Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as an American, I certainly celebrate religious freedom and acknowledge the importance of freedom of religion and speech and the ability to have access to a free press. Sadly, I rise to take issue with the comments said by the Commander in Chief, well documented by Senator Durbin and the Senator from South Carolina, Lindsey Graham, who delicately tried to instruct the Commander in Chief of the ugliness of his words. I will not say them on the floor, and I have not said the complete word, but over this weekend of the beloved community of Dr. Martin Luther King, everywhere I went, people were appalled. I believe that it is crucial that we pass the Dream Act and that we speak to the racism of this President through 1973, 1980, 1988, and 1989.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, let me repeat the refrain of those of us who are members of the Judiciary Committee who have gone through this process since 9/11, and that is that we support the integrity and the importance of section 702 as a national security tool, and we want it reauthorized, but we want it right. Our job and our task is also to be the protectors of the Fourth Amendment, and that is the protection of the American people against unreasonable search and seizure. No matter how much my friends on the other side of the aisle argue, we know that the FBI can have the tools that it needs; but, in the instance of this underlying bill, similar to the bill that was passed in 2007 by the Bush administration, on which the Judiciary Committee came back and amended it and made it a bill that provides the tools that were needed by those who are on the front lines in the United States military and the FBI, ultimately, it was changed to deny those rights. In this instance, the warrant that my friends are talking about is revised only to fully predicated cases. It does not apply to the searching of documents that will have information about Americans. I ask my colleagues to postpone this. Let us work together on behalf of the American people. Who are we if we cannot uphold the Constitution? It is not protected in this bill. Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, I rise in strong opposition to S. 139, the FISA Amendments Reauthorization Act of 2017.'' S. 139 reauthorizes Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which is scheduled to expire on January 19, 2018. Section 702 authorizes the Justice Department and NSA to collect non- U.S. persons' communications that are sent while abroad. The collection programs have to be approved each year by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA Court). The FISA Court was set up by the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA; Public Law 95-511) to oversee intelligence- gathering activities and ensure compliance with the U.S. Constitution. Under FISA, the term ``U.S. person'' covers citizens, green card holders, associations with a ``substantial number of members'' who are U.S. citizens or permanent residents, and U.S.-incorporated companies. Title VII also allows intelligence agencies to conduct surveillance on a specific U.S. person reasonably believed to be outside of the country, with the approval of the FISA Court. The NSA's use of section 702 authority to collect Americans' information from their communications with foreign surveillance targets was revealed by former government contractor Edward Snowden in 2013. Snowden also revealed that the NSA obtains communications from U.S.- based providers such as Google, Verizon, and Facebook. Although Section 702 is a critical national security tool set to expire on January 19, 2018, events of the recent past strongly suggest that Section 702 should not be reauthorized without necessary and significant reforms that are not included in the legislation before us. So as the Ranking Member of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations, I oppose the bill for several compelling reasons: 1. S. 139 fails to address the core concerns of Members of Congress and the American public--the government's use of Section 702 information against United States citizens investigations that have nothing to do with national security. 2. The warrant ``requirement'' contained in the bill is riddled with loopholes and applies only to fully predicated, official FBI investigations, not to the hundreds of thousands searches the FBI runs every day to run down a lead or check out a tip. 3. S. 139 exacerbates existing problems with Section 702 by codifying so-called ``about collection,'' a type of surveillance that was shut down after it twice failed to meet Fourth Amendment scrutiny. 4. S. 139 is universally opposed by technology companies, privacy, and civil liberties groups across the political spectrum from the ACLU to FreedomWorks. Mr. Speaker, the bill before us comes from the Intelligence Committee, where it was passed on a strict party-line vote. This stands in stark contrast to H.R. 3989, the USA Liberty Act the bipartisan bill reported by the Judiciary Committee after multiple hearings, an open markup process, and a bipartisan vote of approval. The USA Liberty Act enjoys much broader support, contains meaningful reforms to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and is far superior to the bill before us. Inexplicably, the House Republican leadership did choose the best option, which was to bring the USA Liberty Act to the floor for debate and vote; instead, they chose the worst option, which is S. 139, the bill before us. For this reason, I urge all members to join me in supporting the Amash-Lofgren Amendment, the best option remaining before us. The Amash-Lofgren strike the text of S. 139 in its entirety and substitutes in its place the text of the ``Uniting and Strengthening America by Reforming and Improving the Government's High-Tech Surveillance Act'' (``USA RIGHTS Act''). In contrast to S. 139, the ``USA RIGHTS Act'' enacts necessary and meaningful reforms to Section 702, which are necessary in light of the past abuses of surveillance authorities, contemporary noncompliance with this authority, and the danger posed by potential future abuses. First, the USA RIGHTS Act creates a search warrant requirement that closes the so-called ``backdoor search loophole'' through which the government searches, without first obtaining a court-issued warrant based on probable cause, for information about U.S. persons or persons inside the U.S. The ``USA RIGHTS Act'' provides an exception for emergencies, but requires a court warrant afterward. Second, the ``USA RIGHTS Act'' prohibits the collection of domestic communications and permanently ends ``about'' collection, an illegal practice the National Security Agency recently stopped because of persistent and significant compliance violations. This is important because while ``reverse targeting'' is prohibited under the Jackson Lee Amendment incorporated in the USA Freedom Act enacted on June 2, 2016 (Pub. L. 114-23), this prohibition was often skirted by collecting information from communications that merely mention an intelligence target. Under the ``USA RIGHTS Act'', collections would be limited to communications that are ``to'' or ``from'' a target, and the intentional collection of wholly domestic communications is prohibited. Third, the ``USA RIGHTS Act'' requires the government give notice when it uses information obtained or derived from Section 702 surveillance in proceedings against U.S. persons or people on U.S. soil which will enable a defendant to assert his or her constitutional rights and help ensure that foreign intelligence surveillance is not being misused. Fourth, under the ``USA RIGHTS Act'', Section 702 authority sunsets in 4 years, which will obligate the Congress to exercise regular oversight and provide the opportunity to make necessary reforms before reauthorization. Mr. Speaker, Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was enacted to protect the liberty and security of Americans, not to diminish their constitutional rights. All Americans want to find the common ground where commonsense rules and regulations relating to fighting terrorism at home and abroad can exist while still protecting the cherished privacy and civil liberties which Americans hold close to our collective hearts. That is why Section 702 should not be reauthorized with reforms to prevent the government from using information against its political opponents or members of religious, ethnic, or other groups. One way to do that without interfering with the national security objectives of 702 surveillance is simply to reject S. 139 and support the USA RIGHTS Act by voting for the Amash-Lofgren Amendment. Mr. Speaker, I noted in an op-ed published way back in October 2007, that as Alexis de Tocqueville, the most astute student of American democracy, observed nearly two centuries ago, the reason democracies invariably prevail in any military conflict is because democracy is the governmental form that best rewards and encourages those traits that are indispensable to success: initiative, innovation, courage, and a love of justice. And the best way to keep America safe and strong is to remain true to the valued embedded in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. S. 139 does not strike the proper balance between our cherished liberties and smart security. We can do better; we should reject S. 139 and support the Amash- Lofgren Amendment.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, this body cannot be afraid of the Constitution. It has been our guiding moral force for this Nation for all of our beginnings and our nows. This amendment is truly an amendment that will protect and provide for the FBI to do its work and to protect our men and women around the world who are wearing the uniform unselfishly. But let me be very clear: all this amendment does, frankly, is provide a roadmap for the FBI to utilize when it is surveying and it is using the private data of Americans. All the amendment does is ask the FBI and the Attorney General, where there is probable cause, that such communication provide evidence of a crime; and, as well, if there is a foreign power or foreign agent, to be able to utilize a warrant, and that is the protection of the Fourth Amendment. Uphold the Constitution. Vote for the Amash-Lofgren amendment and let's move forward on this legislation.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, this weekend, I will join the AFL-CIO's 2018 MLK Conference dealing with civil and human rights. At that time, we will discuss the GOP tax scam that stops the labor movement in its tracks because 83 percent of the tax cuts goes to the wealthiest 1 percent and raises taxes on 86 million. I invite my constituents to join me from 1 to 3 at the Hilton Americas, where we will be talking about the labor movement and the devastation of the GOP tax scam on the American people. At the same time, I am glad that I live in a nation that welcomes those who want to serve coming from other countries and live up to the ideals of this country. I want to pay tribute to Rose and Jose Escobar. Jose came to this country under TPS from El Salvador. It is important that this family not be broken up. Jose was unfairly deported and deserves humanitarian parole to come back to be with his loving wife, a citizen who works for the Texas Medical Center, and his two wonderful children. TPS, again, is not violating or jeopardizing the American people's security. It is a reflection of our compassion, our humanity, and our respect for those who come to this Nation fleeing persecution and devastation. To send back Haitians, to send back El Salvadorans will be a terrible tragedy, and to send back our DREAMers will be worse. Let's work as Americans to make this country what it is, our greatest country in the world.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my continued support for the people of Iran and continued support for freedom of speech as it is encapsulated in H. Res. 676, a resolution supporting the rights of the people of Iran to free expression and condemning the Iranian regime for its crackdown on legitimate protests. On Sunday, January 7, 2018, I stood in protest with Iranian-Americans on the streets of Houston to take a stand for human rights in Iran. At that event, I stated ``It is time for freedom to take over'' and I stand by that statement here in Congress and add that separation of church and state is essential for a free and democratic Iran. On December 28, 2017, popular protests against the Iranian regime began in the city of Mashad and rapidly spread throughout the country, in the most significant antigovernment protests in Iran since June 2009. The protesters have expressed numerous economic grievances, including the regime's widespread corruption and the Revolutionary Guard Corps' control of the country's economy. Protesters have decried the regime's costly, destabilizing activities abroad, including its support for terrorist groups such as Hezbollah and the murderous Assad regime in Syria. Reports indicate that more than 1,000 Iranians have been arrested and almost two dozen killed in connection with the protests. The Iranian regime has shut down mobile internet access and has blocked and pressured companies to cut off social media applications used by activists to organize and publicize the protests. Congress has provided authority to license the provision of communications technology to Iran to improve the ability of the Iranian people to speak freely. I encourage the Administration to expedite the license of communications technology to Iran to improve the ability of the Iranian people to speak freely and I call on companies to reject requests by the regime to cut off the Iranian people from social media and other communications platforms. On January 1, 2018, regime officials threatened to crack down, with Brigadier General Esmaeil Kowsari of Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps stating, ``If this situation continues, the officials will definitely make some decisions and at that point this business will be finished.'' Congress has provided authority to designate and sanction elements of the Iranian regime involved in significant corruption and serious human rights abuses. I urge the Administration to use targeted sanctions and work to convene emergency sessions of the United Nations Security Council and the United Nations Human Rights Council to condemn the ongoing human rights violations perpetrated by the Iranian regime and establish a mechanism by which the Security Council can monitor such violations. Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps and its Basij militia have been sanctioned by the United States for planning and carrying out serious human rights abuses against the Iranian people, including for the cruel and prolonged torture of political dissidents, behavior that is absolutely intolerable. The regime has routinely violated the human rights of Iranian citizens, including ongoing, systematic, and serious restrictions of freedom of peaceful assembly and association and freedom of opinion and expression, including the continuing closures of media outlets, arrests of journalists, and the censorship of expression in online forums such as blogs and websites. The Department of State's 2016 Human Rights Report on Iran noted: severe restrictions on civil liberties, including the freedoms of assembly, association, speech, religion, and press. Other human rights problems included abuse of due process combined with use of capital punishment for crimes that do not meet the requirements of due process, as well as cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment; and disregard for the physical integrity of persons, whom authorities arbitrarily and unlawfully detained, tortured, or killed. For a country that once enjoyed great pride in its freedom of thought, the information in this Report comes with sadness. On December 29, 2017, the Department of State strongly condemned the arrest of peaceful protesters and noted that ``Iran's leaders have turned a wealthy country with a rich history and culture into an economically depleted rogue state whose chief exports are violence, bloodshed, and chaos.'' On January 1, 2018, the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs of the United Kingdom, Boris Johnson, stated that: The UK is watching events in Iran closely. We believe that there should be meaningful debate about the legitimate and important issues the protesters are raising and we look to the Iranian authorities to permit this. On January 2, 2018, the French Foreign Ministry stated that: French authorities are closely monitoring the situation in Iran. Demonstrating freely is a fundamental right. The same is true for the free movement of information. France expresses its concern over the large number of victims and arrests. On January 1, 2018, a spokesman for the Canadian Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that: We call on the Iranian authorities to uphold and respect democratic and human rights and ``We are encouraged by the Iranian people who are bravely exercising their basic right to protest peacefully. Canada will continue to support the fundamental rights of the Iranians, including freedom of expression. As hypocrisy has it, Iran is a member of the United Nations, voted for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and is a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, among other international human rights treaties. In violation of these and other international obligations, Iranian regime officials continue to violate the fundamental human rights of the Iranian people. Today, I rise with my colleagues in Congress to stand with the people of Iran that are engaged in legitimate and peaceful protests against an oppressive, corrupt regime. I rise in support of H. Res. 676 which condemns the Iranian regime's serious human rights abuses against the Iranian people, significant corruption, and destabilizing activities abroad. I call on all democratic governments and institutions to clearly support the Iranian people's right to live in a free society. I rise to urge the Iranian regime to abide by its international obligations with respect to human rights and civil liberties, including freedoms of assembly, speech, and press. The Iranian regime must do the right thing and respect the proud history and rich culture of the Iranian nation. The people of Iran want nothing more than to promote the establishment of basic freedoms that build the foundation for the emergence of a freely elected, open, and democratic political system. I whole-heartedly support H. Res. 676 and continue fighting for a free Iran.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the gentleman from Florida for his astute assessment and analysis in his earlier remarks today, particularly sharing with us his experience on the Intelligence Committee, and I thank him for mentioning the fact that I serve as the ranking member on the Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations Subcommittee. In that capacity, that committee certainly encounters not only our Nation's law enforcement but many of the issues dealing with terrorism, including the work on homeland security. With that in mind, I want to simply say to my colleagues and, certainly, to my good friend, who served and dedicated his life to the FBI for 14 years, none of us over the past couple of months will take a backseat to championing the FBI, thanking the FBI, recognizing the FBI for the very valiant work that it does. Being on the Judiciary Committee for the number of years that I have served, I have worked with almost every FBI Director, and agents, particularly the SACs in my particular jurisdiction, and have been engaged in discussions on the resources and needs of that organization. Mr. Speaker, again, we thank them for their service. I would offer to say that the position I take today is to protect the FBI and to protect the American people. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record, interestingly enough, an article written by Sheila Jackson Lee, ``Protecting America, protecting Americans,'' dated October 16, 2007. [From the POLITICO, Oct. 16, 2007] Protecting America, Protecting Americans (By Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee) Nearly two centuries ago, Alexis de Tocqueville observed that the reason democracies invariably prevail in any martial conflict is because democracy is the governmental form that best rewards and encourages those traits that are indispensable to martial success: initiative, innovation, resourcefulness and courage. The United States would do well to heed de Tocqueville and recognize that the best way to win the war on terror is to remain true to our democratic traditions. If it retains its democratic character, no nation and no loose confederation of international villains will defeat the United States in the pursuit of its vital interests. A major challenge facing the Congress today is to ensure that in waging its war on terror, the administration does not succeed in winning passage of legislation that will weaken the nation's commitment to its democratic traditions. This is why the upcoming debate over congressional approval authorizing the administration to conduct terrorist surveillance on U.S. soil is a matter of utmost importance. I offer some thoughts on the principles that should inform that debate. In the waning hours before the August recess, the House acceded to the Bush administration's request and approved the woefully misnamed ``Protect America Act,'' which gives the federal government enlarged powers to conduct electronic surveillance of American citizens under the guise of conducting surveillance of foreign terrorists. Fortunately, the authority conferred by the PAA expires next February. It is therefore incumbent on the Congress to act expeditiously to amend the PAA so that it achieves the only legitimate goals of a terrorist surveillance program, which is to ensure that Americans are secure in their persons, papers and effects, but terrorists throughout the world are made insecure. The best way to achieve these twin goals is to follow the rule of law. And the exclusive law to follow with respect to authorizing foreign surveillance gathering on U.S. soil is the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Enacted by Congress in 1978, the exclusivity of FISA was undisputed. Any legislation authorizing terrorist surveillance programs which the administration seeks to conduct must explicitly affirm that FISA is the sole basis of lawful authority for conducting foreign surveillance gathering on U.S. soil. That FISA remains the exclusive source of authority does not mean that the law cannot be adapted to modern circumstances or revised to accommodate new technologies. One widely acknowledged reform is to amend FISA to make clear that foreign-to-foreign communications are not subject to FISA, even though modern technology enables that communication to be routed through the United States. Additionally, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court is indispensable and must play a meaningful role in ensuring compliance with the law. Legislation must ensure that the FISC is empowered to act as an Article III court should act, which means the court should operate neither as a rubber stamp nor a bottleneck. The function of the court is to validate the lawful exercise of executive power on the one hand, and to act as the guardian of individual rights and liberties on the other. Congress should reject any proposal that grants amnesty to any telecommunications company or other entity or individual that helps federal intelligence agencies spy illegally on innocent Americans. Amnesty will have the unintended consequence of encouraging telecommunications companies to comply with, rather than contest, illegal requests to spy on Americans. The only permissible path to legalization of conduct in this area is full compliance with the requirements of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Finally, authorization to conduct foreign surveillance gathering on U.S. soil must never be made permanent. The threats to America's security and the liberties of its people will change over time and require constant vigilance by the people's representatives in Congress. In short, it makes much more sense to enact legislation that protects Americans, rather than one that protects America, as the administration's proposal claims to do. At bottom, America is its people connected to each other, and to past and future generations, as in Abraham Lincoln's unforgettable phrase, by ``the mystic chords of memory stretching from every heart and hearthstone.'' America, in other words, is Americans coming together in a community of shared values, ideals and principles. It is those shared values that hold us together. It is our commitment to those values that the terrorists wish to break because that is the only way they can win. Thus, the way forward to victory in the war on terror is for this country to redouble its commitment to the values that every American will risk his or her life to defend. It is only by preserving our attachment to these cherished values that America will remain forever the home of the free, the land of the brave and the country we love.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, that article suggests that we have the responsibility to protect America and Americans. I would make the point to my good friend, who mentioned that men and women or families sending their young people over to battlegrounds, they are absolutely right, and those young people who are going over to battlegrounds are going over on the basis of freedom. Their parents sacrificed, these loved ones sacrificed their young people because they believe so much in the freedom of this Nation. Well, I will tell you that section 702 and the underlying bill, there is no freedom in this particular bill, and that is why we need to address the question in a thoughtful manner. I don't mind if we extend this to have a longer debate so that we can work through some of our concerns. Let me be clear that S. 139 fails to address the core concern of Members of Congress and the American public. The government's use of section 702 information against United States citizens in investigations that have nothing to do with national security, that is the crux of our advocacy for both the Amash amendment, joined by myself and Zoe Lofgren and Ted Poe and many others--it is not to undermine the security of this Nation. It is to give substance to those families who sacrifice and send their young men and women to faraway places. The warrant requirement contained in the bill is riddled with loopholes and applies only to fully predicated official FBI investigations, not to the hundreds of thousands of searches that the FBI runs every day to run down a lead or check out a tip. S. 139 exacerbates existing problems with section 702 by codifying the so-called bulk collection, a type of surveillance that was shut down after it twice failed to meet the Fourth Amendment scrutiny. S. 139 is universally opposed by technology companies, privacy and civil liberties groups across the political spectrum. Let me read briefly what the Amash amendment really says. It is not something that would stop security, surveillance, and work in its tracks. What it does is, ``Except as provided in subparagraph C or D, no officer, agent, or employee of the United States may conduct a query of information acquired under subsection A in an effort to find communications of or about a particular person if there is reason to believe such person is a United States person,'' protecting the First Amendment freedom of speech and all of that, but matched with the important amendment of the Fourth Amendment, which, of course, is unreasonable search and seizures. An application by the Attorney General to a judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that describes the determination of the Attorney General is probable cause to believe that such communications provide evidence of a crime, such person is a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power. This is a minimal standard.