Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Law enforcement officers have to be able to abide by the law. It is unjust to penalize law enforcement and the citizens they serve because Congress disagrees with the enforcement priorities with respect to our Nation's immigration laws. And they are right. But they also say that they need to build trust in our communities. This bill destroys community trust. It also penalizes hardworking governments of mayors and county leaders who are, in fact, trying to run the government and ensure that victims of domestic violence and crime, even as immigrants, are able to be treated in a manner where justice is had. What about the National Sheriffs' Association or the Texas Police Chiefs in Texas' major cities who indicate that this bill will serve no good and no good can come to a similar bill in the States? Let me say to you, I stand with the Catholic church, and I am not Catholic. What are our values? This church opposes the idea of our values. Let me be very clear as I close. We are doing the sanctuary cities bill, but I want to know about the integrity of this place. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 3003, the ``No Sanctuary for Criminals Act,'' which requires state and local cooperation with federal immigration enforcement, expands DHS detainer authority, and expands detention authority. I oppose this bill mainly because it directly violates the Constitution of the United States. If H.R. 3003 were to become law, it will coerce states and localities to cooperate with immigration enforcement, it will hurt victims and witnesses to crimes, and ultimately make communities less safe, which directly contravenes the stated and alleged goals of this bill. Police Chiefs across the nation are responding to less disturbances, not because crime is magically disappearing, but because immigrant communities are afraid to report them out of fear of being targeted. H.R. 3003 will completely strip state and local jurisdictions of their ability to enact common-sense policies that breed respect and trust and turn local law enforcement into an auxiliary arm of the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). To ensure compliance, this bill coerces states and localities by imposing penalties that will deny federal funding for critical law enforcement, national security, drug treatment, and crime victim initiatives. This divisive and vindictive administrative policy abridges the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, which states: ``The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.'' H.R. 3003 also violates the Fourth Amendment's proscription against unreasonable searches and seizures in respect to the changes it makes to DHS's detainer authority. It expands upon current DHS detainer practice by broadening the ways in which DHS can determine it has probable cause to issue a detainer and it significantly expands the time an individual may be held by law enforcement. The Supreme Court has stated that the Fourth Amendment requires a judicial finding of probable cause, usually within 48 hours of arrest. H.R. 3003, however, allows law enforcement to hold a person up to 96 hours before DHS takes custody, and there is no mention of when the person will even see an immigration judge. H.R. 3003 compounds these constitutional violations by eliminating the ability for a detained individual to obtain an independent, individualized review of his or her bond determination by a neutral decision-maker. This bill also authorizes DHS to detain individuals in removal proceedings without time limitation and it expands the categories of individuals who would be subject to such a detention on a mandatory basis. These provisions make it substantially more difficult, if not impossible, for individuals to obtain release on bond while removal proceedings are pending, thus increasing detention costs and separating families while they seek to litigate their immigration cases. H.R. 3003 is nothing but an anti-immigrant, enforcement-only proposal that represents another step in Trump's mass deportation plan. Mr. Speaker, rather than forcing state and local officials into a one-size-fits-all federal enforcement scheme, Congress and the administration should enact legislation and adopt policies that integrate unauthorized immigrants into our communities--approaches that the American public supports by a wide margin. For these reasons, I join with local law enforcement chiefs and faith community leaders in denouncing and opposing this mean-spirited, ill- considered, and un-American legislation. I end, Mr. Speaker, by apologizing to Mika Brzezinski, to the press, for the horrible words that were said about a bleeding face. There is no way that we can entrust this law or any other laws to this President of the United States. He has lost the trust, and I will vote for nothing until he steps down.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as we go home to commemorate the birth of this Nation, to wish all well, we would hope we would be able to go home by feeling comfortable that the administration was taking care of the American people. We have come to find out that the EPA is reversing a decision of the Obama administration to allow a pesticide by the name of--trade name Lorsban, that is chlorophyll-based, to be utilized on fruits and vegetables. I understand the needs of farmers, but there are documented studies that indicate that it may have a significant impact on the brain function of little children as young as 7 years old. Where is the care of the Nation by this administration? And then, they are planning a healthcare bill that will see this young lady lose her healthcare. In my district, 89,000 people will lose their insurance when they cut $854 billion out of Medicaid; 16,000 will be children. Where will the hospitals survive if they are closed in rural and urban America, and where will the seniors be when their nursing home puts them out because the Medicaid that has been for working seniors but now retired in nursing homes who rely on Medicaid? The TrumpCare bill in the Senate is a devastating bill. We need to have an administration that takes care of the American people.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Chairman, I would say to my colleagues that this is about bad medicine, not good medicine, and it is about undermining good healthcare, as we have seen in the TrumpCare saga, causing some 49 million people to lose their insurance. Here we go again. I would offer to say that the most difficult, hurtful, and harmful aspect of this particular legislation is that it would make it more difficult for plaintiffs to seek redress for medical injuries that have been proven in court. In addition, it proposes to make dangerous and potentially unconstitutional changes to our Nation's Federal system, intruding on State sovereignty, the very thing that Republicans seem to relish and to support, because this bill attempts to preempt the several areas of tort law that have been traditionally reserved to the States. I would tell my good friends in Tennessee and West Virginia: Deal with your States, just as other individuals deal with their own States. This bill, as well, has a very difficult impact on medical malpractice. Because it was written so vaguely, the broad language sweeps into not only doctors and other medical professionals, but hospitals and clinics and almost every entity that contributes in any way to making any healthcare product or service available. That clearly impacts the healthcare of Americans. When your child is injured through no fault of their own or your own, you need relief for that child. Interestingly enough, the American Bar Association that represents all lawyers, trial lawyers, of which there is an attempt to impugn their work, contempt for trial lawyers and the good work that they do. But the ABA says they are opposed to this bill, and they represent lawyers who fight every day to make sure the injustices don't happen. But here is the real cause of my angst for this particular bill: ``Medical Error Leaves Family With Unanswered Questions.'' ``Olivia was a senior in high school in Santa Monica, California, an accomplished scholar, actress, and musician who had earned early acceptance to Smith College.''

Ms. JACKSON LEE. ``Olivia was born with a congenital heart condition.'' She was going into college, but had a condition that caused her to go into the hospital. When she went in, she had a small procedure. Her vitals were dropping. Hospital staff waited more than 10 minutes before attempting resuscitation, but it was too late. She remained in a coma and died. Mr. Chairman, I include the article in the Record. Medical Error Leaves Family With Unanswered Questions Research has found that 440,000 Americans die every year from preventable medical errors each year. Olivia was a senior in high school in Santa Monica, California, an accomplished scholar, actress, and musician who had earned early acceptance to Smith College. Olivia was born with a congenital heart condition that was monitored throughout her childhood. The fall that Olivia was supposed to start college, she underwent a routine procedure to help doctors figure out if she could be considered for a surgery that would improve her condition. The procedure was completed without complications, but while Olivia was still under anesthesia, a cardiology fellow- in-training pulled the catheter lines, causing Olivia's heart rate, pulse, and blood pressure to drop rapidly. Even though her vitals were dropping, hospital staff waited more than 10 minutes before attempting resuscitation. But it was too late. Olivia would never regain consciousness and died that winter, never having lived her dream and attending college. Her future was stolen from her, and immediately her family tried to understand what had gone wrong. They began to ask questions on how this could have happened, but they were given very few answers from the hospital. Finally, the hospital gave her family incomplete medical records to sift through and find answers. They sought the help of an attorney because, despite their best efforts, they still did not fully understand what caused their daughter's death. But due to California's out dated $250,000 cap on medical negligence damages, it was nearly impossible to find one. Olivia's life was cut short by a preventable medical error, and unfortunately, she is not alone. In the U.S., preventable medical errors are the third leading cause of death. Our focus should be on improving patient safety and preventing medical errors, not limiting the rights of injured patients and their families. Lawmakers who seek to limit the accountability of health care providers are seeking to limit our rights and our avenues to justice. Don't our loved ones deserve better?

