Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, we cannot run the government by ambiguity, confusion, lack of clarity, and just throwing language down on the floor and expecting all the pieces of government to work together. I question whether this legislation and the legislation dealing with the Congressional Review Act is ever going to be passed in the United States Senate. I question that. It would have been nice to have hearings and work together. This amendment tries to bring clarity. My amendment tries to define the term ``significant impact.'' The term ``significant impact on inflation'' means an executive order was estimated to increase or decrease Consumer Price Index inflation by at least 1 percentage point over the course of a year. This amendment does clarify that the meaning of ``significant impact on inflation'' is quantifiable in any effort to make such a determination. The lack of specificity of applicability for when this unnecessary legislative restriction would take place, and mandate, will be imposed on all executive orders, as provided for in the bill, is unnecessary, time-consuming, and a waste of resources. In fact, I don't even know how any President would get through it. I am not saying that executive orders should not have their necessary oversight. They can. The Oversight and Accountability Committee and other jurisdictional committees can have oversight. If this is to reduce inflation, all this bill will do is raise the costs of any act or action that is asked for in the executive order. Jackson Lee amendment No. 7 would help to ensure that any attempt to restrict the powers and authority of executive orders is curtailed in a manner that would limit such mandate to apply only in such scenario whereby economically accepted standards are considered and applied. For example, ``significant impact on inflation'' is limited to instances where there has been an increase or decrease in the Consumer Price Index, the CPI, inflation by at least 1 percent over the course of a year. With that in mind, we would have clarity; we would have an understanding; and we would be able to know whether this is irrelevant, burdensome, and overly excessive in doing the work on behalf of the American people. Madam Chair, I ask my colleagues to support Jackson Lee amendment No. 7, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, how much time do I have remaining?

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Raskin), the ranking member of the Oversight and Accountability Committee.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, I thank the gentleman from Maryland for further clarifying our intent. Usually, inflation, by the economists, is around 2 percent. To have this amendment that indicates 1 percent, it gives some clarity of a significant impact. I would say this: I believe in oversight, but I don't believe in obstruction, intrusion, and stopping work that impacts the American people. My amendment provides clarity so that the work for the American people can go forward. It is evident that President Biden has had a significant impact on bringing down inflation and building a better quality of life. Madam Chair, I ask my colleagues to support Jackson Lee amendment No. 7, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chair, all of us have seen the great work of the Oversight and Reform Committee in the two initiatives that we have had today. Clearly, we are all sort of stretching to try to understand the impact of the Reduce Exacerbated Inflation Negatively Impacting the Nation Act, and we are trying to find the substance. So my previous amendment was dealing with significant impact, and now we are dealing with quantifiable inflationary impact. I wanted to add as to what this actually means. So my amendment says quantifiable inflationary impact means an executive order was estimated to increase or decrease Consumer Price Index inflation by at least 1 percentage point over the course of a year knowing that inflation is usually 2 percent a year. I am just trying to find light in darkness and to try to understand what this bill is doing and to give those who are in government to do good, those who are trying to solve problems with a legitimate executive order to have some guidance that relates to inflation and not be of no substance with a bottomless pit, to be very honest with you, Madam Chair. I am hoping my colleagues will join me in trying to give some guidance and some quantifiable definition to quantifiable inflationary input by tracking it to what has traditionally been by economists inflation 2 percent. We just went to 1 percent to give some definition to this to give some ability for anyone to understand how to analyze or utilize this legislation if it ever gets to the President's desk. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time to close. Madam Chair, let me quickly say that, again, the Jackson Lee amendment before us is keeping in line with nationally recognized standards. Many economists agree that a quantifiable inflationary impact is deemed to occur when there is an increase or decrease in the Consumer Price Index inflation by at least 1 percent and over the course of a year. It will not gut the bill. It will let us try to understand the bill. While H.R. 347 is a clear overreach and would impose improper and onerous restrictions upon the executive branch, the Jackson Lee amendment tries to find some common ground that will be offered to this body as a mere attempt to help ensure that the inappropriate limitations as prescribed by this legislation are curtailed in its effort to limit the authority of the executive orders. Madam Chair, I ask my colleagues to consider and vote for the Jackson Lee amendment No. 8, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, This was no weather balloon. This was a spy balloon. Let me be very clear: Members of both sides of the aisle, Democrats and Republicans, are standing before the American people and recognizing that this resolution of the Chinese Communist Party's actions is appropriate, and we should, as Americans, denounce their