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, this is a minimal standard of which every American should expect and is owed. It is a minimal standard upon which we stand the Constitution. We are missing what our role is here. It is not to rush through a FISA bill that has been delayed by my Republican friends. More importantly, it is to do right by the American people. We are not doing right by the American people. I remember fighting against reverse targeting, a major issue in our work on the Freedom Act and the PATRIOT Act. Now, today--in 2017, going into 2018--in 2018, it is important to remember that 9/11 was to not turn terror on Americans; it was to protect us from terrorism and to withstand that with the upholding of the Constitution. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to oppose the underlying bill. Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, I rise in opposition to the rule for S. 139, the ``FISA Amendments Reauthorization Act of 2017,'' and the underlying bill. S. 139 reauthorizes Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which is scheduled to expire on January 19, 2018. Although Section 702 is a critical national security tool set to expire on January 19, 2018, events of the recent past strongly suggest that Section 702 should not be reauthorized without necessary and significant reforms that are not included in the legislation before us. So as the Ranking Member of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations, I oppose the rule and underlying bill for several compelling reasons: 1. S. 139 fails to address the core concern of Members of Congress and the American public--the government's use of Section 702 information against United States citizens in investigations that have nothing to do with national security. 2. The warrant ``requirement'' contained in the bill is riddled with loopholes and applies only to fully predicated, official FBI investigations, not to the hundreds of thousands searches the FBI runs every day to run down a lead or check out a tip. 3. S. 139 exacerbates existing problems with Section 702 by codifying so-called ``about collection,'' a type of surveillance that was shut down after it twice failed to meet Fourth Amendment scrutiny. 4. S. 139 is universally opposed by technology companies, privacy, and civil liberties groups across the political spectrum, from the ACLU to FreedomWorks. Mr. Speaker, the bill before us comes from the Intelligence Committee, where it was passed on a strict party-line vote. This stands in stark contrast to H.R. 3989, the USA Liberty Act, I the bipartisan bill reported by the Judiciary Committee after multiple hearings, an open markup process, and a bipartisan vote of approval. The USA Liberty Act enjoys much broader support, contains meaningful reforms to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and is far superior to the bill before us. FISA was enacted in 1978 to provide the Executive Branch with a statutory framework for gathering ``foreign intelligence information'' from U.S. persons. FISA authorizes special court orders for four purposes: 1. electronic surveillance; 2. physical searches; 3. the installation and use of pen registers and trap and trace devices; and 4. demands for the production of physical items. Although FISA is designed for intelligence gathering, and not for the collection of criminal evidence, the law applies to activities to which a Fourth Amendment warrant requirement would apply if they were conducted as part of a criminal investigation. Most commonly, authorization for a wiretap or physical search under FISA is obtained by application to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (``FISC'' or the ``FISA court''). Section 702 is part of the FISA Amendments Act (FAA), a successor to the Bush Administration's unlawful warrantless wiretapping program that ended in January 2007. The FAA adds a new Title VII to FISA that grants the government the authority to monitor electronic communications of non-U.S. persons abroad. Section 702 authorizes the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence ``to acquire foreign intelligence information'' from ``persons reasonably believed to be located outside the United States.'' Although the FAA prohibits the intentional targeting of persons in the United States, the FAA had been in place for only a few months when the New York Times reported that the NSA had ``overcollected'' domestic communications, a practice described as significant and systematic, even if unintentional. Subsequently, the Director of the Office of National Intelligence stated that ``it is not reasonably possible to identify the number of people located in the United States whose communications may have been reviewed under the authority of the FAA.'' Section 702 provides that the government ``may not intentionally target a person reasonably believed to be located outside the United States if the purpose of such acquisition is to target a particular, known person reasonably believed to be in the United States.'' Mr. Speaker, Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was enacted to protect the liberty and security of Americans, not to diminish their constitutional rights. That is why Section 702 should not be reauthorized with reforms to prevent the government from using information against its political opponents or members of religious, ethnic, or other groups. One way to do that is without interfering with the national security objectives of 702 surveillance is simply to require the FBI to obtain a warrant before reading communications by Americans, when it finds those communications by targeting that American and searching its 702 databases. Enforcing the warrant requirement would prevent the misuse of Section 702 to conduct ``backdoor searches'' where government agencies, including individual FBI agents, may search the communications collected under section 702 for communications by an individual American, read those communications and disseminate them within the government, all without any external oversight, much less a judicial warrant, simply by claiming a ``foreign intelligence'' purpose. Mr. Speaker, all Americans want to find a common-ground where common- sense rules and regulations relating to fighting terrorism at home and abroad can exist while still protecting the cherished privacy and civil liberties which Americans hold close to our collective hearts. Mr. Speaker, I noted in an op-ed published way back in October 2007, that as Alexis DeTocqueville, the most astute student of American democracy, observed nearly two centuries ago, the reason democracies invariably prevail in any military conflict is because democracy is the governmental form that best rewards and encourages those traits that are indispensable to success: initiative, innovation, courage, and a love of justice. The best way to keep America safe and strong is to remain true to the valued embedded in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The bill before us does not strike the proper balance between our cherished liberties and smart security. We can do better; we should reject this rule and the underlying bill and bring to the floor for debate and vote H.R. 3989, the USA Liberty Act.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, a little clarity I think is very important on a very, very important issue. I would like to call 140,000 young people in my State DREAMers because they dream of the greatness of America. The status that they are under is something called DACA, which was instituted by President Barack Obama because this Republican Congress could not provide legislative relief, so he saw the lives that were being impacted. In a few months, however, the present President, who feigns not knowing what happened, was the individual who removed that DACA status. So let me be very clear: it is a dire situation, and the reason is because there are individuals whose status is now expiring or has already expired, therefore, they are living in limbo. These are doctors, lawyers, teachers, and young people with families. It is crucial that we move quickly for a DACA fix, and we do it without impacting family reunification or diversity visas. We do it out of humanity, caring, and respect. Let's do it now. Let's do it for America.

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. 4559, the Global Aviation System Security Reform Act of 2017. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his leadership on this legislation. This legislation would require the TSA to conduct a global aviation security review in order to improve aviation standards across the global aviation system within 180 days of enactment. The security review within this bill is required to include input from the TSA's Office of Global Strategies, Office of Intelligence and Analysis, and the Office of Security Policy and Industry Engagement, and must identify best practices for foreign partners. While the TSA has taken tremendous steps to improve aviation security at airports with direct service to the U.S., there is more that can be done. In the last 12 months, we have seen the global aviation threat landscape evolve to include an increased threat to cargo security, and passenger planes being targeted with bombs hidden in large electronic devices. The TSA is continually working with global partners and stakeholders to ensure that aviation standards are being maintained and elevated as needed. Under this legislation, improvements that should be made to aviation security will be highlighted for Congress. This legislation has the potential of providing a very good roadmap for Congress to address areas of improvement for global aviation security and to ensure that we constantly strive towards the safest and most secure aviation community. Mr. Speaker, I note that, in the last couple of days, through the holiday season, those people who were either stuck in airports, and bags that were stacked, and people couldn't find bags are not considered a security issue. It was a weather issue. But we understand how crucial it is that the traveling public has needs in the free flowing and secure flowing of aviation. Giving the Congress a roadmap, I believe, is a very important step. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4559, the ``Global Aviation System Security Reform Act of 2017.'' This legislation would require TSA to conduct a global aviation security review in order to improve aviation standards across the global aviation system within 180 days of enactment. The security review within this bill is required to include input from TSA's Office of Global Strategies, Office of Intelligence and Analysis, and the Office of Security Policy and Industry Engagement, and must identify best practices for foreign partners. While TSA has taken tremendous steps to improve aviation security at airports with direct service to the U.S., there is more that can be done. In the last 12 months, we have seen the global aviation threat landscape evolve to include an increased threat to cargo security, and passenger planes being targeted with bombs hidden in large electronic devices. TSA is continually working with global partners and stakeholders to ensure that aviation standards are being maintained and elevated as needed. Under this legislation, improvements that should be made to aviation security will be highlighted for Congress. This legislation has the potential of providing a roadmap for Congress to address areas of improvement for global aviation security, and ensure that we constantly strive towards the safest and most secure aviation community. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4559 will give this body a strong sense of the direction for global aviation security improvements. As threats to aviation security grow more sophisticated, this bill seeks to ensure that TSA is keeping pace with the threat landscape. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let me again emphasize the importance of identifying best practices to be utilized by our system and to utilize these best practices to improve the security for the traveling public. H.R. 4559 will give this body a strong sense of direction for global aviation security improvements. As threats to aviation security grow more sophisticated, this bill seeks to ensure that the TSA is keeping pace with the threat landscape. Since I have no further speakers, I am closing by saying, with that, I encourage my colleagues to support H.R. 4559. 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, and I thank the manager for his kind words. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3202, the Cyber Vulnerability Disclosure Reporting Act. I very much want to thank the committee for bringing the Jackson Lee bill to the floor and the work that we did on it in committee. I wish to speak specifically to the work that is done on the Homeland Security Committee as I discuss this legislation. I think it is very important to take note of the fact that the ranking member works very hard to generate very positive legislation and that we have been able to see a large number of bills, some that I have been able to sponsor, come to the floor of the House. Mr. Speaker, therefore, I thank the chairman, Mr. McCaul, and the ranking member for making the Homeland Security Committee so productive in generating important legislation to ensure the security of this Nation. I thank them for their leadership in putting the security of our Nation's cyber assets first, whether they are computing resources used in voting technology, or industrial control systems that support the delivery of electricity, oil and gas, or management of transportation systems that are vital to our Nation's economic health. Mr. Speaker, I was chairman of the Transportation Security and Infrastructure Protection Subcommittee some few sessions ago. This was when infrastructure was included in the transportation and security domain. I can tell you that, even then, we began to acknowledge the crucialness of protecting the cyber system and how far-reaching cyber systems can go, as far away as water systems, to bridges, to dams, and in between, and to note that a lot of our cyber system, 80 percent of it was in the private sector, probably more at this point. H.R. 3202, the Cyber Vulnerability Disclosure Reporting Act, which I introduced, requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to submit a report on the policies and procedures developed for coordinating cyber vulnerability disclosures. The report will include an annex with information on instances in which cybersecurity vulnerability disclosure policies and procedures were used to disclose details on identified weaknesses in computing systems or digital devices at risk. The report will provide information on the degree to which the information provided by DHS was used by industry and other stakeholders. The report may also contain a description of how the Secretary of Homeland Security is working with other Federal entities and critical infrastructure owners and operators to prevent, detect, and mitigate cyber vulnerabilities. It is important to restate that our cyber system is largely in the private sector. It does not alleviate or eliminate the role that the Federal Government should play. This legislation squarely places with the Federal Government the responsibilities of dealing with those critical infrastructure owners and operators to prevent, detect, and mitigate cyber vulnerabilities. The reason that I have worked to bring this bill before the full House for consideration is a problem often referred to as a zero-day event. A zero-day event describes a situation that network security professionals may find themselves in when a previously unknown error or flaw in computing code is exploited by a cybercriminal or terrorist. The term ``zero-day event'' simply means that there is zero time to prepare a defense against a cyber attack. That is not the place that we would like to find ourselves. When a defect in software is discovered, their network engineers and software companies can work to develop a patch to fix the problem before it can be exploited by those who may seek to do us harm. We have evidence that the cyber world is a good world, but it can be a dangerous world and impact the life and quality and democracy and freedom of Americans. We want to be prepared and never have to face, in this most powerful country in the world, something called a zero-day event. H.R. 3202 seeks a report on the ongoing Department of Homeland Security's policies and procedures for coordinating cyber vulnerability disclosures, such as zero-day events, with private sector partners. Because vulnerabilities can be used by adversaries, it is important that this sensitive information be managed securely so details are not routinely made available, neither to the public nor to Congress. H.R. 3202 provides the Congress with the opportunity to understand the process and procedures used by the Department of Homeland Security and the benefit these disclosures may have for private sector entities participating in programs in support of cybersecurity. Mr. Speaker, I thank Lillie Coney of my district and Jean de Pruneda, a fellow on the Committee on Homeland Security, for their work on this important legislation. I urge Members of the House to vote in favor of H.R. 3202, the Cyber Vulnerability Disclosure Reporting Act. Mr. Speaker, I want to emphasize again a point that I made earlier. Because vulnerabilities can be used by adversaries, it is important that this sensitive information be managed securely so details are not routinely made available, neither to the public nor to Congress. It is important to take note of the fact that the work we have to do is ongoing and continuing. H.R. 3202 will give this body important information on our governmentwide efforts to secure civilian agency networks and the collaborative ongoing work to provide information to private sector partners on computing vulnerabilities. There is no security in keeping zero-day events secure from disclosure and not working on solutions. Cybersecurity is found in finding the zero-day events, creating solutions to defend against them, and sharing the solutions broadly so that they can be deployed. Once solutions are in place, the zero-day event should be disclosed to the public so that scholars and researchers can learn from the experience. In essence, what we are saying is that we want to make sure that we are in the driver's seat, that we know the vulnerabilities, that we can confront the zero-day events, and that we can do that, meaning the Federal Government, in working with the private sector to ensure that we do protect this Nation. Before I close, since we are dealing with Homeland Security Committee issues, I think it is important to take note of the fact of the crucialness and the importance of having a DACA fix and working together, as we have been doing, to ensure that the thousands and thousands of young people located across the Nation, who came here through no fault of their own, have a serious pathway of protection, in particular, the 140,000 that are in the State of Texas. If we can stand here as bipartisan Members, I know that we can continue to work on that crucial and important issue, which I stand with those young people to ensure to get that done. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record an article by Morgan Chalfant, ``Lawmakers approve `cyber vulnerability' bill,'' written in The Hill. [From the Hill, July 26, 2017] Lawmakers Approve `Cyber Vulnerability' Bill (By Morgan Chalfant) A House panel advanced legislation on Wednesday requiring the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to give lawmakers more information on how it discloses cyber vulnerabilities to the private sector. The legislation was sponsored by Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) and received broad support from members of the House Homeland Security Committee, including Chairman Michael McCaul (R-Texas). The bill would require Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly to send a report to relevant congressional committees describing policies and procedures used by the DHS to coordinate the disclosure of what are called ``zero days''-- cyber vulnerabilities that are unknown to a product's manufacturer and for which no patch exists. The federal government decides whether to disclose zero days to the private sector through the vulnerabilities equities process (VEP), which was first acknowledged by the Obama administration in 2014 but is still shrouded in secrecy. While the government is said to err on the side of disclosure, the VEP has proven controversial because so little is known about it. The process has attracted increased scrutiny in the wake of the outbreak of the ``Wanna Cry'' ransomware, which is believed to be based on a hacking tool developed by the National Security Agency. Lawmakers in both chambers have sought to boost transparency of the VEP. On Wednesday, Jackson Lee touted the legislation as providing an opportunity for Congress to better understand the process by which the DHS shares threat information with private companies and how that information benefits the private sector. ``Because vulnerabilities can be used by adversaries, it is important that the sensitive information is managed securely and the details are guarded against premature disclosure,'' Jackson Lee said during a committee markup. ``There's no security in keeping zero day events secure and not working on solutions,'' she said. ``The protection is in finding the zero day events, creating solutions, sharing the solutions broadly, then disclosing the vulnerabilities to the public.'' The report mandated by the legislation would include an annex of information on specific instances when the DHS disclosed vulnerabilities to private sector companies in the previous year and information on how industry acted on the information. It could also contain information about how the DHS is working with other federal agencies and departments, as well as owners of critical infrastructure, to mitigate the threat of these vulnerabilities. Kelly would be required to submit the report, which would be unclassified but could have a classified annex, within 240 days of the enactment of the legislation. The committee approved the legislation in a voice vote with no amendments, sending it to the full House for a vote.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support H.R. 3202, and I thank my manager as well. Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak in support of H.R. 3202, the Cyber Vulnerabilities Disclosure Reporting Act. I thank Chairman McCaul and Ranking Member Thompson for their leadership on putting the security of our nation's cyber assets first whether they are computing resources used in voting technology or industrial control systems that support the delivery of electricity, oil and gas, or management of transportation systems all are vital to our nation. H.R. 3202, the Cyber Vulnerability Disclosure Reporting Act, which I introduced, requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to submit a report on the policies and procedures developed for coordinating cyber vulnerability disclosures. The report will include an annex with information on instances in which cyber security vulnerability disclosure policies and procedures were used to disclose details on identified weaknesses in computing systems that or digital devices at risk. The report will provide information on the degree to which the information provided by DHS was used by industry and other stakeholders. The report may also contain a description of how the Secretary of Homeland Security is working with other Federal entities and critical infrastructure owners and operators to prevent, detect, and mitigate cyber vulnerabilities. The reason that I worked to bring this bill before the Full House for consideration is the problem often referred to as a ``Zero Day Event.'' Zero Day Events are vulnerabilities in software or firmware that have gone undetected or undisclosed, but if exploited by terrorists could cause great harm to computer networks, data, or complex computing dependent systems. Our nation's electric power grid; industrial control systems that operate bridges, dams, water treatment facilities or food processing plants are all vulnerable to the potential harm that could be caused if a weakness in software or firmware goes undetected. Critical infrastructure must be secured against terrorist attacks that may use Zero Day Event vulnerabilities to attack critical infrastructure or civilian government agency computing assets. Zero Day Events discovered in commercial software applications such as the ``Heartbleed'' and OpenSSL cryptographic software library vulnerability. Proactive and coordinated efforts are necessary to strengthen and maintain secure critical infrastructure including assets that are vital to public confidence in the cyber nation's safety. This bill supports the ongoing work of the Department of Homeland Security in security civilian agency and coordinating with private sector computing network owners and operators. The nation's critical infrastructure is diverse, complex, and interdependent. The overwhelming majority of critical infrastructure is privately owned or managed. Critical Infrastructure owners and operators are uniquely positioned to manage risk to their operations and assets. What is needed is a better understanding of how vulnerability discoveries lead to better protection for computing networks. Zero Day Events require a coordinated approach to assignment of responsibility for developing patches or solutions, and a means of effectively distributing the solution without alerting potential terrorist or cyber criminals. H.R. 3202 provides the Congress with the opportunity to understand the process and procedures used by the Department of Homeland Security and the benefit these disclosures may have for private sector entities participating in programs in support of cybersecurity. I thank Lillie Coney of my staff and Jean de Pruneda a Fellow on the Committee on Homeland Security for their work on this important legislation. I ask my colleagues to vote for H.R. 3202. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of 3202, The ``Cyber Disclosure Reporting Act.'' I thank Chairman McCaul and Ranking Member Thompson for their leadership on putting the security of our nation's cyber assets first whether they are computing resources used in voting technology or industrial control systems that support the delivery of electricity, oil and gas, or management of transportation systems that are vital to our nation economic health. H.R. 3202, the Cyber Vulnerability Disclosure Reporting Act, which I introduced, requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to submit a report on the policies and procedures developed for coordinating cyber vulnerability disclosures. The report will include an annex with information on instances in which cyber security vulnerability disclosure policies and procedures were used to disclose details on identified weaknesses in computing systems that or digital devices at risk. The report will provide information on the degree to which the information provided by DHS was used by industry and other stakeholders. The report may also contain a description of how the Secretary of Homeland Security is working with other Federal entities and critical infrastructure owners and operators to prevent, detect, and mitigate cyber vulnerabilities. The reason that I worked to bring this bill before the Full House for consideration is the problem often referred to as a ``Zero Day Event.'' A Zero Day Event describes the situation that network security professionals may find themselves when a previously unknown error or flaw in computing code is exploited by a cybercriminal or terrorist. The term ``Zero Day Event'' simply means that there is zero time to prepare a defense against a cyberattack. When a defect in software is discovered then network engineers and software companies can work to develop a ``patch'' to fix the problem before it can be exploited by those who may seek to do harm. H.R. 3202 seeks a report on the ongoing Department of Homeland Security's policies and procedures for coordinating cyber vulnerability disclosures such as Zero Day Events with private sector partners. Because vulnerabilities can be used by adversaries it is important that this sensitive information be managed securely so details are not routinely made available neither to the public nor to Congress. H.R. 3202 provides the Congress with the opportunity to understand the process and procedures used by the Department of Homeland Security and the benefit these disclosures may have for private sector entities participating in programs in support of cybersecurity. I thank Lillie Coney of my staff and Jean de Pruneda a Fellow on the Committee on Homeland Security for their work on this important legislation. I urge members of the House to vote in favor of H.R. 3202, the Cyber Vulnerabilities Disclosure Act. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3202 will give this body important information on our government wide efforts to secure civilian agency networks and the collaborative ongoing work to provide information to private sector partners on computing vulnerabilities. There's no security in keeping zero day events secure from disclosure and not working on solutions. Cyber security is found in finding the zero day events, creating solutions to defend against them, and sharing the solutions broadly so that they can be deployed. Once solutions are in place the Zero Day Event should be disclosed to the public so that scholars and researchers can learn from the experience. With that, I encourage my colleagues to support H.R. 3202. 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. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4555, the DHS Interagency Counterterrorism Task Force Act of 2017. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4555 authorizes DHS personnel to participate in overseas interagency counterterrorism task forces. Since the attacks of September 11 and the demise of central al-Qaida, there has been an upsurge in the number of foreign terrorist organizations. The terrorist threat picture demands that DHS work to ``push our borders out'' and deal with terrorist threats overseas. As such, it is important that DHS deploy DHS personnel overseas to engage in counterterrorism information sharing with international partners. Our close partnerships with countries around the world, especially in Europe, are essential to preventing returning foreign fighters from attacking the U.S. homeland. However, we remain concerned that terrorist organizations, in particular, ISIS, al-Qaida, and their affiliates, continue to plot attacks against the U.S. homeland and our interests abroad. Authorizing the participation of DHS personnel in overseas interagency counterterrorism task forces will facilitate better counterterrorism information sharing, which will help protect the homeland and U.S. interests abroad. As such, I support this legislation. Mr. Speaker, in closing, H.R. 4555 authorizes the participation of DHS personnel in overseas interagency counterterrorism task forces. This measure seeks to help safeguard our homeland by fostering DHS overseas partnerships and facilitating counterterrorism information sharing. I want to thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Rutherford) for sponsoring this legislation and for working with me on my amendment, which added reporting language on the activities authorized by this measure. This is an important step forward and, again, I might emphasize, the work that is being done between the ranking member, Mr. Thompson, and the full committee chair, Mr. McCaul, in bringing our committee together in producing a myriad of constructive legislation all geared to our task, because, when all is said and done, we are the Homeland Security Committee within the Homeland Security Department, created in the aftermath of the most heinous, horrific tragedy in the history of the United States of recent recollection that was not an incident of war. Therefore, I think the American people, and I know the American people are owed our diligence and are owed our commitment and are owed our studiousness. I am very pleased to say that, on this committee, the production of legislation that comes to the floor, all is geared to securing the homeland. Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of H.R. 4555. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4555, the ``DHS Interagency Counterterrorism Task Force Act of 2017.'' H.R. 4555 authorizes DHS personnel to participate in overseas interagency counterterrorism task forces. Since the attacks of September 11th and the demise of central al Qaeda, there has been an upsurge in the number of foreign terrorist organizations. The terrorist threat picture demands that DHS work to ``push our borders out'' and deal with terrorist threats overseas. As such, it is important that DHS deploy DHS personnel overseas to engage in counter-terrorism information sharing with international partners. Our close partnerships with countries around the world, especially in Europe, are essential to preventing returning foreign fighters from attacking the U.S. homeland. However, we remain concerned that terrorist organizations, in particular ISIS, al Qaeda, and their affiliates, continue to plot attacks against the U.S. homeland and our interests abroad. Authorizing the participation of DHS personnel in overseas interagency counterterrorism task forces will facilitate better counterterrorism information sharing, which will help protect the homeland and U.S. interests abroad. I thank the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Rutherford, for sponsoring this legislation and for working with me on my amendment which added reporting language on the activities authorized by this measure. With that, Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of H.R. 4555. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, let me thank both gentlemen from California for their leadership and for their very important work on a very important crisis fight for human rights and freedom. Just yesterday I rose to the floor of the House to recount my experience over the weekend joining the Iranian-American community in Houston on a busy corner at Post Oak and Westheimer. We joined together as Americans to begin to articulate that there is no divide when it comes to the freedom of speech, freedom for all to have access to protests and democracy. So today I rise to support H. Res. 676, and I rise to speak in horror of the 1,000 Iranians that have been arrested and almost two dozen killed. We mourn their loss. We recognize that it has to be all of us, our allies included, that must stand and join in the language of this resolution, and it is, of course, to ensure that sanctions are pointedly targeted at those who want to oppress the protesters. Interestingly enough, the protesters are now from rural and the middle class. The questions of the economy are very much a part of it, that Iranians are not able to live and to be able to have economic opportunity. Their young people have no growth. So this is far reaching, which is, of course, surprising to the regime. They were hoping to quash this. They have no answers. And the answers should be a concerted, committed, and dedicated group of allies, including the United States, leading in efforts to support these protesters. So I rise today to join in standing with the people of Iran in their legitimate and peaceful protest. I ask that the regime be condemned, and I ask that the communications, Mr. Speaker, be allowed to continue and that our companies don't reject----

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California for yielding. I believe it is so important that the communication--the work that we are getting ready to do here in the United States, to provide communications technology, needs to go forward. We must include in our petition--meaning our petition as Members of Congress--that our companies do not deny or quash the rights of Iranians to communicate with each other for peace, freedom, and democracy. Our message to the regime is: it is time to open the doors of freedom in Iran. Iranian Americans, Americans, the United States Congress, and, of course, all of our government stand for peace, freedom, dignity, and democracy for the people of Iran.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I have often come to this floor to remind my colleagues of the devastation that the people of Texas have experienced with Hurricane Harvey. I certainly don't intend to ignore our other friends in the Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, Florida, and California who have experienced their own devastation, along with Louisiana. But I am excited today, Mr. Speaker, because I am introducing a bill that celebrates the history of Texas. H.R. 4745 is the emancipation national historic trail. Many people know that the Emancipation Proclamation was not heard in Texas but for 2 years later in 1865. This emancipation national historic trail recounts the journey of many of those individuals: freed slaves going from the Osterman Building and Reedy Chapel in Galveston, Texas; along Texas State Highway 3, Interstate Highway 45 North, Freedmen's Town, and Emancipation Park in Houston, Texas; following the migration route of newly freed slaves and other persons of African descent; from the major 19th century seaport of Galveston. It is a collaboration with people from both parties throughout the community. It is one of unity, Mr. Speaker. It is one where we are coming together. I look forward to passing this legislation with my colleagues-- Republicans and Democrats--because it is a celebration of the history of Texas.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, freedom is not partisan. Yesterday, on the corner of Post Oak and Westheimer in Houston, Texas, I stood with Iranian Americans, linking arms with them as they protested and petitioned for a free and democratic Iran. I told them that the cries of hunger and economic needs, and the cries of young people who wanted freedom in Iran were my cries, and that we believed in democracy, freedom, and peace, and that we would not leave them alone. So, again, I say to them: We stand not as Democrats and Republicans, but as Americans, wanting for a free government that allows the people's voices to be heard, and that despotic governments have no place in a society that relishes and thirsts after freedom. I want to thank the law enforcement officers who stood by in the cold--yes, the cold in Houston--and allowed for a peaceful protest in this time of honoring them a national law enforcement commemoration. Again, I want to thank them, for they go to places where they are needed and they allow democracy to reign. I will say democracy will reign in Iran, and Iranian Americans are not alone in their quest for freedom, democracy, and peace.