Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5859, the ``Community Counterterrorism Preparedness Act,'' for two reasons. First, the bill will save lives. Second, the legislation is necessary to support the vital work of first responders in preparing for and responding to crises that may range from terrorist incidents to active shooter events. As a senior member of the House Homeland Security Committee, I understand how critical it is for our first responders to be prepared and well trained to manage a wide range of potential threats both conventional and unconventional. September is National Preparedness Month, which serves as a reminder that we all must take action to prepare, now and throughout the year, for the types of emergencies that could affect us where we live, work, and also where we visit. The recent events in New York, New Jersey, and Minnesota highlight the importance of H.R. 5859, which amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to establish the major Metropolitan Area Counterterrorism Training and Exercise Grant Program. The legislation directs components of the Department of Homeland Security to conduct training programs for emergency response providers to prevent, prepare for, and respond to the most likely terrorist attack scenarios, including active shooters. My congressional district, which is centered in the city of Houston Texas, which has a population of 2.2 million, is the fourth most populous city in the United States, trailing only New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago. Houston, largest city in the South and the Southwest. The city is a racially diverse and ethnically dynamic city comprised of Anglo (38.8 percent), Hispanic (35.9 percent), African American (16.7 percent), Asian (6.7 percent) and others. More than 145 different languages are spoken in Houston, the third largest number of languages spoken in a U.S. city behind New York (192) and Los Angeles (185). It is appropriate that we address how we can better coordinate preparedness training so that first responders can accomplish what we have seen over the last few days--in every city in the nation. The Homeland Security Act created the Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate within the Department of Homeland Security with the purpose of partnering with states, local and tribal governments to accomplish the following: promote the effectiveness of emergency responders through standards, training exercises, and funding; manage and coordinate specified federal resources; aid recovery in the event of an attack; build an intergovernmental national incident management system to guide responses; consolidate existing federal response plans; and, develop programs for communications. There are over 1 million firefighters in the United States, of which 750,000 are volunteers. Local police departments have about 556,000 full-time employees. Sheriffs' offices reported about 291,000 full-time employees. There are over 155,000 nationally registered emergency medical technicians (EMT). H.R. 5859 provides an additional resource to first responders to do the work they have dedicated their lives to doing--saving lives. Last year, the House passed my bill, H.R. 2795, the ``First Responder Identification of Emergency Needs in Disaster Situations,'' (FRIENDS Act). The FRIENDS Act embodies the important and fundamental idea that we have an obligation to ensure that the first responders who protect our loved ones in emergencies, have the peace of mind that comes from knowing that their loved ones are safe while they do their duty. The FRIENDS Act reflects stakeholder input and bipartisan collaboration with the Majority. I am passionate about the work of those who dedicate themselves to public service. I hold in high regard the service of firefighters, law enforcement officers, emergency response technicians, nurses, emergency room doctors, and the dozens of other professionals who are the ultimate public servants. First responders are called to serve and few outside of their ranks can understand why they do the work that they do each day--placing their lives in harm's way to save a stranger. A law enforcement officer, fire fighters, and emergency medical technicians make our lives safer, while often at the same time putting their own lives at risk. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 5859, the ``Community Counterterrorism Preparedness Act.''

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I was unavoidably detained at the White House. Had I been present, I would have voted: Rollcall No. 508, ``nay.''

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R. 1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, to honor the memory of Charles Jackson, age 28, Houston Texas, killed on the Fourth of July and a father of 3, a victim of gun violence who never received a moment of silence or action on the House floor.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, this Sunday will mark the 15th year since that day our nation faced the greatest loss of life on U.S. soil from a terrorist attack. The years that have passed since that day have not dimmed my memory or diminished my resolve to see an end to terrorism not only in the United States, but around the world. As a Member of Congress and a senior Member of the Committees on Homeland Security and the Judiciary, both of which deal with national security issues, I have long been committed and engaged in efforts to develop policies that anticipate and respond to new and emerging challenges to the security of our nation and the peace and safety of the world. I will never forget September 11, 2001 when 2,977 men, women and children were murdered by 19 hijackers who took commercial aircraft and used them as missiles. I stood on the East Front steps of the Capitol on September 11, 2001, along with 150 members of the House of Representatives and sang ``God Bless America.'' I visited the site of the World Trade Center Towers in the aftermath of the attacks and grieved over the deaths of so many of our men, women, and children. I want to thank and commend the work of our first responder community on that day and every day since September 11 for their efforts to protect their communities and our nation from acts of terrorism. Mr. Speaker, September 11, 2001 will always be remembered as a day of tragedy and heroism, heartbreak and courage, and shared loss. But the loss remains especially painful to those whose loved ones died or were injured by the criminal acts of terrorists on that fateful day. They remain in our thoughts and prayers and they have our sympathies. Mr. Speaker, this past July the Judiciary Committee, upon which I sit, held a hearing on S. 2040, the ``Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act,'' at which the bill's supporters offered powerful and compelling testimony in favor of insuring that 9/11 families have access to their day in court against the parties directly and vicariously liable for the injuries they suffered. The ``Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act,'' amends the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 to create a new exception to the Act's general grant of foreign sovereign immunity. As the Ranking Member of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigation, I am committed to doing all that I can to ensure that they receive their day in court. I am sensitive, however, to the concerns raised by the Administration regarding unintended consequences that may result if the bill is passed in its current form. In particular, the Administration, allied nations, and others point out that enactment of S. 2040 in its current form may lead to retaliation by other countries against the United States. Additionally, the Administration raises the legitimate concern that if enacted in its current form, S. 2040 may hamper cooperation from other nations because they may become more reluctant to share sensitive intelligence out of fear that such information may be disclosed in litigation. I am confident, however, that these legitimate concerns can be addressed and resolved as the legislation makes its way through the legislative process and I look forward to working with the Administration and the bill's sponsors and supporters to craft acceptable legislation that can be presented to the President for signature. I thank the House and Senate sponsors of this important legislation, my colleagues Congressmen Peter King and Jerrold Nadler of New York, and Senators John Cornyn of Texas and Charles Schumer of New York, for their tireless efforts on behalf of fairness and justice for the 9/11 families

