Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. J. Res. 76, which grants consent and approval from Congress for the Commonwealth of Virginia, the State of Maryland, and the District of Columbia to enter into a compact relating to the establishment of the Washington Metrorail Safety Commission. As Houston is a major transportation hub, I understand and appreciate the importance of this legislation. The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA), an interstate compact agency, provides transportation services to millions of people each year. It is imperative that the WMATA be safe and effective as it is essential to the commerce and prosperity of the National Capitol Region. The District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Virginia, and the State of Maryland intend to create the Washington Metrorail Safety Commission to act as the state safety oversight authority for the WMATA system under 49 U.S.C. 5329. In title III of the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (section 3026, Public Law 114-94), the Congress provided sole authority to the Secretary of Transportation to appoint Federal Directors to the Board of Directors of the WMATA and required the signatory parties to the Compact to amend the Compact as necessary. This compact is created for the benefit of the people of the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Virginia, and the State of Maryland so that there may be an increase in their safety, commerce, and prosperity. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H. J. Res. 76.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Veasey), the coleader of this hour, along with Delegate Plaskett, for not only their astute leadership of the hour, but certainly of their astute leadership of the issue. I am delighted to join my colleagues. I thank the chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, Mr. Cedric Richmond, for continuing to make sure that the conscience of the Congress, the Congressional Black Caucus, is heard on these crucial issues. Mr. Veasey, I am going to focus my issues--because this is not a Republican or Democratic issue. It is an American issue. I do want to personally thank you for your leadership as the named plaintiff of the Texas voter ID litigation, which has been--how should I say? I wanted to say Earth-shattering--but it has been groundbreaking in its recognition of the diminishing of the rights of people to vote by a draconian voter ID law. We know that it has been somewhat modified, but your astuteness recognizes that, even in its modification, in the coming elections, we should be very wary of the effort that the State will utilize the voter ID law for voter suppression. So today I want to rise in the backdrop of the Shelby case, which many of us are well aware of. The Shelby case, which occurred in Alabama, was the unfortunate case that turned back the clock on the 1965 Voting Rights Act that had been working for decades with absolutely no problem; but, unfortunately, this conservative-leaning Supreme Court made decisions not on what is good for America, not even on what is good in terms of the law, but decided to eliminate section 5. I am reminded of the very astute words of Justice Ginsburg, very astute words, when she was appalled that the Supreme Court yielded to what I would consider misinterpretation, that there is no problem with discrimination and there is no problem with racism, and Justice Ginsburg very astutely said: Well, we have been very fortunate that the polio vaccination has all but extinguished polio in the United States. That is great news. But because we have extinguished polio, does that mean we need to get rid of the polio vaccination? And any commonsense thinker, any American, any hardworking American, would absolutely, because they love their children and their families, would have a resounding ``no.'' So why would you get rid of section 5 when there is documentation, unfortunately and sadly, of discrimination and of racism? Racism is a question of being discriminated against because of race. It does not say Black, it does not say any particular type of race, but it does mention race. That means that section 5 was a protector for all Americans and giving them the added protection of one vote, one person. So, unfortunately, on June 28, 2017--and, by the way, Mr. Speaker, the pending meeting of this established Commission, the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, PACEI, is going to be meeting July 19, this week. This is a dangerous phenomenon. The chair and Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach wrote to the Nation's secretaries of state requesting extensive personal information on American voters--personal information, when we have stood in this well fighting against the PATRIOT Act when it was not written well after 9/11 because its premise was to spy on the American people and to ignore the Fourth Amendment, which is to protect Americans against unreasonable search and seizure. This is unreasonable search and seizure. Let me list for you what this Commission is asking for. Some of this is public knowledge, but listen to this list: the full first and last names of all registrants; middle names or initials, if available; addresses, dates of birth, political party, if recorded in your State; last four digits of Social Security, if available; voter history--voter history--what elections you voted in from 2006 onward; active and inactive status. I would venture to say that if I asked my Republican colleagues if they want their constituents sending this information in I would hear a little bit of grumbling. Canceled status; information regarding any felony convictions. All these are State issues. Information regarding voter registration in another State; information regarding military status; and overseas citizen information. First of all, there is no documentation of massive voter fraud. ``The right to vote, and the sanctity and privacy of the vote, is protected by the U.S. Constitution, including the Fifth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments. Due process. All of these allow you to have a degree of privacy. It is an obligation of your administration,'' which is a letter to President Trump that I am reading from, ``to preserve the sanctity and privacy of the vote, not to undermine it as would be the case if Texas were to comply with the PACEI's unconscionable request. The only approved government use of voter registration data, outside of voting, is jury selection, not a Presidential Advisory Commission of dubious purpose formed to search for nonconsistent evidence to vindicate your false claim that you lost the popular vote by 2.9 million votes, the largest loss in American history, because `millions of people who voted illegally.' '' As you well know, that was a statement that no one can document by this present administration. So this Presidential Advisory Commission is a doubling down of an executive order to find a problem that does not exist. It is a solution, a false solution, seeking to find a problem. It is a dangerous proposition. It is an invasion of the privacy of the American people. And any good person who believes in the right to privacy, any conservative, liberal, moderate, anyone with any political philosophy who believes in the Constitution of the United States should stand arm in arm together against PACEI. It is the beginning of Big Brother, the arm of Big Brother, the frightening Big Brother, to intrude into the homes of the American people and to secure information that is, in fact, challenging whether you can move from one State to the next, challenging whether or not you can have a voter card canceled or expired, challenging individuals who have been given pardons but had a felony, and challenging military persons who move from place to place. This is an insult, and this is clearly voter suppression, not in any way a way to speak to the issue of fraud. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to take this very seriously. I have asked my State to stand down. I have asked the President to pull this request, and I, frankly, believe this executive order should be eliminated. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record two documents related to this. Congress of the United States, House of Representatives, Washington, DC, July 6, 2017. President Donald J. Trump, The White House, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. President: I am writing to urge you to rescind your May 11, 2017 Executive Order establishing the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity (PACEI) and to direct that the PACEI be dissolved immediately. The PACEI is charged with studying ``the registration and voting processes used in Federal elections'' and identifying ``vulnerabilities in voting systems'' that could lead to voter fraud. Many people, however, suspect that the real purpose of the Commission is not investigate widespread voter fraud, which every reputable study has already debunked as a myth, but to gather data to aid in future voter suppression efforts. On June 28, 2017, PACEI Chair and Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach wrote to the nation's secretaries of state requesting extensive personal information on American voters threatens to violate individual privacy. Specifically, the PACEI seeks to obtain, inter alia: ``the full first and last names of registrants, middle names or initials if available, addresses, dates of birth, political party (if recorded in your state), last four digits of social security number if available, voter history (elections voted in) from 2006 onward, active/inactive status, cancelled status, information regarding any felony convictions, information regarding voter registration in another state, information regarding military status, and overseas citizen information.'' Releasing the confidential voter information sought by the PACEI which will be stored in an unsecure database on unsecured servers and accessible to the public is illegal, irresponsible, jeopardizes civil liberties and privacy rights, and puts our national security at risk. It is important that all voters, including those in the 18th Congressional District of Texas whom I am privileged to represent, be fully protected. While supplying only public voter information may seem secure, the sad fact is that it is not. There is no publicly available record for voter registration information for any state in America. Such data set is protected under the principle of collective privacy, recognized by the Supreme Court in the landmark decision of NAACP v. Alabama, 377 U.S. 288, 84 S. Ct. 1302, 12 L. Ed. 2d 325 (1964), which held that compelled disclosure of affiliation with groups engaged in advocacy may constitute an impermissible chilling effect on the freedom of association guaranteed by the First Amendment. The Court has affirmed this principle and it is now settled law. Accordingly, Texas cannot, consistent with the U.S. Constitution, supply the private voter information requested by the PACEI. Indeed, if the information sought was public as PACEI contends, there would be no need for it to request the information from state governments. The right to vote, and the sanctity and privacy of the vote, is protected by the U.S. Constitution, including the Fifth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments. It is an obligation of your administration to preserve the sanctity and privacy of the vote, not to undermine it as would be the case if Texas were to comply with the PACEI's unconscionable request. The only approved government use of voter registration data, outside of voting, is jury selection, not a presidential advisory commission of dubious purpose formed to search for nonexistent evidence to vindicate your false claim that you lost the popular vote by 2.9 million votes, the largest loss in American history, because ``millions of people who voted illegally.'' Voter suppression is real but the oft-repeated claim that American elections are rife with voter fraud is a myth. A comprehensive 2014 study published in The Washington Post found out of more than a billion votes cast only 31 credible instances of impersonation fraud from 2000 to 2014, and that event this tiny number was likely inflated because the study's author counted not just voter fraud prosecutions or convictions but all credible claims. Numerous other reports have reached the same conclusion. Finally, it should be noted that compliance with the PACEI's voter data request would put the security of the nation's electoral processes at risk. We know from recent and painful experience, including the cyberattacks on the Veterans Administration, the Office of Personnel Management, not to mention SONY and Yahoo, that large centralized databases are targets of opportunities for criminals, terrorists, and foreign adversaries. It would be the height of recklessness for Texas to provide the PACEI with personal information of millions of person via unsecured email address to be stored in undersecured databases on undersecured servers. This is why the large majority of states, 44 states and the District of Columbia, have refused to comply with the PACEI's data requests. To date, only five states have indicated they will cooperate with the PACEI and with a data set this small, any findings drawn by the PACEI will lack external validity and yield no generalizable conclusions. In view of all the circumstances extant, the most reasonable and accurate conclusion that can be reached about the PACEI is that it is not intended to ferret out and prevent voter fraud, but to obtain information that can be used to refine voter suppression efforts. For these reasons, I strongly urge you to rescind your May 11, 2017 Executive Order and direct that the President's Advisory Commission on Election Integrity be disbanded immediately. Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions or need additional information. Very truly yours, Sheila Jackson Lee, Member of Congress.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, let me conclude by holding up this map, which indicates the colors of the individual States that are only slightly adhering to this Commission. The orange and the blue are individual States, some that are not adhering and some that are giving basic public information, but not all the personal information. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I hope we can collectively fight against the suppression of voters, and I thank him for alerting the American people to this severe attempt to perpetrate a wrongness, which is that there is voter fraud, and that we should not violate the privacy of Americans.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I always applaud when the United States steps in and takes a leadership role to prevent war. I have traveled to the Mideast for many years as a Member of the United States Congress representing my constituents. I want to express my appreciation to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson for the energy that he is putting into engaging Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, UAE, Jordan, Egypt, and Qatar to be able to stop the blockade and the conflict that may continue to grow against Qatar. This is a region that many of these countries have been allies of the United States, the Southern Command is in Qatar, and, frankly, I think they need to be united against those terrorists that plague them all. I would also say that the UAE, as has been reported in the Nation's newspapers, hacked into the emails of Qatar and put words in the mouths of their government officials that were untrue. This is not the way to proceed with peace and diplomacy. So I believe we should energetically and aggressively engage these countries to stop this blockade and begin to repair the collaborative efforts to ensure that we fight the war on terror together and not against. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Tillerson. I look forward to working with him as a Member of the United States Congress to bring peace to that region.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I rise to speak on House consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018. I thank Chairman Thornberry and Ranking Member Smith and the Armed Services Committee for their work on the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018. As a senior member of the House Committee on Homeland Security and Judiciary, I take our role in Congress as stewards of our nation's security seriously. I offer my thanks and appreciation to the men and women of the armed services who place themselves in harm's way each day for the safety and security of our nation's people. The National Defense Authorization Act's purpose is to address the threats our nation faces not just today, but into the future. This makes our work vital to our national interest and it should reflect our strong commitment to ensure that the men and women of our Armed Services receive the benefits and support that they deserve for their faithful service. This bill encompasses a number of initiatives designed to confront the military challenges posed by violent extremism, terrorists engaging in ground wars, making more efficient the work of protecting America, addresses defense of our nation's computing networks and infrastructure, the medical health needs of men and women in the armed services, and extends economic and education opportunity to small minority and women owned businesses. We live in a dangerous world, where threats are not always easily identified, and our enemies are not bound by borders. Russia's aggression towards the United States has long been understood, but in 2016 the stakes were raised in terms of how far they would go to harm our nation and Democratic institutions when they interfered in our national election. Since September 11, 2001, we have kept a steadfast commitment to ending the threat of global terror. Boko Haram, ISIL, and AI Shabaab remind us of how fragile our nation's security could be without a well trained and equipped military. The introduction of cyber offensive actions against the United States and our interest has altered the definition of war and with it our understanding about what is needed to combat a unique type of enemy that fights under no flag, for any nation, and can cause harm to computing networks. I appreciate the House Armed Services Committee's continued support of our national defense and support a number of provisions in H.R. 1735, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year (FY) 2018, such as authorities that support ongoing operations. The amendments offered to this bill offered opportunities to address these and other Administration concerns that will improve the bill. Let me discuss briefly the amendments I offered that were adopted by the House and included in the final version of the bill. 1. Jackson Lee Amendment No. 56 calls for increased collaboration with NIH to combat Triple Negative Breast Cancer and provides $10 million in appropriations. 2. Jackson Lee Amendment No. 76 dIrects the Department of Defense to prepare contingency plans to assist relief organizations in delivering humanitarian aid in South Sudan and to deescalate conflict. 3. Jackson Lee Amendment No. 83 directs the Secretary of Defense to prepare against deployment of North Korean nuclear ICBMs to prevent damage or destruction of satellites critical to U.S. national defense and global communications. These Jackson Lee Amendments are straightforward, and make improvements to the bill. There were 14 additional Jackson Lee Amendments that were not included in the Rule for consideration of the Fiscal Year 2018 National Defense Authorization Act. The Jackson Lee Amendments to H.R. 2810 are in four categories: 1. National Security Amendments that protect and promote national security, national defense and U.S. foreign policy interests; 2. Counterespionage and Deterrence Amendments that uphold the interests of American citizens at home and abroad. 3. Healthcare, technology and know-how, and Opportunities for Women Amendments that promote advances in PTSD and Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Research and Professional Development and Business opportunities for women. 4. Cybersecurity Amendments that support the work of the DOD to ensure defense of our nation against cyberattacks. I have submitted six amendments that protect and promote national security, national defense or U.S. foreign policy interests: 1. Jackson Lee Amendment No. 175 authorizes the Secretary of Defense to provide technical assistance by U.S. military women to military women abroad combating terrorism, human and narcotics trafficking and their impact on women and girls. 2. Jackson Lee Amendment No. 166 condemns the actions of Boko Haram and directs the Secretary of Defense to provide technical assistance to Nigeria in establishing a central missing persons' database and a Victims Relief Fund. 3. Jackson Lee Amendment No. 187 expresses Sense of Congress that the International Military Education and Training (IMET) program is an important U.S. foreign policy and national defense instrument of value and asks Secretary of Defense to make maximum use of it. 4. Jackson Lee Amendment No. 184 directs Secretary of State to inform Congress of the feasibility of providing training, equipment and logistics to improve air traffic control systems in African countries where U.S. military operations require it. 5. The Jackson Lee Amendments No. 76 and No. 83 that were accepted by the Rules Committee and are under consideration by the House addressed the humanitarian crisis in South Sudan, and North Korea's Intercontinental Ballistic Missile Program. These six Jackson Lee amendments would have enhanced the effectiveness of the NDAA by protecting and promoting U.S. foreign policy and national security interests. I have submitted three amendments to defend against espionage and provide deterrence against threats to the United States: 1. Jackson Lee Amendment No. 177 authorized the Secretary of Defense to work with local partners in providing security at civilian nuclear research centers to assure nuclear weapons do not fall into the possession of terrorists or rogue nations. 2. Jackson Lee Amendment No. 181 required the Secretary of Defense to report to Congress the programs employed to ensure Department of Defense National Security Education Program students studying abroad are trained to recognize, resist, and report against foreign governmental recruitment efforts. 3. Jackson Lee Amendment No. 179 directed the Secretary of Defense to conduct and report to Congress the results of a study on whether requirement to notify Voting Action Officer within 10 days of registration in service member duty reassignment state imposes significant burden on military voters. Two of these amendments sought to address known threats to our national interest and one would have assured that changes in voter registration rules for persons serving in the military would not impose an undue burden to their right to vote at a polling location instead of by absentee ballot. Jackson Lee Amendment No. 177 (Secure Nuclear Material in developing nations) There is a wide array of peaceful uses for nuclear material such as nuclear power plant power generation; radiation treatment for cancer and other medical conditions; as well as research at academic and research institutions. China and India are both pursuing nuclear power as an option to dependence on fossil fuels, while oil-rich Gulf nations are considering nuclear power with the hope of exporting more oil. There are 65 reactors being built around the world, and 69 percent of them are in Brazil, Russia, India and China. India has no fossil fuel resources and is expanding its use of nuclear power to address shortfalls in electric generation capacity that is out stripped by economic growth. India goal is to have nuclear power be the source for 50 percent of its electricity needs by 2050. I have submitted six amendments to protect women and health: 4. Jackson Lee Amendment No. 224 provides $2.5 million increase in funding to combat Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. 5. Jackson Lee Amendment No. 180 enforces the title and section ``Minority and Business Ownership'' to include HUZ and disadvantaged businesses. 6. Jackson Lee Amendment No. 226 directs the Secretary of the Navy to report to Congress on the ability to apply desalination technologies for drought relief for both military and civilian purposes. 7. Jackson Lee Amendment No. 431 directs that the Office of Women's Business Ownership shall include a focus on outreach and engagement of minority women owned businesses. All six of these amendments enhance the NDAA. I have submitted two amendments to ensure greater cybersecurity capacity and resource allocation for the purpose of protecting America's Cyber Defense interest: 1. Jackson Lee Amendment No. 182 directs the Secretary of Defense to develop plans for early detection, mitigation, and defense against state-sponsored cyberattacks regarding elections and voter engagement efforts. 2. Jackson Lee Amendment No. 183 directs the Secretary of Defense to develop effective countermeasures to defend networks against attacks by cyber weapons. Both of these Jackson Lee amendments offered improvements to the NDAA's protection of America's cyber security. In addition to these Amendments, I am in support of the AUMF Amendment offered by Representatives Walter Jones and John Conyers that was not made in order by the Rules Committee. Congress has an obligation to the American people to debate the issue of war. Our military is now in theaters of war without Congressional approval which is in contravention to the Constitution because it states that only Congress has the power to declare war. We must continue to direct our efforts as a body to ensure that our troops remain the best equipped and prepared military force in the world. They are not just soldiers they are sons and daughters, husbands and wives, brothers and sisters--they are some of the people we represent as Members of Congress. Support for them is a sacred obligation of Congress, both to those who are at risk on battlefields and serving as the guard against threats around the world, but they are also those who have returned home from war.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to the Franks Amendment No. 13 to H.R. 2810, the ``National Defense Authorization Act'' (NDAA), which would require the federal government to conduct so- called strategic assessments of Islamic religious doctrine. I am shocked and appalled at this blatant attempt to single out Muslims for a religious test in a direct violation of the Constitution and our nation's founding principles. It frankly astounds me that such a hateful, discriminatory, and incoherent piece of religious bigotry has been made in order for this bill and is under consideration today. To illustrate the sheer absurdity of this amendment, I would like to offer the amendment's sponsor a brief lesson on the history of religious persecution and freedom in the United States. In 1620, a group of English-born Puritans braved the Atlantic Ocean in order to found Plymouth Colony in the New World of America--they were fleeing, above all else, religious persecution in England, where discriminatory religious tests were common practice and the law. On September 17, 1878, two and a half centuries later, 39 delegates signed the United States Constitution; in Article 6, Section 3 of this Constitution, they wrote that ``no religious test shall ever be required . . . under the United States.'' In the First Amendment, they went even further: ``Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.'' Every child in America knows these facts about our nation's founding. The essential human right to freedom of worship, without fear of persecution or discrimination, is explicitly written into our genetic code as Americans. What we do not teach our children is to associate any particular religion with the violent acts of a few extremists who claim to belong to that religion. We understand that such an accusation would be irrational, intellectually dishonest, and ineffective at identifying and combatting the real roots of violent extremism. It would be remiss for me to neglect to point out that the Ku Klux Klan was founded and continues to identify as a Christian organization, or that racial terrorist Dylann Roof, who murdered nine innocent churchgoers in cold blood, was himself a member of a Lutheran church. Yet Representative Franks' amendment does not require any strategic assessments of ``violent or unorthodox'' Christian doctrine. Instead, Amendment No. 13 wrongfully casts the specter of terrorism upon all Muslim communities and individuals through the use of coded language like ``strategic assessments.'' Nowhere does this Amendment acknowledge the fact that many Muslims, both domestically and abroad, have been contributing wholeheartedly to the U.S.'s mission to end violent extremism. Amendment No. 13 mandates the identification of key Islamic leaders who practice any form of Islam, with no exception for those who have never violated any laws--this is not only a completely nonsensical proposition, but a dangerous violation of the principles of religious liberty, individual privacy, and equal protection as established by the First Amendment. Amendment No. 13 requires the Secretary of Defense to create a ``team of experts'' to determine which practices and beliefs of the Islam are legitimate or acceptable--another direct violation of the Constitution. Mr. Chair, this Amendment is a stain on our national honor and pride as Americans. Muslim Americans make up a vital part of our nation's diverse, multicultural fabric; every day, they make valuable contributions to the arts, the economy, academia, government, military services, and much more. If it is passed, Amendment No. 13 would only further stigmatize and alienate a vibrant community of Americans who have been subject to harassment and discrimination for years, and especially under the Trump Administration. We are better than that and I urge all Members to join me in rejecting this terrible legislation.