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Congressman Evans for the mighty leadership that he has given and for the service that he gives to his constituents in Philadelphia. I accept his challenge, and I accept the challenge of my chairman, Cedric Richmond, who told a story that hopefully will be an inspiration and a guide for all of those who believe that they are not yet mature enough to serve, to give, to offer to the beloved community that Dr. King so aptly speaks of. What can I say about John Lewis, whose moral guidance, but whose bloody brow, was never bowed. I thank Congressman Lewis not only for the straight talk but the loving talk. To my colleagues who are here, I know that each will have a moment, so allow me to take just a moment to be able to offer my tribute and commemoration of Dr. King's life. What a powerful year we face in 2018, and I am so grateful to have left 2017. I believe that this gives a fresh look to America. I looked at the movie ``Remember the Titans,'' and maybe you saw that with Denzel Washington, and it reflected a racial conflict with football players just outside of Washington in Virginia. It is a moving story of how when you get young people together, we can break the chains of racism and differences. It brought tears to my eyes, because in 2017, we went that journey again, and I was hoping that we would come in this year, the commemoration year, to accept Dr. King's challenge of a beloved community. I salute my community of Houston. Some say there was no civil rights movement, and I beg to differ with them. Dr. King came one time, and the clergy gathered, most of them gathered, those who were afraid; we know that most were not. They were all ready to have a big rally, and wouldn't you know it, a bomb threat. But our Houstonians were ready to march and to be out front in spite of the fear of a bomb. I believe that every community that Dr. King was either invited to or that he went to, there were people of courage who were willing to stand up and embrace freedom in the face of devastating potential disaster. So let me just say that my greatest claim for this legacy is my fight as a younger person to be part of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. It will be my greatest honor to have been able to work for the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, to walk in that office on Auburn, that I believe may not be to meet Ralph David Abernathy because it was after the death of Dr. King, to know James Orange, and to know the brother that walked with the wooden leg, and to know Andy in a way that they were still engaged in Dr. King's work. I am reminded of the message that he has given to us. And as Chairman Richmond said, he was young, and he asked the question: ``Life's most persistent and nagging question is''--he said--``what are you doing for others?'' And I think we as members of the Congressional Black Caucus and the adjunct of the foundation that works for young people, we have no doubt in what we are doing for others. But Dr. King gave us the words: ``I would like somebody to mention''--as he talked about his death on February 4, 1968, this is what we should be doing in 2018. We should be talking about what we are doing in commemoration. ``I would like somebody to mention on that day Martin Luther King, Jr., tried to give his life serving others.'' And he said: ``I want you to say on that day''--that I might have lost my life--``that I did try in my life . . . to love and serve humanity.'' So as I close, I want to remind those of us who have not yet made our journey to something that brought us closer to Dr. King that this body, this group of Republicans and Democrats, this administration, we need to unshackle ourselves. This question of race needs to be thrown under the bus of the beloved community. And we need to be able to dream like Dr. King did and say--but he learned to use his imagination when he saw this separation and his dreams to see right through those ``White Only'' signs--to see the reality that all men and women, regardless of our place of origin, their gender, or their creed, are created equal. What a visionary. And so I close with his braveness in two points: his answer to the question about who are we as a nation and what this citizenship should mean. And he simply turned us back to the Declaration of Independence and said that we simply should have citizens who can live out the words written in the Declaration of Independence that have a place in this Nation's Bill of Rights. We simply want to be like others. And he took this courage to his death, for at the end of his life, he was not ashamed to go to Riverside Church and stand against the Vietnam war while others looked aghast, afraid. Why are you stepping out of your box? Dr. King said: I believe in the beloved community, a dreamer with works and actions. And so I close in that faithful journey that he made that we will be commemorating all converging in Memphis, Tennessee, and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees who were forged and born in the shadow of two sanitation workers who were killed in the line of their duty, and Dr. King felt compelled to be there. When do we feel compelled: on the tax bill, on CHIP, on fully qualified healthcare, on affirmative action? When are we taking this, in essence, to the mat? Because that is what Dr. King did. He took it to the mat. And he went to the mat in the face of violence, and he told us, in his last words, that he had been to the mountaintop. He had seen the promised land. And he did not know if he would get there someday, but he knew that we as a people would pine away to that pathway. I thank the gentleman for yielding to me. Mr. Speaker, next Monday, January 15, the nation observes for the 33rd time the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Holiday. Each year this day is set aside for Americans to celebrate the life and legacy of a man who brought hope and healing to America. The Martin Luther King Holiday reminds us that nothing is impossible when we are guided by the better angels of our nature. Dr. King's inspiring words filled a great void in our nation, and answered our collective longing to become a country that truly lived by its noblest principles. Yet, Dr. King knew that it was not enough just to talk the talk; he knew that he had to walk the walk for his words to be credible. And so we commemorate on this holiday the man of action, who put his life on the line for freedom and justice every day. We honor the courage of a man who endured harassment, threats and beatings, and even bombings. We commemorate the man who went to jail 29 times to achieve freedom for others, and who knew he would pay the ultimate price for his leadership, but kept on marching and protesting and organizing anyway. Dr. King once said that we all have to decide whether we ``will walk in the light of creative altruism or the darkness of destructive selfishness. ``Life's most persistent and nagging question,'' he said, is ``what are you doing for others?'' And when Dr. King talked about the end of his mortal life in one of his last sermons, on February 4, 1968 in the pulpit of Ebenezer Baptist Church, even then he lifted up the value of service as the hallmark of a full life: I'd like somebody to mention on that day Martin Luther King, Jr. tried to give his life serving others,'' he said. ``I want you to say on that day, that I did try in my life . . . to love and serve humanity. We should also remember that the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was, above all, a person who was always willing to speak truth to power. There is perhaps no better example of Dr. King's moral integrity and consistency than his criticism of the Vietnam War being waged by the Johnson Administration, an administration that was otherwise a friend and champion of civil and human rights. Martin Luther King, Jr. was born in Atlanta, Georgia on January 15, 1929. Martin's youth was spent in our country's Deep South, then run by Jim Crow and the Ku Klux Klan. For young African-Americans, it was an environment even more dangerous than the one they face today. A young Martin managed to find a dream, one that he pieced together from his readings--in the Bible, and literature, and just about any other book he could get his hands on. And not only did those books help him educate himself, but they also allowed him to work through the destructive and traumatic experiences of blatant discrimination, and the discriminatory abuse inflicted on himself, his family, and his people. The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. that we celebrate here today could have turned out to be just another African-American who would have had to learn to be happy with what he had, and what he was allowed. But he learned to use his imagination and his dreams to see right through those ``White Only'' signs--to see the reality that all men, and women, regardless of their place of origin, their gender, or their creed, are created equal. Through his studies, Dr. King learned that training his mind and broadening his intellect effectively shielded him from the demoralizing effects of segregation and discrimination. Dr. King was a dreamer and his dreams were a tool through which he was able to lift his mind beyond the reality of his segregated society, and into a realm where it was possible that white and black, red and brown, and all others live and work alongside each other and prosper. But the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was not an idle daydreamer. He shared his visions through speeches that motivated others to join in his nonviolent effort to lift themselves from poverty and isolation by creating a new America where equal justice and institutions were facts of life. In the Declaration of Independence in 1776, Thomas Jefferson wrote, ``We hold these truths to be self evident, that all Men are Created Equal.'' At that time and for centuries to come, African-Americans were historically, culturally, and legally excluded from inclusion in that declaration. Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King's ``I Have a Dream'' Speech, delivered 54 years ago, on August 28, 1963, was a clarion call to each citizen of this great nation that we still hear today. His request was simply and eloquently conveyed--he asked America to allow its citizens to live out the words written in its Declaration of Independence and to have a place in this nation's Bill of Rights. The 196os were a time of great crisis and conflict. The dreams of the people of this country were filled with troubling images that arose like lava from the nightmares of violence and the crises they had to face, both domestically and internationally. It was the decade of the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Vietnam War, and the assassinations of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Malcolm X, Presidential Candidate Robert Kennedy, and the man we honor here today. Dr. Martin Luther King's dream helped us turn the corner on civil rights. It started when Dr. King led the Montgomery Bus Boycott, with 4, Rosa Parks and others, which lasted for 381 days, and ended when the United States Supreme Court outlawed racial segregation on all public transportation. But the dream did not die there. It continued started with a peaceful march for suffrage that started in Selma, Alabama on March 7, 1965--a march that ended with violence at the hands of law enforcement officers as the marchers crossed the Edmund Pettus Bridge. Dr. King used several nonviolent tactics to protest against Jim Crow Laws in the South and he organized and led demonstrations for desegregation, labor and voting rights. On April 4, 1967, at Riverside Church in New York City, he spoke out against the Vietnam War, when he saw the devastation that his nation was causing abroad and the effect that it had on the American men and women sent overseas. When the life of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King was stolen from us, he was a very young 39 years old. People remember that Dr. King died in Memphis, but few can remember why he was there. On that fateful day in 1968 Dr. King came to Memphis to support a strike by the city's sanitation workers. The garbage men there had recently formed a chapter of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees to demand better wages and working conditions. But the city refused to recognize their union, and when the 1,300 employees walked off their jobs the police broke up the rally with mace and Billy clubs. It was then that union leaders invited Dr. King to Memphis. Despite the danger he might face entering such a volatile situation, it was an invitation he could not refuse. Not because he longed for danger, but because the labor movement was intertwined with the civil rights movement for which he had given up so many years of his life. The death of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., will never overshadow his life. That is his legacy as a dreamer and a man of action. It is a legacy of hope, tempered with peace. It is a legacy not quite yet fulfilled. I hope that Dr. King's vision of equality under the law is never lost to us, who in the present, toil in times of unevenness in our equality. For without that vision--without that dream--we can never continue to improve on the human condition. For those who have already forgotten, or whose vision is already clouded with the fog of complacency, I would like to recite the immortal words of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.: I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former shareholders will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood. I have a dream that one day even the State of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice. I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but for the content of their character. I have a dream today. I have a dream that one day down in Alabama with its vicious racists, with its Governor having his lips dripping with words of interposition and nullification--one day right there in Alabama, little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers. I have a dream today. I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough place will be made plain and the crooked places will be made straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together. Dr. King's dream did not stop at racial equality, his ultimate dream was one of human equality and dignity. There is no doubt that Dr. King wished and worked for freedom and justice for every individual in America. He was in midst of planning the 1968 Poor People's Campaign for Jobs and Justice when he struck down by the dark deed of an assassin on April 4, 1968. It is for us, the living, to continue that fight today and forever, in the great spirit that inspired the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, this has been a painful season for so many of us, from California to Texas to Florida, Louisiana, to Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, and so I am still here begging my colleagues for those who are begging in Texas. Right now, my local officials are letting my constituents from Kashmere Gardens share in the public view how desperate they are for housing money. So this CR and this emergency supplemental should be separated. But the CR, on the other hand, should be funding CHIP completely. And DACA, the DREAMers, should be protected completely. I introduced a bill when Hurricane Harvey came for $164 billion. That is where we should be, and I know that because of the sacrifice and loss and devastation. But also, a DREAMer lost his life trying to rescue my constituents, so, you see, we have a situation that should be corrected across the board. Fix the DREAMers, but provide for the hurricane victims. I will say that we are going to keep on pushing beyond the $81 billion. I am glad the $1 billion that I pushed for for small businesses is in this bill.