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, today, on the steps of the House, we sang ``God Bless America.'' Standing on those steps some 15 years ago, the searing memory comes back again--the horrific bloodshed, the dividing of families, the loss of lives, the pain, and the tragedy. To those remaining loved ones, I offer my deepest sympathy. And to America: we will never forget. I am grateful that we passed S. 2040 today, the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act. The reason is, our citizens should never be denied the right to enter courts and to petition for justice. As well, the pain needs to be eased. I want to thank those first-responders. I visited Ground Zero. I have felt that pain. Every year, I think it is important for Americans to understand that we must remember to give honor and respect to those fallen and recognize the values of this Nation. As this legislation makes its way, I am committed to working with the administration in ensuring that all is well. It is important to note today, as we sang ``God Bless America,'' we honored those families still in pain by passing S. 2040, Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act. God bless America. Mr. Speaker, I rise to join my colleagues in recognizing and commemorating the 15th anniversary of the attacks on our homeland on September 11, 2001. This Sunday will mark the 15th year since that day our nation faced the greatest loss of life on U.S. soil from an enemy attack since the attack on Pearl Harbor. The years that have passed since that day have not dimmed my memory or diminished my resolve to see an end to terrorism not only in the United States, but around the world. As a Member of Congress and a senior Member of the Committees on Homeland Security and the Judiciary, both of which deal with national security issues, I have long been committed and engaged in efforts to develop policies that anticipate and respond to new and emerging challenges to the security of our nation and the peace and safety of the world. I will never forget September 11, 2001 when 2,977 men, women and a children were murdered by 19 hijackers who took commercial aircraft and used them as missles. I stood on the East Front steps of the Capitol on September 11, 2001, along with 150 members of the House of Representatives and sang ``God Bless America. September 11, 2001 remains a tragedy that defines our nation's history, but the final chapter will be written by those who are charged with keeping our nation and its people safe while preserving the way of life that terrorists seek to change. I visited the site of the World Trade Center Towers in the aftermath of the attacks and grieved over the deaths of so many of our men, women, and children. I want to thank and commend the work of our first responder community on that day and every day since September 11 for their efforts to protect their communities and our nation from acts of terrorism. I watched as thousands of first responders, construction workers, and volunteers worked to recover the remains of the dead, and removed the tons of debris, while placing their own lives and health at risk. The men and women who worked at ``Ground Zero'' were called by a sense of duty to help in our nation's greatest time of need since the bombing of Pearl Harbor. There is unfinished work for those first responders who were injured or suffered illnesses during and after the September 11, 2001 attacks. September 11 will forever remain a part of our national memory and for those who serve in Congress a clarion call to be vigilant against those who would do our nation harm. To respond to the medical needs of the thousands of people who became ill from exposure to the toxic environment at Ground Zero, Congress passed the James Zadroga September 11 Care Act (9/11 Care Act), which provides rescue and recover workers with health care to treat the conditions that resulted from their exposure to toxic dust after the terror attack. Under the leadership of President Obama, Bin Laden was found and killed. President Obama accepted, and succeeded in the mission to bring justice to those responsible for the carnage of September 11, 2001. Today, let us remember those who perished on this awful day 14 years ago, and rededicate ourselves to honoring their sacrifice by doing all we can to protect our homeland and all who dwell peaceably therein.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, you have heard the cries of our colleagues. You have heard the cries of the American people. Redundancy is not a question here. It is telling the truth. In fact, our health professionals have indicated that the Zika virus presents an unprecedented threat to the people of our Nation, especially to pregnant women. We cannot hear this often enough, and although busy with the beginning of the school year and with going back to work, it is important to warn the American people of this impending and ongoing threat. While we are fiddling and doing things that have no impact on providing a portion of the $1.9 billion that is needed by the American people, we have 1,600 cases of Zika virus in the United States--200 plus women who are pregnant and 35 known transmitted diseases here in the United States of the Zika virus. We also now know, through health professionals, that it is sexually transmitted. We know that the entire United States is vulnerable, but most of the vulnerable States are in the Gulf region. It is time now to address the question of funding without riders, like preventing Planned Parenthood from getting funding, and without riders for allowing the Confederate flag to be in a veterans' cemetery. Where is our concern about the American people--for the people in Louisiana with a lot of water? for the people in Texas with a lot of water? in Florida? in Puerto Rico? It is important that this funding comes now to rapidly expand mosquito control programs and to accelerate a vaccine. That is really important--to be able to provide the American people with a vaccine. They are in the midst of the research. They need the funding. The CDC and the NIH have reprogrammed more money than they have to try to help those who are desperate. I make the argument that it is time now for us to do the job. The other body needs to engage in providing a bill, and this body, this House, needs to stop playing those kinds of politics and provide the funding--the funding that does not take from Ebola but the funding that the American people need to be safe. Mr. Speaker, we are currently in a state of a public health crisis as a result of the growing rate of Zika infections across the country. Sadly, we are failing as our nation's leaders in our ability to respond to this crisis. As days and month go by it is alarming and the level of action and inaction my colleagues are taking to hamper the ability of our federal government to respond to this rapidly growing public threat. In particular, I am concerned that we--as a body of Congress--have not taken the critical steps to move forward and appropriate necessary funding that will help screen, treat, vaccinate and test deadly cases of Zika infections. According to the Coalition for Sensible Safeguards, Congress should be looking for ways to strengthen our nation's regulatory system by identifying gaps and instituting new science-based safeguards for the public. I cannot agree more--as we are now in perilous times where the Zika virus presents unprecedented threats to the people of our nation. As cited by Tom Frieden, Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Anthony Fauci, Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health in an op-ed, dated August 21, 2016: There have been more than 16,800 cases of Zika infection reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in the U.S. and its territories, including more than 2,700 on the mainland. Laboratory tests have confirmed that 1,595 pregnant women have been infected with the virus, and tragically, 17 babies have been born with birth defects related to Zika. As highlighted by Frieden and Fauci--``We have an obligation to meet the Zika threat and protect this country''--as ``the potential cost of a funding shortfall will be measured in human misery and even death.'' Now is not the time to pass measures or engage in futile debates that will undermine or slow the ability of our federal and local governments to address and respond to this growing threat and active cases of Zika infections. Rather, we need to invest in stopping this deadly, but preventable virus, before it is too late. We cannot afford to stand by with our hands tied any longer. Our limited time as the days in September wain down cannot be wasted. We should be focused on the crucial mission of protecting our nation's people. That is why, in these critical times of need, I am calling upon my colleagues to place the growing epidemic of the Zika virus at the top of our priorities and demand no less than fully financed measures to timely and adequately respond to this devastating and deadly public health emergency. [From Time, Sept. 7, 2016] How To Fight Zika and Cure Nation's Ailing Public Health System--Enact a Law to Respond Quickly to Threats (By Sheila Jackson Lee) There is an excellent model that demonstrates how the U.S. should reform the current reactive model of public health emergency management--it is the solution found to address disasters established by the Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act. Under the Stafford Act, enacted in 1974 and later updated in 1988, authorizes the President of the United States, when disaster strikes, to deploy the coordinated efforts and resources of the federal government to save lives and property, and restore communities hit hard by a calamity. The federal government provides warnings of hurricanes and floods, and in cases of wildfires dispatches resources to extinguish flames before they threaten people and property. The knowledge of public health experts, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, policy makers, health-care professionals and patient advocacy organizations should be brought together with the relevant committees in the House and Senate to develop measurable criteria to create baselines for defining, responding and mitigating public health threats to effectively and immediately without the delay engendered by the need for Congress to pass an emergency supplemental appropriations. The U.S. must be capable of responding quickly to emerging threats that are identified anywhere in the world. The Ebola and Zika viruses for examples existed in other nations for many years before they became a clear and present threat to public health in the Western Hemisphere and the U.S. The cost of waiting until a public health threat is present in the U.S. increases the threat to our nation's public health systems; it reduces the likelihood of success in winning the battle against a pathogen and it risks a new contagious disease becoming endemic--akin to the common cold. In addition, the cost of putting down a public health threat increases as time passes. There is a long history of threats to public health posed by pathogens. In March 1918, in Kansas, the U.S. had its first case of the Spanish Flu, which is recorded as the first H1N1 flu epidemic. This