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate Bastille Day. On this day we are reminded of the extraordinary resilience and democratic values that have made France an inspiration to the entire world. Today also marks the one-year anniversary of the devastating and tragic loss of life last year in Nice. We remember to keep the injured and the deceased in our hearts, and we remind ourselves of the strong, persevering character of the French Republic. Time and time again, all throughout history, the French were able to demonstrate strong leadership through tragic times, and that is why the United States stands in unyielding solidarity with the people of France, which like the United States, is one of the most welcoming nations in the world. Mr. Speaker, for centuries Paris has been known to the world as the City of Light. The title is richly deserved, because Paris has been a world leader in the march of human progress in the arts, culture, science, democratic theory and governance. I am proud to mention that in my own city of Houston, we commemorate Bastille Day with special celebrations that feature art, dancing, and food. France embraces the challenges and opportunities of the modern world. France, and the values it cherishes, showcases a nation that has faced and prevailed against the most sinister of lethal adversaries. However, we will always ensure that they never confront these adversaries alone; they will be joined by the United States and the other countries of the civilized world. The French are justly proud of their national motto; ``Liberte, egalite, fraternite,'' (liberty, equality, fraternity) and no perpetrator can ever succeed in leading them to renounce their heritage of freedom and justice.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, we are not Republicans and we are not Democrats. We are Americans, and we draw together around the protecting of America's security. With that in mind, you can imagine my shock as a member of the Judiciary Committee to find out that a KGB agent was in a meeting with Jared Kushner, who now has a security clearance, and Donald Trump, Jr., among others. I was shocked to find out that the lawyer who was present in that meeting had a $200 million lawsuit to stop being sued on the money laundering, and that that lawsuit was settled by the Trump Justice Department for $6 million--$200 million down to $6 million. To the American people, that means that the $200 million that was owed to this government turned out to be $6 million. That is why I will have a resolution to ask the President to step down. And, as well, to introduce a resolution--a constitutional resolution--to begin a constitutional investigation into whether or not we are protected here in this Nation. Our security is our greatest priority. I would also suggest that the sanctions bill that was voted on in the Senate must be voted on in the House now. We cannot still continue to hide the ball. Sanction the KGB, sanction Mr. Putin, sanction Russia. They are, in fact, here to demolish the democracy of this Nation.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I want to thank Chairman Thornberry and Ranking Member Smith for shepherding this legislation to the floor and for their devotion to the men and women of the Armed Forces who risk their lives to keep our nation safe. Mr. Chair, thank you for the opportunity to explain the Jackson Lee Amendment to H.R. 2810, the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2018, which authorizes $2.5 million in increased funding to combat and treat Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. Had it been made in order, this Jackson Lee amendment would have provided additional funding to be used toward outreach activities targeting hard to reach veterans; especially those who are homeless or reside in underserved urban and rural areas. Mr. Chair, along with traumatic brain injury, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD is the signature wound suffered by the brave men and women who fought or are fighting in Afghanistan, Iraq, and far off lands to defend the values and freedom we hold dear. For those of us whose daily existence is not lived in harm's way, it is difficult to imagine the horrific images seen by American servicemen and women deployed in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other theaters of war. In an instant a suicide bomber, an IED, or an insurgent can obliterate your best friend and right in front of your face. Yet, you are trained and expected to continue on with the mission, and you do, even though you may not even have reached your 20th birthday. But there always comes a reckoning. And it usually comes after the stress and trauma of battle is over and you are alone with your thoughts and memories. And the horror of those desperate and dangerous encounters with the enemy and your own mortality come flooding back. PTSD was first brought to public attention in relation to war veterans, but it can result from a variety of traumatic incidents, such as torture, being kidnapped or held captive, bombings, or natural disasters such as floods or earthquakes. People with PTSD may startle easily, become emotionally numb (especially in relation to people with whom they used to be close), lose interest in things they used to enjoy, have trouble feeling affectionate, be irritable, become more aggressive, or even become violent. They avoid situations that remind them of the original incident, and anniversaries of the incident are often very difficult. Most people with PTSD repeatedly relive the trauma, called flashbacks, in their thoughts during the day and in nightmares when they sleep. A person having a flashback may lose touch with reality and believe that the traumatic incident is happening all over again. Mr. Chair, the fact of the matter is that most veterans with PTSD also have other psychiatric disorders, which are a consequence of PTSD. These veterans have co-occurring disorders, which include depression, alcohol and/or drug abuse problems, panic, and/or other anxiety disorders. The Jackson Lee Amendment recognizes that these soldiers are first and foremost, human and that they carry their experiences with them. Ask a veteran of Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan about the frequency of nightmares they experience, and one will realize that serving in the Armed Forces leaves a lasting impression, whether good or bad. The Jackson Lee Amendment would have helped ensure that ``no soldier is left behind'' by addressing the urgent need for more outreach toward hard to reach veterans suffering from PTSD, especially those who are homeless or reside in underserved urban and rural areas of our country. Mr. Chair, I also want to speak in support of the amendment to H.R. 2810, the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2018, offered by Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Conyers, and supported by Congresswoman Barbara Lee of California, Congressman Walter Jones of North Carolina, myself, and many other colleagues but not made in order by the Rules Committee. The Conyers Amendment is simple and straightforward, stating: ``Nothing in this Act shall be construed as authorizing the use of force against North Korea.'' Interviewed by Reuters in the Oval Office on Apri1 27, 2017, the President stated: ``There is a chance that we could end up having a major, major conflict with North Korea. Absolutely.'' According to media reports, military strikes against North Korea remain an option for the President and his national security team. Earlier this year, the Trump Administration sent an aircraft carrier and a nuclear-powered submarine to the region in a show of force. Of course, direct U.S. military action runs the risk of massive North Korean retaliation and huge casualties in Japan and South Korea and among U.S. forces in both countries. The Conyers Amendment would make clear and explicit that nothing in the FY2018 NDAA can be construed as congressional authorization or acquiescence regarding the use of military force against North Korea. The Framers understood that while the military does the fighting, the entire nation goes to war. That is why the Framers lodged the power to declare war in the Congress, the branch of government closest to the people. They knew that the decision to go to war was too important to be left to the whim of a single person, no matter how wise or well-informed he or she might be. The President must consult with Congress and to obtain an AUMF before undertaking any military offensive against North Korea. Over the last 16 years, we have seen 3 Presidents use the 2001 Afghanistan AUMF as a blank check to engage in serious military action. In 2016, the Congressional Research Service issued a report detailing 37 unclassified uses of this authorization in 14 countries, including for operations at Guantanamo Bay, warrantless wiretapping, and recent military action in Libya, Syria, Somalia, and Yemen. The overly broad 2001 AUMF represents a critical deterioration of Congressional oversight, which should be repealed, rather than repeated with respect to North Korea. As our brave service members are deployed around the world in combat zones, Congress is missing in action. As provided under the War Powers Resolution of 1973, absent a Congressional declaration of war or authorization for the use of military force, the President as Commander-in-Chief has constitutional power to engage the U.S. armed forces in hostilities only in the case of a national emergency created by an attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces. As a co-equal branch of government, it is Congress's right and responsibility to be fully consulted regarding any potential plans to conduct military operations in North Korea, to assess whether such action is in the national security interest of the United States and its allies, and to withhold or grant authorization for the use of military force based on this assessment. As we have learned from the painful and bitter experience of the past 16 years, at the initiation of hostilities, the costs in terms of blood and treasure of U.S. military interventions abroad are often underestimated and the benefits overstated. For example, more than 6,800 American service members gave the last full measure of devotion to their country on battlefields in Afghanistan and Iraq, with hundreds of thousands more returning with physical, emotional, or psychological wounds that may never heal. The direct economic cost of the war in Afghanistan exceeds $1.07 trillion, including $773 billion in Overseas Contingency Operations funds, an increase of $243 billion to the Department of Defense base budget, and an increase of $54.2 billion to the Veterans Administration budget to address the human costs of the military involvement in Afghanistan. We should not repeat the mistakes of the past and my position on this issue is directly aligned with the will of the American people. I commend my colleague, Congressman Conyers for offering this important amendment and am disappointed that it was not made in order. I am confident that depriving Members of the opportunity to debate and vote on the Conyers Amendment will strengthen our resolve to restore Congress's preeminent constitutional role in the decision to take the nation to war. If it had been made in order and approved, Jackson Lee Amendment No. 179 would have directed the Secretary of Defense to conduct, and report to Congress within 180 days, the results of a study regarding whether the requirement to notify a Voting Action Officer within 10 days of registering to vote in a state where a service member resides, due to a duty reassignment, imposes a significant burden on military voters. Members on both sides of the aisle want our men and women in the armed services to be able to vote. Unfortunately, they often cannot, despite the option of casting an absentee ballot if they are deployed overseas. For most of U.S. history, military personnel have been barred from voting by State laws and constitutions that specifically restricted military personnel from voting. Following the Civil War, many of these laws began to change because so many citizens served in the military. Today, there is a Federal Voting Assistance Program that assists military voters and their families living in the United States and abroad to vote in public elections. Work has been done and is continuing to be done to make the absentee voting experience for military voters as easy as possible, but there are still issues with receiving a ballot and being able to return it by the deadline. The military population is extremely mobile. Since voting materials are postal materials that cannot be forwarded, it is important for them to provide their election office their current address annually, as well as after every move, because information provided is the only way of election agencies can contact them. Military personnel are often relocated because of reassignments, which are outside of their control. The process for voting is difficult for persons serving in the military and adding a requirement that military voters who decide to register where they may have been reassigned may need more than 10 days to meet the requirement of notice to their Voting Action Officer. This Jackson Lee Amendment directs the Department of Defense to study and report to Congress the impact the 10 day requirement and whether it imposes an undue burden on military voters who seek to cast their ballots in person. Military voters should have the option of casting an in-person ballot, while they serve our nation at a station or on assignment in the United States. This Jackson Lee Amendment would have ensured that our men and women of the armed services have equal access to the ballot and the opportunity to cast a vote, without fear of violating a 10 day deadline. I am disappointed that this Jackson Lee Amendment was not made in order, but I will continue working with my colleagues to find ways to ensure our armed services men and women have equal and just access to voice their opinion by casting a voting ballot. Mr. Chair, thank you for the opportunity to explain the Jackson Lee Amendment to H.R. 2810, the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2018, which would have required the Secretary of Defense to report to Congress on programs and procedures employed to ensure students studying abroad through Department of Defense National Security Education Programs are trained to recognize, resist, and report against recruitment efforts by agents of foreign governments. This training would have been helpful for students such as Glenn Shriver, an outstanding college student-majoring in international relations at a college in Michigan and interested in seeing the world. Seeking new experiences, Glenn traveled to China during the 2002-2003 academic year to Study Abroad in one of Shanghai's universities and practice his Mandarin. During his study abroad program in China, Glenn developed an interest in Chinese culture and considerably improved his fluency in Mandarin, so after graduating from college in 2004, he returned to the China to continue his language studies and to look for work. After seeing potential in Glenn, a Chinese official going by the name of Amanda approached him and asked him to write papers and paid him $120. In the following months, Glenn took some $70,000 from the woman and her associates, and eventually sought a U.S. government job with the aim of accessing classified information with the purpose of providing it to Chinese officials until his scheme was uncovered and he was arrested by the FBI in 2010. To a recent college graduate, $70,000 seems like a lot of money if they are graduating with high student loan debt, and the promise of even more can be too tempting to pass up. There are other means and methods for foreign agents to attempt to