Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, a few minutes ago, in Detroit, the dean of the United States Congress offered his retirement immediately. He has asked me, a member of the Judiciary Committee, to offer his words to his colleagues and to put his statement in the Record that indicates that he has notified Speaker Ryan, Leader Pelosi, and Governor Snyder of his retirement from the United States House of Representatives. It is important to note, as I begin, that there is no difference or no undermining of the rights of women and the abhorrence of sexual harassment and sexual assault. But this is a statement that I believe should be read on behalf of the dean of the United States Congress, Mr. John Conyers. As a Member of Congress, I have known Mr. Conyers to not shy away from a legislative challenge. In addition to being the first Member to introduce the Martin Luther King holiday bill, he was the first to hold hearings on police misconduct, the first to examine the problem of solitary confinement, the first to offer racial profiling legislation, the first to introduce legislation protecting against disenfranchisement of ex-felons, and the first to pursue legislation protecting Black farmers from discrimination, among many other civil rights measures. In 2007, Representative Conyers stood up for the prerogatives of the House of Representatives and successfully brought a suit against the former President Bush White House for failing to comply with subpoenas relating to a U.S. attorney's investigation. He has been the chairman of the Judiciary Committee; and he will continue to, in his life, as he has indicated, stand for what is right. It is now my privilege to read this statement from Mr. John Conyers. I reiterate that he says that he notified Speaker Ryan, Leader Pelosi, and Governor Snyder of his retirement from the United States House of Representatives. It was his honor--these are his words--and his privilege to serve the constituents of Detroit, Michigan, as their United States Congressman in the 13th and 14th Congressional District for 53 years. This is his statement again: I came to Congress in 1964. Since then, I have devoted my entire career to improving the lives of my constituents in Detroit and on the behalf of justice everywhere. These years witnessed a profound evolution in civil rights, led by millions in the streets who marched for justice and people of conscience in the Congress--both Democrats and Republicans-- who heard them and enacted the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act, and other landmark reforms. I have been in the forefront of the civil rights movement. I have been a champion of justice for the oppressed and the disenfranchised. I never wavered in my commitment to justice and democracy. I am proud to have been part of that rich history. I have been privileged to be a founder of the Congressional Black Caucus and to represent the United States Congress by being dean. I passed, as indicated, the law dealing with the Martin Luther King, Jr., Holiday Act, the Violence Against Women Act, the Hate Crimes Act, the USA Freedom Act, and the extension of the Voting Rights Act. I have led the fight against mandatory minimum sentences, hoping to reverse the devastating incarceration rates for African Americans and poor people. I have tried to pass a universal healthcare law, H.R. 676. Every Congress since 1989, I have introduced H.R. 40 to study reparations for slavery, and I deeply appreciate those handful of courageous colleagues who have joined me. For Detroiters, I am proud of what we have been able to accomplish to bring hundreds of millions of dollars in critical grants and Federal funding for southeast Michigan to revitalize our great city, attract rich talent, and return to us prosperity. I recognize that in this present environment, due process will not be afforded to me. I was taught by a great woman, my mother, to honor women. The first employee I ever hired was Mrs. Rosa Parks, who worked in my office for 22 years. It has been my great honor to work alongside some of the most talented and honorable staff on Capitol Hill and in Detroit. I have stated my position on these allegations. I have worked with both women and men. Given the totality of the circumstance of not being afforded the right of due process in conjunction with my current health condition, and to preserve my legacy and good name, I am retiring. I hope that my retirement will be viewed in the larger perspective of my record of service, and as I enter a new chapter, I pledge to continue my commitment to a progressive vision and a better future for this country that I love. I owe that to the legacy of my father, John Conyers, Sr., who integrated labor unions in this country; to my brother Nathan, who integrated business, and he is my ``main man;'' and to my loving wife, Monica; and to my son, John III, who I believe offers hope to this generation of leadership, and who is committed to being an advocate of fairness and justice for all; and to Carl Edward, who never leaves my side. I cannot allow the great work of this body to be distracted from the important work, or the goals of the Democratic Party to be distracted. It has been an honor and a privilege of my life to represent the people of Michigan in the House of Representatives, but that responsibility will now fall to my colleagues and my successor. They have my deepest support and prayers. Jobs, justice, and peace.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let me, first of all, thank my good friend, Mr. Katko, who is the original sponsor; and I am proud to be an original cosponsor of this legislation. We serve on the Homeland Security Committee and have oversight over the Secret Service, as does the aspects of this legislation, as relates to Judiciary has oversight as well. So ensuring that our men and women, who put their lives on the line daily, are protected is an important initiative. As I said earlier, I am proud to be an original cosponsor, along with my colleague from New York (Mr. Katko). The Secret Service Recruitment and Retention Act of 2017 is intended to provide overtime pay for employees of the United States Secret Service. Currently, the premium pay for protective services, under the Overtime Pay for Protective Services Act of 2016, has severe earning limitations, or otherwise caps, which many of these men and women have reached. Due to earnings limitations put in place through 5 U.S.C. 5547, many Secret Service employees are not receiving timely or full payment for the hours they work. The requirements of protective operations directly contrast with the intent of an annual pay cap, as the protective mission requires continued, uninterrupted coverage for our protectees, beyond the control of the Secret Service. I think that is an important point. And I want my colleagues to know that I wholly support that our protectees are protected wherever they go. But I would be remiss if I did not express my concern on the number of trips that the Secret Service today has had to make on outings for entertainment, Mar-a-Lago, which I think is over 100 times, and the enormous amount of money and burden that is being placed on the Federal Government. This does not mean that I do not want these individuals to be compensated. And might I stop for a moment to thank the Secret Service, who I have known and have seen working over the years that I have served in the United States Congress in many different ways. Let me personally thank them for their service and for their professional service, dedicated service, and longstanding service and commitment to sacrificing their life for their protectee. I would say that this problem often requires individuals to work over the amount of premium pay, for which they are able to be legally paid, due to the annual cap. We have seen the extent to which Secret Service members are stretched in this administration alone. Providing protection for the President, his family members, and other high officials requires depth within the agency to ensure protectees are covered as well as their respective posts when pulled away. As I made the point, these various family members and President go in many ways off of the path of their government service related to the people of the United States. It is my hope that we are able to eventually work collaboratively on a more permanent fix to this problem since the Secret Service cannot administratively control protective overtime, which is dependent on the schedules of the protectees. Raising the pay cap will aid the Secret Service in reducing attrition rates and retaining personnel, which is what this bill purports to do. I truly want to make sure that happens. Exit interview data indicates the pay cap issue is the number one concern among employees leaving the Secret Service. We must ensure that we are employing the best available candidates when dealing with the protection of America's highest diplomats. Therefore, pay should not be a deterrence in the recruitment and/or retention of Secret Service agents, and it is crucial that we retain them. Departing employees said raising the pay cap would have had an effect on their decision to leave, and they would have stayed. They are leaving the Secret Service for other positions in the Federal Government with equal pay and less travel. The U.S. Secret Service is currently protecting a historic number of protectees--about 25 percent more protectees--than during the Obama administration. In comparison to the previous five Presidential administrations--Bush 41 to Obama--for the first 6 months in office, Trump administration Secret Service protectees had more travel stops and travel days than any other President. As such, the operational tempo for protective activities have remained higher than normal. Protective overtime hours for special agents are about 15 to 20 percent higher when compared to CY 2015, the last non-Presidential campaign year. For CY 2017, as of 9-30-17, the Secret Service anticipates approximately 1,200 personnel will exceed the statutory pay cap. The costs related to protective overtime in excess of the pay cap for CY 2017 is estimated at $10.5 million. The same costs are projected for 2018, if the protective tempo remains unchanged. I, therefore, support this bill, and I urge my colleagues to do the same. Any way that we can help protect the protectees, and keep these well-experienced, committed, dedicated agents, willing to sacrifice their lives, from leaving, so that we can also recruit, is a vital step forward. I hope not only is this bill passed by the House, but I also hope passed quickly by the Senate to be able to be signed by the President of the United States. Ensuring that our men and women, who put their lives on the line daily, are protected is an important initiative. I am proud to be an original co-sponsor along with my colleague Mr. Katko from New York. ``The Secret Service Recruitment and Retention Act of 2017'' is intended to provide overtime pay for employees of the United States Secret Service. Currently, the premium pay for protective services under the ``Overtime Pay for Protective Services Act of 2016'' has severe earning limitations, or otherwise caps, which many of these men and women have reached. Due to earnings limitations put in place through 5 U.S.C. 5547, many Secret Service employees are not receiving timely or