pandemic killed 50 million persons worldwide it ended abruptly in 1919. The mortality rate of the Spanish Flu was as high as 1 death for every 5 infections and 50% of the deaths, or about 25 million, occurred in the first 25 weeks of the outbreak. We are now in the 31st week of the Zika Virus global health emergency, which was declared by the World Health Organization on Feb. 1, 2016. The world is still battling the HIV/AID global pandemic, which became known to public health experts well before the disease made it into the United States. Still, it took President Clinton's efforts to put the full force of the federal government behind finding an effective treatment for HIV that slowed the progression of the disease from becoming full blown AIDs. By 2011, more than 6o million people globally had been infected by AIDS and 25 million had died. The legislative process has proven itself not to respond in a timely manner to public health threats. The U.S. to be more robust enough needs to have in place mechanisms designed to respond systemically to federally declared public health emergencies and deliver assistance to support state and local governments in carrying out their responsibility to protect the public health. This is the second time in three years that a global health emergency has been declared that required Congress to act by passing a new law to fund the national response. This is the second time that the legislative process failed to act quickly when the public health threat was known and its consequences were clearly understood by domestic infectious disease experts. On Aug. 24, 2014, the Democratic Republic of the Congo Ministry of Health notified the World Health Organization of an outbreak of Ebola virus. On Oct. 8, 2014, Ebola claimed the life of Thomas Eric Duncan after he presented symptoms at the time of admission to an emergency room. He had recently traveled to a country where the disease was actively being transmitted; he had a fever over too degrees accompanied by abdominal pain, dizziness, nausea and headache. Communications had gone to public health officials, hospitals, and health-care providers from the Centers for Disease Control stating that all patients should be asked whether they had traveled to West Africa recently; and checked for sytnptoms of Ebola, which include a dangerously high fever, abdominal pain, nausea and headache. Unfortunately, Mr. Duncan having all of the symptoms to be considered a possible Ebola patient was not admitted for observation, tests, and treatment, but instead sent home. As of April 13, 2016, globally there were 28,652 suspected Ebola cases; 15,261 laboratory confirmed Ebola cases and 11,325 deaths from Ebola. Today, the CDC continue to monitor for Ebola disease outbreaks. We can no longer act as if a disease outbreak in a nation on the other side of the world has no relevance or importance to the public health status of communities within the U.S. In fact, we know that this is not the case. H1N1, Ebola, and Zika viruses are hard lessons to the global health community teaching that the world has changed and that it is time the U.S. adjusts by becoming proactive and cease being reactive in preparing for and defending against public health threats and emergencies. Establishing a model that is quantitative and based upon measurable changes in public health conditions around the world as well as within the U.S. and having the capacity to react quickly can save lives and assures public health system stability. Our nation has some local health-care systems that are second to none, such as the Houston Medical Center, but our national public health system has glaring weaknesses when handling pathogens that may be as dangerous as Ebola and as contagious as the Spanish Flu. There are only four hospitals in the U.S., and a total of 15-16 beds, for persons infected with a human viral hemorrhagic fever: Emory University Hospital in Atlanta has two Ebola beds, St. Patrick Hospital in Missoula, Montana, has one or two; National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland, has the capacity to treat two patients in its Special Clinical Studies Unit, according to the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the NIH; and Nebraska Medical Center in Omaha, reportedly has a biocontainment facility with 10 beds total. The public health challenge for our nation is to effectively address the sudden emergence of a highly contagious pathogen with a mortality rate of 1 in 5 so that the public health threat may be identified within hours of patient zero, a team of public health experts deployed with the requisite equipment and resources within 24 hours to any point on the globe, establish field labs, hospitals, coordinate with local public health officials, communicate with public health and disease experts globally; type and identify the threat; its method of transmission; and determine what is needed to contain the threat; while beginning work on treatments and potential cures. Their work would also be to calculate mortality rates and the point when the disease may become endemic over a 25 week time period to stop its spread, which should include communicating to local, state and tribal public health officials' the information they will need to prepare to face the threat that may be just a flight away. A Public Health Relief and Emergency Assistance Law is overdue--I urge the leadership of the House and the Senate to work in a bipartisan fashion to put on the desk of the President of the United States a law that will be the cure for the weaknesses in our nation's public health system when it is faced with public health emergencies.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I want to celebrate the return of the Chibok schoolgirls. Many of you know that 200-plus girls were taken back in 2014, in Nigeria, snatched out of their beds, snatched out of a boarding school, abused, and taken by Boko Haram. Boko Haram, of course, is an ISIS cousin. I want to acknowledge that Frederica Wilson, Lois Frankel, and myself, we went to Nigeria when they were taken. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to celebrate those girls are back. But we are going to fight Boko Haram in every way that we can possibly fight. Finally, congratulations to the University of Houston football team that beat Oklahoma.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, there was such expectation, as Members returned from their work recess in August. Many times, the American people are quizzical, inquisitive about the structure of our work. We are constitutionally mandated; and, in fact, we have major responsibilities of oversight; but we also are the umbrella on a rainy day. The Congress must rise to the occasion in time of war. It is our authority to declare war. We must rush to the aid of those Americans in need by our oversight over executive agencies, such as Homeland Security and FEMA, as we watched the suffering of our fellow Americans in the terrible storms of Baton Rouge, of the hurricanes up and down the east coast, of what happened on 9/11 or Sandy or Katrina or Rita or Hurricane Ike and many others. Hurricanes and others, it is up to us to do our work. Well, we are not doing our work. We left this place having had the Senate pass a $1.1 billion Zika funding bill--not what the executive asked, but a reasoned response to the crisis and emergency that we are facing. It is devastating in Puerto Rico, which is part of the United States. It is devastating to the people there. They are suffering greatly. Now we have found cases in parts of Florida, including areas that my colleague, Congresswoman Wilson, represents, and areas around Miami Beach. More importantly, there are 2,000 Zika cases in the United States, 600-plus are pregnant women, babies not yet born; and 35 cases have been found to have been transmitted here in the United States--and yet fiddling is going on. Unnecessary riders are being included in something that should simply pass because it is an emergency. Shame on those who would cloud legislation with preventing the health clinics that women need, run by Planned Parenthood, from getting money. Shame on those who would try to undermine the executive order about confederate flags in veterans cemeteries on official flagpoles. You have every right to put it at your personal grave, or the family does. How ridiculous, how undermining of our authority, our constitutional responsibility to govern this Nation. I am saddened because the image that is being perceived is that we cannot do our job. We can. We have to be Americans united together, facing the emergency. Many Americans are not focused on the Zika virus. I understand. It has been a time of summer and frolic and time with family. But most infectious disease doctors--the regional task force that I have organized: Dr. Hotez, an infectious disease doctor at Baylor who is well renowned; and Dr. Persse, a well renowned medical professional in public health; along with OB/GYN and State officials. I want to thank them for their work. They are asking me: Where are the resources for mosquito control, for the research, for the vaccine? Just so you know, the cost of a baby that has been impacted by this terrible disease is $10 million. IRS Commissioner

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, and then on the question of our duties, why would there be any discussion to impeach or to suggest the impeachment of a public servant like the IRS commissioner, who I know has done nothing wrong, including the words of the inspector general who can find nothing wrong that this retired private citizen, who came to help turn the IRS around, who came way after the trouble was raised about targeting different groups--he had nothing to do with it. And yet someone is suggesting he should be impeached. What are you going to do with Americans who sacrifice and say, I want to serve, and then you abuse them and abuse the power of this Congress and suggest some kind of an impeachment? I have gone through impeachment proceedings. Read the Madison papers. There is no suggestion of misconduct or treason by this individual. We can't impeach people because the IRS is some entity that most of us would find not a welcomed guest at our dinner table. And then again, they do great work. They are a part of the structure of this government. So I would ask the question: Why? That is not oversight; that is abuse. Celebrating the Return of the Chibok Schoolgirls