course, trick or in some other way deceive a college student into becoming a tool of that government. The Jackson Lee Amendment would have laid the foundation for protected students attending domestic institutions of higher education by providing them with the training necessary to recognize, resist, and report recruitment efforts by agents of foreign governments when they occur in the United States. Congress should not assume that foreign governments seeking to recruit students attending institutions of higher learning will limit their efforts to students studying abroad. Had it been made in order and adopted, the Jackson Lee Amendment simply would require the Secretary of Defense to report to Congress on whether U.S. students attending institutions in the United States would benefit from similar or some aspects of the training described in the bill. We have seen and learned so much regarding Russia's efforts to influence our nation's elections in large part by leveraging relationships between Russian agents and key individuals in President Trump's Campaign. Although the work to investigate what took place continues, we should take steps today to make sure that young people attending institutions of higher learning are equipped with the knowledge and training needed to resist influence of a foreign government. Although I am disappointed this important amendment was not made to order, I will continue to work with my colleagues to find ways to train our young people studying abroad on ways to detect, resist, and report attempts to recruit them by hostile foreign nations and actors. Had it been made in order and approved, Jackson Lee Amendment No. 182 would direct the Secretary of Defense to develop plans for early detection, mitigation, and defense against state sponsored cyberattacks targeting federal public election assets, election administrators, election workers, or voter engagement efforts. The aim of this amendment is to ensure that elections, and the peaceful transfer of power, which are pillars of our democracy, remain secure and are not undermined by external factors. Last year, during one of the most contentious elections we have seen, a foreign state commenced a series of spearphishing attacks with the goal of penetrating the networks of a variety of Republican and Democratic Party organizations. This foreign adversary was Russia, whose intelligence agencies worked under the directive of Vladimir Putin with the goal of making Donald Trump the 45th President of the United States. Russian interference may have begun as early as 2015, and lasted through the winter of 2016. While at first, the hacking may have been done with the aim of foreign intelligence collection, by July 2016, Russian intelligence weaponized their information and worked to damage Hillary Clinton's campaign. While the exact extent of Russia's influence on our elections may never be known, the fact is that Russia successfully intervened in our democracy and American intelligence agencies have determined that they have the capability and motivation to do so once more. The Jackson Lee amendment would have helped to ensure that this never happens again. Neither Russia, nor any other country, will ever have a say in our democratic processes. The Jackson Lee Amendment would protect our election administrators, our election workers, and our voter engagement efforts. I am disappointed that this amendment was not made in order, but I will continue to work with my colleagues to ensure that the United States has the proper technology, capability, and methods to defend our elections against malicious foreign state-sponsored cyberattacks.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Washington and the gentleman from Texas for their leadership, making their way through a very important action on behalf of the American people, and that is the defense authorization. I thank them for the amendments that were made en bloc, and I hope to speak quickly about these important amendments. I am very grateful. Over the years, I have consistently introduced the triple negative breast cancer amendment because of the many women in the United States military who benefit from the research necessary. My amendment authorizes and encourages increased collaboration between the DOD and the National Institutes of Health regarding combating triple negative breast cancer. It has a particular impact on African-American women, but it impacts White women, Hispanic women, and others, as well. This is a serious illness that affects between 10 to 17 percent of female breast cancer patients and is more likely to cause death. My amendment would help to save lives. I am delighted because this would impact Active-Duty women, as well as veterans; but, in particular, Active-Duty women with testing. It affects women under 50 years of age, and, therefore, women who would be in the United States military. I am very grateful for the acceptance of the South Sudan amendment. My amendment directs the Department of Defense to prepare contingency plans to assist relief organizations and delivery of humanitarian assistance efforts in South Sudan and to engage in consultation with South Sudan military counterparts to deescalate conflict. Famine in South Sudan has been created by conflict. On February 20, 2017, famine was declared formally in two counties of Unity State. 100,000 people will be in jeopardy of dying from famine. It has come about between the conflicts between the President and his former Chief of Staff, or his former Vice President. We need to have the engagement to save lives, and I thank the support for this amendment. Likewise, the North Korean ICBMs. As I was in Europe, during the Fourth of July, my amendment, in particular, supports upholding the goals of the 1963 Treaty Banning Nuclear Weapon Tests in the atmosphere, in outer space, and under water; addresses the fact that our Nation should take the next step in preparing for a nuclear North Korea; and establishes that the stakes may be far greater. We have all been discussing the question of North Korea and ICBMs. We have to be studious in assessing it. Let me also say, however, that I am disappointed that the amendment dealing with the AUMF on North Korea did not get in. I believe it is an important issue that we must be concerned about. I want to continue to work with the committee on PTSD and ensuring that, even though authorized, more funding can come. I had asked for $2.5 million. And then I want to indicate the importance of recognizing, in light of the large footprint that Russia now has in its effort to undermine the democracy in this country, that we be very concerned about recruitment of college students by foreign agents. I had an amendment for us to be concerned about that. I look forward to working with the committee. I plan to introduce this as legislation because a young man by the name of Glenn Shriver, an outstanding college student, majoring in international relations at a college in Michigan, while doing a study abroad in China, developed an interest in Chinese culture, and he was sought after by the Chinese. I also want to work with the committee on addressing the question of elections for our soldiers. And, finally, I want to make sure that we stop cyber attacks by foreign entities into our elections. But, I am asking support for my amendment on the Korea ICBMs, the Triple-Negative Breast Cancer, and the support of helping humanitarian aid get to South Sudan. Mr. Chair, I thank the ranking member and chairman, and I ask support for my amendments. Mr. Chair, I want to thank Chairman Thornberry and Ranking Member Smith for shepherding this legislation to the floor and for their devotion to the men and women of the Armed Forces who risk their lives to keep our nation safe. I especially wish to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for including Jackson Lee Amendment No. 56 in the Chairman's En Bloc Amendment to H.R. 2810, the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2018. This Jackson Lee Amendment authorizes and encourages increased collaboration between the DOD and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to combat Triple Negative Breast Cancer. ``Triple Negative Breast Cancer'' is a term used to describe breast cancers whose cells do not have estrogen receptors and progesterone receptors, and do not have an excess of the ``HER2'' protein on their cell membrane of tumor cells. This makes commonly used test and methods to detect breast cancer not as effective. This is a serious illness that effects between 10-17 percent of female breast cancer patients and this condition is more likely to cause death than the most common form of breast cancer. Seventy percent of women with metastatic triple negative breast cancer do not live more than five years after being diagnosed. The Jackson Lee Amendment will help to save lives. TNBC disproportionately impacts younger women, African American women, Hispanic/Latina women, and women with a ``BRCA1C genetic mutation, which is also prevalent in Jewish women. TNBC usually affects women under 50 years of age and makes up more than 30 percent of all breast cancer diagnoses in African American. African American women are far more susceptible to this dangerous subtype than white or Hispanic women. The collaboration between the Department of Defense and NIH to combat Triple Negative Breast Cancer can support the development of multiple targeted therapies for this devastating disease. A Triple negative breast cancer is a specific strain of breast cancer for which no targeted treatment is available. The American Cancer Society calls this particular strain of breast cancer ``an aggressive subtype associated with lower survival rates.'' Triple negative breast cancer is a term used to describe breast cancers whose cells do not have estrogen receptors and progesterone receptors, and do not have an excess of the HER2 protein on their cell membrane of tumor cells. In 2011, the Centers for Disease Control predicted that year 26,840 black women would be diagnosed with TNBC. The overall incidence rate of breast cancer is 10 percent lower in African American women than white women. African American women have a five year survival rate of 78 percent after diagnosis as compared to 90 percent for white women. The incidence rate of breast cancer among women under 45 is higher for African American women compared to white women. Triple Negative Breast Cancer cells account for between 13 percent and 25 percent of all breast cancer in the United States and are usually of a higher grade and size, are more aggressive and more likely to metastasize, and onset at a much younger age. Currently, 70 percent of women with metastatic triple negative breast cancer do not live more than five years after being diagnosed. African American women are 3 times more likely to develop triple- negative breast cancer than white women. African-American women have prevalence TNBC of 26 percent versus 16 percent in non-African-Americans women. African-American women are more likely to be diagnosed with larger tumors and more advanced stages of breast cancer. Currently there is no targeted treatment for TNBC exists. Breast cancers with specific, targeted treatment methods, such as hormone and gene based strains, have higher survival rates than the triple negative subtype, highlighting the need for a targeted treatment. Because there continues to be a need for research funding for biomarker selection, drug discovery, and clinical trial designs that will lead to the early detection of TNBC and to the development of multiple targeted therapies to treat this awful disease, the Jackson Lee Amendment is essential to paving a way for advancements in these areas. That is why I am pleased that Jackson Lee Amendment No. 56 has been included in the Chairman's En Bloc Amendment and I urge all Members to join me in voting for its adoption. I also wish to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for including Jackson Lee Amendment No. 168 in the Chairman's En Bloc Amendment to H.R. 2810, the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2018. This Jackson Lee Amendment directs the Department of Defense to prepare contingency plans to assist relief organizations in delivery of humanitarian assistance efforts in South Sudan and to engage in consultation with South Sudan military counterparts to deescalate conflict. As a member of the South Sudan Caucus, and the sponsor of H.R. 48, the ``Equal Rights and Access for the Women of South Sudan Act,'' I have long advocated and supported emergency assistance to South Sudan, the world's newest nation, located in the center of Africa and bordered by six countries. Such emergency assistance is desperately needed now to respond to the famine in South Sudan. On February 20, 2017 famine was declared formally in two counties of Unity State, which is located in the northern region of South Sudan. The United Nations currently estimates that more than 100,000 people in two Unity State counties are directly affected by the famine. In addition, food security experts are concerned that famine will spread. According to expert analyses, in the absence of urgent humanitarian action, as many as 4.9 million South Sudanese, about 4o percent of the country's population, face the grim and certain prospect of starvation. In 1998 the region suffered from a famine spurred by civil war and approximately 70,000 to several hundred thousand people died during that famine. Although South Sudan has previously experienced widespread food insecurity, the present famine crisis is different because it is almost entirely man-made. South Sudan is rich in oil, but following decades of civil war it is also one of the least developed regions on earth--only 15 percent of its citizens own a mobile phone and there are very few tarmac roads in an area larger in land mass than Spain and Portugal combined. This makes the Nile River, which flows through regional centers, an important transport and trade route. Since South Sudan overwhelmingly voted to break away from Sudan in 2011, the government's main concern has been to get oil flowing following disagreements with the regime in Khartoum. There have been a few small armed rebellions, border clashes and deadly cattle feuds but these have all taken place far from the capital city of Juba. Signs of friction within the governing party, Sudan People's Liberation Movement (SPLM), came when President Salva Kiir, an ethnic Dinka, the country's largest group, fired his deputy Riek Machar, who is from the second largest tribe, the Nuer. President Kiir believes Mr. Machar was behind a coup plot to oust him and seize power. Mr. Machar denies the accusations, but has publicly criticized Mr. Kiir for failing to tackle corruption and vowed to challenge President Kiir for leadership of the SPLM. It is not clear what led to the breach in their relationship but what started out as a political squabble has escalated into ethnic violence. The loyalties of the South Sudan army are divided with each of the principals commanding significant military support and forces loyal to each man have clashed around the country. And some of the most intense fighting has taken place in areas where famine is most severe. Compounding matters, South Sudan is awash with guns after decades of conflict and there is a history of ethnic tension for politicians to exploit