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, we have 300,000 homes underwater. Puerto Rico has no lights in homes; U.S. Virgin Islands, none, no homes. Key West still needs debris picked up. What my constituents are saying is, because the lights are out, we are forgotten; because DREAMers don't have rights, they are forgotten. So I am not going to stand here and ignore our children, 9 million of them who need CHIP, or our DREAMers. But I am also going to say that, whatever is in this for us, which is not a lot, I am going to keep pushing and fighting for my constituents. And the money that we are getting, get it to us now--now.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak on the Rule, and H.R. 4667, one of the two underlying bills made in order. H.R. 4667 provides $81 billion in aid to respond to the damage caused by Hurricanes Irma and Maria, and the wildfires in California. I thank the Speaker and Rules Committee Chairman Sessions for acting favorably upon my request to bring this emergency disaster supplemental to the floor for debate and vote as a stand-alone measure. Ever since the widespread and catastrophic destruction of Hurricane Harvey, I have been working closely with the Texas Governor and the Hurricane Harvey Taskforce to secure the help necessary for the region to rebuild. I have witnessed firsthand the pain of storm-weary Houstonians who lost their homes, their belongings, and in many cases their jobs. They are struggling and hurting. So this is personal to me. The amount of funding provided in the disaster relief package is very disappointing because it is not nearly sufficient to ameliorate the suffering still being experienced by the people of the communities in the areas affected by Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria. Congress has had more than three months to develop an aid package that is commensurate to the challenge faced by the affected states and territories in rebuilding their devastated communities. Much of this time has been squandered by the Republican congressional leadership's all-consuming focus on ramming through the Republican Tax Scam legislation that gives 83 percent of its benefits to the top 1 percent, raises taxes on working and middle-class families, takes away health insurance from 13 million Americans, explodes the deficit by $1.5 trillion and the national debt by $1.7 trillion, and will be paid for by 5.4 trillion in cuts to vital programs Americans depend on, including an imminent $25 billion reduction in Medicare funding. Mr. Speaker, on September 6, 2017, ten days after Hurricane Harvey struck and joined by 44 of our colleagues, I introduced H.R. 3686, the ``Hurricane Harvey Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2017,'' which provides $174 billion in disaster relief for the areas affected by Hurricane Harvey, the worst superstorm ever to strike the mainland United States. The $174 billion in funding provided by H.R. 3686 represents a comprehensive response commensurate to the challenge; specifically, my legislation provides relief in the following amounts: 1. Housing and Community Development Fund: $50 billion 2. FEMA Disaster Relief Fund: $35 billion 3. Army Corps of Engineers--Construction: $15 billion 4. Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies: $13 billion 5. Public Transportation Emergency Relief Program: $33 billion 6. Small Business Disaster Loans Program: $2 billion 7. Emergency Conservation Activities: $650 million 8. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: $321 million 9. National Aeronautics and Space Administration: $50 million 10. Legal Services Corporation: $10 million 11. Army National Guard: $10 million 12. Army Corps of Engineers--Civil Investigations: $150 million 13. Coast Guard: $450 million 14. National Park Service Historic Preservation Fund: $800 million 15. EPA Environmental Programs and Management: $2.5 billion 16. EPA Hazardous Substance Superfund: $7 million 17. Leaking Underground Storage Tank Fund: $15 million 18. State and Tribal Assistance Grants: $600 million 19. Employment and Training Services: $100 million 20. Public Health and Social Services Emergency Fund: $2.5 billion 21. Airport and Airway Trust Fund: $90 million 22. Federal-Aid Highways Emergency Relief Program: $6.5 billion And that is just for Texas and the areas affected by Hurricane Harvey; the damage wrought by Hurricane Irma in Florida, and Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands was nearly as great in dollar terms and equal in the level of misery and suffering inflicted on the residents. Mr. Speaker, on September 20, 2017, Hurricane Maria made landfall in Puerto Rico, along the southeastern coast, near the small town of Yabucoa. The devastation wrought on that beautiful Caribbean oasis and its 3.5 million inhabitants, our fellow citizens of the United States, is unimaginable, except perhaps to those of us who have lived through and survived similar natural disasters, like Hurricanes Harvey and Katrina. At least 48 people have died as a result of the storm as rescue and recovery operations proceed, a number likely to rise, especially with so many elderly, sick, and very young persons at risk. Much of Puerto Rico's population is still without potable drinking water and large swaths of the population still lack electrical power. Hurricane Maria destroyed 80 percent of Puerto Rico's agricultural industry, including banana, plantain and coffee crops, which translates into lost income of approximately $780 million. On August 30, 2017, Hurricane Irma struck, inflicting horrific damage on the U.S. Virgin Islands of St. Thomas, St. Croix, and St. John, the Caribbean nations of Barbuda, St. Maarten, Cuba, and Anguilla, before making landfall in the Florida Keys. In Florida alone, 6.4 million people were told to evacuate to safety, leading to days of jammed highways and frantic searches for gasoline amid one of the nation's largest ever emergency evacuations. At least 124 persons are known to have lost their lives in Hurricane Irma, more than 200,000 Floridians took refuge in shelters, and nearly 6.5 million homes and businesses were without power. Mr. Speaker, we do not yet know the full extent of the damage and devastation suffered by our fellows Americans in Florida, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico in the wake of Hurricanes Irma and Maria. But what we do know is that the costs of recovery and reconstruction will be extensive, best estimates place the cost in the range of $50- $100 billion. This puts in perspective the inadequacy of the amount of disaster relief provided under H.R. 4667 and why more, much more, must be done. Mr. Speaker, right now, at this very moment, approximately 300,000 Texans--in Port Arthur, in Port Aransas, in Houston and Harris County-- remain homeless or are living in substandard homes with blue tarp roofs and infected with mold. Today, residents of the Cashmere Gardens community are meeting with local government officials to highlight their plight and those of other residents in the northeastern part of Houston. They are angry and frustrated and anxious, and who can blame them? Mr. Speaker, this is personal to them; and it is personal to me. That is why right now my highest priority is to ensure that funding that has been made available expeditiously gets in the hands of local governments so that relief can deliver the resources and services so desperately needed. And I will be working with the Texas General Land Office and HUD Secretary Carson to relieve the emergency housing crisis in my congressional district and state. Mr. Speaker, I wish to commend the bipartisan leadership of both Chambers, and my colleagues in the Texas congressional delegation for their diligence and commitment in bringing this package to the floor for debate and vote. I thank Chairman Frelinghuysen and Ranking Member Lowey, and Speaker Ryan and Democratic Leader Pelosi, and their Senate counterparts for the work that has been done thus far and for their assistance in the work that lies ahead. I also thank Chairman Frelinghuysen and Ranking Member Lowey, and T- HUD Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Diaz-Balart, and Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee Chair Simpson and Ranking Member Kaptur for including in the legislation before us the following beneficial measures that I requested, including: 1. Authority to establish and implement a $1 billion pilot program to provide small business disaster recovery grants, modeled on H.R. 3930, the ``Hurricane Harvey Small Business Recovery Grants Act,'' legislation I introduced on October 3, 2017 and co-sponsored by 16 of our colleagues. 2. $75 million for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Investigations account, which is to be used in areas affected by Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria, and can be used to finance the $3 million Houston-Area Watershed Assessment Study I have worked to secure and previously approved by the House. 3. The bill also includes helpful legislative language to ensure that in awarding CDBG-Disaster Relief funds to states, the Secretary of HUD should to the maximum extent practicable award grants to units of local government and public housing authorities that have the financial and administrative capacity to manage a grant awarded under the program. Let me describe briefly some of the major provisions contained in the Disaster Relief Supplemental: 1. FEMA Disaster Relief Fund: $27.5 billion to provide critical funding to assist the ongoing federal disaster response. Allows up to $4 billion to be provided for Community Disaster Loans (CDLs). 2. Community Development Block Grants Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR): $26.1 billion for housing and infrastructure needs, $13.56 billion for grants to states, tribes, and territories for unmet housing needs and business losses. 3. $12.5 billion for mitigation efforts to help communities protect against future disasters. 4. This funding can provide for housing elevation, buyouts in the flood plain, water/sewer infrastructure enhancements, public infrastructure hardening (e.g. stormproofing public buildings). 5. Federal Highway Administration's Emergency Relief: $1.4 billion to address all current damages to federal highways caused by designated disasters. 6. $12.11 billion for the Army Corps of Engineers to repair existing damages by natural disasters and for studies and projects to reduce the risk of future natural disasters, $75 million to expedite studies to help mitigate future disaster damage. 7. 2.9 billion to help displaced students get back to school. Funding can be used for both public and private schools. 8. $3.8 billion for agriculture assistance. 9. $1.66 billion for Small Business Administration Disaster Loans to assist small businesses and homeowners repair or replace real estate, personal property, machinery and equipment, and inventory and business assets. Mr. Speaker, there is much more work to be done in my city of Houston, and across the areas affected by the terrible, awesome storm that will be forever known simply as Hurricane Harvey, and by Hurricanes Irma and Maria. That is why I am disappointed that only $81 billion is being provided at this time. That is why it must be emphasized and understood that this can only be understood as a partial response because much more funding will be needed to provide our fellow Americans in Texas, Florida, Louisiana, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands the help and support they need to restore their communities to their previous greatness.