full payment for the hours they work. The requirements of protective operations directly contrast with the intent of an annual pay cap, as the protective mission requires continued, uninterrupted coverage for our protectees, beyond the control of the United States Secret Service. This often requires individuals to work over the amount of premium pay for which they are able to be legally paid due to the annual cap. We have seen the extent to which the Secret Service members are stretched in this administration alone. Providing protection for the President, his family members and other high officials require depth within the agency to ensure protectees are covered as well as their respective posts when pulled away. It is my hope that we are able to eventually work collaboratively on a more permanent fix to this problem since the Secret Service cannot administratively control protective overtime, which is dependent on the schedules of the protectees. Raising the pay cap will aid the Secret Service in reducing attrition rates and retaining personnel, which is what this bill purports to do. Exit interview data indicates the pay cap issue is the number #1 concern among employees leaving the Secret Service. We must ensure that we are employing the best available candidates when dealing with the protection of America's highest diplomats. Therefore, pay should not be deterrence in the recruitment and/or retention of Secret Service agents. Departing employees said raising the pay cap would have had an effect on their decision to leave the agency. (They are leaving the Secret Service for other positions in the federal government with equal pay and less travel.) The USSS is currently protecting a historical high number of protectees--about 25 percent more protectees than during the Obama Administration. In comparison to the previous five presidential administrations (Bush 41 to Obama), for the first six months in office, Trump Administration Secret Service protectees had more travel stops and travel days than any other. As such, the operational tempo for protective activities has remained higher than normal. Protective overtime hours for special agents are about 15 to 20 percent higher when compared to CY 2015--the last non- presidential campaign year. For CY 2017, as of 9/30/17, the Secret Services anticipates approximately 1,200 personnel will exceed the statutory pay cap. The costs related to protective overtime in excess of the pay cap for CY 2017 is estimated at $10.5 million. The same costs are projected for CY 2018, if the protective tempo remains unchanged. I therefore, support this bill and urge my colleagues to do the same. Mr. Speaker, we must do everything we can to protect our United States Secret Service personnel and ensure an effective process for recruitment and retention of these agents. These agents play a vital role in our democratic system both here at home and abroad. Their keen attention to details and adequate response to dangerous situations around the world cannot be measured in dollar signs. Beyond protecting the President, Vice-President, their families and other identified individuals, the Secret Service plays a vital role in representing the United States interest around the world through criminal investigation activities that span the gamut from anti- counterfeiting operations to now encompassing financial crimes, identity theft, counterfeiting, computer fraud, and computer-based attacks on the nation's financial, banking, and telecommunications infrastructure, among other areas. For all these reasons, I therefore, support this bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings), the chairman and ranking member of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Let me acknowledge Mr. Cummings for his leadership on this legislation. I believe the combination of Members who are sponsoring this legislation and the work of the Oversight and Government Reform, Homeland Security, and Judiciary Committees clearly speak to almost the crisis of the issue and what we are dealing with. As we come to a close, Mr. Speaker, I am hoping that my colleagues will vote for this legislation in resounding numbers and I hope that the Senate will hotline this legislation so that it can immediately get to the desk of the President. I would also ask that we recognize that we must do everything we can to protect our United States Secret Service personnel and ensure an effective process for recruitment and retention of these agents. I am glad there is an element in this legislation that will allow for a review of all of these issues and that the Congress will have a role in assessing how we can work with the Secret Service agency to improve its performance, its retention, and certainly to say to those hardworking agents that we appreciate them, by way of compensation. These agents play a vital role in our democratic system both here at home and abroad. Their keen attention to details and adequate response to dangerous situations around the world cannot be measured in dollar signs. Beyond protecting the President, Vice President, their families, and other identified individuals, the Secret Service plays a vital role in representing the United States' interests around the world through criminal investigation activities that span the gamut from anticounterfeiting operations to now encompassing financial crimes; identity theft, which has exponentially grown in the United States; counterfeiting; computer fraud; and computer-based attacks on the Nation's financial, banking, and telecommunications infrastructure, among other areas. Congress is standing up to make its voice known and to make appropriate changes. I think it is appropriate for the administration in this instance, the Commander in Chief, to stand up as well and review the extensive travel and the burdens that are being placed on the Secret Service agents and their families. They are not complaining, but I think it behooves any good leader to look at what can be improved and what can be corrected in order to ensure the astuteness, the excellence, and the safety and security of the protectees and those agents who are out there on the line sacrificing or willing to sacrifice their life. For all of these reasons, I therefore support this bill. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to vote for this legislation, H.R. 3731, and 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, let me thank the gentleman from Florida for managing this bill along with the previous initiative, and let me thank Mrs. Maloney and Mr. Trott for their leadership on this very important legislation. Protecting girls and young women from abuse and exploitation is vital to the health of our communities. The Stopping Abusive Female Exploitation Act is intended to amend 18 U.S.C. Section 116 by raising the penalty such that the maximum penalty for the crime of genital mutilation is 15 years. Given the abhorrent nature of this practice, States should have in place laws that require healthcare professionals, school employees, and other professionals who work with children to report any suspected practice of female genital mutilation to the appropriate law enforcement entity. This legislation is important as a means for Congress to appropriately punish those who commit this crime. Female genital manipulation, cutting, is internationally recognized as a violation of human rights of girls and women. It is currently a crime in 26 States, including Michigan and Texas. It is also a Federal crime. Around the world, at least five girls are mutilated, cut, every hour. An estimated 100 million girls and 140 million women worldwide are living with the consequences of FGM. Despite the fact that FGM has been banned in the United States since 1996, people continue to engage in this abusive practice. Recently, Michigan was faced with the first Federal prosecution under this statute, whereby a Michigan doctor was charged with performing female genital mutilation on two girls that crossed State lines. Because this intolerable practice has no medical benefits, it has no place in our society, and those who commit these horrendous crimes should be held accountable for their actions. I, therefore, ask support for this bill and urge my colleagues to do the same. Protecting girls and young women from abuse and exploitation is vital to the health of our communities. ``The Stopping Abusive Female Exploitation Act of 2017'' is intended to amend 18 U.S.C. Sec. 116 by increasing the maximum penalty for the crime of female genital mutilation (FGM) from five years to fifteen. Given the abhorrent nature of this practice, States should have in place laws that require health care professionals, school employees and other professionals that work with children, to report any suspected practice of female genital mutilation, to the appropriate law enforcement entity. I support this legislation as a means for Congress to appropriately punish those that commit this crime. Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C) is internationally recognized as a violation of the human rights of girls and women. It is currently a crime in 26 states, including Michigan and Texas. It is also a federal crime. Around the world, at least five girls are mutilated/cut every hour. An estimated 100 million girls and 140 million women worldwide are living with the consequences of FGM. Despite the fact that FGM has been banned in the United States since 1996, people continue to engage in this abusive practice. Recently, Michigan was faced with the first federal prosecution under this statute, whereby, a Michigan doctor was charged with performing female genital mutilation on two girls that crossed state-lines. Because this intolerable practice has no medical benefits, it has no place in our society and those who commit these horrendous crimes should be held accountable for their actions. I therefore, support this bill and urge my colleagues to do the same. Mr. Speaker, we must do everything we can to protect victims, particularly, the most vulnerable people in our society, our children. This bill will certainly do that. Beyond serving as a deterrence for many in our society that continue to engage in the practice of female genital mutilation, this legislation will also provide a more appropriate punishment for violation of the FGM statute, under 18 U.S.C. Sec. 116. For all these reasons, I therefore, support this bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, it is certainly a pleasure to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney), a good friend and a champion of these issues dealing with vulnerable women, the original sponsor of this legislation along with Mr. Trott.