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. So what I argue today is that we are within the confines of the law. It is a minute portion. It is not the billions of dollars that have been represented. It is certainly not a slush fund. Mr. Chairman, I include in the Record an article from the Houston Chronicle, dated Sunday, September 4, 2016. It involves shooting victims. These are the survivors of the Aurora, Colorado, shooting. And guess what. The theater prevailed. They didn't have to pay a dime. They didn't have to have any check as to whether or not their doors could have been more secure. They could have had security, but it said the shooting survivors owe $700,000 to the theater. Do you want to hear who one of the victims was? Let me just share with you a victim who just couldn't bring herself to accept. I feel sorry. Her suffering had been profound. Her child was killed in the shooting. She was left paralyzed, and the baby she was carrying had been lost. Do you know what she got? Zero, zero, zero. I just wish the Justice Department could have shared a resource with her or a group or the class action lawsuit that was thrown out of court causing them to have to pay $700,000 to the theater. This bill does not deal with those in need. Vote against this bill. (The following article appeared on September 4, 2016 in the Houston Chronicle:) [From the Los Angeles Times] Shooting Survivors Owe $700K to Theater (By Nigel Duara) Denver.--They had survived brain damage, paralysis and the deaths of their children. For four years, they met in secret as a group. Now, they were finally prepared to settle with the Aurora, Colo., movie theater that became the site of one of the deadliest massacres in U.S. history. On a conference call, the federal judge overseeing the case told the plaintiffs' attorneys that he was prepared to rule in the theater chain's favor. He urged the plaintiffs to settle with Cinemark, owner of the Century Aurora 16 multiplex where the July 20, 2012, shooting occurred. They had 24 hours. But before that deadline, the settlement would collapse and 15 survivors of the massacre would be ordered to pay the theater chain more than $700,000. The settlement conference, corroborated by the Los Angeles Times with four parties present at the conference, was hastily convened after a separate set of survivors suffered defeat in state court, where a jury decided that Cinemark could not have foreseen the events of that night in 2012, when James Holmes killed 12 people and injured 70 others in a 10-minute rampage at a screening of ``The Dark Knight Rises.'' In the federal case, survivors agreed to split $150,000 among 41 plaintiffs. The deal came with an implied threat: If the survivors rejected the deal, moved forward with their case and lost, under Colorado law, they would be responsible for the astronomical court fees accumulated by Cinemark. Then one plaintiff rejected the deal. Her suffering had been profound: Her child was killed in the shooting, she was left paralyzed and the baby she was carrying had been lost. None of the plaintiffs would receive a dime. Although a source close to the theater chain said that there is no intention to actually seek recovery of the court costs, the theater chain has not issued any statement about its intentions.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished ranking member of the subcommittee. I acknowledge the chairman of the full committee and, as well, the ranking member of the full committee. I am going to announce some breaking news. The Judiciary Committee gets along. We do a lot of good work together. I am looking forward to moving legislation dealing with a number of good policy suggestions and legislative initiatives involving the criminal justice system. I hope we can continue to work together. But I would raise concern as to this legislation, and I raise it in the context of all that this Congress has to do. I would also raise it in the context that the administration has indicated on this bill, H.R. 5063, the misnamed Stop Settlement Slush Funds--totally misnamed--a veto threat. We don't know whether anyone in the United States Senate, the other body, has any interest in this legislation at all. So in the meantime, there are any number of issues that should be addressed. My State of Texas is suffering under the threat of the Zika virus. The State of Florida is already in the eye of the storm, Puerto Rico, all of the Gulf States, maybe as far reaching as New York. That work needs to be done. The children of Flint are still asking us to respond to their concerns. The people of Baton Rouge, Louisiana, are still asking us to respond to the devastation that they are facing. Yet we deal with legislation that has totally misconstrued what has been done by the Department of Justice. It is important to note that it is not unconstitutional. There is no breach of the Constitution by way of what is going on here. First of all, it is not billions of dollars. It is minute in the course of helping individuals--$50 million--less than 1.1 percent of a total settlement of $23.5 billion. We know that the Congressional Research Service must be nonpartisan. All of us use the Congressional Research Service. I would venture to say that it is one of the most nonpartisan, independent entities that we have. He has indicated twice that the settlements are lawful. I said, Mr. Chairman, lawful. That is my concern with this misnamed legislation. This legislation hurts the vulnerable and victims. This legislation is not dealing with the crux of the issue. These are settlements engaging in agencies. These are not appropriated dollars. These are judgments within the context of the court. What is happening is that, out of the settlement, the agency is attempting to help people to help victims. Let me give you an example as it relates to HUD counseling. Just a few days ago, we saw mention of the ongoing concerns involving foreclosures. Many people may think that that is a thing of the past, but it is not. It is clearly something that is important to many people. Working with HUD counseling organizations, they are providing resources to help individuals get out of the pit of a foreclosure. It is well known that if individuals get counseling, they are nearly three times more likely to obtain a money-saving mortgage modification. If an individual family all over this Nation was to get that, they would be more likely to receive a payment reduction of approximately $61 a month greater, on average, than noncounseled homeowners. They would be nearly twice as likely to get their mortgage back on track without a modification. Maybe, Mr. Chairman, a family of four, six, eight, or nine might not get kicked out of their house because of HUD counseling resources that have been given through a settlement, not forced through a settlement, not oppressed and overbearing, but through a settlement, through a legal justified settlement. What would our friends want us to do? To ignore these people. Counseling would bring about, if necessary, an ability to complete short sales faster than homeowners who don't work with housing counselors and about 60 percent less likely to re-default after curing a serious delinquency. That is the kind of agency that is being called some kind of slush fund. This is totally skewed into the needs of our citizens, and it is opposed by individuals who work with our citizens--clean water action, individuals who work dealing with consumers, the National Council of La Raza, employment lawyers, the National Fair Housing Alliance, and the National Urban League. These are organizations that can document that they help people in their worst needs. Who is helping to assist in the Baton Rouge floods after FEMA? It will probably be a lot of nonprofits dealing with housing counseling.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I want to, again, reiterate that words do matter. The naming of this bill, unfortunately, skews and distorts a legitimate right that agencies in litigation have. In particular, I want to take note of the fact, again--I think it is always important to set the record straight--that the settlement donations have been 1.1 percent of $23.5 billion, that a government- independent entity has indicated that these settlements are lawful. The sledgehammer effect that has been taken in order to ensure that we stop victims, innocent persons from getting some relief is unbelievable. So the Jackson Lee amendment No. 3 would address the problematic concern with H.R. 5063, which would only exempt payments to third parties to provide restitution for actual harm directly and proximately caused by the party making the payment. The Jackson Lee amendment No. 3 would carve out an additional exemption to enable States to act as third-party actors with the ability to remedy generalized harm for mass injuries where the actual party responsible for directly or proximately causing the harm is there. For example, the Jackson Lee amendment No. 3 would allow for States, such as Texas and other Gulf Coast States, to address the environmental harms resulting in settlement agreements to impacted parties such as those harmed by a variety of man-made disasters. I urge adoption of this particular amendment because, again, it would provide an opportunity for States to remediate generalized harm of unlawful conduct beyond harms to identifiable victims. I believe, in particular, the bill here that we have would ban the