One of those rules was a prohibition on U.S. person queries of communications obtained through upstream surveillance. Five years later, the NSA discovered that its agents had been routinely violating this prohibition. But rather than immediately report these violations to the FISA Court, the NSA waited for several months. When it finally admitted the violations, the FISA Court chastised the NSA for its ``institutional lack of candor,'' and refused to approve the continuation of Section 702 surveillance until the NSA cleaned up its act. The NSA proved incapable of bringing its agents into compliance. The agents continued to routinely search though the upstream data in an effort to find and review Americans' communications, in violation of Section 702, the Fourth Amendment, and the FISA Court's orders. Well aware that the court would not continue to approve Section 702 surveillance under these conditions, the NSA, in 2017, made the only decision it could: it terminated ``abouts'' collection. Well, it has now been seven years since the NSA stopped ``abouts'' collection, and the government has not claimed that ending this practice has resulted in a loss of critical intelligence or had any other kind of negative impact on national security. No official has pointed to a single bad result that could have been averted through the use of ``abouts'' collection. Collecting communications that are neither to nor from an approved target of surveillance is contrary to the text and intent of Section 702. It inevitably results in the collection of wholly domestic communications, which Section 702 expressly prohibits. Over the course of a decade, the NSA proved that it was incapable of operating ``abouts'' surveillance responsibly and in accordance with the law--and the past seven years shown that ``abouts'' collection is not necessary for national security. It is time for Congress to shut the door on ``abouts'' collection. In the future, if the government can show that it needs ``abouts'' collection for national security purposes and that it can operate the program without violating the law and the Fourth Amendment, it can come to Congress and ask for authorization. But the burden should be on the government to show the need and the ability to lawfully conduct the program. For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the Cline/Jackson Lee Amendment [#3].

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, it is unbelievable that we would go after innocent Americans and Members of Congress in the random searching and fishing of information that may not be relevant. In the past, ``abouts'' collection focused on collecting communications that include a target's email address, phone number, or Twitter handle or something like that, but in theory, ``abouts'' collection could be used to collect emails that merely mention a person who is a target of section 702 surveillance. Mr. Chair, I rise today to indicate that we cannot pass this legislation without these vital amendments and that we cannot pass this legislation without the American people believing that when they pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, they are pledging allegiance to civil liberties, freedom, and justice and equality for all. I rise to support these amendments and as well a free nation with democracy and liberty for all. Mr. Chair, I include in the Record a list of groups who support this amendment. Congress of the United States, Washington, DC, April 12, 2024. Dear Colleague: Please join us in supporting our amendment to H.R. 7888, the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act. Rules Amendment #5 would end what is known as ``abouts'' collection, which involves the capturing of massive amounts of communications by government agencies such as the National Security Agency (NSA) in which the selector, for example, an email address, of a target appears somewhere in communications, even if that target is not a party to the communications. It has long been controversial. The FISA Court previously discovered that the government had misrepresented its activities and held that handling this type of data was of significant concern and a violation of the Fourth Amendment. Although the NSA abandoned the practice of ``abouts'' collection in 2017, Congress in 2018 amended FISA to prohibit this type of collection unless the AG and DNI notify the House and Senate Intelligence and Judiciary Committees of its plans to resume such collection. But that only means that if the NSA notifies Congress, they can resume ``abouts'' collection at any time. Our amendment would proactively end the practice for good. The following groups support this important amendment: FreedomWorks--Key Vote; Due Process Institute; Americans for Prosperity; Project for Privacy and Surveillance Accountability; Reform Government Surveillance; Center for Democracy and Technology; American Civil Liberties Union; Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC); Restore the Fourth; Defending Rights & Dissent; Brennan Center for Justice; Wikimedia Foundation. Demand Progress; Electronic Frontier Foundation; Project on Government Oversight; United We Dream; Asian Americans Advancing Justice; Muslim Advocates; Free Press Action; National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers; Freedom of the Press Foundation; New America's Open Technology Institute; Fight for the Future; Stop AAPI Hate. We urge you to vote in favor of Amendment #5. Sincerely, Ben Cline, Member of Congress. Sheila Jackson Lee, Member of Congress.