if they believe that could help them gain, or remain in, power. Complicating this situation is the fact that while the Government of South Sudan has reportedly promised access to the most at-risk areas, humanitarian organizations remain unable to provide vital food, water and shelter in many locations. The actions of South Sudan Government in prohibiting humanitarian assistance from getting to starving communities has undermined the most proactive attempts by the United States and others to address what has now become a famine. The Jackson Lee Amendment directs the Department of Defense to prepare contingency plans to assist relief organizations delivering humanitarian assistance and consult with South Sudan's military leaders to deescalate intra-party conflict, put petty disputes aside, and to put the well-being of the South Sudan people first. Mr. Chair, let me conclude by observing that while bringing an end to the civil war and humanitarian relief the famine-stricken in South Sudan must be our first order of business, it is also very important to note that all of us who worked to secure its independence want the country to succeed and become a productive and constructive member of the community of nations. That is why I have reintroduced the ``Equal Rights and Access for the Women of South Sudan Act'' (H.R. 48), which promotes the human rights of women in South Sudan as the country transitions to a long-term government and to ensure women enjoy the right to participate fully in the political and economic life of the country. Despite its newly won independence women in South Sudan continue to face brutal violations of their human rights. A lack of infrastructure as well as gender inequality has the potential to regress much of the progress that has been made in South Sudan. Such a lack of human development factors only furthers the marginalization of women in South Sudan. The ``Equal Rights and Access for the Women of South Sudan Act'' puts equal rights and access for the women of South Sudan at the forefront by: 1. Encouraging the appointment of women to high level positions within Republic of South Sudan Government; 2. Ensuring that a significant portion of United States development, humanitarian, and relief assistance is channeled to local and United States-based South Sudanese organizations, particularly South Sudanese women's organizations; 3. Providing long-term financial assistance for primary, secondary, higher, nontraditional, and vocational education for South Sudanese girls, women, boys, and men; 4. Providing financial assistance to build health infrastructure and deliver high-quality comprehensive health care programs, including primary, maternal, child, reproductive, and mental health care; 5. Requiring military training regarding the protection, rights, and particular needs of women and emphasizing that violations of women's rights are intolerable and should be prosecuted; and 6. Taking all necessary steps to ensure that internally displaced South Sudanese women are directly receiving food aid, shelter, relief supplies, and other services from United States-sponsored programs. Mr. Chair, as a nation, we should support the Republic of South Sudan in its efforts to become a freer, more equitable society that respects, supports, and endorses the rights of women. That is why I am pleased that Jackson Lee Amendment No. 168 has been included in the Chairman's En Bloc Amendment and I urge all Members to join me in voting for its adoption. Mr. Chair, thank you for allowing me the opportunity to explain the Jackson Lee Amendment No. 83, as designated by the Rule governing debate on H.R. 2810, the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2018. This Jackson Lee Amendment directs the Secretary of Defense to develop measures to defend against deployment of nuclear ICBMs by North Korea to protect against damage or destruction of satellites critical to U.S national defense and global communications, International Space Station, and other vital assets. I request the support of my colleagues for this Jackson Lee Amendment because it: upholds the goals of the 1963 Treaty Banning Nuclear Weapon Tests in the atmosphere, in outer space, and underwater; addresses the fact that our nation should take the next step in preparing for a nuclear North Korea; establishes that the stakes may be far greater than a nuclear North Korea when they may have the capacity to launch a device using an ICBM, because of our nation's dependence on the global telecommunications infrastructure that includes Geo-stationary satellites as well as its implications for Space Stations and our space program; and may have serious consequences for a range of environmental factors that are critical to the health and wellbeing of our planet. On July 4th, our nation's Independence Day, the U.S. confirmed that North Korea had achieved a major step toward its objective of delivering a nuclear weapon as far as U.S. shores. This test represents a new escalation of the threat that a nuclear North Korea poses to the United States and our interest. The launch of Hwasong-14 missile reached a range of approximately 4160 miles, a distance capable of reaching Alaska, according to experts. The timing of this test launch was confirmed as a calculated insult when North Korean Leader Kim Jung-Un stated that the missile was a ``gift to Americans for the July 4th Anniversary.'' The United States must attempt to manage this situation and retain the peace in the region. We understand the end to the Korean War was a Armistice Agreement signed in 1953, that put into place a cease fire. North Korea still views itself as being at war with the United States. Otto Warmbier, an American college student who died days following his release from a North Korean prison was held as a prisoner of war. Given the unstable nature of the North Korean government, which has political purges in recent years that included members of North Korean President's Kim Jongun's family we can hold little hope for cooperation that is essential to avoid unintended conflicts and reduce tensions with its neighbors. A nuclear-armed North Korea does not mean that country will be able to shoulder the burden of managing a responsible nuclear weapons program, given their single minded pursuit of a nuclear armed ICBM. Nuclear arms programs are not always safe or easy for the nation attempting to develop weapons. The United States had its share of near disasters. For example, in 1961, a B-52 Stratofortress carrying two 4-megaton Mark 39 nuclear bombs broke up in mid-air, dropping its nuclear payload in the process over North Carolina. Fortunately, neither bomb detonated averting a catastrophic nuclear incident at our own hands. North Korea's program poses a danger to the entire Korean Peninsula, Japan, and the Asia Pacific region because it insists on using the world as its nuclear testing ground. Even if an unarmed ICBM should land in a populated area, this could trigger a conflict. If North Korea decides to test nuclear weapons on its ICBM rockets this poses serious problems for peace and stability not only that region of the world, but the United States as well. Since the entry of the space age, America has lead and we now rely on the fruits of our investments in manned and unmanned missions to support a global telecommunications infrastructure; a permanent research presence in the International Space Station; plans for going much further. A nuclear North Korea armed with ICBMs can put all of that in jeopardy. We also have interest in the environment within our atmosphere, but also the physical environment that envelopes the earth. One component of the earth's space environment that protects against solar radiation is called the Van Allen Belts. The Van Allen belts present another factor to be considered when talking about North Korea's nuclear program. The Van Allen belts may respond to incoming solar radiation and is known to change size. The primary benefit to people on earth is they protect us from solar radiation. Should North Korea's tests of ICBM include nuclear devices of significant size this could pose risks to not only our satellites, space stations, but extend to the Van Allen Belts. This Jackson Lee amendment allows for a deliberative approach to addressing the potential for a nuclear North Korea. This amendment works to develop plans to develop effective countermeasures to the threat that North Korea's nuclear program presents. I ask that my Colleagues join me in support of this Amendment.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the chairman and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee for the work that we have done in a bipartisan manner on human trafficking, sex trafficking. Let me thank the gentlewoman, the sponsor, and the cosponsor, Mr. Clay, for their leadership on this legislation and for recognizing that we must give direction, as Members of the United States Congress, to how grants are to be utilized. This is a very, very important initiative to be able to help our law enforcement. Let me give you the real life of some of those who have been sex- trafficked. The life of Esperanza: She was waiting for a cousin outside her high school in Mexico one day when a strange man drove up in a car and forced her inside with him and sped way. At that moment, Esperanza had, in effect, become a sex slave. ``He beat me; he raped me,'' she told CNN. A few times, she tried to escape and failed to escape. The gentleman, the person, the perpetrator, the heinous man, Poncho, now 47, always tracked her down and then beat her again. Eventually, Esperanza realized she was pregnant. Three months later, she said Poncho drove her across the Mexican/U.S. border and on to Houston, Texas, where he forced her to work in a cantina called La Costenita. This is a story that reads inside Houston's sex trade. I am a Representative of the congressional district in Houston where we have recognized that it is one of the hot spots of the sex trade. But I do want to acknowledge that law enforcement, a sheriff, the police chief, the mayor, the head of the city, local government, and county government have all come together, Members of Congress, faith organizations, and recognized and made a resistant stance to stand against this sex trade. In fact, I want to applaud them for recognizing the plight of Esperanza. I want to, with enthusiasm, support a bill that would amend the omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to include an additional permissible use of amounts provided as grants under the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant, also known as the Byrne JAG Program, to combat human trafficking, sex trafficking, including programs to reduce the demand for trafficked persons. The legislation was introduced by Mrs. Hartzler and joined by her colleague, Mr. Clay. I am glad to be a cosponsor, as are members of the Judiciary Committee and others. Sadly, sex trafficking, like labor trafficking, is a modern-day form of slavery. It is slavery. The epidemic of this abhorrent practice of sex trafficking continues. First, sex trafficking occurs nationwide, and the data from the National Human Trafficking Hotline shows that reports of human trafficking were almost doubled, from 372 reported cases in 2012 to 670 reported cases in 2016, with sex trafficking accounting for more than 75 percent of all human trafficking. Let me be very clear that sex trafficking is easy. It is very profitable because, unfortunately, you use the vulnerable victim over and over again. Take Esperanza. She was waiting to go to high school. She became pregnant. You would think there would be some form of mercy, but she was forced to be used again, to be sex-trafficked again, and to find herself in a cantina in Houston, Texas, all the way from Mexico. ``I really wanted to speak up, to ask the police for help,'' Esperanza said, but she got caught up by the threats he would make against the little baby girl that she was now raising. After waiting for this horrific nightmare to end, Esperanza eventually was rescued in a raid of that cantina that I remember very well, thanks to the bravery and steadfast approach of Houston's finest, like Agent Steven Roskey, a native Houstonian, then, believe it or not, with the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission that was really going after the cantina for liquor violations. But he was astute and he was law enforcement. Esperanza's prayers were answered. And so, thankfully, although traumatized, Esperanza survived the horrors of sex trafficking, human trafficking. But not all victims are as lucky as that. Esperanza, who fell victim to human trafficking, should absolutely not be treated as a criminal for her involvement. Mr. Speaker, I include the CNN article on Esperanza in the Record. [From CNN, Aug. 12, 2016] Inside Houston's Sex Slave Trade (By Thom Patterson) (CNN) Esperanza was waiting for her cousins outside her high school in Mexico one day, when a strange man drove up in a car, forced her inside with him and sped away. At that moment, Esperanza had in effect become a sex slave. ``He beat and raped me,'' she told CNN's ``The Hunt with John Walsh.'' She said the man--who called himself Poncho--brought her to a madam who showed Esperanza how to charge clients and how to use a condom. A few times Esperanza tried--and failed--to escape, but she said Poncho, now age 47, always tracked her down, and then beat her. Eventually, Esperanza realized she was pregnant. Three months later, she said Poncho drove her across the Mexican-US border and on to Houston, Texas, where he forced her to work in a cantina called La Costenita. She gave birth to a baby girl, but Poncho took the infant away as insurance that Esperanza would keep working as a sex slave and wouldn't escape. ``I really wanted to speak up, to ask the police for help,'' Esperanza said. ``But I got caught up by the threats he would make towards my daughter. I didn't want anything to happen to her.'' Esperanza--whose real name is being withheld for her protection--had become just like the more than 19,000 sex trafficking cases reported in the US since 2007, according to the National Human Trafficking Resource Center. The site says more than 2,600 sex trafficking cases have been reported in the US this year alone, most of them in California. Texas ranks as the nation's number-two sex trafficking state, on the website. For the uninitiated, it's hard to imagine that thousands of young people--overwhelmingly women--have been kidnapped in Mexico or elsewhere and taken against their will to the United States, where they serve as sex slaves. ``I thought human trafficking was just this crime that happens in third world countries. Until I started to look into my city,'' said Rachel Alvarez, a human trafficking case worker for the Houston YMCA. Texas authorities first met Esperanza when they raided La Costenita in 2010. ``Her initial demeanor was just kind of stoic,'' remembered Steve Roskey, who took part in the raid when he was an agent with the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission. ``But then, all of a sudden, we noticed tears start running down her face. She started telling us her story: how she got here, what she was forced to do.'' When she told police that her pimp, a man named Alfonso Diaz-Juarez who also went by ``Poncho,'' was holding her daughter, authorities sprang