following entirely legitimate, appropriate uses of SEP funds that are currently permitted by EPA: pollution prevention projects that improve plant procedures and technologies and/or operation and maintenance practices that will prevent additional pollution at its source. I ask my colleagues to support the amendment. Mr. Chair, the Jackson Lee Amendment No. 3 exempts from H.R. 5063 settlement agreements that pertain to providing restitution for a State. Mr. Chair, H.R. 5063, as currently drafted, is flawed and misguided. This bill seeks to exempt only those payments to parties other than the government to provide restitution for actual harm ``directly and proximately caused by the party making the payment.'' Mr. Chair, I urge adoption of the Jackson Lee Amendment No. 3 which seeks to address the additional case exception for those instances where funds are directed to states to remediate the generalized harm of unlawful conduct beyond harms to identifiable victims. One clear example of where such an exemption is needed is concerning the Deepwater Horizon Settlement agreements directing payments to states as third parties for general remediation of harms. Under current law, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) may include Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs) in settlement agreements to offset the harms of unlawful conduct by requiring parties to undertake an environmentally beneficial project or activity that is not required by law, but that a defendant agrees to undertake as part of the settlement of an enforcement action. In 2012, the EPA and Justice Department resolved the civil liability of MOEX Offshore through a settlement agreement resulting from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, that included funds to several Gulf states, including Texas, where Texas was not party to the complaint, but received $3.25 million for SEPs and other responsive actions. Professor Joel Mintz of Nova Southeastern University College of Law, a former chief attorney with the EPA, noted in his written statement on H.R. 5063, that the proposed bill would prohibit these agreements. That is, many of the important benefits now provided by EPA's SEPs program would be excluded by H.R. 5063. The bill's definition, according to Professor Mintz, excludes ``any payment by a party to provide restitution for or otherwise remedy the actual harm (including to the environment), directly and proximately caused by the alleged conduct of the party that is the basis for the settlement agreement.'' As such, this exception is too narrowly drawn to allow for numerous beneficial uses of SEP monies. Thus, for example, the bill would appear to ban the following entirely legitimate, appropriate uses of SEP funds that are currently permitted by EPA: Pollution prevention projects that improve plant procedures and technologies, and/or operation and maintenance practices, that will prevent additional pollution at its source; Environmental restoration projects including activities that protect local ecosystems from actual or potential harm resulting from the violation; Facility assessments and audits, including investigations of local environmental quality, environmental compliance audits, and investigations into opportunities to reduce the use, production and generation of toxic materials; Programs that promote environmental compliance by promoting training or technical support to other members of the regulated community; and Projects that provide technical assistance or equipment to a responsible state or local emergency response entity for purposes of emergency planning or preparedness. Each of these types of programs provide important protections of human health and the environment in communities that have been harmed by environmental violations. However, because they are unlikely to be construed as redressing ``actual (environmental) harm, directly and proximately caused'' by the alleged violator, the bill before this committee would prohibit every one of them. The Jackson Lee Amendment No. 3 would eliminate this harmful prohibition by implementing a common sense exception for these very types of cases. Accordingly, I urge my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee Amendment No. 3. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, quite the contrary to my dear friend, this bill is unclear. It is not clear. So victims are impacted positively by environmental restoration projects, including activities to protect local ecosystems, facility assessments and audits, including investigations of local environmental quality, programs that promote environmental compliance, projects that provide technical assistance or equipment. Each of these types of programs provide important protections of human health and the environment in communities that have been harmed by environmental violations and others. It is not clear whether or not these kinds of projects or programs that the State may be able to utilize are, in fact, able to be utilized in this legislation. That is why I offer amendment No. 3. Again, I will raise the terrible headline of victims having to pay $700,000. Let's not make victims pay by this underlying bill, H.R. 5063. Let's support the Jackson Lee amendment that takes into consideration the victims who need to be compensated and provide a pathway for restoration. I urge my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment No. 3. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I have amendment No. 4 at the desk.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, again, as I have indicated, there are victims that are not in the purview or even in the eyesight of this legislation that will be harmed by this legislation. The Jackson Lee amendment No. 4 would address the problematic concern with H.R. 5063, which would only provide an exemption for payments to parties, other than the government, to provide restitution for actual harm directly and proximately caused by the party making the payment. The Jackson Lee amendment would provide an exemption for cases where funds are necessary to remedy generalized harm, other than for restitution, to specific or immediately identifiable victims. In particular, Jackson Lee amendment No. 4 would allow the Federal Government to engage with third parties that help carry out settlement agreements--again, settlement agreements--dollars that are under the purview of the settlement and that are minute in distribution, indicated 1.1 percent, in furtherance of resolution of the civil action or potential civil action in specific relation to sexual harassment, violence, or discrimination in the workplace. Jackson Lee amendment No. 4 would carve out this additional exception to protect such actions and the ability to provide the mediators or other third parties to intervene on behalf of civil action litigants. It is clear that we have had a number of civil rights violations in this country. We are not yet through with overcoming discrimination in many aspects of life, particularly in workplace discrimination. For instance, in the settlement of an EEOC sexual harassment case of female laundry workers, a consent decree resolving the case provides that in addition to paying $582,000, Suffolk Laundry will adopt new procedures to prevent sexual harassment and will train its managers and staff on identifying and preventing sexual harassment and retaliation. The policies and staff training will be available in Spanish. EEOC will monitor Suffolk Laundry's compliance with these obligations and title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for a period of 4 years. Because of this consent decree, these women will receive due compensation for the abuse they suffered; and there is confidence, with the consent decree in place and the conditions of that consent decree, that no more employees will be victimized in the future. In another example of an EEOC sex discrimination lawsuit--and so there will be those that will help implement this settlement--the Cintas Corporation settled to pay $1.5 million. The corporation entered into a further agreement: to hire an outside expert to reevaluate the criteria used to screen, interview, and select employees and the interview guides used in employee hiring; to provide training to the individuals involved in the selection of employees, whereby such training would cover record retention and an explanation of what constitutes an unlawful employment practice under title VII; to continue to provide diversity, harassment, and antidiscrimination training annually to employees; to post a notice informing employees that Federal law prohibits discrimination; and to report to EEOC over an approximate 28-month period information and materials on training programs, recruiting logs, descriptions, and explanations for any changes. I would argue the point that this helps to promote the antidiscrimination necessary to correct the pathway that some have found their way in. The Jackson Lee amendment No. 4 would create an appropriate exemption to the absolute block and prohibition that the underlying legislation provides. Mr. Chair, the Jackson Lee Amendment No. 4 exempts from H.R. 5063 settlement agreements that resolves a civil action or potential civil action in relation to sexual harassment, violence, or discrimination in the workplace. Mr. Chair, H.R. 5063 as currently drafted is flawed and misguided. This bill seeks to exempt only those payments to parties other than the government to provide restitution for actual harm ``directly and proximately caused by the party making the payment.'' A few months ago we saw that the Justice Department filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the state of North Carolina and other parties declaring North Carolina House Bill 2's restroom restriction unlawfully discriminatory. Attorney General Loretta Lynch stated that this complaint was about ``a great deal more than just bathrooms.'' She explained: ``This is