actions. Let me be very clear as well: I want to congratulate the United States military intelligence officials and others who effectively took the Commander in Chief's order that occurred on February 1st to shoot it down. They handled themselves with the greatest amount of appropriateness to ensure that the American people were safe, to contain the threat, and do their job. It serves no purpose to suggest that the Commander in Chief, President Joe Biden, failed the American people or did anything wrong. Interestingly enough, in the midst of the spy balloon, over 70 percent of the American people believe that Joe Biden took to the podium in the State of the Union and gave them enough comfort that the State of the Union is well, our souls are strong, and the American people are strong. Yes, as a member of the Homeland Security Committee, I am keenly aware and concerned about the Nation's national security, keenly aware of the timeframe in which this spy balloon came into our eyesight. With that in mind, even as it traversed the United States, I can assure you, in spite of the chronicling of the facts here, that General Austin, the Department of Defense, and others that were responsible for our safety, pursuant to the direction of the Commander in Chief, followed this spy balloon and were able to handle it appropriately in the course of shooting it down. Finally, let me say: it is important that we use this as a condemnation of the Chinese Communist Party. Let us not use this to intimidate Chinese Americans or to be able to create atmospheres of hate. I denounce that, and I denounce SB 147 in the State of Texas that wants to stop Chinese Americans from buying property. That is not the American way. What is the American way is to stand as Democrats and Republicans and Members of Congress to take our full responsibility, alongside the executive, to ensure national security. We have done that. We have the facts, we know the traversing, and I can assure you that the Chinese Americans have not engaged themselves in this activity and should not be condemned. The Chinese Communist Party is aware of the strength of the people of the United States and their defense.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.J. Res. 26, a resolution disapproving the action of the District of Columbia Council in approving the Revised Criminal Code Act of 2022. This resolution is not only a brazen and misguided measure seeking to uphold decades of racially systemic policies of criminal injustice, it is an insulting attempt to trample on the rights and the will of the people in the District of Columbia. By subjecting thousands of Black residents of Washington, D.C. to criminalization and incarceration, the Revised Criminal Code Act of 2022 was the first comprehensive revision of the D.C. code since the year 1901, something that should've been revised long before. However, in contrast to the majority of other states, D.C. did not update its criminal statues throughout the 1960s and 1970s. As a result of the antiquated laws, which had been in place for decades, the human rights and freedoms of Washingtonians has been compromised, resulting in D.C. having one of the highest imprisonment rates in the nation, whereby Black males account for more than 95% of those who are behind bars. The 2022 revision was a necessary push forward, and for the Republicans within this congress to attempt to undo these revisions, shows a rejection of Home Rule. The revisions helped to correct many of the faults that the District of Columbia continuously ran into with the district itself making the necessary corrections with the support of the public. The D.C. Criminal Code Reform Commission was formed by the D.C. Council to revise the statutes to guarantee that the revisions of offenses and punishments are precise, consistent, reasonable, and constitutional. The District of Columbia Public Defender Service, the District of Columbia Attorney General, legal professionals, and the general public were among the sources of input that the Commission consulted. Members of Congress should not use their own policy judgment to replace that of the elected officials within D.C. Prior to these revisions simple assault carried a sentence of less than six months in prison, while the threat of simple assault carried a 20-year sentence. Possession of self-defense spray and possession of a fully automatic machine gun carried the same maximum penalty of one year. Some offenses can be traced back to the District's Black Codes and Slave Codes and others that were introduced by segregationists from states outside D.C. The almost 700,000 individuals who live in Washington, D.C., are capable of self-government and through the Revised Criminal Code Act of 2022, proved themselves as such. Congress is not judge, jury and executioner and should not overstep its place within Washington, D.C. Washington, D.C. has its sole right to govern its jurisdiction and citizens.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member and thank the managers of this bill for their work. This was no weather balloon. This was a spy balloon. Let me be very clear: Members of both sides of the aisle, Democrats and Republicans, are standing before the American people and recognizing that this resolution of the Chinese Communist Party's actions are appropriate, and we should, as Americans, denounce their actions. Let me be very clear as well: I want to congratulate United States military intelligence officials and others who effectively took the Commander in Chief's order that occurred on February 1 to shoot it down, and they handled themselves with the greatest amount of appropriateness to ensure that the American people were safe, to contain the threat, and to do their job. It serves no purpose to suggest that the Commander in Chief, President Joe Biden, failed the American people or did anything wrong. Interestingly enough, in the midst of the spy balloon, over 70 percent of the American people believe that Joe Biden took to the podium in the State of the Union and gave them enough comfort that the State of the Union