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I thank the distinguished ranking member of the Judiciary Committee and the chairman of the Judiciary Committee. Even in this time of 2024, we need this legislation to protect now one of the most revered civil rights leaders, Dr. Martin Luther King. Yes, we need legislation that would, in fact, protect someone who simply wanted to provide justice to this Nation. He was the subject of COINTELPRO, a distorted investigation of his family, his belongings, his extended family members, and his wife, who I think at the time was expecting. This legislation is important to save lives. It is important legislation to ensure that our intelligence community, our law enforcement community, can do their jobs, but it is not legislation that should be utilized to abuse the American people. I rise today to speak of the concerns on H.R. 7888. It is a bipartisan bill to reauthorize an essential intelligence authority, section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, FISA, and other FISA provisions before they would expire on April 19. In doing so, we find ourselves being subject to the eye of the knife, if you will, in penetrating the personal matters of individuals that have no desire to do harm to this country. As we know all too well, expiration of 702 authorities would deprive our Federal Government of the necessary insight into precisely the threats Americans expect their government to identify and counter. We understand that, as highlighted and emphasized through Federal administration, if we lose 702, we lose vital protections to the United States and its allies from hostile foreign adversaries, including terrorists, proliferators, and spies, and to inform cybersecurity efforts. We are also acutely aware that 702 is an extremely controversial, warrantless surveillance authority that must not be reauthorized without substantial reform to rein in warrantless surveillance of Americans. We simply cannot do that. Indeed, warrantless surveillance intended for non-American targets located abroad inevitably has resulted in the collection and capture of Americans' communications and, yes, the results of capturing information that safeguards the American people and provides us with a safety net that we can fight for justice, fight for civil rights, and yet be protected. It is no secret that intelligence agencies have turned section 702 into a domestic spying tool used to perform hundreds of thousands of warrantless backdoor searches for Americans' private phone calls, emails, and text messages. By the way, Mr. Chair, we have a whole new world of technology where you can probe every aspect of our lives. These searches have included shocking abuses, including against civil rights leaders, protesters, Members of Congress, 19,000 donors to congressional campaigns, political parties. Mr. Chair, I rise today to speak on H .R. 7888--Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act (RISAA), a bipartisan bill to reauthorize an essential intelligence authority, Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (``FISA''), and other FISA provisions before they would expire on April 19, 2024. As we know all too well, expiration of Section 702 authorities would deprive our federal government of the necessary insight into precisely the threats Americans expect their government to identify and counter. As highlighted and emphasized through federal administration, if we lost 702, we would lose vital protections to the United States and its allies from hostile foreign adversaries, including terrorists, proliferators, and spies, and to inform cybersecurity efforts. We also are acutely aware, that Section 702 is an extremely controversial warrantless surveillance authority that must not be reauthorized without substantial reform to rein in warrantless surveillance of Americans. Indeed, warrantless surveillance intended for non-American targets located abroad ``inevitably'' has resulted in the collection and capture of Americans' communications, too. And it is no secret that intelligence agencies have turned Section 702 into a domestic spying tool, using it to perform hundreds of thousands of warrantless ``backdoor'' searches for Americans' private phone calls, e-mails, and text messages every year. Yes, these searches have included shocking abuses, including baseless searches for the communications of Black Lives Matter protesters, members of Congress, 19,000 donors to a congressional campaign, a local political party, and tens of thousands of people involved in ``civil unrest.'' To protect the American people, we need to maintain the vital collection authority as intended to protect our nation and national security, while at the same time strengthening its protective guardrails with the most robust set of reforms ever included in legislation to reauthorize Section 702. Importantly, H.R. 7888, as amended here today provides several critically needed reforms--including a fix to the backdoor search loophole and a prohibition on the ``abouts'' collection provision, and ultimately seeks to accomplish the necessary balancing we seek for national security protections and the protection of American's privacy rights. To protect the American people, we need to maintain the vital collection authority as intended to protect our Nation and national security. We must do that while at the same time strengthening its protective guardrails with the most robust set, if you will, of protection that we possibly can. That is why I have joined with several Members, including Mr. Cline, to offer the ``abouts'' amendment. We will offer that as one of the Judiciary three. This amendment does something Congress should have done 7 years ago, prohibit the government from resuming ``abouts'' collection, a form of section 702 that poses unique risks to Americans. ``Abouts'' collection is a collection of communications that are neither to nor from an approved target of surveillance--can you imagine?