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler), the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Again, let me thank the gentleman from Florida for managing and joining me in the managing of this legislation, and, again, I thank the cosponsors. Let me also express my appreciation to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Trott) for his service to this Congress and, as well, for his excellent bill that is on the floor. I thank the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney), as well, for her leadership on this legislation. I think it is important to note that these are dastardly acts against women and girls; and as I indicated, across the world, we are talking about 140 million women and 100 million girls who have been subjected to living with the consequences of the FGM. It was banned in the United States since 1996, but we know this act still goes on. So we must do everything we can to protect victims, particularly the most vulnerable people in our society: our children. This is not a mandatory minimum. This is upwards of 15 years. This is a deserving penalty for a horrific crime. This bill will certainly do that to try to protect these children here in the United States. Beyond serving as a deterrent for many in our society who continue to engage in the practice of female genital mutilation, this legislation will also provide appropriate punishment for violation of the FGM statute under 18 U.S.C. 116. For all these reasons, I ask my colleagues to support this bill. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I serve on the House Judiciary Committee and serve as the ranking member on the Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations Subcommittee, which means that I deal with every single Federal law enforcement entity across the Nation. I am disappointed and I am outraged by the language from the Commander in Chief to suggest that the FBI is in tatters. We have agreements and disagreements with the chief law enforcement agency, but these men and women protecting us in this Nation, but also against domestic terrorism and even beyond, are called around the Nation to investigate heinous crimes. Their expertise is respected. I remember when there was a child molester in my community. I worked with local police, but I insisted that the FBI get involved. They were willing to do so even though it was not a matter across State lines. Their very presence made a difference. I think we owe them a better response, and I certainly think the Commander in Chief has a responsibility to do a better job. I also believe that we have got to pass CHIP because thousands of children need healthcare. It is important for us to do our job.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I am opposed to the House agreeing to conference with the Senate on their cruel and immoral $1.7 trillion tax giveaways to wealthy corporations and the top one percent, but as a member of the Budget Committee, I rise in strong support of the Democratic Motion to Instruct Conferees appointed by the House to conference with the Senate on H.R. 1, the so-called ``Tax Cut and Jobs Act,'' which more accurately should be called the ``Republican Tax Scam Act.'' The Motion to Instruct does two things: first, it directs House conferees to disagree with Section 11081 of the Senate amendment which would eliminate the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate by instructing conferees. Second, the Motion to Instruct would also oppose eliminating the current tax deduction for state and local property, income, and sales taxes by instructing house conferees to recede from Section 1303 of the House bill. Instead, we should junk this shameful legislation and start over in a bipartisan manner that provides relief to working and middle class families, does not increase the deficit, and ensures that the government has the resources needed to make the investments required to keep our country strong, safe, healthy, and economically competitive. H.R. 1, on the other hand, raises taxes on poor, working, and middle class families; explodes the deficit by adding an additional $2.2 trillion over ten years; and will require an estimated $5.4 trillion cut in funding for the programs ordinary Americans depend on for health security, educational opportunity, and economic progress. Mr. Speaker, in the last several months we have witnessed and borne the brunt of several of the most powerful storms ever recorded, including Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria. I remember so well that the President visited Texas and promised the people affected by Hurricane Harvey of his unwavering commitment to provide everything needed to recover. We need that promise kept now, and approval of this reckless and immoral tax plan will make it virtually impossible to keep the promise. Residents of Texas who are facing the long road to recovery need at least $61 billion for home flood mitigation, repair, replacement, and home buyouts. There are other states with pressing needs related to disaster recovery. My colleagues across the aisle and the President should understand that the Texas and Florida congressional delegations are in full agreement regarding the need to meet the disaster recovery needs of the states and territories. There are particular concerns for our seniors who survived the terrible storms that ravaged the Texas Coast, Florida, U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico because so many of them are alone, while trying to do the difficult and hard job of cleaning out their homes, or removing debris from their yards. That work is nowhere near done in my State of Texas. Thousands of families have no home because of the storm, and many more thousands are living in gutted out shells of structures they once called home and too many others are sleeping in cars. Houston's response to the immediate disaster was impressive and all- encompassing for the size and complexity of the disaster caused by unprecedented flooding due to Hurricane Harvey. The efforts of Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner and the work of the Public Works Department, Police, and First Responders, as well as Federal and State agencies that were joined by citizen volunteers helped save thousands of lives. We have communities in Texas that are struggling to find the new normal that FEMA officials warned Texans would need to accept following the historic flood. The effort is being made difficult by a lack of appreciation by the Administration of the true cost of recovery for Texas, Florida, the U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico. FEMA has proven that it is excellent at disaster response, but is showing that they are not very good at recovery management for individuals and families. The Administration risks a shutdown over not adequately meeting the needs of hurricane impacted areas. Mr. Speaker, Americans are not fooled; they know trickle-down economics has never worked, and they see right through this phony tax plan and recognize it for the scam that it is. That is why Americans reject this Republican tax giveaway by an overwhelming 2:1 margin according to a poll released recently by Quinnipiac. Specifically, 61 percent think the Republican tax scam will benefit the wealthy the most; only 16 percent say the plan will reduce their taxes. 59 percent think it a very bad idea to eliminate the deduction for state and local income taxes. Nearly half of respondents (49 percent) think it a bad idea to lower the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 20 percent. This Republican tax plan is even more toxic to my constituents in the Eighteenth Congressional District of Texas. Mr. Speaker, as you may know, my constituents and others in Texas are still struggling to recover from the devastation caused by Hurricane Harvey, the worst storm ever to make landfall in the continental United States. My constituents understand that it is important that the United States has a tax system that is fair, balanced, smart, and provides the resources and opportunities to allow all Americans to reach their potential. And by margins exceeding 90 percent, they reject: 1. Any cuts to Medicare or Medicaid to finance tax cuts for wealthy corporations and the top 1 percent; 2. Eliminating the mortgage interest deduction; 3. Eliminating the deductibility of state and local taxes; 4. Eliminating existing deductions for student loan interest or making taxable college endowment funds or college fellowships expenses. Mr. Speaker, the average annual tax cut for the top one-tenth of one percent is $320,000; for the top one percent it is $62,000, and for those earning $1 million a year it is $68,000. Nearly 25 percent of the tax cut goes to households in just the top one-tenth of one percent, who make at least $5 million a year (2027). While super-wealthy corporations and individuals are reaping windfalls, millions of middle-class and working families will see their taxes go up: 1. 13 million households face a tax increase next year. 2. 45 million households face a tax increase in 2027. 3. 29 million households (21 percent) earning less than $100,000 a year see a tax increase. On average, families earning up to $86,000 annually would see a $794 increase in their tax liability, a significant burden on families struggling to afford child care and balance their checkbook. It is shocking, but not surprising, that under this Republican tax scam, the total value of tax cuts for just the top one percent is more than the entire tax cut for the lower 95 percent of earners. Put another way, those earning more than $912,000 a year will get more in tax cuts than 180 million households combined. The core of this Republican tax scheme is a massive tax cut from 35 percent to 20 percent for corporations, but that is not the only way that the wealthy are rewarded. The massive tax cuts for corporations are permanent but temporary for working and middle-class families. Another immoral aspect of this terrible tax scam is that it abandons families that face natural disasters or high medical costs by repealing deductions for casualty losses and medical expenses. Mr. Speaker, in what universe does it make any sense to eliminate, as this bill would, a deduction for: 1. teachers who purchase supplies for their classroom; 2. moving expenses to take a new job and taxes employer-provided moving expenses; or 3. dependent care assistance, making it harder for families to afford day care, nursery school, or care for aging parents? This Republican tax scam jeopardizes American innovation and competitiveness by eliminating the deduction for student loan interest, which affects 12 million borrowers, and cuts total education assistance by more than $64 billion. Under the extraordinary leadership of President Obama and the determined efforts of ordinary Americans, we pulled our way out from under the worst of the foreclosure crisis when the housing bubble burst in 2007. Inexplicably, Republicans are now championing a tax scheme that will make the homes of average Americans less valuable because deductions for mortgage interest and property taxes are much less valuable than under current law. A tax plan that reduces home values, as this one does, puts pressure on states and towns to collect revenues they depend on to fund schools, roads, and vital public resources. Mr. Speaker, the $5.4 trillion cuts in program investments that will be required to pay for this tax giveaway to wealthy corporations and individuals will fall most heavily on low-income families, students struggling to afford college, seniors, and persons with disabilities. This tax scam is not a revenue policy adapted for the real world that real Americans live in but a fantasy resting on the monstrous belief that the wealthy have too little money and that poor, working, and middle-class families have too much. Congressional Republicans continue to cling to the fantasy belief that their tax cuts for the rich will pay for themselves despite all precedent to the contrary and evidence that their tax scheme is projected by experts to lose between $3 trillion and $7 trillion. Mr. Speaker, in evaluating the merits of a taxing system, it is not enough to subject it only to the test of fiscal responsibility. To keep faith with the nation's past, to be fair to the nation's present, and to safeguard the nation's future, the plan must also pass a ``moral test.'' The Republican tax bill fails both of these standards. That is why I support the Democratic Motion to Instruct Conferees, even though I strongly oppose the Motion to Go to Conference on H.R. 1, the ``Republican Tax Scam Act.''