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 1766, the Sexual Assault Forensic Evidence Reporting Act of 2017. This bipartisan legislation passed the Senate on October 23, 2017. I am glad that this House is moving this legislation, because it is about children. It is about the scourge that children, women, and others find themselves victims of--sexual assault. S. 1766 will reauthorize the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000 through the year 2022, by amending the language in section 2(c)(4) of 34 U.S.C. 40701(c)(4). Furthermore, this legislation also amends other sections of the DNA Sexual Assault Justice Act of 2004 by ensuring that role of forensic nurses pertains to both adult and pediatric care. The SAFER Act also amends this statute by making a provision after ``elder abuse'' for the need of nurse examiners, particularly where there is the need for pediatric sexual assault nurse examiners, including such nurse examiners working in the multidisciplinary setting, in responding to abuse of both children and adolescents. Finally, this legislation will sunset through 2023 by amending the SAFER Act. The SAFER Act is a critical program, administered by the U.S. Department of Justice, that allows: Local law enforcement programs to obtain funding for programs to reduce the rape kit backlog in communities across the country; Victims of sexual assault get justice more quickly than in the past; Thirty-five percent of funds available under the Debbie Smith Act for grants to local law enforcement agencies to focus more resources on rape kit testing; Five to seven percent of the Debbie Smith Act funding to be used by local jurisdictions to conduct 1-year audits of untested sexual assault evidence to identify serious areas of backlog; and Forensic testing to be done by both pediatric and adult sexual assault nurse examiners. This is a very important measure that will address the large volume of cases that fester due to the excessive backlog in our processing of rape kits. According to the National Institute of Justice, a multidisciplinary, victim-centered approach and standardized, efficient evidence processing in sexual assault cases are the focus of its new report. The report, ``National Best Practices for Sexual Assault Kits,'' outlines 35 suggestions for laboratories and law enforcement to improve their sexual assault investigations, tackling issues such as evidence collection, storage, and maintenance; backlog tracking and processing; victim advocacy and notification; and sensitivity to trauma in sexual assault victims. A working group--consisting of victims and victim advocates, sexual assault nurse examiners and medical examiners, forensic laboratories, law enforcement agencies, prosecutors, and members of the judiciary-- developed the suggestions over a 2-year period following the Sexual Assault Forensic Evidence Reporting Act of 2013, the SAFER Act, a component of the Violence Against Women Act. We will soon reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act, and we will be happy to have this expansion included in this. A victim-centered approach is the focus on the needs and the concerns of a victim to ensure the passionate and sensitive delivery of services in a nonjudgmental manner. A trauma-informed approach considers the impact of trauma and victim safety considerations. Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Texas, Congressman Poe, and my colleague from New York, Congresswoman Carolyn B. Maloney, have worked on a number of these issues, and also Senator Cornyn, because this is a very important step. I remember the days, in our respective jurisdictions, that we had a mounting backlog of rape kits. Do you know what that means, Mr. Speaker? Women and children do not get either their day in court or do not get justice. Mr. Speaker, I believe that this is a timely and very important legislative initiative. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to support the legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, to my good friend from Texas, I am just a measure above your lost voice. I am suffering from somewhat of the same thing, but I have a little bit of a voice, so I can say thank you, again, for your very hard work on this legislation as a former judge in Harris County on the criminal bench. I know you saw injustices because rape kits had not been processed. I believe, as the chair and co-chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus and the ranking member on the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations, that we went through this as well. I was very pleased that the Justice Department understood the importance of grants to help our local law enforcement, but, more importantly, that the Judiciary Committee understood the importance of this legislation to really move forward to process kits. Can you imagine, Mr. Speaker, children having a backlog of kits that have been subjected to sexual assault--the most dastardly act and violence--not only against adults, but against children, like 3-month- olds, or toddlers, by sick people who sexually assault them. So the development and implementation of policies and procedures by the National Institutes of Health leads to more timely submission of evidence to forensic laboratories, enhances communications and investigative procedures, promotes better informed prosecutorial decisionmaking, and, as my friend said, it helps the accused and the accuser. These approaches are the most important because they get victim participation. Victims of sexual assault require justice that is swift, thorough, and expedient so they may begin to heal and attempt to put the pieces of their lives back together. They deserve the best efforts of law enforcement to help them along the way. When Houston was trying to rebuild its rape testing structure, we utilized the FBI. And I want to take a moment to thank the FBI for its deep abiding integrity and honesty and how it comes to the rescue of so many jurisdictions, local law enforcement. Let us be very clear on how important it is to maintain the integrity and the respect for the FBI, as opposed to demeaning the FBI. Today, on the floor of the House, I want to thank them for their service. So this legislation would reauthorize the SAFER Act, provide funding to conduct 1-year audits of untested sexual assault evidence, and ensure that law enforcement agencies across the country are trained and armed with the skills and tools they require to stand against sexual assault and stand for those individuals who might be victimized. The SAFER Act would also ensure that forensic nurses are eligible for training under the program. These professionals are indispensable. Our citizens deserve to be protected and remain free from harm. Our children, women, and men, who are sexually assaulted, deserve to be protected, but their cases must move expeditiously. Accordingly, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important legislation, as we continue to stand for victims and against the viciousness of sexual crimes of any kind, protect them, and bring the perpetrators to justice. I ask for a ``yes'' vote for this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 1766, the ``Sexual Assault Forensic Evidence Reporting'' or the (SAFER) Act of 2017.'' This bipartisan legislation passed the Senate October 23, 2017. S. 1766 will reauthorize the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000 through the year 2022, by amending the language in section 2(c)(4) of the (34 U.S.C. 40701(c)(4)). Furthermore, this legislation also amends Section 304(c)(2) of the DNA Sexual Assault Justice Act of 2004 (34 U.S.C. 40723(c)(2)) by ensuring that role of forensic nurses pertains to both adult and pediatric care. The SAFER Act also amends this statute by making a provision after ``elder abuse'' for the need of nurse examiners, particularly, where there is the need for pediatric sexual assault nurse examiners, including such nurse examiners working in the multidisciplinary setting, in responding to abuse of both children and adolescents''. Finally, this legislation will sunset through 2023 by amending Section 1006 of the SAFER Act of 2013 (34 U.S.C. 40701 note). The SAFER Act is a critical program administered by the U.S. Department of Justice that allows: Local law enforcement programs to obtain funding for programs to reduce the rape kit backlog in communities across the country. Victims of sexual assault get justice more quickly than in the past. 35% of funds available under the Debbie Smith Act for grants to local law enforcement agencies to focus more resources on rape kit testing. 5%-7% of the Debbie Smith Act funding to be used by local jurisdictions to conduct one-year audits of untested sexual assault evidence to identify serious areas of backlog. Forensic testing to be done by both pediatric and adult sexual assault nurse examiners. This is a very important measure that will address the large volume of cases that fester due to the excessive back log in our processing of rape kits. According to the National Institute of Justice, a multidisciplinary, victim-centered approach and standardized, efficient evidence processing in sexual assault cases are the focus of its new report. The report, National Best Practices for Sexual Assault Kits, outlines 35 suggestions for laboratories and law enforcement to improve their sexual assault investigations, tackling issues such as evidence collection, storage and maintenance; backlog tracking & processing; victim advocacy and notification; and sensitivity to trauma in sexual assault victims. A working group--consisting of victims and victim advocates, sexual assault nurse examiners and medical examiners, forensic laboratories, law enforcement agencies, prosecutors and members of the judiciary-- developed the suggestions over a two-year period following the Sexual Assault Forensic Evidence Reporting (SAFER) Act of 2013, a component of the Violence Against Women Act. A victim centered approach is the focus on the needs and concerns of a victim to ensure the compassionate and sensitive delivery of services in a nonjudgmental manner. A trauma-informed approach considers the impact of trauma and victim safety considerations. Utilizing both approaches in the development and implementation of policies and procedures leads to more timely submission of evidence to forensic laboratories, enhances communications and investigative procedures, promotes better informed prosecutorial decision-making, and ultimately may reduce re-traumatization of victims by the criminal justice system. In fact, these approaches are more likely to increase victim participation and thereby, support more complete investigations, increasing the overall likelihood of successful prosecutions.'' For these reasons, I support this bill. Victims of sexual assault require justice that is swift, thorough, and expedient, so that they may begin to heal and attempt to put the pieces of their lives back together. They deserve the best efforts of law enforcement to help them along the way. This legislation would reauthorize the SAFER Act, provide funding to conduct one-year audits of untested sexual assault evidence, and ensure that law enforcement agencies across the country are trained and armed with the skills and tools they require to stand against sexual assault, and stand for those individuals who might be victimized. The SAFER Act would also ensure that forensic nurses are eligible for training under the program. These professionals perform indispensable functions within the investigation of sexual abuse cases. They also provide specialized care and attention to children, youth, and the elderly, who are sexually abused. This legislation would help local authorities make certain that state and local forensic nurses are fully capable of providing such an important service to child victims. Our citizens deserve to be protected and remain free from harm. We have a responsibility to do all that we can during those unfortunate times where one of them might be victimized. Accordingly, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important legislation as we continue to stand for victims and against sexual crimes of any kind. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman from New York; I want to thank the chairman; but I do want to take a moment and particularly thank the gentlewoman from New York for the kindness that she showed the first victims of this horrific hurricane season. I remember coming back to Congress in the immediacy of Hurricane Harvey. Many don't know, but I left my home in a firetruck--not out of desperation, but to go where my constituents were--and spent the rest of the time with 14,000 homeless evacuees in a shelter that had been set up immediately with concern about the city of Houston. We had meetings starting at 6 a.m. In the evening, as the waters started moving in different communities and different communities became flooded, we could see evacuees carrying their only belongings--pillows, just a paper bag--flooding into the George R. Brown Convention Center. This is serious for me. I remember seeing elderly persons being evacuated after the Addicks Reservoir, Barker Reservoir was released and family members standing on what was now the shore waiting for those loved ones. I know the family and went to the funerals of the six family members who died in Greens Bayou in my congressional district. I introduced a bill, H.R. 3686, which the gentlewoman from New York was quite interested in. It was for $174 billion. If we had that amount now, I would be more than happy to share that with Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. We don't have that. And I am extremely disappointed that we have $81 billion, not because of the lack of the hard work of those who worked on the Appropriations Committee, because I know they wanted to do more, but there were other distractions--like a $1.4 trillion tax cut.