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, what do you want families to face--no relief? Or do you want these constant errors to go unrecognized and reconciled? This bill will do that by denying the ability. It provides immunity for healthcare providers who dispense defective or dangerous products. It makes it harder for victims to attain adequate legal representation, and it imposes a risk or loss on victims rather than wrongdoers. This bill undermines healthcare and it undermines good healthcare. Mr. Chair, I include in the Record a letter from the American Bar Association opposing this bill. American Bar Association, Washington, DC, February 27, 2017. Re Concerns Regarding H.R. 1215, the ``Protecting Access to Care Act of 2017.'' Hon. Bob Goodlatte, Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Hon. John Conyers, Jr., Ranking Member, Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Goodlatte and Ranking Member Conyers: On behalf of the American Bar Association, which is the largest voluntary membership organization of legal professionals in the United States, consisting of more than 400,000 members from all 50 states, the District of Columbia and other jurisdictions, I am writing to express our opposition to H.R. 1215, the ``Protecting Access to Care Act of 2017.'' I understand that your committee is scheduled to mark up this bill as early as tomorrow. For over 200 years, the authority to determine medical liability law has rested in the states. This system, which grants each state the autonomy to regulate the resolution of medical liability actions within its own borders, is a hallmark of our American justice system. The states also regulate the insurance industry. Because of the roles they have played, the states are the repositories of experience and expertise in these matters. Therefore, the ABA believes that Congress should not substitute its judgment, as is proposed in H.R. 1215, for the systems that have evolved in each state over time. Specifically, I would like to share with you the ABA's concerns and other views regarding key provisions in the proposed legislation relating to damages, proportionate liability, and contingent fees. Damages. The ABA believes that compensatory damages should not be capped at either the state or federal level, and, as a result, we have serious concerns regarding Section 3(b) of H.R. 1215 that would cap noneconomic damages for a plaintiff's injuries at $250,000 regardless of the number of parties against whom the action is brought or the number of separate claims or actions brought with respect to the same injury. For more than thirty years, the ABA has studied the research on federal and state legislative efforts to impose limits on noneconomic damages, including pain and suffering. Empirical research has shown that caps diminish access to the courts for low wage earners, like the elderly, children, and women; if economic damages are minor and noneconomic damages are capped, victims are less likely to be able to obtain counsel to represent them in seeking redress. Those affected by caps on damages are the patients who have been most severely injured by the negligence of others. These patients who reside in communities around the country should not be told that, due to an arbitrary limit set by members of Congress in Washington, DC, they will be deprived of the compensation determined by a fair and impartial jury. The courts already possess and exercise their powers of remittitur to set aside excessive jury verdicts, and that is the appropriate solution rather than an arbitrary cap. For these reasons, the ABA opposes those provisions in H.R. 1215, such as Section 3(b), which would place a dollar limit on recoverable damages and operate to deny full compensation to a patient in a medical liability action. Proportionate Liability. Section 3(d) of H.R. 1215 would create a ``fair share rule'' under which each party would be liable only for its share of any damages, and, as a result, the provision would preempt existing state laws that provide for joint and several liability in medical liability cases. The ABA believes that, at the state level, the laws providing for joint and several liability should be modified to recognize that defendants whose responsibility is substantially disproportionate to liability for the entire loss suffered by the plaintiff should be held liable for only their equitable share of the plaintiff's noneconomic loss. Although the ABA supports this principle and encourages other improvements to the tort laws at the state level, it opposes federal preemption of the medical liability laws of the states and territories. Therefore, the ABA opposes Section 3(d) to the extent that it would preempt existing state laws and to the extent that it would apply a proportionate liability rule to all damages, not just the plaintiff's non- economic damages. Contingent Fees. Section 4(a) of H.R. 1215 would empower a court to reduce the contingent fees paid from a plaintiff's damage award to an attorney, redirect damages to the plaintiff, and further reduce contingent fees in cases involving minors and incompetent persons. The ABA opposes sliding scales for contingent fees and other special restrictions on such fees. In 1985, the ABA created a Special Committee on Medical Professional Liability (``Special Committee'') to study the initiatives proposed at that time in an Action Plain of the American Medical Association Special Task Force on Professional Liability and Insurance. Among the initiatives was a recommendation of sliding scales on contingent fees, having effects comparable to the caps proposed here. After review, the Special Committee concluded the following: ``A sliding scale for contingency fees in medical malpractice litigation may very well reduce total awards for patient-victims by depriving them of representation by a trial lawyer sufficiently skilled at obtaining the highest appropriate award. Mandatory sliding scale systems could also inhibit claimants' access to the court system by limiting the availability of counsel. And imposing sliding scales only in medical malpractice cases would, in effect, create different level of skills among available counsel for plaintiffs in medical malpractice cases from those available to claimants in other tort cases.'' As a result of this finding, the ABA adopted a policy in 1986 that ``no justification exists for imposing special restrictions on contingent fees in medical malpractice actions.'' Therefore, the ABA opposes the limits on contingent fees contained in Section 4 of H.R. 1215. The American Bar Association remains committed to maintaining a fair and efficient justice system where victims of medical malpractice can obtain redress based on state laws, without arbitrary or harmful restrictions. We offer these perspectives for your consideration as you mark up H.R. 1215. Sincerely, Thomas M. Susman, Director, Governmental Affairs Office. Mr. CHAIR, as a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 1215, the so-called ``Protecting Access to Care Act of 2017.'' I oppose this misguided and ill-considered legislation for several reasons. Specifically, the bill before us should be rejected because: 1. H.R. 1215 violates state sovereignty; 2. H.R. 1215 applies well beyond medical malpractice; 3. Unjustifiably caps noneconomic damages, which will have a disproportionately adverse impact on women, the poor, and other vulnerable groups. 4. Provides unjustifiable immunity for health care providers who dispense defective or dangerous pharmaceuticals or medical devices; 5. Imposes an excessively short statute of limitations period; 6. Makes it harder for victims to obtain adequate legal representation; and 7. Inequitably imposes the risk of loss on victims rather than wrongdoers. For over 200 years, the authority to determine medical liability has rested in the states. This system, which grants each state the autonomy to regulate the resolution of medical liability actions within its own borders, is a hallmark of our American justice system. H.R. 1215 would preempt state law in all 50 states with a rigid, uniform set of rules designed to make it more difficult for malpractice victims to obtain relief in the courts. Victims injured by the negligent conduct of others, who have lost limbs, suffered traumatic brain injury, or lost their vision following medical procedures should not be subject to additional burdens of a possible limited recovery, currently available under state patients' bills of rights and other protections under the Affordable Care Act. The definitions in H.R. 1215 are written in such vague and broad language as to potentially sweep in not only doctors and other medical professionals, hospitals and clinics, but also every entity that contributes in any way to making any health care product or service available, including insurance companies, pharmaceutical manufacturers, health product manufacturers, pharmacists, nursing homes, assisted living facilities, and mental health treatment centers, and drug and alcohol rehabilitation facility, among others. H.R. 1215 will do nothing to strengthen protections for patients. It goes in the opposite direction, by excusing the health care industry from accountability for carelessness, and shifting the burden for shouldering the consequences of preventable medical injury to the injured patients, their families, their employers, their insurance companies, and taxpayers. Current provisions of the Affordable Care Act prohibit insurance companies from denying coverage for preexisting conditions, mandate coverage for young adults and children under the age of 26, and secure lifetime coverage caps, ensuring patients receive the care they need. Empirical research has shown that caps on damages, such as those envisioned by H.R. 1215, diminish access to the courts for the most vulnerable, such as low wage earners, like the elderly, children, and women. The bill arbitrarily caps so-called ``non-economic loss''--which sweeps in essentially everything that is not loss of salary or additional medical expenses--at $250,000 for the patient's lifetime, punishing those patients with the most devastating, life-altering injuries. The bill forces the injured patient to take the amounts received for future expenses resulting from the injury in a ``structured settlement,'' which may not match up with the patient's actual needs as they arise, and would further reduce the amount the careless health care provider actually pays. Preventable medical errors are the third-leading cause of death in the United States, with an estimated 440,000 deaths each year following a medical error or hospital-caused infection during a hospital stay. Addressing this problem must be a national priority. And although policies to promote and require safer practices are key to this effort, that is insufficient. We cannot assign a government monitor to every hospital operating room and every doctor's office. Effective protection should also include enabling patients and their families to hold health care providers accountable for errors that cause harm. H.R. 1215 would unfortunately take several major steps backward from this goal. The bill twists important protections found in many state laws into an additional legal hurdle. An extended statute of limitations protection allows patients who do not discover their injury until much later, sometimes many years after the medical procedure or intervention, to still have a change to seek legal help. But in the bill, the period in which an injured patient can seek legal help is actually shortened to one year. The bill cuts off a patient injured as a young child if their family fails to bring legal action on their behalf, long before they are old enough to