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, it is not enough to subject the GOP tax plan to the test of fiscal responsibility. To keep faith with the nation's past, to be fair to the nation's present, and to safeguard the nation's future, the plan must also pass a ``moral test.'' This tax plan fails both the fiscal responsibility test and the moral responsibility test. This tax cut package is a return to trickle-down economics. This tax bill is a thoughtless and immoral GOP tax scam that will explode our nation's deficit and hurt poor, working, and middle class families. It will explode the deficit by $2.2 trillion over 10 years. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office has concluded that the Senate bill would, on average, raise taxes or reduce federal expenditures for households with incomes below $75,000 by about $60 billion This tax cut bill is a repudiation of the social contract that F.D.R. announced in the New Deal. The overwhelming portion of the bill is a lowering of the corporate tax rate, from the current 35 percent down to 20 percent. In my home state of Texas, more than 1.7 million households earning less than $127,000 would see a tax hike. The proposed elimination of the personal exemption will harm millions of Texans by taking away the $4,050 deduction for each taxpayer and claimed dependent; in 2015, roughly 9.3 million dependent exemptions were claimed in the Lone Star State. In this tax bill, by taking away the student loan interest and educator expense deductions, more than 876,000 Texas students will lose an average credit of $1,063, while nearly 354,000 Texas teachers who buy notebooks and erasers for their classrooms will lose an average credit of $261. The Republicans in Congress ASSUME that corporations will pass down savings to consumers. But this never works. Corporations simply stash their money in tax havens. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the last time the GOP cut taxes for corporations, they spent as much as 90 percent of their windfall buying back shares, giving dividends to shareholders, stock options and executives. This ``tax bill'' would lift a 1954 ban on political activism by churches, further blurring the line between church and state. The House and Senate bills would circumscribe the ability of states and local governments to levy own taxes, which would force states to cut spending on health, care education, public transportation and social services. The full 10-year plan for the bill reveals how bad it is: by 2027, individuals making between $40,000 and $50,000 would pay a combined $5.3 Billion more in taxes, while those earning more than $1 billion or more would get a $5.8 billion cut. To quote the former Chief of Staff of the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation: ``[This tax bill] is not aimed at growth. It is not aimed at the middle class. It is at every turn carefully engineered to deliver a kiss to the donor class.'' According to the New York Times, in a recent survey of from the University of Chicago, only one of 38 prominent economists said the proposed tax cuts would yield substantial growth. The proposed tax cuts would add to the long term federal debt burden. This health bill would also alter healthcare in America. Health Coverage would shrink in the United States, while wealthy estates would not pay at all. The Senate version of the tax bill would cause 13 million people to lose health care and insurance premiums overall could rise by up to 10 percent. This would result in savings of about $53 billion, which the GOP will use to fund corporate tax cuts. America will not be made great by financing a $1.7 trillion tax cut for the rich by stealing $1.8 trillion from Medicare and Medicaid, abandoning seniors and families in need, depriving students of realizing a dream to attend college without drowning in debt, or disinvesting in the working families. This bill is opposed by colleges and universities, too. The tax cut proposal would end the deductibility of tuition waivers for graduate students, repealing the deduction for interest paid on student loans and taxing university endowments. According to the Brookings Institution, the endowment tax in particular, threatens the ability of low-income students to pursue college and graduate studies. This is because endowments subsidize students from lower-income families, while allowing students across the board to graduate with less debt. This bill is beyond sinister: the GOP tax bill is written so that in just 10 years, certain tax cuts (benefitting the wealthy) would remain permanent and paid for with other permanent measures that raise revenues or reduce program spending, while letting lower priority tax cuts (typically benefitting lower-income folks) expire. That is why Americans reject this Republican tax giveaway by an overwhelming 2:1 margin according to a poll released yesterday by Quinnipiac. Specifically, 61 percent think the Republican tax scam will benefit the wealthy the most; only 16 percent say the plan will reduce their taxes. 59 percent think it a very bad idea to eliminate the deduction for state and local income taxes. Nearly half of respondents (49 percent) think it a bad idea to lower the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 20 percent. In fact, the average annual tax cut for the top one-tenth of one percent is $320,000; for the top one percent it is $62,000, and for those earning $1 million a year it is $68,000. Nearly 25 percent of the tax cut goes to households in just the top one-tenth of one percent, who make at least $5 million a year (2027). While super-wealthy corporations and individuals are reaping windfalls, millions of middle-class and working families will see their taxes go up: 13 million households face a tax increase next year. 45 million households face a tax increase in 2027. 29 million households (21 percent) earning less than $100,000 a year see a tax increase. On average, families earning up to $86,000 annually would see a $794 increase in their tax liability, a significant burden on families struggling to afford child care and balance their checkbook. It is shocking, but not surprising, that under this Republican tax scam, the total value of tax cuts for just the top one percent is more than the entire tax cut for the lower 95 percent of earners. Put another way, those earning more than $912,000 a year will get more in tax cuts than 180 million households combined. Mr. Speaker, an estimated 2.8 million Texas households deduct state and local taxes with an average deduction of $7,823 in 2015. But this is not the end of the bad news that will be delivered were this tax scam to become law, not by a long shot. Equally terrible is that this Republican tax scam drastically reduces the Earned Income Tax Credit, which encourages work for 2.7 million low-income individuals in Texas, helping them make ends meet with an average credit of $2,689. The EITC and the Child Tax Credit lift about 1.2 million Texans, including 663,000 children, out of poverty each year. So to achieve their goal of giving more and more to the haves and the ``have mores,'' our Republican friends are willing to betray seniors, children, the most vulnerable and needy, and working and middle-class families. The $5.4 trillion cuts in program investments that will be required to pay for this tax giveaway to wealthy corporations and individuals will fall most heavily on low-income families, students struggling to afford college, seniors, and persons with disabilities.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, established by the World Health Organization in 1988, December 1st is universally known as World AIDS Day. World AIDS Day serves to focus global attention on the devastating impact of the HIV/AIDS epidemic. All governments, national AIDS programs, churches, community organizations and individuals are given the opportunity to display their commitment to fight this deadly disease. It has been more than 30 years since the first AIDS case was reported in the United States. It does not seem like it was too long ago, but HIV/AIDS had affected many around the world before the disease even made its way to America's shores. Since then, countless researchers, healthcare providers, politicians, and educators have contributed to the global initiative to contain and eventually eliminate its presence in all corners of the world. Although HIV/AIDS is no longer a mysterious and mischaracterized entity, it is the most relentless and indiscriminate killer of our time. And though a diagnosis is no longer the sealing of an immediate fate, it is the beginning of an indefinite battle for life, adequate health care, and for social belonging. With an estimated 38.6 million people worldwide living with HIV at the end of 2005, and more than 25 million people having died of AIDS since 1981, December 1st is a date which serves to remind everyone that action makes a difference in the fight against HIV/AIDS. Let there be no mistake, we are here to acknowledge that AIDS is a deadly enemy against which we must join all our forces to fight and eliminate. Americans should be reminded that HIV/AIDS does not discriminate. With an estimated 1,039,000 to 1,185,000 HIV-positive individuals living in the U.S., and approximately 56,000 new infections occurring every year, the U.S., like other nations around the world is deeply affected by HIV/AIDS. The detrimental effects of HIV/AIDS have also hit home. More than 65,000 people in Texas are living with HIV. Thirty-six percent more Texans are living with HIV today than just seven years ago. In 2010, studies showed that 1 in every 3 diagnosed persons in Texas were not getting proper medical treatment. We must make certain that every affected individual receives efficient medical treatment that will afford them long life. Not only is the state of Texas suffering from HIV and AIDS, but my district, the 18th Congressional District of Texas, has seen an increasing number of people living with the disease. In 2010, there were over 22,000 reported persons living with HIV (non-AIDS) in the greater Houston area, and more than 9,000 reported persons living with AIDS. This problem continues to escalate as there have been 1,700 new infections each year among individuals in Harris County, particularly among racial and ethnic minorities. We must continue to fight a tough fight to reverse all of these costly and tragic trends. I will continue to sponsor and co-sponsor legislation that addresses the HIV/AIDS epidemic. The fight is not over. We must continue to stand strong in our struggle to conquer some old and new challenges that we as Americans and members of the global community encounter. Today, Friday, December 1st is World AIDS Day. And, we will focus on HIV/AIDS, prevention and awareness, and continue to fight for life. Together, we will help all of our friends, relatives, and children live healthy and full lives.