--under section 702 of FISA but merely contain information related to the target.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I first start by indicating that all of the hostages should be brought home in this heinous crisis that we are facing, and the innocent women and children and others in the Palestinian crisis should be fed and protected. Additionally, we must find peace, security, and democracy in the area. At the same time, I want to come home to America and apprise the American people that we must be concerned about having a fair and equal election season. We must be afraid of election intrusion from Russia. We must be afraid of the attack on our technological systems of elections. Additionally, I am calling on the FBI and other Federal law enforcement agencies to protect the Federal elections that are coming up in the near future. Those are congressional as well as the Presidential election. We must recognize that we are the beacon of democracy. The citadel of democracy is this place where I stand. It will not have that name unless we call upon all of our resources to make sure that we are not attacked by forces that want to change democracy in front of our very eyes. I close, Mr. Speaker, by saying to the Attorney General: It is imperative that we have voting rights now in this Nation. Mr. Speaker, I will talk more next week.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I certainly want to be very clear in the hearts and minds of Americans and the hearts and minds of Texans, the hearts and minds of the Democratic Caucus that no one in our Caucus condones the killing of innocent people no matter where we find ourselves. So I rise today to take great issue with any suggestion that our Democratic Caucus would not fight for those who are the most vulnerable. I recognize the Maryland delegation and the leader, Mr. Mfume, who comes to the floor to ensure that the voices of Marylanders are heard in helping to rebuild the Francis Scott Key Bridge but also to ensure the representation of the American people that we do not discard our friends. What we will do is demand that our friends stand up for the vulnerable, that our friends love babies and women and children, and that we make sure that there is not an unequal mistreatment of individuals who are here in this country and who are overseas. So I must challenge any interpretation of Democrats as being anything but supportive of the President's policies, which are policies that believe in protecting human rights workers, and again, as I started out, by protecting those vulnerable persons in the--how should I say it--in the very vigorous war that is going on and the loss of life that we see. That is why you hear a difference of opinion in the Democratic Party. That is why you hear from the majority leader of the United States Senate a different voice because that voice has to speak for, again, the most vulnerable. At the same time, would we not want to have the Nation acknowledge the tragedy that happened in Maryland in the Baltimore Harbor where so many detrimental disasters could be forthcoming because of the terrible tragedy of the bridge coming down, the lack of money to be able to support a new system of construction, as well to be able to pay for it. So here is the real story. Tragedy struck the Baltimore Harbor some weeks ago. We saw not only the Maryland delegation come together, but we saw the Nation come together. The Nation has come together to be able to speak to the pain of the people that are in Maryland, that are in Baltimore, and in particular, in the city of Baltimore. That is what happened. So I am standing with and supporting Mr. Mfume who comes to represent the Maryland delegation to ensure that those funds are forthcoming and that they are not dismissed. I think it is extremely important that we know to help our various communities that are suffering from hurricanes, suffering from a particular type of disaster that no one had ever heard, which is the disaster of the collision of a cargo carrier, if you will, going into the Francis Scott Key Bridge that many of us remember as the source of the Star Spangled Banner. So I would not be here if I didn't think the value that I stand for is to stand alongside Mr. Mfume to recognize that we are Americans first and that we are here to help those who are in their time of need who cannot help themselves. That is why the President immediately went to Maryland in terms of his voice, immediately spoke up on behalf of the people of Maryland and the people of Baltimore and immediately spoke up on behalf of the Maryland Congressional Delegation which Mr. Mfume now will continue to lead. He immediately stood up because he is going to be a man of his word. He stood up because he is a man of his word that he was going to be here to stand with the great people of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to indicate my support for the funding efforts to help the great people of the great State of Maryland. Let's do it together. That is what Americans do. We help each other, and we work together. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to reinforce one of the most important positions that we have in the United States, and that is the Attorney General of the United States of America. That officer of the Nation is to provide protection when it comes to fair voting laws, to structure a scheme of social justice and criminal justice interacting together where you have justice in the eyes of the citizen, and, of course, you have a response in the eyes of the person that is the perpetrator, that they are held accountable. So I call upon the Attorney General of the United States to defend this Nation: Defend this Nation on the grounds of more women's rights; defend this Nation on a better social voting rights structure that is not being defended; and fight for a young boy that is sitting in a classroom isolated in Texas because he does not have the right hairstyle. He is suffering because the State of Texas is not abiding by the CROWN Act. I want the Attorney General of the United States to do its job of defending the citizens of this country and to hold those responsible who have done wrong and to be able to protect those who have not done wrong. I will follow up in the days to come.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, what a great amount of excitement yesterday when I left downtown Houston and went to one of our community schools to engage with young Hispanic and African-American students on the eclipse that had not been seen for years and years and years. What an enthusiastic message we were giving them that they, too, can stand for science and the solar system. Yet, my Republican friends want to make light of some interpretation that I gave to one of the elements of this eclipse. Rather than being excited about the idea of those seeing the eclipse, Republicans again wanted to make fun. They didn't want to talk about prenatal care. They didn't want to talk about the idea of women's rights. They didn't want to talk about school student loan reduction. They wanted to talk about a Democratic Member. Well, I am glad I was standing with these children right here--here I am--to be able to celebrate the eclipse that will not be seen until 2044. It is unfortunate that we didn't have this picture, at least, to show that someone is looking at the Sun in 2017. That is something to laugh about. Mr. Speaker, I rise today because it seems that I have caused a dust- up on outrage island. Ah yes, Republicans in search of their day-to-day quest to find something to be mad at, are obsessing with the fact that I misspoke yesterday when talking about the sun. Well, since tomorrow we know they will be looking for something else, allow me to suggest some ideas. Let us hear the selective outrage of their dear leader staring aimlessly with his own unshielded eyes at the last eclipse. Or maybe, let's hear the screams of disapproval over the time he told us all we should inject ourselves with bleach during the Pandemic. Hmmm one more for good measure, the time just a few weeks ago he thought Nikki Haley who has never served in Congress, was in control of security at the Capitol on, I believe January 6, 2021. While you all focus on the misuse of words, I'm focused on helping kids get exposed to science and expanding the rights of women that all of you are so desperate to take away. Want a story to write? Write about that. And write about the goodness of so many Americans.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss the critical crisis that is occurring in Haiti, an increasing escalating situation. The situation in Haiti is deteriorating and the Haitian government has recently declared a state of emergency. In the last couple of years, Haiti has seen an increase in violence, including kidnappings and sexual violence in Haiti's capital, Port-au- Prince which have ravished the country. At least 80 percent of the capital is under the control of gangs. Many Haitian citizens cannot leave their homes for fear that they will never make it back. In 2023, there were 5,000 murders and 2,000 kidnappings and over 300,000 people have been displaced within the country while another 1.4 million Haitians are near famine. It is truly devastating to see Haiti in such a condition considering its history of resilience and fervent fighting spirit. For decades, Haiti has faced significant challenges, including natural disasters and environmental shocks as well as multiple political crises. Intensified gang violence and recurring political and civil unrest since July 2018 have severely exacerbated Haiti's dire economic and humanitarian conditions: unemployment and inflation are high; the national currency is volatile; fuel shortages are recurring and severe; foreign reserves are dangerously low; more than 60 percent of the population lives below the poverty line, and more than four million Haitians face crisis- or emergency-level food insecurity. Following the catastrophic events that occurred in 2018, I introduced H.R. 6325, the Continue American Safety Act (CASA) which provided temporary protected status for certain countries, such as Haiti. The proportion of people in Haiti facing acute food insecurity has increased significantly, from 1 in 3 people in 2018 to almost 1 in 2 people in 2022, according to the study ``Food security in Central America, Panama, Dominican Republic, Mexico