about the dignity and respect we accord our fellow citizens and the laws that we, as a people and as a country, have enacted to protect them--indeed, to protect all of us. And it's about the founding ideals that have led this country--haltingly but inexorably--in the direction of fairness, inclusion and equality for all Americans.'' Enforcing these rights is as important today as they were during the enactment of the Civil Rights Act over fifty years ago. H.R. 5063 would prohibit remediation of generalized harm in civil rights cases, restricting relief for non-parties to the litigation and non-identifiable victims of discrimination. Professor David Uhlmann observed during last month's hearing on this bill ``fails to adequately address the fact that generalized harm arises in civil cases,'' including cases involving ``harm to our communities . . . that cannot be addressed by restitution.'' In these cases, Professor Uhlmann concluded, third-party payments are appropriate. Yet, the Majority witness, Daniel Lungren, specifically testified on behalf of the Chamber that the bill should prohibit ``the U.S. government from entering into a settlement agreement requiring a defendant to donate to an organization or individual not a party to the litigation.'' The Jackson Lee Amendment No. 4 would remedy this flaw by creating an exception to cases where settlement funds are directed to the remediation of generalized harm other than restitution to identifiable victims. For instance, in the settlement of an EEOC sexual harassment case of female laundry workers and a consent decree resolving the case provides that: In addition to paying $582,000, Suffolk Laundry will adopt new procedures to prevent sexual harassment and will train its managers and staff on identifying and preventing sexual harassment and retaliation. The policies and staff training will be available in Spanish. EEOC will monitor Suffolk Laundry's compliance with these obligations and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for a period of four years. Because of this consent decree, these women will receive due compensation for the abuse they suffered and, there is confidence, with the consent decree in place and the conditions of that consent decree, that no more employees will be victimized in the future. In another example of an EEOC sex discrimination lawsuit where Cintas Corporation settled to pay $1.5 million, the corporation entered into a further agreement: To hire an outside expert to revalidate the criteria used to I screen, interview and select employees and the interview guides used in employee hiring. To provide training to the individuals involved in the selection of employees, whereby such training would cover record retention and an explanation of what constitutes an unlawful employment practice under Title VII. To continue to provide diversity, harassment and antidiscrimination training annually to employees. To post a notice informing employees that federal law prohibits discrimination, and to report to EEOC over an approximate 28-month period information and materials on training programs; recruiting logs; descriptions and explanations for any changes made to the employee hiring process; its expert revalidation findings; unprivileged materials and reports from any audits made of a facility's employee hiring or recruitment methods or practices, should an audit be done; record retention and reporting on applicant data. According to EEOC General Counsel, David Lopez, the injunctive relief obtained provides confidence and a strong foundation for eliminating barriers in recruiting and hiring women and will prevent the reoccurrence of this type of situation. The Jackson Lee Amendment No. 4 would have a direct impact on these very types of cases by providing an exception to cases where funds are directed to the remediation of generalized harm, as highlighted in the above agreements that falls within the category of other than direct restitution to the identifiable victims. Accordingly, I urge adoption of the Jackson Lee Amendment No. 4. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I think the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary just answered, this is a political bill. If an independent entity in the settlement wants to retain an entity to help train, to help provide information, to speak Spanish, why is that prohibited? My amendment says there should be an affirmative affirmation through an exemption that this is not disallowed because specifically what they are trying to go to is blocking the particular settlement and the parties from making an informed decision as to who would best implement the settlement; and if that required funding to do so to an entity that may happen to be a civil rights group, an NAACP, an Urban League, La Raza, then it seems that my friends on the other side of the aisle want to make sure that those organizations' storied histories in civil rights does not get a chance to help improve and to eliminate sexual harassment, workplace harassment, workplace discrimination, sexual violence, none of these things. I can't, for the life of me, understand why the Jackson Lee amendment No. 4 would not be an acceptable affirmation that it is all right for these corporations to engage with other entities that can do the job better than them. Let's work together to eliminate discrimination in America once and for all, and let's work together so that we don't read any more headlines like the Aurora, Colorado, headline victims, where they were told to pay $700,000 back to the theater. I am appalled, and I think none of us would agree with that. I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment No. 4. It is right for justice and equality. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4511, the ``Gold Star Families Voices Act,'' which allows Gold Star families to submit to the Veterans History Project recordings of biological histories of a service member who was killed in action. Gold Star family members are defined by law as parents, spouses, siblings, or children of members of the Armed Forces who died while serving their country. Current law only allows the personal histories and testimonials from veterans themselves be included in the Veterans History Project archive, which excludes the biographies of veterans who were killed in action during war. Since its passing in 2000, the Veterans History Project has collected the oral history records of over 100,000 veterans who have served in armed conflicts since World War I. Extending the opportunity to participate in the Veterans History Project to Gold Star families would result in nearly 1,000 new collections for the Project. These veterans sacrificed more than can be imagined in order to protect the freedoms and rights that we take for granted every day. Not only did these veterans miss birthdays, anniversaries, and many other holidays to defend the country they loved, but the veterans of these Gold Star families made the ultimate sacrifice by giving what President Lincoln called the ``last full measure of devotion'' so that their nation might remain free. These brave souls left behind relatives, friends, and loved ones who continue on with memories of the loved and lost to comfort them and, in Lincoln's words, ``the solemn pride that is theirs in having laid so costly a sacrifice on the altar of freedom.'' This legislation provides Gold Star families a voice. H.R. 4511 gives Gold Star families the opportunity to share that pride with the nation by telling the story of their fallen loved ones and in doing so ensure these heroes live on not only in the memories of family members but also in the national memory through the Veteran's History Project. I ask all Members to join me in supporting H.R. 4511, the Gold Star Families Voices Act.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5578, the ``Survivors' Bills of Rights Act of 2016.'' I am pleased to be an original cosponsor of this measure because this critical bill will eliminate barriers to the law faced by sexual assault survivors. H.R. 5578 is an important bill intended to provide additional legal protections and support to survivors of the horrific crime of sexual assault. An estimated 1 out of every 6 women in the United States will be the victim of a sexual assault or attempted sexual assault during their lifetime. All too often, the victims of sexual abuse are children. According to a 2013 Department of Health and Human Services survey on child maltreatment, child protective service agencies estimated that for the period from 2009 through 2013, an average of 63,000 children were victims of sexual abuse each year. Despite these statistics, the United States presently lacks standardized procedures for victims of sexual assault to gain full access to justice. Basic rights and protections for survivors of sexual assault vary from state to state. Moreover, not a single State gives sexual assault victims the right to require that critical forensic evidence in their case--the sexual assault evidence collection kit, or rape kit--be retained until the statute of limitations on the crime has expired. As a result, critical evidence can be lost. The Survivors' Bill of Rights Act will create a federal standard that states can model. For example, Massachusetts has a 15-year statute of limitations on sexual assaults, but untested rape kits are required to be stored only for six months. In another example, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department in North Carolina has destroyed more than 1,000 rape kits since 2000. This bipartisan legislation would ensure sexual assault survivors in federal criminal cases have certain rights and serve as an example for States to adopt similar practices. This bill will add to the existing rights for the survivors of sexual assault the following: The right to not be prevented from, or charged for, receiving a medical forensic exam; The right to be informed of any result of