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank you, and I want to extend my courtesies to the gentleman from Texas for his courtesy as well, Mr. Al Green. I stand here today because this is World AIDS Day. Since 1988, we have commemorated World AIDS Day. I have on my lapel, if you will, on my shawl, a red ribbon which symbolizes remembrance. Earlier today I called in to the Thomas Street Clinic, as I have celebrated with them for many years, and while I was in Washington, I wanted to give them the recognition as fighters against HIV/AIDS. It does not seem that long ago, but HIV/AIDS affected many around the world before the disease even made its way to America's shores. Countless researchers, healthcare providers, politicians, and educators have contributed to the global initiative to contain and eventually eliminate its presence in all corners of the world. I remember going to Zambia on the first Presidential trip dealing with HIV/AIDS around the world. 38.6 million people worldwide were living with HIV at the end of 2005, and more than 25 million have died of AIDS since 1981. In December, we remember that, and that is what this day is: a day of remembrance, when an estimated 1 million to 1.2 million HIV-positive individuals live in the United States and approximately 56,000 new infections occur every year. Mr. Speaker, my district is impacted, upwards of 22,000 people. Texas is impacted. Today is a day of remembrance to honor those we lost and to commit to those we fight for. Mr. Speaker, established by the World Health Organization in 1988, December 1st is universally known as World AIDS Day. World AIDS Day serves to focus global attention on the devastating impact of the HIV/AIDS epidemic. All governments, national AIDS programs, churches, community organizations and individuals are given the opportunity to display their commitment to fight this deadly disease. It has been more than 30 years since the first AIDS case was reported in the United States. It does not seem like it was too long ago, but HIV/AIDS had affected many around the world before the disease even made its way to America's shores. Since then, countless researchers, healthcare providers, politicians, and educators have contributed to the global initiative to contain and eventually eliminate its presence in all corners of the world. Although HIV/AIDS is no longer a mysterious and mischaracterized entity, it is the most relentless and indiscriminate killer of our time. And though a diagnosis is no longer the sealing of an immediate fate, it is the beginning of an indefinite battle for life, adequate health care, and for social belonging. With an estimated 38.6 million people worldwide living with HIV at the end of 2005, and more than 25 million people having died of AIDS since 1981, December 1st is a date which serves to remind everyone that action makes a difference in the fight against HIV/AIDS. Let there be no mistake, we are here to acknowledge that AIDS is a deadly enemy against which we must join all our forces to fight and eliminate. Americans should be reminded that HIV/AIDS does not discriminate. With an estimated 1,039,000 to 1,185,000 HIV-positive individuals living in the U.S., and approximately 56,000 new infections occurring every year, the U.S., like other nations around the world, is deeply affected by HIV/AIDS. The detrimental effects of HIV/AIDS have also hit home. More than 65,000 people in Texas are living with HIV. Thirty-six percent more Texans are living with HIV today than just seven years ago. In 2010, studies showed that 1 in every 3 diagnosed persons in Texas were not getting proper medical treatment. We must make certain that every affected individual receive efficient medical treatment that will afford them long life. Not only is the state of Texas suffering from HIV and AIDS, but my district, the 18th Congressional District of Texas, has seen an increasing number of people living with the disease. In 2010, there were over 22,000 reported persons living with HIV (non-AIDS) in the greater Houston area, and more than 9,000 reported persons living with AIDS. This problem continues to escalate as there have been 1,700 new infections each year among individuals in Harris County, particularly among racial and ethnic minorities. We must continue to fight a tough fight to reverse all of these costly and tragic trends. I will continue to sponsor and co-sponsor legislation that addresses the HIV/AIDS epidemic. The fight is not over. We must continue to stand strong in our struggle to conquer some old and new challenges that we as Americans and members of the global community encounter. Today, Friday, December 1st, is World AIDS Day. And, we will focus on HIV/AIDS, prevention and awareness, and continue to fight for life. Together, we will help all of our friends, relatives, and children live healthy and full lives.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for her distinguished leadership and for yielding to me. Mr. Speaker, I want to focus in particular on where we are and where we have been. I think it is important, as we discuss these issues dealing with the Ensuring a Qualified Civil Service Act of 2017, that we really have the responsibility, as Members of Congress, to engage in safe and fair workplaces all over the Nation. Certainly, I want to speak particularly about the Civil Service Act, which I am stunned that this would extend the period of time for a probationary period from 1 year to 2 years. But what is most striking, since I am a member of the Judiciary Committee, is that Federal employees will remain at-will employees for a period of time with virtually no due process protection. I clearly want to try to understand an administration that, first of all, wants to make skinny the government to disallow it to do its work; and then, on top of that, it wants to have temporary employees with no due process rights. Yesterday, we stood on the floor of the House to insist that there be mandatory training for sexual harassment and, as well, to recognize that there should be zero tolerance for sexual harassment and, of course, sexual assault. As an African-American woman, over the years, historically, we, along with women all over the world, have seen the plight, or the devastation, of sexual harassment and sexual assault. I was disappointed that this floor could not vote on that resolution. I would really ask for that resolution to be called up again so that this House could go on record for supporting mandatory training. At the same time, I think it balances, with due process, the work that we have to do to make sure that we have a workplace that is tolerable and allows women who feel insulted, harassed, and, God forbid, assaulted easy, quick access to a pathway of relief. This legislation and the underlying bill on this rule specifically dealing with taking away due process rights from civil servant women strikes me as the wrong direction to go in light of where we are. So I am questioning this legislation. I think it is the wrong direction to go. I, frankly, believe it should be pulled. And as that legislation is pulled, I believe that we would do ourselves well to reassert the resolution from yesterday and to cast a vote. Let's get on the record of where we stand on the issues protecting women against sexual harassment and sexual assault. Finally, let me indicate that we are in the middle of appropriations. We have not been compensated for the devastation of Hurricane Harvey. My constituents are suffering. They are suffering in Puerto Rico, in the Virgin Islands, and in Florida. The appropriation, or the recommendation from the White House, is insufferable, unacceptable, and it is time for us to move as a Congress to bring relief to the people who have suffered from the hurricane.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, certainly my deepest thoughts as well to the Hinchey family. Mr. Speaker, I rise today because I come from an area that saw the greatest catastrophic flooding in the history of the continental United States. Someone asked me: I haven't heard anything from your State. I said to them: We are still hurting. We do have 120,000 to 130,000 homes still under water. People are living in shells. I am not selfish. I know what is going on in Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Florida. We begged the administration to give us the amount of money in their request for what was needed, and we got $44 billion for every victim from the U.S. Virgin Islands to Puerto Rico to Florida to Texas. I can't stand for that, for the desperate people who are in need. I ask the President to reevaluate his submission and to submit to us a reasoned response to the devastation of this State and the other States. I ask the appropriators, who I know are very concerned, to come together to give us the emergency supplemental so that homes can be rebuilt, that homes can be bought out, and that, in fact, the infrastructure that is crumbling and caused the major flooding, that reservoir pools that flooded whole complete developments, can be fixed, that we can do infrastructure and save lives. The people of the floods beg of you, and we will be in the fight.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the House Committees on the Judiciary, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 630, which requires all employees of the House of Representatives--including Members, interns, detailees, and fellows--to complete an anti- harassment and anti-discrimination training program during each session of Congress. Additionally, each individual would be required to complete the training within ninety days of the start of each session, and each new employee to complete the training within ninety days of their hire date. This training must be completed every session of Congress. The resolution directs the Committee on House Administration to issue regulations to ensure compliance and transparency and upon passage of the resolution, the Committee is required to promulgate these regulations within thirty days. Mr. Speaker, the many allegations of sexual harassment that have come to light involving prominent individuals in the fields of government, entertainment, business, and other fields in recent months are appalling and intolerable. There must be zero-tolerance for sexual harassment in our society, and this body can set an example for the nation by declaring itself to be sexual harassment free zone and policing itself to hold members, staff, and associated personnel to this standard. It is important that all persons working in this body understand that everyone has a right to a workplace free of harassment and intimidation and that complaints will be taken seriously and fully investigated by the Ethics Committee or the House Administration Committee. Mr. Speaker, this is the moment to embrace and affirm zero tolerance for sexual harassment and assault and we must soon reauthorize and strengthen the Violence Against Women Act to provide stronger tools to prevent and punish sexual harassment and sexual assault. As the Ranking Member of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, I am committed to doing all I can to make this happen as soon as possible. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support H. Res. 630 and urge all Members to vote in favor its adoption.