into action. ``We knocked on Poncho's family members' houses, we knocked on his friends' houses,'' Roskey said. ``It irritated the family and friends so much that (Diaz-Juarez) eventually dropped off the child to a cousin, and at about 3 o'clock in the morning, we got a phone call. The child was safe.'' But Diaz-Juarez was nowhere to be found. Pimps will often lure women from Mexico across the border to the US by promising them better lives, perhaps a better job, Alvarez said. These pimps may get help from people the women already know and trust, like a neighbor. Once they're kidnapped, these women are no longer viewed as people in the eyes of their handlers. They've been reduced to a commodity that can be bought and sold repeatedly in an open market. In the United States, Houston has become one of those markets. ``People see Houston as a hub for human trafficking because of its proximity to the border,'' said FBI special agent Suzanne Bradley. ``It also has access to the I-10 highway corridor, which goes across the country, so if they're smuggling people in and trying to get them into human trafficking in other areas of the country, it's very easy to get them on that I-10 route and disperse them throughout the country.'' After the kidnapped women are brought into the US, the beatings begin as a way to keep them from trying to escape. Their captors threaten to hurt family members. Pimps use fear to keep their sex slaves in bondage. ``Poncho was one of the most violent pimps I've come across in the 11 years I've worked human trafficking,'' said Edwin Chapuseaux, a former investigator with the Harris County Sheriffs Office. ``He did a lot of brutal things, bordering into torture, to make the girls do what he wanted.'' A former sex slave we'll call ``Laura'' said Poncho knew her ``mother's name, her address, everything. He would threaten me, tell me if I talked to anyone that he would hurt my family.'' A pimp would have a lot to lose if a girl walked out the door. ``If a pimp has, let's say, four or five girls, and each one is making him, you know, $2,000, $3,000 a week, do the math, tax-free,'' said Chapuseaux. That works out to a maximum of $780,000 per year. Laura recalls one night when she counted 70 women working. ``The usual was 30 men. We each had to tend to 30 clients a night.'' For years federal and local authorities had been gathering evidence against a huge Houston-area sex trafficking network led by Raquel Medeles Hortencia-Arguello. The woman everyone knew as ``Tencha'' owned a brothel called Las Palmas that offered minor-aged girls to customers who would pay up to $500 an hour, according to the FBI. Coincidentally, as a cautionary move, Tencha had distanced herself from Las Palmas by leasing it to Diaz-Juarez. When police found out, they arrested him on a previous warrant. Diaz-Juarez pleaded guilty in a deal with prosecutors that led to his release several months later. Poncho was back on the loose. Authorities continued to gather evidence in the big sex trafficking case. ``We realized early on that we had potential financial crimes, money laundering involved in the case, so we got the [Internal Revenue Service] involved in it,'' said Bradley. The IRS began following the money, reviewing bank statements, locating assets. ``We did an estimate on how much she made from the room rental, entrance fee, and the condoms for the whole entire period she was operating Las Palmas and that estimated to be about $12.5 million,'' said IRS Special Agent Lucy Tan. When it was time for police to move in and raid Las Palmas, 13 people were arrested. Diaz-Juarez wasn't among them. But Tencha was. Twelve pleaded guilty. Prosecutors charged Tencha with one count of conspiracy to commit sex trafficking, one count of conspiracy to harbor aliens, three counts of money laundering and one count of conspiracy to money launder. Tencha pleaded not guilty. When Tencha began crying in front of the judge, saying she was innocent and she had no idea what was going on, it stirred something inside the freed women who once worked for her. They began to get angry. One by one they decided to take the stand and testify against their former captor. ``You didn't have to speak Spanish to see how much pain they had over what had been done to them, and what they had to do,'' remembered Bradley. ``You could just see it in their face, hear it in their voice.'' Ultimately, the jury found Tencha guilty and the judge sentenced her to life in prison. Despite the legal victory against Tencha, authorities are disturbed by the fact that Diaz-Juarez remains free. ``It's very important to get Poncho arrested and prosecuted, because he will not stop doing what he does until he is arrested and put behind bars,'' said Chapuseaux. Laura, who still fears Poncho, admits she'll ``feel safer when he is captured. There aren't any words to describe what a terrible person he is.''

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, second, we must provide our law enforcement with the necessary tools to fight the epidemic. I would like to thank Agent Roskey, our fervent Houston Police Chief Art Acevedo, and chiefs before him for their entire effort and collaboration. Houston law enforcement has been working diligently, but they have limited funds. To be able to use the Byrne grants in this effective way to save one more life, to stop another little girl from detouring from high school involuntarily and then be steered off, become pregnant, and no mercy given, driven to another country to continue to be utilized, abused, victimized, beaten, I think this legislation clearly speaks to the millions of little girls and boys who are not in line but apt to be victims from all over the world coming to the United States, finding themselves in hot points, victimized, and maybe even tragically losing their life. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss H.R. 2480, the ``Empowering Law Enforcement to Fight Sex Trafficking Demand Act of 2017.'' This bill would amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to include an additional permissible use of amounts provided as grants under the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program, also known as the Byrne JAG Program, to combat human trafficking (including programs to reduce the demand for trafficked persons). This legislation was introduced by Representative Vicky Hartzler (R- MO) on May 17, 2017 and I am proud to be a Co-Sponsor in this step forward to addressing concerns about sex trafficking in our cities. Sadly, Sex Trafficking, like labor trafficking, is a modern-day form of slavery that includes U.S. citizens, foreign nationals, women, men and children as victims equally. The epidemic of this abhorrent practice of sex trafficking is growing, which makes the need for consideration of all measures to help law enforcement prevent these crimes from occurring even more imperative. First, sex trafficking occurs nationwide, and data from the National Human Trafficking Hotline show that reports of human trafficking cases have almost doubled in most states, including Texas, from 372 reported cases in 2012 to 670 reported cases in 2016; with sex trafficking accounting for more than 75% of all human trafficking cases reported. Too often, thousands of young people--overwhelmingly women--have been kidnapped around the world and taken against their will to the United States, where they serve as sex slaves and become victims of these horrendous crimes--especially children--whom are afraid to seek help from law enforcement because of the risk that they will be treated as criminals rather than the victims they undoubtedly are. Take Esperanza for example. She was waiting for her cousins outside of her high school in Mexico one day, when a strange man drove up in a car, forced her inside with him and sped away. At that moment, Esperanza had in effect become a sex slave. Esperanza was an innocent child when she first became a victim of sex trafficking. Her 47 year old trafficker brought her to a madam at a Cantina, who taught her how to have sex with adult men for profit, and the trafficker would beat and rape this young child whenever she tried to escape. Eventually Esperanza became pregnant and was driven across the Mexico-U.S. border onto Houston, Texas my congressional district, where her baby was taken by her perpetrator as insurance, in order to force Esperanza into his world of sex slave trade. Like so many children living the daily nightmare of human trafficking, Esperanza was terrified to tell anyone what was occurring. ``I really wanted to speak up, to ask the police for help,'' Esperanza said. ``But I got caught up by the threats he would make towards my daughter. I didn't want anything to happen to her.'' After waiting for this horrific nightmare to end, Esperanza eventually was rescued in a raid of the Cantina, thanks to the bravery and steadfast approach of Houston's finest, like Agent Steve Roskey, a native Houstonian, then with the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission in Houston. Esperanza's prayers were answered because once she started telling Agent Roskey and the other Houston officers her story of how she got here, what she was forced to do, the identification of her trafficker and the taking of her baby, Houston's finest and Agent Roskey immediately started knocking on the perpetrator's family members' houses, knocked on his friends' houses, and after the family and friends became irritated, they eventually dropped off the child to a cousin. The child was safe. Thankfully, although traumatized, Esperanza survived the horrors of human trafficking but not all victims are as fortunate because there are many sad stories laced in this practice, which is why these unfortunate victims, like Esperanza, who fall prey to human trafficking, should absolutely not be treated as criminals for their involvement in these sex, and labor acts. Second, we must provide our law enforcement with the necessary tools to fight this epidemic. I would like to thank Agent Steve Roskey, our fervent Houston Police Chief, Art Acevedo, his entire department, and various other entities for all the hard work they are doing daily to combat this epidemic in sex trafficking. Houston's law enforcement are working diligently to take our city back from the grips of those who seek to perpetuate this appalling practice of sex trafficking. Like Houston, law enforcement everywhere are fighting mightily oftentimes, with limited funds to crush the glaring statistics reported across this country by the National Human Trafficking Hotline. Hence we must provide them with meaningful resources to make this goal a reality, and ensure that victims are not penalized for the illegal enterprise of the traffickers that exploit them. This is why we must empower our law enforcements everywhere, through the Byrne JAG Program, to fight the demand for sex trafficking by supporting this bill. Finally, we understand it is already possible for state and local jurisdictions to use JAG Grant Program funding to combat human trafficking, including demand reduction, under the current purpose areas. However, I support adding an additional purpose area for these grants that emphasizes the need to fund initiatives that target and fight human trafficking, as proposed under this bill. H.R. 2480 will ensure that state and local law enforcement agencies have the funds needed to implement more programs to combat human trafficking such as that which occurred at the Cantina in Esperanza's case and all the trafficked victims rescued there that day. The addition of this purpose area would allow state and local jurisdictions to target and penalize buyers who drive the demand for sex acts, human trafficking, and sexual exploitation; including the demand for sex trafficking involving children. An example of a project that could be funded by the addition of this purpose area is training for a multi-jurisdictional task force to conduct proactive stings on buyers in an effort to combat human trafficking, like the Cantina raid in my home district in Houston. Accordingly, I urge my colleagues to support this measure. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguish gentlewoman from California (Ms. Bass), a member of the Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations, who has a long history of dealing with the vulnerable children, children who have been in the foster care system, and a leading voice on the issue of sex and human trafficking.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Clay), a colleague of the sponsor of the bill, Mrs. Hartzler from Missouri. I thank him for his leadership on the issues of sex trafficking and human trafficking.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Missouri.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Let me thank the sponsor of this bill for her leadership. I am delighted to work with her as a cosponsor. And the speakers on the outside who are cosponsors, I thank them for their important contribution. I simply want to take this time to close and to say to all of us: Don't forget the Esperanzas--plural--and their little boys as well, who are sex trafficked. Let us not forget them. The addition of this purpose area added to the Byrne grants would allow States and local jurisdictions to target and penalize buyers who drive the demand for sex acts, human trafficking, and sexual exploitation, including demand for sex trafficking involving children. An example of a project that could be funded by the addition of this purpose area is training for a multijurisdictional task force to conduct proactive stings on buyers in an effort to combat human trafficking, just like what was done at the cantina raid in my home community in Houston. The Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission officer was one of those who helped bring this cantina, this substitute for sex trafficking kingpin down, and saved Esperanza. Accordingly, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the authors of the legislation, Mr. Smith and Ms. Bass, for their leadership, and thank Chairman Royce for again reemphasizing the importance of this in terms of all committees, including the number of committees that have been noted. Let me thank the cosponsors for acknowledging as well, Frederick Douglass. It is right that he was born in slavery, but he reminded us that there is no power without struggle, and there will have to be a struggle to end sex trafficking and human trafficking. Mr. Speaker, I am reminded of the 1990s, when I met my first real modern-day slaves on the border of Bangladesh, where we were seeing women fleeing who had been trafficked and who had been utilized sexually. Their parents had sold them out of desperation. They were actual true slaves who were fleeing to the border of Bangladesh. That is a startling and stark recognition that in the 1990s, and now in the 21st century, slavery still exists. I am delighted to be an original cosponsor of this legislation and to have worked on these issues, and to acknowledge the commemoration of Mr. Douglass' 200th birthday. So I am grateful for the $130 million in current funds appropriated to ensure a robust response to fight human trafficking; again, to do this at home and abroad; and to acknowledge the alliance to end slavery and trafficking at the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, who are supporting this. The bill would also provide human services grants, opportunities to be used for educating children and staff in U.S. schools about human trafficking. Of course, it would help my own center in Houston, the Center to End Trafficking and Exploitation of Children, or CETEC. I thank them for their great work. It is the only center of its kind in Texas established to combat minor sex trafficking. In addition, this important bill helps many others. Let me conclude by simply saying that I support the idea of holding airlines accountable. We have been working with them. Homeland Security has been working with them. The flight attendants want to be engaged. All of us should be engaged in fighting sex trafficking. Mr. Speaker, I ask for support of the bill.