legally act on their own behalf. This legislation would impose various restrictions on medical malpractice lawsuits, causing these restrictions to apply regardless of how much merit a case may have, the negligence at issue, or the severity of the issue. If economic damages are minor and noneconomic damages are capped, victims are less likely to be able to obtain counsel to represent them in seeking redress in these personal injury malpractice cases that often operate under contingency fee. Those affected by caps on damages are the patients who have been most severely injured by the negligence of others. These patients who reside in communities around the country should not be told that, due to an arbitrary limit set by members of Congress in Washington, DC, they will be deprived of the compensation determined by a fair and impartial jury. The courts already possess and exercise their powers of remittitur to set aside excessive jury verdicts, and that is the appropriate solution rather than an arbitrary cap. I am concerned that H.R. 1215 would put patient safety at higher risk, by significantly undermining the accountability of those who provide patients with medical care. H.R. 1215 undercuts patients in situations in which carelessness or misconduct by several health care providers combines to injure the patient. It arbitrarily ``divides'' blame among those actors and then if one of them evades accountability for any reason, the others who caused the injury are excused from having to make up the difference, and the injured patient is short-changed. H.R. 1215 shifts accountability away from the careless health care providers who caused the injury and onto ``collateral sources,'' such as the patient's insurance company or employer, or the government, that pay for part of the patient's medical expenses or other expenses resulting from the injury. In effect, these other sources provide involuntary free insurance to careless health care providers. The bill excuses doctors and other health care providers from any responsibility of looking into the safety and effectiveness of any medication or medical product, so long as it has been approved by the FDA. Accordingly, I strongly oppose H.R. 1215 for these and many more reasons and urge my colleagues to reject this bill.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman very much. I think the question to the gentleman from Michigan, and the gentleman's comments from Iowa, is the question of good medicine, and additional tests may, frankly, just be good medicine. Maybe, Mr. Chair, Mr. Conyers would agree that we should gather about insurance reform and capping premiums so that we can help our doctors. And I would assure you that they would be very happy on that. But to the gentleman's point, I'm sorry to say he was incorrect, because we note that there are almost 20 States that have a variety of noncaps on certain aspects, and now the Federal intrusion will come in and now tell them where they do not have caps, that they have to have caps. In fact, he is incorrect, and this bill does skew the medical service or medical treatment in our States.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I want to speak about a young man by the name of Will, who is 34 years old and tells us a story that, if he was a Canadian, there would be a good chance that he could live 17 more years. He has cystic fibrosis, and I imagine there are many families with children who have that, but he is concerned about TrumpCare and the impact. At age 2, he was diagnosed with cystic fibrosis, a hereditary disease impacting 30,000 Americans. He says: Imagine being under water and coming up for air, but instead of breathing, you uncontrollably cough that air out. The harder you try to breathe, the more you cough. At its worst, this disease feels like a long, drawn-out panic attack set to the soundtrack of an endless hacking cough. At 34, statistically, I have 7 more years left before my lungs cease to function. He mentions that if he were in Canada, statistically, he would have 17 more years because of the healthcare, but he also says this is not an exaggeration: The cold data from a recent study by the U.S. Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, the conclusion is that Canada's nationalized single-payer healthcare system that guarantees health insurance for everyone is the primary reason why Canadians with my disease will live longer. But look what happened to him: For the past 4 years, however, my disease has gone into reverse. I have been gradually getting better. It is an extraordinary sensation. A new medication called Kalydeco made by a company in Boston has given me the promise of extending both the length and quality of my life. I have been healthy enough to work abroad as a freelance journalist. A year and a half ago, Will got married. My wife and I hope to one day have kids, but today is a sobering day. The House Republicans replaced the Affordable Care Act, and if the Senate bill goes through, a plan that likely won't allow me to remain on this drug, then my long- term plans go out the window. I have a preexisting condition. My outlook would likely regress back to the one of short-term survival and carpe diem. That is a very different future than the one I plan to have. That is what TrumpCare represents to millions of Americans: higher costs; less coverage; not 22 million now, but in 2026, 49 million Americans will not be insured. How can you? Where is the moral standing? It guts protections for preexisting conditions no matter what kind of smoke and mirrors the Senate is trying to tell us. It does not exist. It has got a crushing age tax. If you are over 50, more of your income will be used for your insurance premiums, up to $12,000 to $15,000. And it steals from Medicare. It makes the Medicare trust fund insolvent. In my own State of Texas, here is a long chart that talks to each Member, including my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, how many people in their district will lose their health insurance. I would ask the question: Is there any mercy? Is there anyone that understands? In my district alone, almost 100,000--89,000--individuals will be losing their insurance; almost 20,000 of those will be children. And it goes on in other Members' districts, talks about children: 7,000, 9,000, 8,000, 15,000, 13,000, 12,000, 10,000, 14,000, 18,000, 16,000 children in different districts in the State of Texas will lose their insurance. And then Will, who would have and has now, because of the Affordable Care Act, a decent life, with a preexisting condition that he described, how would you like to come from under water and try to breathe and that breathing is undermined by the hacking of that cough? I hope that this bill is derailed. I hope that TrumpCare in the House and the Senate never sees the light of day, not because I don't want to work with my colleagues, but because the chronically ill will suffer and many will die. The statistics show that in the State of Texas, Mr. Speaker. I conclude with this one sentence, Mr. Speaker. I want to go back to Mr. Clay, and I ask the Attorney General to investigate the shooting of Mr. Castile, and to do it now.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule governing debate of H.R. 1215, the ``Protecting Access to Care Act of 2017'' and the underlying bill. I oppose the rule for H.R. 1215, the ``Protecting Access to Care Act of 2017'' for the following reasons: There were twenty-five amendments proposed by colleagues from both sides of the aisle. Only five of those amendments were made in order. What did all five of those amendments have in common? These amendments were all submitted by my Republican counterparts. The rule for this bill incorporates none of the amendments offered by my Democratic colleagues. Mr. Speaker, that exclusion is problematic. The amendments not made in order reflect the crippling partisanship of the House majority. I also oppose the underlying bill on the merits, because it limits noneconomic damages to a mere $250,000, which if enacted, would have a disproportionately adverse impact on women, the poor, and other vulnerable groups. When given the opportunity, members refused to incorporate an amendment that would increase that cap to reflect the cost of inflation and a concern for the humane treatment of those individuals affected by medical malpractice. H.R. 1215 provides immunity for health care providers who dispense defective or dangerous pharmaceuticals or medical devices. Finally, I oppose the bill, because it creates an excessively short statute of limitations period, makes it harder for victims to obtain adequate legal representation, and imposes the risk of loss on victims rather than wrongdoers. Mr. Speaker, there are numerous examples of people who have suffered at the hands of medical providers and whose lives will never be the same. Consider the case of Olivia, an exceptionally bright high school senior from Santa Monica, California, who had gained early acceptance to Smith College in Massachusetts. She never made it to Smith College, because after a medical procedure was completed and while Olivia was still under anesthesia, a fellow-in- training pulled the catheter causing Olivia's vital signs to plummet. Hospital staff waited more than ten minutes to resuscitate her, but it was far too late for Olivia. She passed away, and her promising future disappeared. This tragedy never should have happened. Mr. Speaker, instead of wasting time on this giveaway to special interests, we should be improving the Affordable Care Act, and opposing any bill that would leave over twenty million Americans uninsured, and investigating Russian involvement in our democratic processes. For these reasons, I oppose the rule and the underlying bill.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the manager of this legislation, the cosponsors, Mr. Clyburn, and so many others who have been part of this historic legislation for their leadership on it. Mr. Speaker, I rise as a member of the bipartisan Congressional HBCU Caucus and as an original cosponsor of H.R. 1135. H.R. 1135 would authorize the appropriation of millions of dollars from 2018 through 2024 to the Historic Preservation Fund to provide assistance for the restoration and preservation of historic structures at Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Let me indicate that this has been a long journey. The reauthorization is very special and emotional to many of us. As many of us know, Historically Black Colleges and Universities came at the wake of the ending of slavery and were a place of refuge for so many students. I am reminded of those individuals who, as freed slaves, told stories of walking miles to be able to get to a school like Fisk University or to a school for so many in North Carolina and South Carolina or all throughout the South. They were great refuges for individuals who wanted a better life. It is important to note that in the 1980s, the National Park Service awarded more than $65 million. These grants require you to cover 30 percent of the project. So it is not a handout. It is a hand-up. It is preserving the history of this great Nation. I am very grateful to the Congressional Black Caucus. When the question is asked, ``What is the Congressional Black Caucus and what do we do,'' I will say without shame that we are the conscience of this Nation and we recognize that we have a responsibility to protect the vulnerable things of this Nation, whether it be people or things. So the idea was to make sure that not only students have a brilliant education, but those who would seek knowledge will be able to come to the campuses of these Historically Black Colleges and Universities. I happen to represent two State schools: Texas Southern University and Prairie View A&M. There are many HBCUs throughout the State of Texas. We are grateful for the leadership that they have given. They have history. Soon I will be establishing what we call the Emancipation Trail, which chronicles the announcement of freedom in Texas. It was called Juneteenth. It was 2 years that some learned about their freedom after everyone else was free. Those stories are being told at the HBCUs, but at the same time, STEM education is being taught. Oakwood College, a historically Black college of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, educates huge numbers of doctors. I am told it has the largest number of African Americans that go into medical school. STEM is very important to our HBCUs. Texas Southern University has a renowned homeland security program. This is a good bill, and I thank my colleagues for voting for this very right and positive bill. Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Bipartisan Congressional HBCU Caucus and an original co-sponsor, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1135, which reauthorizes the Historically Black Colleges and Universities Historic Preservation Program. H.R. 1135 would authorize the appropriation of $10 million annually from 2018 through 2024 for the Historic Preservation Fund to provide assistance for the restoration and preservation of historic structures at Historical Black Colleges (HBCUs). Specifically, H.R. 1135, reauthorizes $10 million in annual appropriations for the National Park Service grant program supporting the preservation of historic buildings on the campuses of historically black colleges and universities. Since the 1980s, the National Park Service (NPS) has awarded more than $65 million to more than 80 HBCUs to repair historic buildings on their campuses. To be eligible for grants under the program, recipients have to cover 30 percent of the cost of a project. Eligible projects include stabilization, masonry repair, removing lead paint or other hazards, and the improvement of access for the disabled. Mr. Speaker, the Historically Black Colleges and Universities Preservation Program exists to preserve, and stabilize historic structures on HBCU campuses through projects such as structural stabilization, masonry repair, replacement of antiquated electrical and plumbing systems, abating environmental hazards such as asbestos, ameliorating termite damage, and replacing leaking roofs. The HBCU preservation project is critically important because much of the history of African Americans has been lost due to it not being considered important enough by historians to study and the fact that many of the repositories of that history--black churches--have been destroyed by arson. I thank and my colleague, Assistant Democratic Leader James Clyburn for his work in bringing this important legislation to the floor. Mr. Speaker, I am proud that one of the greatest HBCUs in the country, Texas Southern University, is located in my congressional district. Texas Southern University has a rich history with nine academic units, 1,000 dedicated staff members, and over 9,200 esteemed students. Like most of my HBCU Caucus colleagues, I have worked closely with my local HBCU to provide funding and resources needed to enable them to fulfill their mission of educating the next generation of social engineers and conducting research programs addressing issues of major concern to the African American community. I was proud to spearhead the initiative that brought more than $13 million in financial aid relief for the students and campus of Texas Southern University. I also worked with TSU administrators to initiate digital archive projects to preserve the records of two of its most distinguished alumni, the legendary Barbara Jordan and Mickey Leland, both of whom preceded me as the Member of Congress for the Eighteenth Congressional District of Texas. I was pleased to facilitate a partnership between Comcast and TSU's School of Communication to provide scholarships and internships to TSU students and in-kind marketing services to the university. I helped secure funding needed to establish the Center for Transportation, Training and Research in the TSU College of Science, Engineering, and Technology. HBCU's have played a critical role in American history. As the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. stated: The function of education is to teach one to think intensively and to think critically. Intelligence plus character--that is the goal of true education. HBCUs do not just educate--HBCUs have and will continue to fill an important role in education opportunity and engagement for millions of young people from diverse backgrounds. I ask my colleagues to support reauthorization of the Historically Black Colleges and Universities Historic Preservation Program by joining me in voting to pass H.R. 1135.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 397, a resolution that reaffirms the United States' commitment to Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty and its principle of collective defense. In the aftermath of World War II, the greatest conflict in human history, the United States, Canada, and their Western Europe allies founded the North American Treaty Organization (NATO) in 1949 in Washington. Founded on the principle of collective defense, Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty states that, ``The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all.'' In the 68 years since the Treaty's ratification, Article 5 has only been invoked once, following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, when NATO members came to the aid of the United States. NATO sent seven planes with 830 crewmen from 13 countries to protect American skies until May 2002, marking the first time in American history that the continental United States was protected by foreign forces. NATO allies and partners have stood with the United States in joint operations in the Western Balkans, Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere around the world. Until this year, every American president since the treaty's signing in 1949--Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama--has publicly reaffirmed the American commitment to Article 5. American presidents have affirmed this nation's commitment to come to the aid of any NATO member that is under attack. That is the symbolic meaning of the immortal words spoken by President Kennedy in West Berlin at the Brandenburg Gate in 1963: ``Ich bin ein Berliner.'' Mr. Speaker, the principle of collective defense is the core of NATO's founding treaty and the NATO alliance has been the backbone of American national security and foreign policy for nearly 70 years. The strength and solidarity of this western alliance kept Western Europe whole, prosperous, and free and paved the way for the collapse of the Soviet Union and the liberation of the nations of Eastern and Central Europe, many of which have now been integrated into NATO. The Constitution of the United States grants Congress the sole power to declare war, but Article 5 does not increase the chance of war. Rather, NATO is a bulwark against the outbreak of war because it deters aggression by any adversary. As a result, NATO is the most successful military alliance in world history, successfully deterring the outbreak of a third world war, seeing the Cold War to a victorious conclusion, and protecting the principle of territorial integrity. This is why I strongly support H. Res. 397, which reaffirms the commitment of the People's House to Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty. The resolution also expresses support for the agreement reached at the 2014 NATO Wales Summit calling upon each NATO member nation to allocate at least two percent of its gross domestic product to defense by 2024. The resolution also condemns any threat to the sovereignty, territorial integrity, freedom and democracy of any NATO ally and welcomes the Republic of Montenegro as the 29th member of the NATO alliance. I urge all Members to join me in affirming the commitment of the United States to Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty for this important resolution by voting for H. Res. 397.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, today a number of us were able to go to the children's hospital here in Washington, D.C., and met two miraculous families, children with complex, chronic diseases. With the love of their parents, one could not tell they were different from any other child, yet they had horrific and difficult medical conditions. Those parents were middle class working families, and said that, without Medicaid, the half a million dollars of healthcare that keeps those beautiful children alive and leads them to a pathway of a life of love would not be possible. I am glad that the Senate TrumpCare bill has been stopped in its tracks, the same bill that the CBO has said will cause 49 million Americans to lose their insurance in 2026. There is no pathway to reform this bill. There is no White House meeting, no Presidential cajoling and shooting deals back and forth. These are lives of Americans, and as long as it takes, we will fight to the end to stop the demolition of the Affordable Care Act, which most Americans, over 50 percent, want the Affordable Care Act. Stop the foolishness.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1684, the Disaster Assistance Support for Communities and Homeowners Act of 2017. This bill directs the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to provide technical assistance to Common Interest Communities to ensure they are eligible to apply for public assistance. H.R. 1684 also instructs FEMA to provide legislative proposals to Congress in order to make condominiums and housing cooperatives eligible for disaster assistance in the future. Madam Speaker, H.R. 1684 addresses an outstanding issue many Americans face in the aftermath of natural disasters because they are ineligible for FEMA assistance based on the type of home they live in. The glaring discrepancy and inequity in FEMA's policy were revealed as communities struggled to recover and rebuild from the ravaging effects of Hurricane Sandy in 2012. In addition to causing the deaths of 72 U.S. citizens, Hurricane Sandy was the second-costliest hurricane in United States history, destroying 651,000 housing units in New York and New Jersey and exacting a staggering $19 billion in damages for New York City alone. However, due to FEMA's unfair policy towards community associations, thousands of New Yorkers found themselves ineligible for federal recovery assistance needed to repair their homes because under current federal law, condominiums, housing cooperatives, and homeowners associations are classified as businesses. H.R. 1684 corrects this unfairness by authorizing FEMA to provide direct disaster relief to these communities in the form of technical assistance and monetary reimbursements. Further, the legislation directs FEMA to submit to Congress within 90 days of enactment a plan to make common areas of condos and co-ops eligible for disaster assistance. Madam Speaker, this legislation is particularly beneficial to my congressional district since Houston ranks among the most disaster- prone cities in the country. Many of my constituents can recall with horror the devastating effects of Hurricane Ike in 2008, which killed 37 people and destroyed 100,000 homes in Texas. Over the course of this massive natural disaster, FEMA played a vital role in responding to the needs of impacted areas and victims. Unfortunately, FEMA's response to Hurricane Ike was also beset by a lack of clear communication between appointed officials and regional emergency managers on the ground. Improving federal policy for disaster relief is a bipartisan issue and H.R. 1684 is endorsed by the Community Associations Institute, a leading membership organization with more than 34,000 members and 70 chapters nationwide. Madam Speaker, legislation like H.R. 1684 is crucial to ensuring that all Americans receive the relief and assistance they deserve in the wake of natural disasters like Hurricane Sandy that destroy lives and leave local economies in tatters. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 1684.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as many families were making their way home or picking up children from either school or some daycare that they had to be in, the CBO report came out on the unfortunate representation of healthcare from the United States Senate. I think the most striking comment to be made is that, by 2026, with this healthcare bill of sorts, 49 million Americans will lose their insurance. To add to the insult of those working families picking up children and trying to make ends meet with the dinners that they will be preparing, hoping that the Federal Government would take care of them, the President of the United States indicated that he hopes that the Affordable Care Act that now has helped insure millions of Americans would crash and burn, crash and burn because he has strangled the subsidies. He has made sure that the insurance companies do not have stability, and he has decreased the amount of people who can get the expanded Medicaid. I am sad when the President of the United States who should be the chief comforter, the person who takes care of Americans, takes great glee that 49 million people will be thrown off of insurance, without insurance by 2026 under TrumpCare in the House and TrumpCare in the Senate. Democrats know how to fix this. I would hope that the Republicans and the President of the United States get off the special interests and stand with the American people. Save our healthcare. Stop taking away our healthcare.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman who represents the U.S. Virgin Islands for her constant leadership and consistently allowing us to come to the floor to speak to our colleagues and, hopefully, the American people on important topics. I can't think of a topic more important than this one that really represents, when I say this one, the question of healthcare for Americans. Might I say that the healthcare statement or framework was issued about 12 noon on Thursday. As you well know, we worked through Friday, and I left about 12 noon, landed in Houston, and went directly to the Legacy Community Health clinic on Lyons Avenue in Fifth Ward, Texas. That was a federally qualified health clinic that was able to be constructed in the neighborhood of Barbara Jordan and Mickey Leland by the Affordable Care Act and to bring healthcare to senior citizens living across the street access, easy access to healthcare. There was 40, 50, 60, 70 people who came. We walked down the street to ask that this President and the Senators leave our healthcare alone. But more importantly, the disabled community came. I want to personally thank them. There were children, there were pastors, there were doctors, there were good people there, but there was the blind, there was the deaf community, there were people in wheelchairs, and they cried. And one of them said: Please don't take my Medicaid healthcare away; and please allow me to continue to live independently, because I have at least the healthcare. Of course, the Senate did not listen. The President today said that he hopes that the Affordable Care Act will crash and burn. And we know that polls are showing that they increasingly think their healthcare will get worse. But polls are showing that 51 percent of Americans believe and support the Affordable Care Act. I want to spend the remaining moments of my life here on the floor-- not my life, but my time on the floor. I hope to the Lord that it is not the remaining time of my life, but I am so overwhelmed by this bill, I know that some people will lose their lives. So I am going to include in the Record an article entitled ``Center for American Progress Coverage Losses Under the Senate Health Care Bill Could Result in 18,100 to 27,700 Additional Deaths in 2026.'' [From the Center for American Progress, June 22, 2017] Coverage Losses Under the Senate Health Care Bill Could Result in 18,100 to 27,700 Additional Deaths in 2026 (By Ann Crawford-Roberts) One Republican member of Congress, defending the GOP health care plan--the American Health Care Act (AHCA)--suggested that concerns that the loss of health care coverage leads to death are overblown. However, the scientific literature on the effects of insurance coverage on mortality shows that the coverage losses from the AHCA would result in tens of thousands of deaths. The secret Senate bill was finally released today, and it is broadly similar to what passed in the House: It ends Medicaid expansion and makes further deep cuts to the program; eliminates the individual mandate; and reduces funding that helps low-income Americans afford health coverage. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has not yet released its score of the Senate bill, although it is expected to do so early next week. The CBO, however, has released a score of the House's version of the AHCA, which is largely similar to the Senate bill. The score projected that, by 2026, 23 million more Americans would be uninsured under the House bill compared to the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, this is what we are confronting. These are not numbers that anyone would print just to create hysteria. These are truthful numbers. Now, let me answer the question. The critics keep saying that we are crumbling. I said to you the President said: crash and burn. That is not the case, that insurers appear to be fleeing the Affordable Care Act's health insurance exchanges or State-based, online marketplaces where people can buy individual health insurance. The fact that one-third of counties are projected to have just one insurer on their ObamaCare exchanges this year has been a popular talking point among Republicans, including President Trump, trying to gain or gin up support to replace the Affordable Care Act. The stat was echoed in a recent editorial by Tom Price. Though some insurers are still deciding whether to participate in ObamaCare exchange, the complaint about lackluster insurer participation is valid. In recent weeks alone, Aetna pulled out, leaving its participation in ObamaCare limited. But the real issue is that we have been strangling these insurance companies. They leave out that the insurers might be less likely to exit if more States had expanded Medicaid under ObamaCare. Mr. Speaker, I include this article in the Record, ``Why So Many Insurers Are Leaving ObamaCare.'' [From The Atlantic, May 11, 2017] Why So Many Insurers Are Leaving Obamacare

Ms. JACKSON LEE. And the answer, of course, is a litany of ways that the Republicans have extinguished the very essence of it. But I just want to close by bringing to the attention of my colleagues Ryan Smith. He has a mental health generalized anxiety disorder. He has got a beautiful picture with, it looks like, his mom and him. And it says: Without the ACA, I would not have been able to move and find a new job. He has generalized anxiety disorder. He is a young man with a job who worked for the Michigan House of Representatives, and he was diagnosed in 2013. Because of the Affordable Care Act, he keeps his job. Then we have, how TrumpCare will kill me before cystic fibrosis. I am 34 years old. If I was a Canadian, there would be a good chance I would live for 17 more years, but, in the Americas of Donald Trump and Paul Ryan, that is not going to happen. At 2, I was diagnosed with cystic fibrosis. And this individual indicates: I got married. I hope one day to have children. But without the Affordable Care Act, they too may lose their lives. ObamaCare saved my life. What now? This was a gentleman, lying in bed with my dog, recovering from the most recent surgery, when the news alert went off on my iPhone after midnight. Breaking news: the Senate has just taken a major step toward repealing the Affordable Care Act. Fear, that is what I and millions of Americans felt. This is a breast cancer survivor, and she is worried about being able to survive. So there are many stories like this, and there are stories of the disabled and senior citizens who may be thrown out of nursing homes and children who are very sick who may, because of a preexisting disease, not have insurance. I am glad to be with you on the floor, and I think I will end by saying, my commitment is to see that this never happens to the American people; that whatever the shenanigans and negotiating that are going on in the Senate--and I respect the other body, but whatever is going on to pass a bill that may kill people, or cause people to lose their lives under the medical system, or, in fact, throw people off of insurance, I believe we have a moral obligation to stand in the gap and stand against this. I really would lift up my hand to my friends, Senators and others, I lift my hand. Let us sit down to the negotiating table together, and let us save lives. Mr. Speaker, I rise to join my colleague in strong opposition to the issue of repealing, revising, and replacing the Affordable Care Act presented by the Republicans. Tonight, after seven years of claiming to have a workable replacement for the Affordable Care Act, the Senate, just as House Republicans before them, showed their hand; and it is empty. Senate Republicans have finally released their draft version of the House-passed American Health Care Act and it is clear why they kept it behind closed doors all this time. Today, the Congressional Budget Office and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) completed their estimate of the direct spending and revenue effects of the Better Care Reconciliation Act of 2017, which is the Senate amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 1628. The Senate bill would increase the number of people who are uninsured by 22 million in 2026 relative to the number under current law, slightly fewer than the increase in the number of uninsured estimated for the House-passed