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I wish and hope that all of my colleagues and Americans had a wonderful Thanksgiving. I thank the men and women of the United States military for their service. It is particularly noteworthy that they serve in this time when families are gathered. I thank Mr. Goodlatte for collaborating on this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2228, the Law Enforcement Mental Health and Wellness Act of 2017. Ensuring the mental health and well-being of our law enforcement officers is paramount to the safety of our communities and the people our officers take a solemn oath to protect. I am also very pleased to acknowledge Val Demings, a colleague and a member of the Homeland Security Committee, of which I serve. We are better off for the experience, commitment, and professional career that she had as a law enforcement officer and chief. She is one of the cosponsors of this legislation and I look forward to hearing from her. Let me also take note of the fact that Texas experienced a depth of sadness over the holiday weekend when we lost one of our Department of Public Safety officers, who was killed by a perpetrator during the Thanksgiving weekend. We pray for him and his family. H.R. 2228 is intended to provide support for law enforcement agency efforts to protect the mental health and well-being of law enforcement officers. I support this legislation as a good first step towards Congress addressing the various matters surrounding the mental health of our law enforcement officers. We must recognize that law enforcement officers play a special role in our communities, with exceptional responsibilities to protect and serve where they see, encounter, and respond to horrendous situations that are dangerous, stressful, and often life-threatening. Imagine those officers who came upon that scene Sunday morning in Texas a few weeks ago where 27 Texans were murdered in church and 20 were injured. Imagine churches that are frightened about worshipping. Imagine, as I left my hometown Houston, that there were law enforcement officers who were gathered to meet with pastors to give them comfort. They are there for us. As well, for example, law enforcement officers have had to respond to several recent tragedies, which include the Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando, Florida, where 49 people were killed and 53 others were wounded; the killing of 5 officers and the wounding of 9 other officers, along with 2 civilians in Dallas, Texas; the San Bernardino, California, shooting of 14 innocent employees; the Las Vegas, Nevada, massacre, where a gunman killed 58 innocent concertgoers and injured nearly 500 others; and, again, most recently, as I indicated, on November 5, the deadliest mass shooting by an individual in Texas, the fifth deadliest mass shooting in the United States, as well as the deadliest shooting in an American place of worship in modern history, where 26 were gunned down in Sutherland Springs, Texas, including an 18-month-old child, a pregnant mother, and where 20 others were injured. These horrific occurrences have become all too common in today's society. These chilling tragedies continue to affect us all. Imagine the impact that they have collectively on our law enforcement officers with whom these traumatic situations remain long after the threats are reduced. Everyone has returned home and communities they serve have regained a renewed sense of safety. Imagine that officer that comes upon a horrific traffic accident that kills a family. Imagine their pain and their concern. Requiring these officers to continue to serve without providing them an effective avenue to process the day-to-day crisis does an injustice to them. That is why this is a very important initiative and I am really excited to support it. I want to also raise for my colleagues that I have been a longstanding advocate for helping police officers, as we have worked together with the chairman of the committee and other members of the committee. I want to make mention of the Law Enforcement Trust and Integrity Act, which takes a comprehensive approach to addressing policing issues, including recognition of the importance of sustaining the mental well-being of our officers. This piece of legislation addresses tragedies where we have seen actions take place. Countless unfortunate incidents have happened maybe because of the lack of deescalation. This bill, I hope we can move along, as this bill that we have, the underlying bill, requires the Attorney General to perform an initial analysis of existing law enforcement accreditation standards and to recommend areas for development. That gives training, and it also takes into account mental health needs and funding needs. It authorizes the Attorney General to make grants to States, units of local government, Indian tribal governments to study law enforcement agency management and operations and to develop pilot programs to implement best practices. It requires the Attorney General to study the prevalence and impact of any law, rule, or procedure that allows a law enforcement officer to delay the answer to questions posed, as quickly as possible, by any of the authorities investigating situations. It authorizes appropriations for expenses related to criminal and civil enforcement activities by the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department. It requires the Department of Justice to establish a task force to assist in local investigations, and it requires each Federal, State, and local law enforcement agency to report to the Attorney General on the actions in that particular department to help that department assess its own work. It requires the Department of Justice to cooperate with the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund--something that was very important to me--to create and provide a distinctive medallion to be issued to the survivors of law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty or memorialized on the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial. This is in sync with the task force that was held in the last administration that offered to discuss ways to improve policing and to help our individual police officers. We want to be partners for safety and security and community police relations, and we want them to have good health and the ability to serve the public in a good health mindset. Under today's bill, the Attorney General shall review current mental health practices and services of Federal agencies and report to Congress, develop resources to educate mental healthcare providers about the law enforcement culture across the board, and develop evidence-based therapies as a result. I believe this legislation and the Law Enforcement Integrity Legislation, if passed, will create an atmosphere where law enforcement officers will be comfortable in sharing their thoughts or their assessments or best practices. Under this bill, the underlying bill, the Director of Community Oriented Policing Services shall conduct case studies that focuses on programs designed primarily to address officer psychological health and well-being and submit such a report to Congress. The Attorney General shall also consult with the Secretary of Homeland Security and the heads of Federal agencies to examine the mental health needs of Federal law enforcement officers and the efficacy of expanding peer mentoring programs; ensure the recommendations, resources, or programs protect the privacy of officers--that is extremely important--and report these findings to the Congress no later than 1 year after enactment. Mr. Speaker, the key to all of this is to build the trust between community and police, the police community and the police families and families of those who come within the range of law enforcement. If we can all work together, we can trust each other, we will have a better system of justice. This bill is a good first step, and I look forward to working as well with other law enforcement bills, including the Law Enforcement Integrity bill that I have just so noted. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2228, the ``Law Enforcement Mental Health Act of 2017.'' Ensuring the mental health and well-being of our law enforcement officers is paramount to the safety of our communities and the people our officers take a solemn oath to protect. H.R. 2228 is intended to provide support for law enforcement agency efforts to protect the mental health and well-being of law enforcement officers. These horrific occurrences have become all-too common in today's society. These chilling tragedies continue to affect us all. Imagine the impact they have collectively on our law enforcement officers, with whom these traumatic situations remain long after the threats are reduced, everyone has returned home and communities they serve have regained a renewed sense of safety. Requiring these officers to continue to serve, without providing them an effective avenue to process these day-to-day crises does an injustice to them. For example, law enforcement officers have had to respond to several recent tragedies which include: the Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando, Florida, where 49 people were killed and 53 others wounded; the killing of five officers and wounding of nine other officers along with two civilians in Dallas, Texas; the San Bernardino shooting of 14 innocent employees; the Las Vegas massacre, where a gunman killed 58 innocent concert-goers and injured nearly 500 others; and again, most recently on November 5, the deadliest mass shooting by an individual in Texas, the fifth-deadliest mass shooting in the United States, as well as the deadliest shooting in an American place of worship in modern history, where 26 were gunned down in Sutherland Springs, including an 18-month-old child and a pregnant mother, and where 20 others were injured. This is why I have been a longstanding advocate for adoption of the ``Law Enforcement Trust and Integrity Act,'' which takes a comprehensive approach to addressing policing issues, including a recognition of the importance of sustaining the mental well-being of our officers. This piece of legislation addresses the tragedies in some of our most recent cases such as: Tamir Rice, Brown, Freddie Gray and Garner and the countless others that do not receive publicity. The bill provides seven substantive approaches towards improving law enforcement management and misconduct prosecution tools: (1) It requires the Attorney General to perform initial analysis of existing law enforcement accreditation standards and to recommend areas for development. (2) It authorizes the Attorney General to make grants to States, units of local government, Indian Tribal Governments, to study law enforcement agency management and operations and to develop pilot programs to implement best practices. (3) It requires the Attorney General to study the prevalence and impact of any law, rule or procedure that allows a law enforcement officer to delay the answer to questions posed by a local internal affairs officer, prosecutor, or review board on the investigative integrity and prosecution of law enforcement misconduct. (4) It authorizes appropriations for expenses related to criminal and civil enforcement activities by