and Haiti,'' published by the Inter-American Development Bank. In addition to grappling with the COVID-l9 pandemic and an economic recession, President Jovenel Moise was assassinated on July 7, 2021, and weeks later a 7.2 magnitude earthquake hit southern Haiti on August 14. A nearly two-month long gang-led blockage of the nation's largest fuel terminal from late September to early November 2022 led to a nationwide fuel shortage, shutting down hospitals and water treatment facilities at the same time cholera reemerged for the first time since 2019. While humanitarian assistance can alleviate some urgent needs, it will not, and cannot, address the root causes of the current economic and political paralysis in Haiti. Haiti has been one of the closest, and longest-standing allies of the United States. Haiti needs help because the stability of Haiti and its surrounding nations is interconnected. It is only through a unified voice that we will be able to experience a vibrant and successful Haiti that is a leader in the Caribbean. I have supported legislation in the past, such as the introduction of the HOPE for Haitian Prosperity Act of 2023. An Act that would extend trade preferences with Haiti, expand core labor standards, and provide technical assistance to the Haitian government. It is imperative that we support Haiti and help with this ongoing crisis. The Haiti Support Project is an initiative of the Institute of the Black World 21st Century, who recently visited with my office here on Capitol Hill. The primary mission of the Haiti Support Project is to marshal moral, political, and material support to assist the Haitian people to develop a strong and vital democratic society and a vibrant and sustainable economy as a free and self-determining people. Given Haiti's unique history as the first Black Republic in the western hemisphere, the Haiti Support Project seeks to build a constituency and effective base of support for Haiti in the U.S., primarily focusing on mobilizing the human and material resources of African Americans in collaboration with Haitian Americans. Although democracy in Haiti requires a Haitian-led solution, there are many ways we can assist our Haitian brothers and sisters because public safety should be our number one priority, especially in countries outside of our own. It is imperative that we support Haiti in its desire to transition towards free and fair elections while applying pressure to political and economic actors who are exacerbating the humanitarian crisis in Haiti. Haiti's transition to a functional democracy is important to the United States. Strong democratic institutions, including holding regular free and fair elections, can help guarantee Haiti's democratic traditions and ensure a voice for the Haitian people in their governance. By promoting democratic core values, such as respect for human rights, the rule of law, and economic development both in the region and around the world, we can be the prime example for country development and assistance. Additionally, we must subvert the trade and sale of illegal guns which is a major contributor to Haiti's growing gang crisis and the current instability that plagues the country. Haitians have long asked for safety from gang violence and they deserve help that the U.S. can provide. Illicit arms trafficking from the United States to the Caribbean is a regional and national security threat. In 2022, the Department of Homeland Security reported an increase in the number, caliber, and types of firearms illegally trafficked to the Caribbean. The steady flow of illicit firearms has exacerbated crime and migration in the Caribbean. In Haiti, illicit firearms from thejUnited States have enabled violent gangs to control over 80 percent of Port-au-Prince and have caused a dramatic increase in migration to the United States. In the 117th Congress, I also supported the introduction of H. Res. 670, Condemning the inhumane treatment of Haitian migrants at the southern border of the United States, as they should not be mistreated for fleeing a country riddled with violence. My colleague, Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick and others have introduced the Caribbean Arms Trafficking Causes Harm (CATCH) Act to curb U.S. Firearms Trafficking to the Caribbean. By requiring the Coordinator for Caribbean Firearms Prosecutions to report on their implementation of anti-firearm-trafficking provisions in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, this legislation will combat firearms trafficking from the United States to the Caribbean. We must also invest our resources in the people of Haiti by building schools, encouraging education, creating job opportunities. Education is the key that unlocks the possibilities of the future; it changes lives. Sixty-four percent of the Haitian population is under 24 years of age. Working to foster a culture of education in Haiti is the greatest investment we can make in eliminating poverty, boosting economic growth, strengthening democracy, and promoting prosperity. Finally, as members of Congress, we must collaborate to unlock the $40 million in aid that the Biden administration has requested to help stabilize Haiti amid an increase in gang violence there, despite warnings that continued chaos could lead to a humanitarian crisis and drive migrants fleeing the country into the United States. Haiti's insecurity is a threat to America's security. It is past time for the United States to step up and come together and carry out our responsibility as the leader of the free world.