legislation. By 2026, an estimated 49 million people would be uninsured, compared with 28 million who would lack insurance that year under current law. Senate Trumpcare is yet another plan that promotes Wealth Care--if you are billionaire or a millionaire you will become wealthier. If you are part of the middle class or the working poor your economic you will become less well-off due to higher health insurance cost or out of pocket health care expenses. Earlier today, they were making changes to address the growing chorus of objections to their ill-conceived attempt to end Obamacare for more than 20 million Americans The change they proposed could be described as a post-script that people should try to keep health insurance coverage while they strip away the assistance that makes health insurance a right that is affordable and accessible to all Americans. The reality of keeping health insurance under the Republican proposal would be nearly impossible for the very sick who are receiving coverage under Medicaid. The added difficulty for the chronically ill is that their preexisting condition may mean higher premiums that the Republican plan will not help them cover through subsidies or the removal of prohibitions that insurance companies cannot discriminate against them. If you or your loved one depends on Medicaid you will be worse off because the insurance market may allow you to purchase insurance, but there is no subsidies to help you purchase plans, and no control over how high a premium might become. The Senate bill is worse than the one that passed the House, with deeper cuts to Medicaid and a ban on Planned Parenthood funding for one year. Just like the bill that passed the House, this proposal would likely strip coverage from millions of Americans and do nothing to address affordability, all while providing a windfall to corporations and the richest of the rich. Both healthcare bills are immoral bill and I call on Republicans to abandon their efforts to repeal and replace the law of the land at the expense of the most vulnerable Americans. The President promised to a plan to provide health insurance for everybody. But that promise has not been kept. The legislation unveiled by House and Senate Republicans would kick millions of Americans off their health coverage and force millions to pay more for less. This plan is a prescription for misery and spells disaster for hard- working families struggling to make ends meet in the face of spiraling health care costs. The Affordable Care Act was always about real people who have real lives that are impacted by not having access to affordable and accessible health insurance. Those caught up in the Opioid addiction rely on Medicaid for healthcare treatment for withdrawal special medical care centers. The Senate and House Republican bills would eliminate Medicaid coverage for tens of thousands of Opioid addicts who are seeking help. The Affordable Care Act has established healthcare as a right and not just something that the privileged can afford. This repeal charade must end. Republicans have had seven years to show they have a better way to cover millions of Americans but we have learned at last that they have none. Republicans will be held accountable for whatever happens to our health care system under their watch, especially the destabilizing uncertainty their efforts have already engendered. With America finally on the move thanks to the expansion of coverage through the Affordable Care Act, the Republican plan to repeal and replace the ACA threatens to turn the clock back by making America sick again. Statistics Texas Should the Republicans be successful in repealing the Affordable Care Act people living in the State of Texas will be harmed: 1,874,000 individuals in the state who have gained coverage since the ACA was implemented could lose their coverage if the ACA is entirely or partially repealed. 1,092,650 individuals stand to lose their coverage if the Republican Congress dismantles the exchanges. 913,177 individuals who received financial assistance to purchase health insurance in 2016, received an average of $271 per person, would be at risk of having coverage become unaffordable if the Republican Congress eliminates the premium tax credits. 1,107,000 individuals in the state could have insurance if the State of Texas would accept the Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion. These individuals will not be able to gain coverage if the Republican Congress eliminates the Medicaid expansion. 508,000 kids who have gained coverage since the ACA was implemented are also at risk of having their coverage rolled back. 205,000 young adults in the state who are able to stay on a parent's health insurance plan thanks to the ACA now stand to lose coverage if the Republican Congress eliminates the requirement that insurers allow children to stay on their parents' plans until age 26. 646,415 individuals in the state who received cost-sharing reductions to lower out-of-pocket costs such as deductibles, co-pays, and coinsurance are now at risk of having healthcare become unaffordable if the Republican Congress eliminates cost-sharing reductions. 10,278,005 individuals in the state who now have private health insurance that covers preventive services without any co-pays, coinsurance, or deductibles stand to lose this avenue of access to affordable healthcare if the Republican Congress eliminates ACA provisions requiring health insurers to cover important preventive services without cost-sharing. Women in the state who can now purchase insurance for the same price as men are at risk of being charged more for insurance if the Republican Congress eliminates the ACA's ban on gender rating in the individual and small group markets. Before the ACA, women paid up to 56% more than men for their health insurance. Roughly 4,536,000 individuals in the state who have pre-existing health conditions are at risk of having their coverage rescinded, being denied coverage, or being charged significantly more for coverage if the Republican Congress eliminates the ACA's ban on pre-existing conditions. 346,750 seniors who have saved an average of $1,057 each as a result of closing the Medicare prescription drug ``donut hole'' gap in coverage stand to lose this critical help going forward. 1,746,043 seniors who have received free preventive care services thanks to ACA provisions requiring coverage of annual wellness visits and eliminating cost-sharing for many recommended preventive services covered by Medicare Part B, such as cancer screenings, are at risk of losing access to these services if congressional Republicans go forward with their plan to repeal the ACA. National Statistics 2013-2016 There were over 41 million uninsured persons in the United States in 2013, and by 2015 that number had declined to a little over 28 million because of the tremendous success of the Affordable Care Act. In March 2016, HHS reported that due to the Affordable Care Act, 20 million Americans have gained health care coverage. In 2016, Medicaid's share of total U.S. health care spending amounted to 17 percent. The program is funded by both federal and state government. In 2016, there were 72.2 million people enrolled in Medicaid. Since 2012 the number of people receiving healthcare through Medicaid grow by 24.6 million. The number of children enrolled in Medicaid coverage is 43%. As more families were able to purchase health care insurance through exchanges the number of children receiving health insurance through Medicaid decreased from 50% in 2011 to 43% in 2016 because their families' health plan provided them with coverage. The 2016 HHS report said that 6.1 million uninsured young adults ages 19 to 25 have gained health insurance coverage because they could remain on a parent's health plan due to the Affordable Care Act. Black and Hispanic Insurance Rates Gains in coverage because of the Affordable Care Act were strong across all racial and ethnic groups between October 2013 and early 2016. The uninsured rate among Black non-Hispanics dropped by more than 50 percent (from 22.4 to 10 percent); corresponding to about 3 million adults gaining coverage. The uninsured rate among Hispanics dropped by more than 25 percent (from 41.8 to 30.5 percent), corresponding to about 4 million Hispanic adults gaining coverage. The greatest demographic that benefited from the Affordable Care Act were White non-Hispanics whose uninsurance rate declined by more than 50 percent (from 14.3 to 7.0 percent), corresponding to about 8.9 million adults gaining coverage. History of Universal Healthcare in the United States In 1949, Harry Truman became the first sitting President to propose universal healthcare for all Americans as part of the ``Fair Deal.'' On March 23, 2010, with the stroke of President Obama's pen, the American people received this part of the ``Fair Deal.'' The Affordable Care Act has been affirmed to be law by every means provided by our nation's constitution: On March 21, 2010, it passed the House and was sent to the President. On March 23, 2010, President Obama signed the Affordable Care Act into law. On June 28, 2012, the United States Supreme Court in National Federation of Independent Businesses v. Sebelius ruled that it was constitutional. During the 2012 Presidential Election the Affordable Care Act was a central issue. President Obama was soundly reelected with 51.1 percent of the vote and 62% of the Electoral votes (332-206). In 2014, the Affordable Care Act provisions banned insurance companies from: Discriminating against anyone with a pre-existing condition. Charging higher rates based on gender or health status. Enforcing lifetime dollar limits. Enforcing annual dollar limits on health benefits. The Affordable Care Act means: Over 19 million Americans now have health insurance. 105 million Americans have no life time limits on health insurance Nearly 134 million people with pre-existing conditions have coverage. 6.6 million young-adults up to age 26 can stay on their parents' health insurance plans. 5 million Seniors in the `donut hole' have saved billions on their prescription drugs. 3.2 million Seniors have access to free annual wellness visits under Medicare, and 360,000 Small Businesses are using the Health Care Tax Credit to help them provide health insurance to their workers. [Statistics on Texas and the Affordable Care Act] 1.7 million Texas have health insurance because of the Affordable Care Act. 7 million Texans no longer have lifetime limits on their healthcare insurance. 300,731 young adults can remain on their parents' health insurance until age 26. 10 million Texans have insurance although they have pre-existing conditions that would have prevented them from getting coverage before the Affordable Care Act became law. 346,750 seniors are no longer in the prescription drug donut hole, which means they are no sudden large out of pocket expenses to get the medicine they need.