the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department. (5) It requires the Department of Justice to estabijsh a task force to coordinate the investigation, prosecution and enforcement efforts of Federal, state and local governments in cases related to law enforcement misconduct. (6) It requires each Federal, State, and local law enforcement agency to report to the Attorney General data on the following: (1) traffic violation stops; (2) pedestrian stops and detentions; and (3) the use of deadly force by and against law enforcement officers. (7) It requires the Department of Justice, in cooperation with the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, to create and provide a distinctive medallion to be issued to the survivors of law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty or memorialized on the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial. These are all measures similar in nature to those undertaken by the Obama Task Force Initiative. In short, the Law Enforcement Integrity and Trust Act would help law enforcement officers do their jobs, knowing that they have our support. This is why it was endorsed by a broad range of legal, community-based and law enforcement groups nationwide. Under today's bill, the Attorney General shall review current mental health practices and services of Federal agencies and report to Congress, develop resources to educate mental health care providers about the law enforcement culture across the board, and develop evidence-based therapies as a result. Under this bill the Director of Community Oriented Policing Services shall conduct case studies that focus on programs designed primarily to address officers' psychological health and well-being and submit such report to Congress. I support this legislation as a good first step towards Congress addressing the various matters surrounding the mental health of our law enforcement officers. We must recognize that law enforcement officers play a special role in our communities, with exceptional responsibilities to protect and serve, where they see, encounter, and respond to horrendous situations that are both dangerous and stressful, and often life-threatening. The Attorney General shall also consult with the Secretary of Homeland Security and head of Federal agencies to examine the mental health needs of Federal law enforcement officers and the efficacy of expanding peer mentoring programs; ensure the recommendations, resources, or programs protect the privacy of officers; and report these findings to Congress no later than one year after enactment. As this is a good first step, I support the bill and ask my colleagues to do the same. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for her remarks. We are working together to build that trust and to safely secure the community and our officers. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Demings). She brings to the United States Congress very important contributions as the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Intergovernmental Affairs. These voices are well needed. Congresswoman Val Demings is the former chief of police of the City of Orlando, Florida.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler), a distinguished and senior member of the Judiciary Committee, the chair of the Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, again, let me thank the two prior speakers, Congresswoman Demings and Congressman Nadler, for very insightful, very important remarks on this particular legislation. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell), someone who I know has a passion for first responders, as we have worked together even more closely after the heinous tragedy of 9/ 11.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from New Jersey.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Let me, first of all, thank Congresswomen Brooks and Demings for a very astute initiative, and I look forward to us working together, along with the chairman, on other items that impact the service of our officers and the better police practices. And I cite, of course, the Law Enforcement Trust and Integrity Act. Mr. Speaker, I say to the chairman, I wanted to make mention of the fact that we have been meeting on police issues for almost 2 years in the Police Working Group, and it has been very impactful. I look forward to us igniting another meeting and being able to hear from both police and community, because we want a safe community and we want safe law enforcement. Let me also say, as I close, that many police officers are veterans, and they have been in a war situation, and that means they have faced crises, they have faced the violence of war, and they, obviously, have experienced bouts, possibly, of PTSD or, as we know that they do, they may not yield to it and may not know it and go right into serving; whether they are fire or police, they go right into serving the community. Therefore, this legislation will be enormously helpful to them. So, as I said earlier, this is a good first step to helping to enhance the mental health or the mental well-being of our law enforcement officers. These officers endure stressful events on our behalf in the interest of protecting their communities, and so we will all benefit from the effective implementation of this legislation. Therefore, I support this bill, even as I encourage us to continue our work on additional legislation to help foster better coordination between our police officers and the communities they serve. One final point, that I have listened to officers, and they have said to me, with all that they deal with, coming upon a circumstance where a child has been injured or killed is one of the most devastating experiences they have had to have. Just imagine that. This mental health bill will work on all of the issues that they have to address, and I ask my colleagues to support the underlying legislation, which is the Law Enforcement Mental Health and Wellness Act of 2017, H.R. 2228. Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, this is a good first step to helping to enhance the mental well-being of our law enforcement officers. These officers endure stressful events on our behalf, in the interest of protecting their communities. And so, we will all benefit from the effective implementation of this legislation. I therefore support this bill, even as I encourage my colleagues to work together on additional legislation to help foster better coordination between our police officers and the communities they serve. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, this is not the American Dream tax plan. This is the American nightmare, a tax scam of the worst proportion. With over 8,000 of my constituents last evening on a teleconference town hall meeting, overwhelmingly they disagreed with a tax plan that cuts Medicare or Medicaid to finance tax cuts, eliminates the mortgage tax deduction, so that those who are suffering from Hurricane Harvey, trying to rebuild their lives, seeking a new home cannot, in fact, deduct their mortgage. The same thing with the 200,000 Texans who are going to pay more because we are eliminating the deduction for State and local taxes, and eliminating deductions for student loans, casualty losses; by next year, $25 billion in Social Security cuts. My seniors on the phone last night asked me about those cuts. They asked me about the medical expenses cuts for seniors. All of that is eliminated. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a sample of tele-townhall survey questions and answers Tax Tele-Townhall Survey Questions and Answers (1) Do you agree that a tax bill should cut tax at the expense of Medicaid and Medicare? 95 percent said no. (2) The current tax reform bill will eliminate the tax deduction for student loan interest and the lifetime learning credit. Do you support the elimination of these tax credits? 91 percent said no. (3) The current tax code allows homeowners to deduct interest on mortgages. Would you support a tax plan that includes a reduction in credit for first-time home buyers? 95 percent said no.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, this plan will show no growth. The neutral tax policy entity said you will get no growth, no growth in wages, and you will send jobs overseas in waves. It is a tax scam and it is an American nightmare. Vote against this tax scam Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Budget Committee, I rise in strong and unyielding opposition to H.R. 1, the so-called ``Tax Cut and Jobs Act,'' which more accurately should be called the ``Republican Tax Scam Act.'' I oppose this cruel and immoral $1.7 trillion tax giveaway to wealthy corporations and the top one percent because it raises taxes on poor, working, and middle class families; explodes the deficit by adding an additional $2.2 trillion over ten years; and will require an estimated $5.4 trillion cut in funding for the programs ordinary Americans depend on for health security, educational opportunity, and economic progress. Mr. Speaker, Americans are not fooled; they know trickle-down economics has never worked, and they see right through this phony tax plan and recognize it for the scam that it is. That is why Americans reject this Republican tax giveaway by an overwhelming 2:1 margin according to a poll released yesterday by Quinnipiac. Specifically, 61 percent think the Republican tax scam will benefit the wealthy the most; only 16 percent say the plan will reduce their taxes. 59 percent think it is a very bad idea to eliminate the deduction for state and local income taxes. Nearly half of respondents (40 percent) think it a bad idea to lower the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 20 percent. This Republican tax plan is even more toxic to my constituents in the Eighteenth Congressional District of Texas. Mr. Speaker, as you may know, my constituents and others in Texas are still struggling to recover from the devastation caused by Hurricane Harvey, the worst storm ever to make landfall in the continental United States. Yet last evening, nearly 8,000 of them took time out of their busy schedules to join me in a tele-townhall to discuss the tax scheme that has been rushed to the floor for a vote by the Republican leadership in the hope of passing it before the American people learn its insidious details. But I have got news for them: too late. My constituents understand and let me know that they believe it is important that the United States has a tax system that is fair, balanced, smart, and provides the resources and opportunities to allow all Americans to reach their potential. And by margins exceeding 90 percent, they reject: 1. Any cuts to Medicare or Medicaid to finance tax cuts for wealthy corporations and the top 1 percent; 2. Eliminating the mortgage interest deduction; 3. Eliminating the deductibility of state and local taxes; 4. Eliminating existing deductions for student loan interest or making taxable college endowment funds or college fellowships expenses. Mr. Speaker, my constituents, and Americans across the country, oppose this unfair Republican tax giveaway because nearly half of the $1.7 trillion tax cut goes to just the top one percent. In fact, the average annual tax cut for the top one-tenth of one percent is $320,000; for the top one percent it is $62,000, and for those earning $1 million a year it is $68,000. Nearly 25 percent of the tax cut goes to households in just the top one-tenth of one percent, who make at least $5 million a year (2027). While super-wealthy corporations and individuals are reaping windfalls, millions of middle-class and working families will see their taxes go up: 1. 