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. We chose to keep the government open today.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to be able to reaffirm to the American people that I and my colleagues did our job today as I stand in support of the resolution and the appropriations that kept the government open. I told my constituents I could not be at various events today, Friday, March 22, because I had to be here to ensure that our students had Pell grants, to make sure that small businesses are being supported, to ensure that Medicare and Medicaid were strongly enforced, and public health is still in place. I wanted to make sure that we had the biomedical research that helps so many lives be restored. And, of course, I am a champion and an advocate for mental health care. It is not enough for the families who suffer and try to help their loved ones. I want to make sure we get rid of tax cheats and, of course, the drug of choice that kills Americans--fentanyl. I want to be part of the fight as a senior member of the Judiciary Committee and to be sure that Ukraine and Gaza gets the appropriations and the dollars that they need.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the Committees on the Budget, Judiciary, and Homeland Security, I proudly rise in support of H. Res. 1102--Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024 (Approps Minibus No. 2) which will provide funding to continue the operations of the federal government through September 30, 2024, enhance supportive services to the American people, and avoid a wasteful and irresponsible shutdown. After multiple Continuing Resolutions and threats of a government shutdown, I am relieved that an agreement has been reached between the bicameral, bipartisan leadership, and produced a second minibus spending package that keeps our remaining federal agencies funded. This bipartisan legislation, which represents a compromise between Republicans and Democrats that adheres to the Fiscal Responsibility Act, would fund the remainder of the Federal Government through the end of the fiscal year, while investing in key priorities for the American people. Specifically, the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2024, provides full-year funding for the six remaining FY24 Appropriations bills: Defense; Financial Services and General Government; Homeland Security; Legislative Branch; Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education; and State and Foreign Operations. The 2024 funding bills invest in America's future and deliver for the American people by: Helping with the high cost of living, reducing drug costs, and prioritizing childcare and Head Start; Siding with hardworking Americans by supporting education, job training, and placement programs that help Americans find high paying jobs, defending robust worker protection agencies that ensure Americans are safe and properly compensated at work, and by ensuring billionaires and wealthy corporations pay the taxes they owe; Protecting women's rights by blocking attempts to limit women's access to reproductive health care (including the elimination of Title X Family Planning and Teen Pregnancy Prevention Grants) and supporting the reproductive health of women overseas; Reinforcing America's global leadership by strengthening defense capabilities, ensuring America can respond anywhere in the world where freedom and democracy are under attack, amplifying American diplomacy, and reaffirming our global commitments to fight climate change and reinforce global health; and Helping our communities be safe and secure by funding border security, preventing the trafficking of fentanyl and other dangerous drugs, bolstering cyber security, protecting consumers from scammers, fraudsters, and dangerous products, and enabling robust and immediate responses to natural disasters. Like the first Appropriations minibus, the bill rejects nearly all House Republican riders. It also includes $1,383,069 in Community Project Funding that will be going directly to my constituents that I know will have a profound impact on Texas's 18th District. I am pleased that Sec. P118-08-00 Conveyance and Detention Improvements, $1,383,069, was included in Homeland to be funded. It was my goal to fund as many of the 3,203 Democratic projects across all 2024 funding bills as were eligible. I am proud of the hard work it took to get to this point in an unprecedented year for the House of Representatives, and I hope that you will all join me in celebrating these direct investments in your community. These investments create jobs, making a real difference in the lives of so many in my district. I am proud to have fought for funding that will make our community healthier, safer, and stronger. Funding the government is essential to our constituents, and I am happy that we were finally able to deliver. This legislation provides vitally needed and long-overdue funding that will improve the lives of the American people. House Democrats have worked to deliver results to the American people and these projects, programs, services, and improvements will do just that. Without the passage of this bill, the livelihood of millions of Americans will be in jeopardy and the safety and security of the United States would be diminished. The passage of this legislation is vital, I support it enthusiastically, and urge my colleagues to join me in passing this bipartisan, essential legislation to fund our government.