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in commemoration of Caribbean American Heritage Month, which celebrates and recognizes the significant contributions made by Caribbean Americans that have strengthened our country and made it better. This month also marks the 55th anniversaries of independence for the Caribbean nations of Jamaica and of Trinidad and Tobago. Although a half century has passed since they gained their independence, the struggle they waged to win their freedom still stands as a testament to the ideals of our own great nation. I am privileged to represent a large segment of Houston, Texas, which is home to more than 300,000 Americans of Caribbean heritage, making it one of the largest, most diverse, and vibrant Caribbean-American communities in the nation. Mr. Speaker, Americans of Caribbean heritage have made a positive impact on virtually every aspect of American life, including the arts, science, business, education, athletics, military, and government. For example, in the area of government and public affairs America has benefitted from the contributions of Colin Powell, a former Secretary of State and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice; former Members of Congress Mervyn Dymally of California, and Shirley Chisholm of New York, and current Congresswoman Yvette Clarke of New York; and Kamala Harris, the Attorney General of California. Caribbean Americans have enriched American art and culture with the legendary performances of Sidney Poitier, Harry Belafonte, Cicely Tyson, Nia Long, and Cuba Gooding, Jr.; the writings of authors W.E.B. DuBois and Malcolm Gladwell; the music of Beyonce Knowles, Lenny Kravitz, Rihanna, and Wyclef Jean; and the prowess of great athletes like Carl Lewis, Tim Duncan, Patrick Ewing, Sandra Richards-Ross, and Ndamukong Suh. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased that in October, in the city of Houston, will be venue of the 6th annual Caribbean American Heritage Month Festival, which celebrates the rich culture of the Caribbean with a showcase of beautiful costumes, music, food, and enjoyment for all. I also wish to recognize the leadership of the Caribbean American Heritage Foundation of Texas, which works to assist Texas Caribbean Organizations achieve their goals and to advocate on behalf of the peoples of Caribbean descent. I congratulate the Caribbean American Heritage Foundation of Texas, the Caribbean Heritage Organization in my home city of Houston, and the many community organizations and volunteers across the nation for their efforts in making Caribbean American Heritage Month the success that it is. During this month I hope all Americans will join with me in celebrating the remarkable history, culture, and contributions of Caribbean Americans to our nation's past and future.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, healthcare should not be partisan. I have on my jacket a sign that says ``Restore the Vote'' to give opportunities to Americans to vote because Republicans have decided that TrumpCare and healthcare is partisan. We need to be able to ensure that everyone has the right to vote. Today, they issued a mean healthcare bill that is meaner than the House bill. Trillions of dollars are cut from Medicaid, from children and senior citizens. Subsidies are not given to all of those given under the Affordable Care Act. Hospitals will crumble; federally qualified clinics will close; and emergency room doctors, of whom I had the chance to speak to just a few hours ago, indicated 140 million Americans go to emergency rooms, or have gone, for their healthcare. The Affordable Care Act eased that. But, now with this monstrosity of a bill that undermines and throws Americans off healthcare--23 million and growing--then it really does say that elections do matter and that this is a sinister Republican plan to undermine the American people. It is time for us to come together, not partisan, but nonpartisan, to fight for our lives and fight for our children and fight to save the Affordable Care Act. Let's do it now.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2484, the Women, Peace, and Security Act of 2017 which expresses that the United States should be a global leader in promoting the meaningful participation of women in efforts directed at conflict prevention, management, and resolution. This bill directs the President to develop and submit to Congress a Women, Peace, and Security Strategy that will: 1. Be aligned with other nations' plans to improve and encourage women to participate in peace and security over processes, conflict prevention, peace building, and decision making; and 2. Lay out goals and evaluation plans to measure strategy effectiveness. Additionally, H.R. 2484 directs that employees and contractors of the Department of State, Department of Defense, and the U.S. Agency for International Development that personnel deployed to countries or regions at risk or emerging from violent conflict be provided training in conflict prevention, mitigation, and resolution. This training will allow those deployed to these regions to collaborate and support women who live in these conflict ridden communities to develop peace and security strategies. As a member of the Congressional Caucus for Women's Issues, I understand the importance of women's security and its role in conflict prevention and resolution. This is why in the 114th Congress I introduced H. Res. 528 that seeks to create a Victims of Terror Protection Fund for the displaced refugees, migrants and victims of Boko Haram's terror in the region, many of which are women and children. One reason women play such a critical role in the peacebuilding process is because they constitute half of every community. Educating women and men to work in tandem is an imperative step toward instilling peace in communities and mending broken bonds. An important aspect of H.R. 2484 is the inclusion of training personnel who work firsthand in these conflicted regions regarding international human rights laws and the protection of trafficked people. Nearly 21 million people have fallen victim to human trafficking globally, and more than half of them are women and girls. These numbers are staggering, and victims who have been liberated from this awful slavery require special consideration and support to overcome the horrors they have experienced with the aid of women peacekeepers. Women serve as incredible advocates for peace as central caretakers of the family and have already played prominent roles in peace processes in the Horn of Africa. Overall, H.R. 2484 makes an important contribution by requiring the agencies that focus abroad to collaborate on incorporating women in the peacebuilding processes. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 2484, the Women, Peace, and Security Act of 2017.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the Homeland Security Committee, I rise in support of H.R. 2132, ``Traveler Redress Improvement Act of 2017,'' which requires the implementation of a redress process and review of the Transportation Security Administration's intelligence-based screening rules for aviation security. The DHS Traveler Redress Inquiry Program (DHS TRIP) provides a redress process for individuals who have been denied or delayed airline boarding, entry into or exit from the United States at a port of entry or border crossing, or have been repeatedly referred for additional (secondary) screening. I thank the Committee for accepting the Jackson Lee Amendment to H.R. 2132, which extends the time for GAO to submit its report from 180 days to one year. The Jackson Lee Amendment gives GAO additional time to do its work after TSA concludes its work on the Privacy Impact Assessment for the Secure Flight program. In 2015, there were 178 days when TSA screened more than 2 million passengers in a single day. George Bush International and William P. Hobby Airports are essential hubs for domestic and international air travel for Houston and the region. Nearly 40 million passengers traveled through Bush International Airport (IAH) and an additional 10 million traveled through William P. Hobby (HOU). Persons who routinely undergo secondary screening or incur delays in boarding flights only have the DHS TRIP as their sole means of redress. DHS TRIP is a single point of contact for individuals who have inquiries or seek resolution regarding travel difficulties that may be caused by watch list issues, screening problems at ports of entry, and situations where travelers believe they have been unfairly or incorrectly delayed, denied boarding or identified for additional screening at our nation's transportation hubs. H.R. 2132 requires TSA, to report within 18o days on the implementation of the redress process to the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate. TSA is also required to review and update the Privacy Impact Assessment Act for the Secure Flight programs in order to make sure this assessment reflects the operation of the DHS TRIP. As an added measure to ensure DHS TRIP has the most up to date information, the TSA Assistant Administrator of the Office of Intelligence Analysis must conduct a comprehensive review of TSA's intelligence-based screening rules every 120 days. Once this review is completed, the Office of Intelligence Analysis of TSA has 48 hours to notify relevant DHS offices if there is any change, update, implementation, or suspension of any rule or method. Reviewing the screening rules allows TSA to keep the methods that are used for security as up to date as possible and to ensure that air travelers are treated fairly. I am a strong proponent of privacy, civil liberties, and due process. The Federal Privacy Act assures that when agencies use electronic databases to collect, retain, process, or make decisions regarding-U.S. citizens that their privacy is protected. I ask my colleagues from both sides of the aisle to vote in support of H.R. 2132.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the Homeland Security Committee, I rise in support of H.R. 625, the Reporting Efficiently to Proper Officials in Response to Terrorism Act of 2017, or the ``REPORT Act.'' The REPORT Act bridges an information and preparedness gap that has for too long clouded the information Congress receives about acts of terrorism that happen in our homeland. The REPORT Act requires the Secretary of Homeland Security, in coordination with the Attorney General, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and, if appropriate, the head of the National Counterterrorism Center, to submit an unclassified report to Congress, within one year of the completion of an investigation of act of terrorism in the United States. This report will include a statement of the facts regarding the act of terrorism; identify any possible national security gaps that could prevent future acts of terrorism, and any recommendations for additional homeland security improvement measures. The report will help Congress to enact legislation to effectively address security gaps in our national security efforts. The REPORT Act fosters accountability, collaboration, and preparedness. Acts of terror and violence have been at the forefront of the American collective memory for more than a decade now. Americans have become accustomed to hearing about attacks all across our homeland and around the world. The Bookings Institute labeled 2016 as the year of the ``Lone Wolf'' terrorist. Radicalized individuals acting on their own pose a strategic and institutional threat to our national security. This phenomenon requires us to think creatively and collectively to be prepared to address the idiosyncratic aspects of this new wave of terror. The REPORT Act relies on our current security structure to prepare us for the future. Attacks such as the attack on LGBT people of color in Pulse, the attacks in the City of San Bernardino, and recent attacks in London highlight the importance of collaboration and sharing of knowledge to prevent more attacks from happening. This common sense bill relies on our current expertise to prepare for the future. Mr. Speaker, we share the responsibility with the President to keep Americans safe and this bill is a step towards improving the way we go about protecting the American people. I support the REPORT Act and urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important legislation.