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1492, the ``Medical Controlled Substances Transportation Act of 2017.'' This bill amends the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) to direct the Attorney General to register practitioners to transport controlled substances to States in which the practitioner is not registered under the CSA to administer these substances at locations other than principal places of professional practice. H.R. 1492 provides necessary guidance to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to clarify the requirements of physicians whose jobs inherently require transporting controlled substances. By requiring the registration of practitioners who transport and administer controlled substances across state lines, this bill also increases oversight to ensure physicians are appropriately administering controlled substances to their patients. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1492 addresses a crucial element in America's current opioid crisis regarding the mishandling of powerful prescription drugs by licensed physicians which can result in problems with addiction or abuse for patients. This issue is particularly relevant in the arena of sports medicine, where specialized physicians are often required to swiftly treat athlete injuries while on the road. In high-pressure environments, physicians and trainers sometimes prioritize athletic performance over physical and mental health, a mentality which has been shown to leave the door open for long-term, potentially devastating consequences for the players. Earlier this year, a group of more than 1,800 former professional football players filed a federal lawsuit against all 32 teams of the National Football League (NFL) for allowing teams to violate federal laws governing the transportation, distribution, and administration of prescription drugs. The lawsuit revealed a slew of dangerous, illegal practices within the NFL and individual teams, including the excessive administration and use of powerful painkillers and anti-inflammatory drugs as well as the failure of league and team officials to acknowledge or comply with guidance from the DEA. In 2012, for instance, the average NFL team prescribed nearly 5,777 doses of anti-inflammatory drugs and 2,213 doses of controlled medications to its players. The staggering levels of opioid use in the NFL have led to a number of chronic health problems for many former players who continue to suffer from long-term organ and joint damage years or even decades after they have retired. Even more troubling, a 2011 survey of 644 retired players found that 7 percent were still actively using opioid drugs in retirement--more than four limes the rate of opioid use in the general population. National sports leagues like the NFL are massive, multi-billion dollar industries that drive many local economies in the United States; last year, the average NFL team was worth $2.3 billion and employed 3,739 people. However, it is vital that we recognize the human cost of this highly profitable business. With the immense economic and cultural value of America's sports teams and athletes in mind, the federal government should take all necessary measures to ensure that fans and players are able to enjoy their favorite past-times safely and fairly. H.R. 1492 is a crucial step in improving the DEA's ability to protect prescription drug recipients who are vulnerable to misusing or abusing painkillers and other powerful medications. Fixing our national opioid epidemic is a bipartisan cause, and I am confident that this legislation has the potential to effect powerful and positive change for large numbers of Americans. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 1492.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, unable to cope with the brutal fact that he lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton by 2.9 million votes, the largest vote deficit of any president in American history, Donald Trump tweeted that he would have won the popular vote but for ``millions of people who voted illegally.'' Instead of producing any credible evidence to support this claim, a hoax that has been repeatedly and decisively debunked by experts, the President doubled down and issued an Executive Order establishing the ``Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity'' (PACEI), appointing Kris Kobach, anti-immigration warrior and poster-child for voter fraud conspiratorialists everywhere, to lead the Commission. It would be more accurate to characterize the PACEI as the ``Presidential Advisory Commission on Vote Suppression.'' Voter suppression is real but the oft-repeated claim that American elections are rife with voter fraud is a myth. According to a comprehensive 2014 study published in The Washington Post, out of more than a billion votes cast between 2000 and 2014, only 31 credible instances of impersonation fraud were found, and even this tiny number was likely inflated because the study's author counted not just voter fraud prosecutions or convictions but all credible claims. Numerous other reports have reached the same conclusion. Any lingering doubt regarding the true purpose of the PACEI should be laid to rest by the request made by Commissioner Kobach on June 28, 2017 when he wrote each of the nation's state secretaries of state requesting that they provide the Commission with ``the full first and last names of all registrants, middle names or initials if available, addresses, dates of birth, political party (if recorded in your state), last four digits of social security number if available, voter history (elections voted in) from 2006 onward, active/inactive status, cancelled status, information regarding any felony convictions, information regarding voter registration in another state, information regarding military status, and overseas citizen information.'' The information requested by the Commission will not prevent voter fraud. It will violate rather than protect voter privacy. And it will make it easier to craft legislation and devise campaign strategies intended to suppress the vote in urban clusters and among targeted demographic groups, particularly minority voters. It is important that all voters, and the people of the 18th Congressional District of Texas whom I am privileged to represent, be fully protected. While supplying only public voter information may seem secure, the sad fact is that it is not. There is no publicly accessible database of voter registration information in any of the 50 states or the District of Columbia. That is because information of this kind is protected from public disclosure under the settled principle of `collective privacy' recognized by the Supreme Court in the landmark decision of NAACP v. Alabama, 377 U.S. 288, 84 S. Ct. 1302, 12 L. Ed. 2d 325 (1964), which held that compelled disclosure of affiliation with groups engaged in advocacy may constitute an impermissible chilling effect on the freedom of association guaranteed by the First Amendment, a holding that has been affirmed repeatedly. Accordingly, neither Texas nor any state can, consistent with the U.S. Constitution, supply the voter information requested by the PACEI. Indeed, if the information sought was as public in nature as PACEI contends, there simply would be no need for it to request the information from state governments. Trump's voter suppression commission is a solution in search of a problem. Contrary to what Trump and Kobach would have the public believe, American elections are not rife with widespread voter fraud. Studies have shown that it is more likely an American ``will be struck by lightning than that he will impersonate another voter at the polls.'' No, the major ill affecting our election system is not that too many people vote due to voter fraud, but that too many people are prevented from voting due to vote suppression schemes such as discriminatory photo identification requirements, curtailment of early voting, too few polling stations leading to long lines and excessive wait times, and purging of election rolls. Even in the wholly unimaginable event that the commission created by Donald Trump and led by Kris Kobach could be trusted enough for states to cooperate by sharing their voter data, there is no reasonable basis for assuming that information would be kept secure and the privacy of voters protected. Recent cyberattacks have made clear the vulnerability of large central databases to cyberattack. An information security breach at the Department of Veterans Affairs compromised sensitive personal data of 26.5 million persons and cost the VA between $100 million to $500 million to remediate; another occurring at the Office of Personnel Management impacted 22 million current and former federal employees, many of whom held sensitive security clearances; and the attack on Yahoo, the mother of all security breaches, resulted in 1.5 billion user accounts being compromised. Because large centralized databases are targets of opportunities for criminals, terrorists, and foreign adversaries, it would be the height of recklessness for Texas or any state to provide the PACEI with personal information of millions of persons via unsecured email to be stored in undersecured databases on undersecured servers. One of the biggest strengths of the American election system is its decentralized nature. Aggregating all voter data into one centralized database with questionable security protections makes that data highly vulnerable to a cyberattack that could lead to the personal information of hundreds of millions of Americans being stolen and misused. Voter privacy and the integrity of the secret ballot are integral to American democracy. Voter privacy rights should and must be protected. This is especially true since we know for certain that adversaries like Russia are actively involved in cyberwarfare campaigns to undermine our democracy. There is no denying that our election system is under assault, but not in the way Trump imagines. Instead of wasting taxpayer money to fund an investigation into voter fraud, which is as mythical as a unicorn, American democracy would be better served by focusing on and correcting the real problem with our elections--voter suppression and external, illegal, and international interference in our national elections. I am not opposed to employing reasonable, legitimate, and workable means to safeguard the integrity of our electoral system and to protect the precious right to vote. But Trump's Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity is incapable of doing either and thus should be disbanded and dissolved immediately.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 702, the ``Federal Employee Antidiscrimination Act of 2017.'' I support this legislation because it ensures agencies effectively implement their Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) programs and that federal employees are never prevented from disclosing discriminatory or wasteful actions to Congress, the Office of Special Counsel, or Inspectors General. Let me express my thanks to Ranking Member Cummings for introducing this critical legislation that is essential to ensuring that our federal workplaces are free from discrimination, and that any barriers impeding fairness in personnel decisions are identified and eliminated. This is not the first time we have addressed and offered legislation regarding workplace equality. In 2002, the ``No Fear Act'' was first introduced in Congress and set the precedent for imposing additional duties upon Federal agency employers that are intended to reinvigorate their longstanding obligation to provide a work environment free of discrimination and retaliation. On October 2, 2000, the House Science Committee held a hearing entitled ``Intolerance at EPA--Harming People, Harming Science?'' Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, an EPA whistleblower, won a 600,000 dollar jury decision against EPA for race and sex discrimination under title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. During that hearing, then-chairman of the Science Committee Congressman Sensenbrenner illuminated the dangerous precedent set by the EPA, stating, ``While EPA has a clear policy on dealing with employees that discriminate, harass and retaliate against other EPA employees, no one apparently involved in the Coleman-Adebayo or Nolan cases have yet to be disciplined by EPA.'' Mr. Speaker, no employee should fear voicing their concerns in reference to a safer more work conducive environment. According to the 2014 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey, only 60 percent of federal employees agreed that they could quote, ``disclose a suspected violation of any law, rule or regulation without fear of reprisal.'' We must do better and ensure employees have confidence that they can report an act of discrimination without suffering retaliation. Employees need to know that EEO reports will be thoroughly, fairly, and timely investigated and adjudicated. H.R. 702 would require that EEO programs operate independently of an agency's human resources or general counsel offices. This bill requires the head of the program report directly to the head of an agency and the act would prohibit the use of non-disclosure agreements that restrict an employee from disclosing to Congress, the Office of Special Counsel, or instance of waste, fraud or abuse. We often look at individuals or groups who step forward as whistleblowers. This term has been used with a negative connotation to describe insubordinate employees, but history has shown us that whistleblowers are often heroes that have shed light on employers' illegal practices and as a result made the workplace better for future employees. Mark Felt, the FBI agent known as deep throat during the Watergate Scandal of the 1970s. Frank Serpico, New York police officer who confronted his department for the rampant corruption the leadership let take place. Jeffrey Wigand, a tobacco executive who admitted that tobacco companies knew they were putting addictive chemicals into their cigarettes. And Sherron Watkins, an executive of the Enron corporation who was vital in exposing the financial lies and frauds of the company. All these individuals stood up against well-established corporations and agencies even when others doubted their claims. We must protect these types of acts in Federal offices and successfully implement the Equal Employment Opportunity Programs (EEO). Mr. Speaker, in a sense every Member of Congress is a whistleblower for the people in that uncovering and correcting problems in the agencies that administer the laws is an essential part of our oversight responsibilities. As a senior member of the Committees on Homeland Security and the Judiciary, and as Ranking Member of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations, I understand the importance of safe and discrimination free workplaces. By strengthening existing requirements to ensure federal EEO programs meet high standards, we are implementing the best practices available to combat workplace discrimination. It is our duty as Members of Congress to be whistleblowers, bring attention to this pressing matter, and put a stop to injustices occurring in the workforce.