a sexual assault evidence collection kit; The right to be informed in writing of policies governing the collection and preservation of their rape kit; The right to have that rape kit preserved, without charge, for the statutory limitation period or 20 years, whichever is shorter; The right to receive written notice, no later than sixty days before the intended date, if the government intends to destroy or dispose of their rape kit before the end of the statutory limitation period; and The right to request, in writing, that their rape kit be preserved, rather than be destroyed or disposed of before the expiration of the statutory limitation period. This bill also amends Victims of Crime Act to authorize the Attorney General to make grants for the development and dissemination of written notices of applicable rights and policies for sexual assault survivors. Crime victim assistance programs that receive such grants will provide the notices to sexual assault survivors, as well as to medical facilities, law enforcement agencies, forensic examiners, sexual assault service providers, and other agencies that come in contact with sexual assault survivors. Finally, this bill would create a working group under the Attorney General, with advice from the Secretary of Health and Human Services, and participation by representatives of sexual assault prevention, advocacy, or victims groups, to develop best practices regarding the care and treatment of sexual assault survivors and the preservation of forensic evidence. These changes will allow survivors access to vital medical information, improve communication between law enforcement and survivors, ensure survivors have information necessary to monitor aspects of the investigation, and help prevent evidence in their cases being destroyed without their knowledge. This bill expands and strengthens the rights of survivors of sexual assault, and will help ensure that they are fully and timely informed of, and thus able to meaningfully exercise, those rights. For these reasons, I support the Survivors' Bill of Rights Act. I urge my colleagues to support this bill because this important and necessary measure will help ensure that sexual assault survivors are given full access to the justice system.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, over the August work recess, I met with many constituents, but I also met with my regional Zika task force that included health professionals from the public and private sector who recognize the devastation of the Zika virus. In the continental United States, there are over 2,000 cases. Over 600 pregnant mothers have been impacted by the Zika virus with yet unborn children, and then there are about 30-plus cases of transmission right here in the United States. And yet tonight the other body failed to pass the Zika funding. Now is the time. My committee was very constructive. Dr. Persse from the city of Houston talked about surveillance of those coming into their clinics to determine whether they have been impacted by fever and a rash. We have talked about the vaccine and also a Zika act to be able to give information to those who are in need of knowing how to prevent it. Yet the funding is not here. Why? Because we cannot pass a clean Zika funding, emergency funding, without riders. Let's stop playing politics. Pass the Zika funding. The health professionals insist on it. People are dying.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as Members of Congress we know well, perhaps better than most, how blessed our nation is to have in reserve such exceptional young men and women who will go on to become leaders in their local communities, states, and the nation in the areas of business, education, government, philanthropy, the arts and culture, and the military. We know this because we see them and benefit from their contributions every day. Many of them work for us in our offices as junior staff members, congressional fellows, or interns and they do amazing work for and on behalf of the constituents we are privileged to represent. Mr. Speaker, I believe there is no higher calling than the call to serve a cause larger than ourselves. That is why I ran for public office. I was inspired to serve by President Kennedy who said, ``Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country,'' and by the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. who said: Everybody can be great because anybody can serve. . . . You only need a heart full of grace. A soul generated by love. By this measure, there are several other great young men and women who served as volunteers this year in my offices. They may toil in obscurity but their contributions to the constituents we serve are deeply appreciated. That is why today I rise to pay tribute to six extraordinary young persons for their service to my constituents in the 18th Congressional District of Texas and to the American people. They are: Stephanie Gomez from the University of Houston; Bunyad Bhatti from the College of New Jersey; Sara Ali from the University of California at Berkeley; Ashley Hogan from Texas Tech University; George Brewster from Texas Southern University; and Jeremy Dang from Georgetown University. Mr. Speaker, the energy, intelligence, and idealism these wonderful young people brought to my office and those interning in the offices of my colleagues help keep our democracy vibrant. The insights, skills, and knowledge of the governmental process they gain from their experiences will last a lifetime and prove invaluable to them as they go about making their mark in this world. Because of persons like them the future of our country is bright and its best days lie ahead. I wish them all well. Mr. Speaker, I am grateful that such thoughtful, committed young men and women can be found working in my office, those of my colleagues, and in every community in America. Their good works will keep America great, good, and forever young. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have my name removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 4019.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, tomorrow there will be a bright and shiny Sun, but in this Chamber it will be nothing but darkness--nothing but darkness, with no sound, no response from my friends on the other side of the aisle. From 2005 to 2015, 300,000 people have died from senseless gun violence. The people of Flint are crying out for relief from poisoned lead water. And then there is the Zika virus impacting the Gulf region. As of July 6, 1,132 travel-associated cases of the Zika virus; 2,534 cases in U.S. territories; and, of course, the Gulf region is a breeding ground for mosquitoes. Pregnant women with laboratory evidence of Zika, now some 320, including the United States and the District of Columbia, and the U.S. territories is 279. And, yes, a baby has now been born with microcephaly in Harris County in Texas. And our Gulf region Zika task force has said thousands more may come. Give us the Senate bill, $1.9 billion. Our people are suffering. Don't turn off the lights. Let's work. They are crying out for relief.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman from Maine, the ranking member, and the chairman of the subcommittee for their kindness and their support of the Jackson Lee amendments. Let me indicate that in the sum total of my amendments, amendments Nos. 124, 125, and 126, my amendments promote support for national historic areas in our Nation, promote partnership strategies in preserving our urban life refuges, and promote outreach programs by the Smithsonian Institution on the fantastic historical and artistic knowledge of our Smithsonian houses, which facilitate an appreciation for America all over the world. In particular, my amendment No. 124 is an amendment that expresses support for the national historic areas and for the continuation of a national policy of preserving for public use historic sites, buildings, and other objects of national significance. My amendment No. 125 is an amendment that would prohibit the use of funds to eliminate the urban wildlife refuge partnership. Additionally, there is an amendment that would prohibit the use of funds to limit outreach administered by the Smithsonian. The idea behind these three amendments is to, again, recognize the great history of this Nation, even as young as this country is. In particular, in my congressional district, we have Freedmen's Town that had Camp Logan. It was a place of freed African American slaves, which grew into an amazing community. In addition, the Allen Brothers, who founded Houston, are buried in that same neighborhood. In addition to that, we have something called the Juneteenth Trail. That is the trail the slaves traveled from Galveston up to Houston. The trail has an enormous amount of history, and that is part of the history of celebrating Juneteenth. To preserve that history is very important. In the second amendment, I want to make sure that we maintain a program that helps and introduces urban youth to the wonders of wildlife and historic preservation. Finally, I think it is important that we recognize the historic importance of the Smithsonian and continue to emphasize its outreach capacity to ensure that it reaches Americans of all levels to speak about the story of this great Nation. My amendments, again, ask these simple questions: Is our history worthy of knowing, studying, and preserving? It is. Is it important to work with our State and local governments to help them preserve their history? My amendments answer that question by supporting policies that will work with State and local governments that will reach out to urban youth so they can understand the wildlife preservation through the urban wildlife refuge programs, and then, of course, the Smithsonian that provides an eye to the history of this Nation. I ask my colleagues to support Jackson Lee amendment Nos. 124, 125, and 126 in the en bloc amendment. Mr. Chair, I