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the Homeland Security Committee, I rise in support of H.R. 2283, the ``Department of Homeland Security Morale, Recognition, Learning and Engagement Act,'' which will amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002. This bill requires the Chief Human Capital Officer to develop and implement policies related to leadership development, employee engagement, and career progression. The CHCO must evaluate strategic workforce planning efforts, identify methods for managing and overseeing human capital programs, and maintain a catalogue of available employee development opportunities. It is imperative that employees be aware of the opportunities available for them no matter what their current title or role may be. Mr. Speaker, this bill will also authorize the Chief Learning and Engagement Officer to assist the Chief Human Capital Officer on employee development and will also authorize the Employee Engagement Steering Committee. The Employee Engagement Steering Committee will be comprised of representatives from across the Department as well as representatives from employee labor organizations. Having a committee that is representative of the Department's workforce will ensure that a diverse voice is representative in any decisions made that will affect employees. The Steering Committee will identify factors that have a negative impact on employee engagement and morale and will monitor components' efforts in addressing morale. The Component heads are tasked with developing and implementing a component-specific action plan that addresses employee engagement and advances the overall Department action plan. This bill will authorize the Secretary to establish an annual employee awards program to recognize non-supervisory DHS employees who have made significant contributions to the Department. Mr. Speaker, this bill will also require the Secretary to provide an independent assessment of DHS programs to Congress. Congress must ensure that programs are working in the way that they were created to. This bill is endorsed by the National Border Patrol Council, the National Treasury Employees Union, and the American Federation of Government Employees. These organizations have recognized that this bill is a step forward in the right direction which helps employees of the Department have a higher morale. DHS was ranked low in best places to work in a recent poll conducted. Recognition and employee engagement is important to reduce turnover, improve team culture, and increase employee performance. I urge my colleagues to also support this bill and help create a Department of Homeland Security that is professional, efficient, effective, and employee friendly.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, five years ago, on June 15, 2012, President Obama signed the DACA initiative radically changing the lives of thousands of young immigrants by giving them the opportunity to earn degrees, legalize their status and be able to openly contribute their talents to make our country a better place. President Obama's DACA allows thousands of young people the opportunity to dream of a better place, a safer home, and a brighter and more prosperous future. Immigrants in our nation are now under siege by a divisive and misguided political rhetoric that dehumanizes their immigrant experiences by relying on hateful stereotypes. As the DACA program and its beneficiaries come under attack, we must work together to responsibly reform our broken immigration system to ensure that families in immigrant communities can live in this nation freely and without fear. According to the Migration Policy Institute, over 68,000 people in Harris County benefit from the DACA initiative. DACA beneficiaries and immigrants live among us; they are our neighbors, our family members, our classmates, and our friends. Mr. Speaker, Houston is one of the most diverse cities in the nation and immigrants are essential to create Houston's beautiful mosaic of diversity that makes it one of the most dynamic and vibrant cities in America. America is a land of opportunity for those who are willing to work hard and abide by the laws. We must assure that DACA beneficiaries continue to enjoy the opportunity to pursue their American dreams. We are a better country for doing so.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to wish our colleague Congressman Steve Scalise a full and speedy recovery in the wake of this most recent act of senseless violence. Wednesday morning, June 14, 2017, a deranged assailant launched an unprovoked attack against several Members of Congress, who along with some staff members, were practicing at Simpson Park in Alexandria, Virginia for the 56th Annual Congressional Baseball Game, an event designed to build amity across the aisle and raise funds for charity. Among the five persons wounded was Congressman Steve Scalise, the Majority Whip, who sustained serious injuries and remains in critical condition. Our hearts and prayers are with Congressman Scalise and his family. Our thanks and appreciation go to the first responders who rescued and treated the wounded, and the U.S. Capitol Police officers who subdued the shooter and neutralized the threat of this vicious attack. Mr. Speaker, the damage from this mass shooting would have been much greater if not for the heroism, courage, professionalism, and skill of the U.S. Capitol Police Special Agents David Bailey and Crystal Griner, who swiftly responded to sound of gunshots and both of whom were struck and injured in the line of duty. Mr. Speaker, it is no exaggeration to say that political discourse is too charged, too inflammatory, too uncivil these days, and I urge all of us in positions of leadership and influence to exercise calm and restraint and to be mindful of the impact of our words and rhetoric on others. But we also cannot ignore that Wednesday's attack constitutes the 154th mass shooting in our country since the beginning of the year, or that the too easy access to guns helps to make these terrible attacks possible. Today, however, is not the day to debate gun violence prevention policy, but the occasion to wish Congressman Scalise a speedy recovery and a Happy Father's Day: and to hope he will soon be reunited with his wonderful wife Jennifer and their two children, Madison and Harrison.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, yesterday, I indicated to all those who would ask that it was a day of reflection and prayer, to give comfort to those who needed to have comfort, and to reassert over and over again that when tragedy strikes, we are family. When tragedy strikes Americans from the East to the West Coast, to the North to the South, whether it be manmade or natural disasters, hurricanes or tornadoes, terrible floods that we have experienced in different regions of the country, mass shootings, the horrific loss of life of children in Connecticut, the tragic Sandy Hook story that will live forever, the Pulse Nightclub, Virginia Tech, Columbine, and places beyond, San Bernardino, that, in actuality, we recognize that we are, in fact, family. So I think it is important to raise up those who are still in the hospital, and the staff member who was released, in prayer, and to be able to explain to the American people how precious our democracy is. Before I do that, I do want to praise our Capitol Police, Officers Griner and Bailey, and I want to express my deepest prayers for Majority Whip Scalise, who is a neighbor. Those of us in the southern region, Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, and beyond, we are neighbors. We have that southern thing going on. Texas might argue a little bit that they have got a little western thing going on, but we are neighbors. So many of our constituents travel back and forth between Louisiana and Texas--particularly, my city of Houston--and we welcome them. We wish our deepest prayers and a hardy and speedy recovery for Majority Whip Scalise, and we thank him for his service to the Nation. We also recognize two that are wounded--a staff member and volunteer--who just came to be helpful. That is the way we perform here. People who say: Send me. I will help you do this. You have got an event; I will come over and help. That is the preciousness of this country and what is admired by people around the world. But I think it is also important to explain democracy. Democracy generates great passions by Members of Congress, House, and Senate. If we went back over the ages and we were able to read the papers of those who were on this floor when we were a much smaller country, it was high and shrill because of their passion about democracy, because they wanted to put together a country that would respect people because they fled persecution, and they didn't want us to be a nation that would persecute. So I think as we go forward, it is important to engage our constituents in the beauty of democracy and in the beauty of disagreement without being disagreeable and let them know that we welcome acting on their behalf. But violent acts or taking things into your own hands, let us calm our communities all over the Nation. Let us give them a sense of the beauty of our disagreement, because we have managed to keep this democracy sacred for so many years. Let us not allow our good friends in the media, whom I respect with the highest esteem because they are a product of the First Amendment, let us not jump immediately into blaming this one or that one. So many of us have seen the tragedies of the assassination of John F. Kennedy, the assassination of Martin Luther King, and the terrible tragedy of Gabrielle Giffords, who maintained her dignity and love of the institution and has taken on a cause that she believes in and is still fighting as an American. So now we have the opportunity not to raise up who this person was who is now deceased--we don't know his mental state, what his condition was, or why he was out. That it one issue. Let the investigation go forward. And whatever it is, let us still come together and say that we will disagree and not be disagreeable, and we will not encourage or rise up or try to not explain what democracy and love is all about. Mr. Speaker, I leave this podium by saying: Love prevails over hate; and I know that the love that is being generated toward those who are wounded and being cared for is going to cause them to have, I pray to God, a speedy recovery. And I say today: God bless all of you, and God bless the United States of America.