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to give dignity and respect to the victims of pollution across America, those who have suffered from toxic catastrophes, like the train derailment in Palestine, but, more importantly, the cancer clusters in Fifth Ward, Texas, in Kashmere Gardens and Settegast in the northeast part. The legislation, H.R. 7023, Creating Confidence in Clean Water Permitting Act, does the complete opposite by limiting the Environmental Protection Agency's authority to regulate the discharge of pollutants into the United States' waters. Those waters then trickle into the soil. That is what happened in Kashmere Gardens in Fifth Ward, where water pollution trickled into the soil and created cancer clusters in our neighborhoods. This area has the highest number of cancer clusters and cancer victims in the State and maybe the Nation. I am trying to fight it. I have put in an amendment that will require the Administrator to submit a report to Congress. I will not stop until we end the cancer clusters and stop the polluters that are over the people of this Nation. I will continue to fight.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I am here today to speak in strong opposition to the proposed legislation, H.R. 7023, the Creating Confidence in Clean Water Permitting Act. This bill would modify requirements under the well-established Clean Water Act, limiting the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) authority to regulate the discharge of pollutants into United States waters. If passed, it would represent a significant regression from over 50 years of well-established precedent regarding pollution prevention. Moreover, it would defy the overarching intent of the initial legislation, which was to provide for more agency oversight and accountability of industrial polluters, not less. I offered for consideration to the Rules Committee, the Jackson Lee Amendment No. 21, which sought to help ensure that any harmful impact, which would inevitably result from the passage of this dangerous bill, is documented, and reported to Congress. Specifically, the Jackson Lee Amendment No. 21 would have added the following language to the end of the bill text in H.R. 7023: Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency and the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief of Engineers, shall submit to Congress a report on any disparate impacts on minority and disadvantaged communities, and communities previously or currently designated as having cancer clusters, including impacts to human health, environmental quality, and local economies, that may result from the implementation of this Act, including the amendments made by this Act. In my home-state of Texas and in my district particularly, there have been multiple revelations of cancer clusters in many of the underserved and minority communities. For instance, the Fifth Ward, Kashmere Gardens, and the larger Northeast community along with other communities in the 18th Congressional District of Texas, are all regions with minority and underserved populations that have been disproportionately and gravely impacted by harmful environmental pollutants and toxins. In a time where we are still seeking to combat the deadly and dangerous impacts of environmental injustice in my district, and across the country, we must be taking more vigilant steps to protect our communities and the environment for current and future generations. Instead, this partisan package repeals, weakens, or otherwise erodes the oversight and regulatory powers of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Army Corps of Engineers established by the Clean Water Act (CWA) over 50 years ago. While the CWA requires projects to minimize their impact on the environment, this bill hamstrings EPA's oversight of large-scale projects and changes the process by which it reviews ``linear'' projects like oil and gas pipelines. At the same time, the bill also significantly hampers the legal action the government can take against polluters, shortens the timeline for judicial review, and removes opportunities for local governments to give input on projects affecting their communities. Coupled with the ruling in Sackett v. EPA last year that changed the definition of what qualifies as protected waters under the CWA, this bill is simply a shameful attempt to swing the door open for corporations to maximize their profits at the expense of the health of the general public. Although the bill purports to ``cut red tape'' and speed up the permitting process, adding a formal rulemaking process instead of maintaining the system by which the EPA currently issues guidance will actually slow it down and open these permits up to judicial review. It is time we stop playing these senseless and harmful political games that only put the health of the American people at risk. It is time for my Republican colleagues to join me and my Democratic colleagues across the aisle in working towards common sense, bipartisan solutions for the advancement and protection of our Nation and the American people. Yet, here we are again, instead of finding real solutions to real crises--such as providing aid to our allies abroad and providing long- term funding to yet again avert a government shutdown--House Republicans have instead chosen to once again waste precious floor time on political stunts on behalf of Big Polluters. For these reasons, this Resolution providing consideration for this bill and the other anti-environment bills in this rule package should be voted down. I urge my colleagues to vote no on this reckless and shortsighted bill.