13 million households face a tax increase next year. 2. 45 million households face a tax increase in 2027. 3. 29 million households (21 percent) earning less than $100,000 a year see a tax increase. On average, families earning up to $86,000 annually would see a $794 increase in their tax liability, a significant burden on families struggling to afford child care and balance their checkbook. It is shocking, but not surprising, that under this Republican tax scam, the total value of tax cuts for just the top one percent is more than the entire tax cut for the lower 95 percent of earners. Put another way, those earning more than $912,000 a year will get more in tax cuts than 180 million households combined. The core of this Republican tax scheme is a massive tax cut from 35 percent to 20 percent for corporations, but that is not the only way that the wealthy are rewarded. The massive tax cuts for corporations are permanent but temporary for working and middle-class families. Another immoral aspect of this terrible tax scam is that it abandons families that face natural disasters or high medical costs by repealing deductions for casualty losses and medical expenses. Mr. Speaker, in what universe does it make any sense to eliminate, as this bill would, a deduction for: 1. Teachers who purchase supplies for their classroom; 2. Moving expenses to take a new job and taxes employer-provided moving expenses; or 3. Dependent care assistance, making it harder for families to afford day care, nursery school, or care for aging parents? This Republican tax scam jeopardizes American innovation and competitiveness by eliminating the deduction for student loan interest, which affects 12 million borrowers, and cuts total education assistance by more than $64 billion. Under the extraordinary leadership of President Obama and the determined efforts of ordinary Americans, we pulled our way out from under the worst of the foreclosure crisis when the housing bubble burst in 2007. Inexplicably, Republicans are now championing a tax scheme that will make the homes of average Americans less valuable because deductions for mortgage interest and property taxes are much less valuable than under current law. A tax plan that reduces home values, as this one does, puts pressure on states and towns to collect revenues they depend on to fund schools, roads, and vital public resources. Mr. Speaker, an estimated 2.8 million Texas households deduct state and local taxes with an average deduction of $7,823 in 2015. But this is not the end of the bad news that will be delivered were this tax scam to become law, not by a long shot. The proposed elimination of the personal exemption will harm millions of Texans by taking away the $4,050 deduction for each taxpayer and claimed dependent; in 2015, roughly 9.3 million dependent exemptions were claimed in the Lone Star State. Equally terrible is that this Republican tax scam drastically reduces the Earned Income Tax Credit, which encourages work for 2.7 million low-income individuals in Texas, helping them make ends meet with an average credit of $2,689. The EITC and the Child Tax Credit lift about 1.2 million Texans, including 663,000 children, out of poverty each year. So to achieve their goal of giving more and more to the haves and the ``have mores,'' our Republican friends are willing to betray seniors, children, the most vulnerable and needy, and working and middle-class families. The $5.4 trillion cuts in program investments that will be required to pay for this tax giveaway to wealthy corporations and individuals will fall most heavily on low-income families, students struggling to afford college, seniors, and persons with disabilities. America will not be made great by financing a $1.7 trillion tax cut for the rich by stealing $1.8 trillion from Medicare and Medicaid, abandoning seniors and families in need, depriving students of realizing a dream to attend college without drowning in debt, or disinvesting in the working families. America will not be positioned to compete and win in the global, interconnected, and digital economy by slashing funding for scientific research, the arts and humanities, job retraining, and clean energy just to pay for a tax cut to corporations and individuals who do not even need it. Mr. Speaker, the tax scheme presented here by Republicans is not a plan but a scam that represents a betrayal of our values as a nation. This tax scam is not a revenue policy adapted for the real world that real Americans live in but a fantasy resting on the monstrous belief that the wealthy have too little money and that poor, working, and middle-class families have too much. Our Republican friends continue to cling to the fantasy belief that their tax cuts for the rich will pay for themselves despite all precedent to the contrary and evidence that their tax scheme is projected by experts to lose between $3 trillion and $7 trillion. Mr. Speaker, in evaluating the merits of a taxing system, it is not enough to subject it only to the test of fiscal responsibility. To keep faith with the nation's past, to be fair to the nation's present, and to safeguard the nation's future, the plan must also pass a ``moral test.'' The Republican tax bill fails both of these standards. I strongly oppose H.R. 1, the ``Republican Tax Scam Act,'' and urge all Members to join me in voting against this reckless, cruel, and heartless proposal that will do nothing to improve the lives or well- being of middle and working class families, and the poor and vulnerable `caught in the tentacles of circumstance.'

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record The Washington Post op-ed, ``The Republican tax plan's five worst dangers,'' by Secretary Rubin, dated November 15, 2017 [From the Washington Post, Nov. 15, 2017] The Republican Tax Plan's Five Worst Dangers (By Robert Rubin) The deficit-funded tax cuts advancing through Congress are a fiscal tragedy for which our country will pay a huge price over time. While the details of the tax plan remain in flux, its fundamental contours will not change. Nor will its $1.5 trillion of deficit funding, the amount stipulated in the recently passed budget resolution. Perhaps it's hopeless to expect those in Congress who have long bemoaned deficits and the debt to oppose the plan. If, however, as a matter of conscience or renewed reflection they decide to take heed, here are the fiscal dangers posed by the plan. To start, the tax cuts will not increase growth and, given their fiscal effects, would likely have a significant and increasingly negative impact. The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center's latest report estimated that, over 10 years, the average increase in our growth rate would be roughly zero, counting the crowding out of private investment by increasing deficits but not counting other adverse effects of worsening our fiscal outlook. The Penn Wharton Budget Model, using the same approach, estimates virtually no increase in long-term growth. Goldman Sachs projects an increase of 0.1 percent to 0.2 percent in the first couple of years and an average increase over 10 years of just 0.05 percent per year, not counting any of the adverse fiscal effects. These estimates reflect three underlying views held by mainstream economists. First, individual tax cuts will not materially induce people to work more. Second, corporate tax cuts will likely have limited effect on investment or decisions about where to locate business activity, given the many other variables at play. Third, deficit-funded tax cuts will have little short-term effect on growth, except perhaps for some temporary overheating, because we are at roughly full employment. With no additional revenue from increased growth to offset the tax cuts' cost, the publicly held debt of the federal government would increase by $1.5 trillion. An additional danger is that the actual deficit impact would be increased by abandoning the Congressional Budget Office's nonpartisan evaluation that has been used for decades by both parties in favor of partisan calculations by those pushing the tax cuts. Adding $1.5 trillion or more to the federal debt would make an already bad situation worse. A useful measure of our fiscal position is the ratio of publicly held government debt to economic output or gross domestic product, called the debt/GDP ratio. In 2000, the debt/GDP ratio was 32 percent. The ratio is now 77 percent. Looking forward, the CBO projects the debt/GDP ratio to be 91 percent in 2027 and 150 percent in 2047. After $1.5 trillion of deficit-funded tax cuts, those future ratios have been estimated to increase to roughly 97 percent in 2027 and 160 percent in 2047. These estimates likely substantially understate the worsening of our fiscal trajectory. That's because they do not account for the increasingly adverse effect on growth of the difficult- to-quantify effects of fiscal deterioration. Exacerbating our already unsustainable fiscal trajectory with these tax cuts would threaten growth in five respects. These are highly likely to be substantial and to increase over time. First, business confidence would likely be negatively affected by creating uncertainty about future policy and heightening concern about our political system's ability to meet our economic policy challenges. Second, our country's resilience to deal with inevitable future economic and geopolitical emergencies, including the effects of climate change, would continue to decline. Third, funds available for public investment, national security and defense spending--a professed concern of many tax-cut proponents--would continue to decline as debt rises, because of rising interest costs and the increased risk of borrowing to fund government activities. Fourth, Treasury bond interest rates would be highly likely to increase over time because of increased demand for the supply of savings and increased concern about future imbalances. That, in turn, would raise private-sector interest rates, which could also increase due to widening spreads vs. Treasuries, further reflecting increased concern about future conditions. And even a limited increase in the debt/GDP ratio could focus attention on our fiscal trajectory's long-ignored risks and trigger outsize increases in Treasury and private-sector interest rates. The ability to borrow in our own currency, and to print it through the Federal Reserve, may diminish these risks for a while, as might capital inflows from abroad. But these mitigating factors have their limits; at some point, unsound fiscal conditions almost surely would undermine our currency and debt markets. Finally, at some unpredictable point, fiscal conditions-- and these market dynamics--would likely be seen as sufficiently serious to cause severe market and economic destabilization. We have an imperative need to address our unsustainable longer-term fiscal trajectory with sound economic policies. Few elected officials want to face this fact, but, at the very least, they should not make matters worse. We can only hope that responsible elected officials will prevent this irresponsible tax plan from being adopted.