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Committee on Natural Resources, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1719, the ``John Muir National Historic Site Expansion Act,'' authorizing the Department of the Interior to acquire an additional 44 acres of land to expand the John Muir National Historic Site, which currently stretches across 330 acres in the East Bay of San Francisco and includes the home where legendary naturalist John Muir lived until he died in 1914. The John Muir National Historic Site, established by Congress in 1964, is located in Martinez, California and honor one of the nation's foremost conservationists, whom historians refer to as the ``Father of the National Park Service.'' The historic site preserves the 14-room Italianate Victorian mansion where the naturalist and writer John Muir lived, as well as a nearby 325 acre tract of native oak woodlands and grasslands historically owned by the Muir family. H.R. 1719 authorizes the Department of the Interior to acquire by donation approximately 44 acres to expand the boundary of John Muir National Historic Site. The acreage to be acquired is directly continuous with Mount Wanda and will allow for better public access to trails. In the 114th Congress, H.R. 1289, a bill identical to H.R. 1719, passed the House by voice vote. Additionally, a similar bill, H.R. 5699, was introduced in the 113th Congress by former Congressman George Miller, and passed the House by a vote of 361-39. Companion legislation, S. 729, has been introduced in the Senate by Senator Kamala Harris of California. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1719 is a fitting tribute to one of America's greatest citizen activists, the co-founder of the Sierra Club, and a central actor in the successful effort to establish Yosemite National Park. I urge all Members to join me in voting for H.R. 1719.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, the son of Mr. Trump knew full well that he was accepting an invitation from a chain of individuals affiliated with the Kremlin: first, the liaison guy, the publicist, an operative of the Kremlin; the entertainer, the operative of the Kremlin; and then the attorney, who has affiliations through her family with the Kremlin. And then the idea was to receive information from a foreign, hostile nation about the opponent of his father. With all of his outpouring of honesty now, the question has to be why was this meeting hidden, and it has to be whether we are on the brink of seeing a situation where those involved have acted against the interests of the United States of America. Having just come back from a former Soviet bloc country, I know the distinction between the freedom in this Nation and the non-freedom that Putin believes in. So I think it is important, as I have said over and over again, that the House Judiciary Committee needs to open up its investigation, take oversight over issues that are relevant to the Constitution and, of course, those individuals who are holding the public trust. The public trust has been violated, but I believe seriously that something more has been violated. There is Russian collusion: collusion in the election, skewing the idea of a fair election. This is what we are dealing with, and I am saddened by this situation. The Judiciary Committee must investigate the skewing of the election toward one candidate over another.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, unable to cope with the brutal fact that he lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton by 2.9 million votes, the largest vote deficit of any president in American history, Donald Trump tweeted that he would have won the popular vote but for ``millions of people who voted illegally.'' Instead of producing any credible evidence to support this claim, a hoax that has been repeatedly and decisively debunked by experts, the President doubled down and issued an Executive Order establishing the ``Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity'' (PACEI), appointing Kris Kobach, anti-immigration warrior and poster-child for voter fraud conspiratorialists everywhere, to lead the Commission. It would be more accurate to characterize the PACEI as the ``Presidential Advisory Commission on Voter Suppression.'' Voter suppression is real but the oft-repeated claim that American elections are rife with voter fraud is a myth. According to a comprehensive 2014 study published in The Washington Post, out of more than a billion votes cast between 2000 and 2014, only 31 credible instances of impersonation fraud were found, and even this tiny number was likely inflated because the study's author counted not just voter fraud prosecutions or convictions but all credible claims. Numerous other reports have reached the same conclusion. Any lingering doubt regarding the true purpose of the PACEI should be laid to rest by the request made by Commissioner Kobach on June 28, 2017 when he wrote each of the nation's state secretaries of state requesting that they provide the Commission with ``the full first and last names of all registrants, middle names or initials if available, addresses, dates of birth, political party (if recorded in your state), last four digits of social security number if available, voter history (elections voted in) from 2006 onward, active/inactive status, cancelled status, information regarding any felony convictions, information regarding voter registration in another state, information regarding military status, and overseas citizen information.'' The information requested by the Commission will not prevent voter fraud. It will violate rather than protect voter privacy. And it will make it easier to craft legislation and devise campaign strategies intended to suppress the vote in urban clusters and among targeted demographic groups, particularly minority voters. It is important that all voters, and the people of the 18th Congressional District of Texas whom I am privileged to represent, be fully protected. While supplying only public voter information may seem secure, the sad fact is that it is not. There is no publicly accessible database of voter registration information in any of the 50 states or the District of Columbia. That is because information of this kind is protected from public disclosure under the settled principle of ``collective privacy'' recognized by the Supreme Court in the landmark decision of NAACP v. Alabama, 377 U.S. 288, 84 S. Ct. 1302, 12 L. Ed. 2d 325 (1964), which held that compelled disclosure of affiliation with groups engaged in advocacy may constitute an impermissible chilling effect on the freedom of association guaranteed by the First Amendment, a holding that has been affirmed repeatedly. Accordingly, neither Texas nor any state can, consistent with the U.S. Constitution, supply the voter information requested by the PACEI. Indeed, if the information sought was as public in nature as PACEI contends, there simply would be no need for it to request the information from state governments. Trump's voter suppression commission is a solution in search of a problem. Contrary to what Trump and Kobach would have the public believe, American elections are not rife with widespread voter fraud. Studies have shown that it is more likely an American ``will be struck by lightning than that he will impersonate another voter at the polls.'' No, the major ill affecting our election system is not that too many people vote due to voter fraud, but that too many people are prevented from voting due to vote suppression schemes such as discriminatory photo identification requirements, curtailment of early voting, too few polling stations leading to long lines and excessive wait times, purging of election rolls. Even in the wholly unimaginable event that the commission created by Donald Trump and led by Kris Kobach could be trusted enough for states to cooperate by sharing their voter data, there is no reasonable basis for assuming that information would be kept secure and the privacy of voters protected. Recent cyberattacks have made clear the vulnerability of large central databases to cyberattack. An information security breach at the Department of Veterans Affairs compromised sensitive personal data of 26.5 million persons and cost the VA between $100 million to $500 million to remediate; another occurring at the Office of Personnel Management impacted 22 million current and former federal employees, many of whom held sensitive security clearances; and the attack on Yahoo, the mother of all security breaches, resulted in 1.5 billion user accounts being compromised. Because large centralized databases are targets of opportunities for criminals, terrorists, and foreign adversaries, it would be the height of recklessness for Texas or any state to provide the PACEI with personal information of millions of persons via unsecured email address to be stored in undersecured databases on undersecured servers. One of the biggest strengths of the American election system is its decentralized nature. Aggregating all voter data into one centralized database with questionable security protections makes that data highly vulnerable to a cyberattack that could lead to the personal information of hundreds of millions of Americans being stolen and misused. Voter privacy and the integrity of the secret ballot are integral to American democracy. Voter privacy rights should and must be protected. This is especially true since we are now certain that adversaries like Russia are actively involved in cyberwarfare campaigns to undermine our democracy. There is no denying that our election system is under assault, but not in the way Trump imagines. Instead of wasting taxpayer money to fund an investigation into voter fraud, which is as mythical as a unicorn, American democracy would be better served by focusing on and correcting the real problem with our elections--voter suppression and external, illegal, and international interference in our national elections. I am not opposed to employing reasonable, legitimate, and workable means to safeguard the integrity of our electoral system and to protect the precious right to vote. But Trump's Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity is incapable of doing either and thus should be disbanded and dissolved immediately.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I venture to say that none one of us who comes to this floor doubts that any local law enforcement, our neighbors, do any second-guessing to arrest drunk drivers, murderers, and others, and that they are held to the high calling of justice. I do not want to be associated with being mild-mannered and weak on those who would do serious harm, kill, and maim, no matter who they are. That is not this debate. This debate is whether or not this bill interferes with the legitimate enforcement of the law and whether or not it takes away the mercy that we are known for in the United States. Let me tell you why. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from the Fraternal Order of Police--which, by no means, is shy about enforcing the law-- writing to oppose this legislation, saying that local police departments answer to local civilian government, and it is the local government which enacts statutes and ordinances. National Fraternal Order of Police, Washington, DC, 27 June 2017. Hon. Paul D. Ryan, Speaker of the House, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Hon. Kevin O. McCarthy, Majority Leader, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Hon. Nancy P. Pelosi, Minority Leader, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Hon. Steny H. Hoyer, Minority Whip, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Speaker and Representatives McCarthy, Pelosi and Hoyer: I am writing on behalf of the members of the Fraternal Order of Police to reiterate the FOP's opposition to any amendment or piece of legislation that would penalize law enforcement agencies by withholding Federal funding or resources from law enforcement assistance programs in an effort to coerce a policy change at the local level. The House will consider H.R. 3003 on the floor this week and Section 2 of this bill would restrict the hiring program administered by the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS), the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (Byrne-JAG) programs, as well as programs administered by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. The FOP has been very clear on this issue: we strongly believe that local and State law enforcement agencies should cooperate with their Federal counterparts. That being said, withholding needed assistance to law enforcement agencies-- which have no policymaking role--also hurts public safety efforts. Local police departments answer to local civilian government and it is the local government which enacts statutes and ordinances in their communities. Law enforcement officers have no more say in these matters than any other citizen and--with laws like the Hatch Act in place--it can be argued they have less. Law enforcement officers do not get to pick and choose which laws to enforce, and must carry out lawful orders at the direction of their commanders and the civilian government that employs them. It is unjust to penalize law enforcement and the citizens they serve because Congress disagrees with their enforcement priorities with respect to our nation's immigration laws. The FOP issued a statement in January of this year regarding the approach of the Administration on sanctuary cities as outlined in President Trump's Executive Order. The President recognized that it is unfair to penalize the law enforcement agencies serving these jurisdictions for the political decisions of local officials. It allows the U.S. Attorney General and Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to make an informed decision about the public safety impact without an automatic suspension from Federal grant programs. In Section 2 of H.R. 3003, there is no such discretion and it countermands the Administration's existing policy. The FOP opposed several bills in the previous Congress, which were outlined in a letter to the Senate leadership, and we will continue to work against proposals that would reduce or withhold funding or resources from any Federal program for local and State law enforcement. If Congress wishes to effect policy changes in these sanctuary cities, it must find another way to do so. On behalf of the more than 330,000 members of the Fraternal Order of Police, I want to urge the House to reject H.R. 3003's punitive approach and work with law enforcement to find a better way to improve public safety in our communities. Sincerely, Chuck Canterbury, National President.