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I am here today to speak in opposition to the proposed legislation, H. Con. Res. 86--Expressing the sense of Congress that a carbon tax would be detrimental to the United States economy. Days away from a shutdown of their own making, my Republicans colleagues are focused on their political agenda over the needs of the American people. It is important for the American people to know and to be reminded that Democrats made significant strides in unlocking the clean energy economy with the Inflation Reduction Act, while House Republicans are only concerned with undoing that progress and blocking those achievements. Year after year, research comes out supporting what we have known for years: Climate change is one of the biggest threats to the survival of our nation and the welfare of our people. Scientists have warned us about the devasting reality that would follow if we failed to act as a nation. It is clear that some of us have heeded these warnings with great concern while others have taken them lightly. My colleagues on the other side insist that a carbon tax would harm American families, specifically the poor, the elderly, and those on fixed incomes. But what do they have to say about the impacts of emissions on those groups? We know that the effects of climate change are not equally distributed, instead affecting the elderly, low-income communities, and people of color the most. Climate change is no longer a distant threat--we are seeing the direct impacts of our inaction right now across the United States. In countless neighborhoods throughout Texas and across the country we are already seeing the devastating effects of climate change on our coasts, our forests, our farmland, and through extreme weather patterns and ever-more destructive natural disasters. Just last summer, Texas had the second hottest summer on record, with Texans being asked to conserve power as the state grid struggled to keep up with the demand for air conditioning due to scorching temperatures. Heat is deadly, often killing more people each year than hurricanes, tornadoes, or floods. Last summer, at least 97 Texans died from heat-related illness, according to the Texas Department of State Health Services. These record-breaking temperatures put the lives and livelihoods of Texans at risk. As a representative from Houston, where millions of jobs are created from the fossil fuel industry, I understand the concerns my colleagues on the other side have about the economy. However, I assure them that the economy will not be spared if we fail to act. According to a 2023 study, the summer heat cost the Texas economy about $24 billion dollars. Texas is twice as vulnerable to heat-related economic slowdowns than the rest of the country. Studies using data from the last two decades found that for every degree of higher temperature in summer, Texas sees a slowdown of 0.4 percent in economic growth. Extreme heat hurts businesses as customers stay home rather than going out to shop or dine. According to the Texas Tribune, industries whose workers are frequently outdoors--including the oil and gas industry and construction--I saw a notable slowdown in employment growth related to the heat, as construction projects became delayed. When considering national disasters, the monetary burden grows even larger. According to the Houston Chronicle, Texas has felt some of the most severe consequences of climate change than any U.S. state or territory, costing the state at least $401 billion in hazard-related damage. The cost estimates account for more than a dozen factors, including physical damage to buildings and infrastructure, decreases in earnings from interruptions to businesses and loss of agricultural assets. Climate change is expected to impede the rate of economic growth of our Nation over this century. To do absolutely nothing to counter climate change would have damning consequences for my district, my state, and the Nation. Tackling climate change is looking out for wellbeing of our most vulnerable communities and our economy. To do this, we must reduce carbon emissions in our atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is the primary greenhouse gas contributing to this most recent climate change. When large amounts of carbon dioxide are released into the air from man-made sources, our planet grows warmer, affecting the quality of every species on the planet, including us. A carbon tax price provides the economic incentive for the quickest and most comprehensive emission reductions across the entire economy. Democrats have continuously fought for climate solutions that would put our nation in the path of energy security, lower energy costs for Americans, and thousands of clean jobs. It is time my Republicans colleagues put political games aside and join Democrats in supporting environmentally conscious solutions. The time calls for fresh determination and urgency. We must work side-by-side with the American people to create a future of sustainability for our children and grandchildren, and prosperity and opportunity for our families and communities, for generations to come.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Save him from this isolation and prison-like environment.