thank Chairman Sessions and Ranking Member Slaughter for making in order Jackson Lee Amendments Number 124, along with my other Amendments Number 125 and Number 126 to H.R. 5538--``Department of the Interior and the Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2017.'' I also commend Chairman Calvert and Ranking Member McCollum for their leadership in shepherding this measure to the Rules Committee. Mr. Chair, in sum, my Amendment promotes support for National Historic Areas in our nation. Indeed, among other agencies, this measure funds the U.S. Forest Service, the National Park System, and the Smithsonian Institution, which operates our national museums including the National Zoo. Most Americans do not know that this measure also funds a very special agency, the National Trust for Historic Preservation, and its adjunct, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. Mr. Chair, the Jackson Lee Amendments are simple because they send a very important message from the Congress of the United States: that we value tradition, that we think about the impact of history and tradition on future generations to come and that if we recognize and know our history, we are able to work together as an American family in the spirit of respect, unity and growth. Specifically, Jackson Lee Amendment Number 124 encourages us to preserve history, whereby the National Historic Preservation Fund and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation are charged to redouble their efforts to assist state and local governments and community groups in identifying and working to preserve nationally significant sites, structures, and artifacts, for example those relating to communities founded by newly emancipated slaves, such as Freedmen's Town in home District of Houston, Texas. Indeed, just west of downtown Houston lies the Fourth Ward. It is the city's oldest African American community, but before it was the Fourth Ward, this community was known by its original name, Freedmen's Town, given by freed slaves who settled it shortly after receiving the news of their emancipation on Juneteenth. Freedmen's Town prospered during the turn of the century. Economic, community, and social development were at a peak until local government became threatened by the prosperity of this area and its residents. In the 1920's, Freedmen's Town was the ``Harlem of the Southwest.'' The area was filled with many restaurants, jazz spots, and night clubs. As the years passed and with the coming of integration, many of Freedmen's Town residents began to move towards Texas Southern University, in the Third Ward, and other areas of the city. Freedmen's Town has a rich and colorful past and is still home to many significant historical landmarks and features. It was famous for its hand laid brick streets, constructed by Houston's Rev. Jeremiah Smith and his congregation over half a century ago. Houston's first cemetery, Founder's Cemetery at Valentine and West Dallas, contains the graves of military men who fought in the Civil War, as well as the historical remains of John and Augustus Allen, the founders of Houston. Behind Founder's Cemetery lies Congregation Beth Israel, the oldest Jewish cemetery in Houston, which is beautifully maintained to this day. Among other historical churches in the area, Antioch Missionary Baptist Church built in 1866 continues to be a major focal point of Freedmen's Town, though it has been relocated from its original site on ``Baptist Hill'' where the Music Hall and Coliseum now stand. Rev. John Jack Yates, the first Black pastor of Antioch, was a dynamic and influential leader known for his deep commitment to the education of Black youngsters. He often used his personal finances to send Freedmen's Town children to school. Today, Jack Yates High School in the Third Ward stands in his honor. Although Freedmen's Town is a nationally registered historical site, and the largest intact freed slave settlement left in the entire nation, its official designation protects only 40 of the 80 blocks or more of the remaining Freedmen's Town area. To preserve what remains of Freedmen's Town will require the combined efforts of community groups working with local, state, and federal government to reach a consensus of projects worthy of preservation. One such project for Freedmen's Town is the ``Bricks Street Project,'' which is intended to preserve the original brick pavers of Freedmen's Town along Andrews Street and Wilson Street. These streets were found to contain brick pavers patterns which may be unique to the Freedmen's Town area, and are consistent with brick patterns seen on architectural features located in the Historic District. Mr. Chair, hearts break when irreplaceable structures are destroyed or damaged beyond repair, instead of preserved and protected as they deserve. A plaque pointing out ``on this site a great building once stood'' simply cannot tell the story in whole or in full. Equally tragic is the loss of traditions: a way of living or crafting wood or farming, of celebrating holidays or worshiping or feasting on ``Juneteenth'' cuisine. The preservation of artifacts as well as traditions is important to telling the story of the people who settled a community. Thus, I urge support for Jackson Lee Amendment Number 124. Mr. Chair, I would also like to thank Chairman Sessions and Ranking Member Slaugher fror making in order Jackson Lee Amendment Number 125 to H.R. 5538--``Department of the Interior and the Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2017.'' I also comment Chairman Calvert and Ranking Member McCollum for their leadership in shepherding this measure to the Rules Committee. Mr. Chair, in sum, my Amendment promotes partnership strategies in preserving our urban wildlife refuges. Jackson Lee Amendment Number 125 prohibits the utilization of funds to eliminate Urban Wildlife and Refugee Partnerships. According to some estimates, 80 percent of the U.S. population currently resides in urban communities, and the challenge before us is ensuring our natural resources are conserved and valued by the American people and that our youth are beneficiaries of Urban Wildlife and Refugee partnerships. Thus, Jackson Lee Amendment Number 125 works to facilitate the nurturing and education of Americans, especially our youth on the imperative of exposure to urban wildlife and refugee facilities across our nation. Picture this: nature meets skyline near Houston's Buffalo Bayou, one of many sites where Texas works with Houston Wilderness to create shared conservation messages and strategies. Indeed, I commend the work of the Houston Urban Wildlife Refuge Partnership, in Texas. Additionally, the Texas Mid-Coast Refuge Complex will work with Houston Wilderness, an alliance of business, environmental and government interests, to create a coordinated conservation presence in the metro area. Moreover, young people deserve exposure to the educational opportunities and excitement these urban wildlife and refugee parks have to offer, where their minds are developed and enriched; indeed, where they get to interact with and see wildlife they have read about in their school books. Urban wildlife and refugee parks spark creativity in a healthy dose for the imagination of our young people so that they have an appreciation of nature and all the beautiful inhabitants it offers us. From Houston, to Rhode Island to Baltimore, to Chicago and everywhere in between, young people have the opportunity to spearhead replanting projects along various rivers; learn about birding and be partners and stakeholders in their communities' parks and zoos while also sharpening their minds. For all these reasons, I urge support for Jackson Lee Amendment Number 125. Mr. Chair, I would also like to thank Chairman Sessions and Ranking Member Slaughter for making in order Jackson Lee Amendment Number 126 to H.R. 5538--``Department of the Interior and the Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2017.'' I also commend Chairman Calvert and Ranking Member McCollum for their leadership in shepherding this measure to the Rules Committee. Mr. Chair, in sum, my Amendment promotes outreach programs by the Smithsonian Institution on the fantastic historical and artistic knowledge our Smithsonian houses and facilitates an appreciation for America and the world over. Specifically, Jackson Lee Amendment Number 126 prohibits funds to be utilized to limit outreach programs administered by the Smithsonian Institution. As I mentioned earlier, the Smithsonian Institution operates as our national museum and attracts not only Americans and American youth but also dignitaries from across the globe, from Africa to Asia to Europe and everywhere in-between. Indeed, our historical Smithsonian Institution has attracted intellectuals, kings, dignitaries and youth from across the country and others who have come from afar to witness in person the diversity of the art housed in our Smithsonian Institution, the world's largest museum and research complex which includes 19 museums and galleries and the National Zoological Park. No doubt, these Museums have enriched our lives: the African American History and Culture Museum, African Art Museum, the Air and Space Museum, the Air and Space Museum Udvar-Hazy Center, American Art Museum, the American History Museum, the American Indian Museum, Anacostia Community Museum, the Arthur M. Sackler Gallery, Freer Gallery of Art, Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden, the National Zoo, the Natural History Museum, the Portrait Gallery, Postal Museum and the Renwick Gallery. By promoting and protecting the buildings, landscape, special places and qualities that enrich and captivate the exceptional American imagination, attracting visitors from across the globe, we preserve our history for future generations to come and educate the general public about American history. For all these reasons, I urge support for Jackson Lee Amendment Number 126.