is well, our souls are strong, and the American people are strong. Yes, as a member of the Homeland Security Committee, I am keenly aware and concerned about this Nation's national security, keenly aware of the timeframe in which this spy balloon came into our eyesight. With that in mind, even as it traversed the United States, I can assure you, in spite of the chronicling of the facts here, that General Austin, the Department of Defense, and others that were responsible for our safety, pursuant to the direction of the Commander in Chief, followed this spy balloon and were able to handle it appropriately in the course of shooting it down. Finally, let me say: It is important that we use this as a condemnation of the Chinese Communist Party. Let us not use this to intimidate Chinese Americans or to be able to create atmospheres of hate. I denounce that, and I denounce SB 147 in the State of Texas that wants to stop Chinese Americans from buying property. That is not the American way. What is the American way is to stand as Democrats and Republicans and others and Members of Congress to take our full responsibility, alongside the executive, to ensure your national security. We have done that. We have the facts, we know the traversing, and I can assure you that the Chinese Americans have not engaged themselves in this activity and should not be condemned. The Chinese Communist Party is aware of the strength of the people of the United States and their defense.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the Biden administration for work that they have already done by asking to have them help us in the closure of the disposable e-cigarette loophole. As chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus, the administration's work in curtailing youth e-cigarette use is commendable. Vaping and e- cigarette usage among youth is at a historic low. Good news. Despite this, however, the FDA guidance issued by the previous administration that prohibits flavored e-cigarettes fails to include any disposable e-cigarette products currently on the market. This loophole, alongside the appeal that disposable e-cigarettes have for our youth, has influenced a surge in youth consumption. Right now, in smoke shops, corner stores, and gas stations across the country, disposable e-cigarettes are being sold for prices as low as $5. Like candy, they are being offered in enticing flavors such as strawberry, iced apple mango, and pineapple lemonade; just what a child would look at. Each product is cleverly designed to easily fit in one's pocket, easy to take to school or other places. These products are sleek, affordable, pocket-sized, and highly accessible. A single disposable device can contain enough nicotine as an entire pack of cigarettes. A 2022 National Youth Tobacco Study said these products' usage is up 2,188 percent since 2019. It is dangerous. Let's get to work. Let's save our children. Let us celebrate a happy Black History Month, as well. Mr. Speaker, I rise to thank the Biden Administration for its help already. Now the Nation needs help in closing the disposable e- cigarette loophole. The Administration's work in curtailing youth e-cigarette use is commendable; vaping and e-cigarette usage among youths is at a historic low. Despite this, however, the FDA guidance issued by the previous administration that prohibits flavored e-cigarettes, FAILS to include any disposable e-cigarette products currently on the market. This loophole, alongside the appeal that disposable e-cigarettes have for youth, has influenced a surge in youth consumption. Right now, in smoke shops, corner stores, and gas stations across the country, disposable e-cigarettes are being sold for prices as low as $5. They are being offered in enticing flavors such as Strawberry, Iced Apple Mango, and Pineapple Lemonade. Each product is cleverly designed to easily fit in one's pocket. These products are sleek, affordable, pocket-sized, and highly accessible to our youth. A single disposable device can contain enough nicotine as an entire pack of cigarettes. According to the Centers for Disease Control 2022 National Youth Tobacco Study, usage of these products is up 2,188 percent since 2019. This is a dangerous over site that will put thousands of lives at risk. I urge this Administration to close the loophole to ensure the flavor ban includes disposable e-cigarettes. The future and safety of America's youth depend on it.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to H. Res. 76--Removing a certain Member from a certain standing committee of the House. H. Res. 76 is a brazen, hypocritical and offensive effort to oust Rep. Omar from the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Once again, Speaker McCarthy and House Republicans are putting extreme political stunts over solving the actual problems facing the American people. In modern American history, the punishment of stripping Members of Congress of their committee assignments has been reserved for only the most egregious wrongdoers: those convicted or indicted on corruption, bribery, sexual misconduct, encouraging violence, and other grave charges. This pure partisan move to strip Ilhan Omar from her committee is not only a political stunt, but also a blow to the integrity of our democratic institutions and a threat to national security. We're thankful to Leader Jeffries for taking up this fight--if Republicans want to degrade the integrity of the House and its committees, Democrats will always stand up against those efforts. These antics are meant to suppress the work of Omar--simply because Republicans in Congress don't like her and her views, all while claiming that they respect and welcome differing opinions. Questioning someone's objective decision making is the most illegitimate litmus test for serving on a committee. We know this is true because the Speaker has admitted in a fundraising appeal that he was ``firing'' her because of her ``antics.'' Ultimately, this is just the latest chapter in the Speaker's bargain with extreme MAGA Republicans. The Speaker could not become Speaker without the support of extremist members and removing Omar from the House Foreign Affairs committee is the price he was all-too-eager to pay. This is political vengeance for investigating and speaking truth about the twice-impeached former president. The ramifications for the American public, our national security, and foreign relations are real. Omar is an experienced, knowledgeable legislator, who has served on the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the House Education and Labor Committee for the past two terms, committees and has lived experience and expertise in. Omar is a child survivor of war who lived in a refugee camp. Omar is the first African-born member to serve as a Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations, and brings a wealth of lived experiences to the panel. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene and Rep. Paul Gosar were removed from their committees last session on a bipartisan basis for encouraging violence against their colleagues, even after a deadly insurrection. In February 2021, just a month after she was sworn into Congress, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to censure and remove Greene from her committee assignments for her many extreme, bigoted, and threatening statements--including her past embrace of conspiracy theories and social media interactions encouraging violence against Democratic officials, In November 2021, the House voted to censure Gosar and strip him from his committee assignments after he posted an edited anime video on Twitter that depicted him swinging swords at President Biden and killing Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY). Gosar said on the House floor that he does not ``espouse violence towards anyone,'' and voluntarily took the video down ``out of compassion for those who genuinely felt offense.'' Greene and Gosar went on to appear at a conference hosted by white nationalist Nick Fuentes in early 2022, prompting widespread condemnation from leaders in both parties. Sen. Tommy Tuberville and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene are coming under fire for making racist comments during separate Donald Trump rallies over the weekend. The remarks come on the heels of Trump himself using an anti-Asian slur to refer to Elaine Chao--his former transportation secretary and the wife of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell--and raise questions about whether some Republicans are growing more comfortable using overtly racist rhetoric. During a rally Saturday night in Minden, Nevada, Tuberville, R-AL, Democrats ``want reparations because they think the people that do the crime are owed that,'' drawing a direct line between crime and African Americans. On Sunday in Mesa, Arizona, Greene, R-GA, espoused rhetoric that echoed the ``Great Replacement'' conspiracy theory long promoted by white nationalists that nonwhite immigrants could eventually displace native-born white Americans. There is simply no comparison here. Doing the right thing should never be a precedent for doing wrong. And yet, both Reps. Marjorie Taylor Green (R-GA) and Paul Gosar (R- AZ) have since been reassigned to House committees after being stripped off their panel roles in the Democratic-controlled Congress in 2021. The House GOP Steering Committee assigned Greene (R-GA) to the House Homeland Security and Oversight Committees and Gosar (R-AZ) to the House Natural Resources and Oversight Committees, according to multiple reports, received committee assignments back after being stripped from their assignments in the Democratic-controlled Congress in 2021. Let's be very clear here: Rep. Omar immediately apologized when she was told by the Jewish community that her words were hurtful and sought out Members of the Jewish community to learn how she could be an ally in the fight against antisemitism. Other members of this body however regularly spread antisemitic conspiracy theories, talks about Jewish space lasers, and threatens violence against their colleagues. While the Republican Party leader and former President dine with open neo-Nazis like Nick Fuentes and vile antisemites like Kanye West. Trump dined also with Nazis, and said ``Jews have to get their act together,'' and also said to a group of Jewish leaders, ``You're brutal killers. Not nice people at all. But you have to vote for me; you have no choice.'' He never apologized. We must continue to support Representative Omar. Her goal is to work for her constituents, and they reelected her to do just that. Republicans cannot continue with these stunts. We must work on legislation that actually impacts the American people instead of these political stunts that do no good.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to H.R. 185, to terminate the requirement imposed by the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for proof of Covid-19 vaccination for foreign travelers. H.R. 185 is hasty attempt to reverse the order issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention without any proper planning or preparation. The Amended Order Implementing Presidential Proclamation on Advancing the Safe Resumption of Global Travel During the COVID-19 Pandemic was first published on April 7, 2022, and was implemented to save lives. The CDC order imposes necessary restrictions on the entry of noncitizens into the United States by air travel unless they are fully vaccinated against COVID-19 or otherwise attest that they will take public health measures to prevent the spread of the disease. Similar restrictions have been implemented and enforced worldwide, and countries like Thailand have had to reimplement such restrictions after lifting them. Now is not the time to roll back protections, only to be in a place where we will need to reimpose more onerous and unwanted lockdowns and shutdowns across the country. Yet, H.R. 185 would nullify any successor or subsequent orders that require foreign persons traveling by air to show proof of a COVID-19 vaccination as a condition of entry, as well as prohibit the use of federal funds to administer or enforce such a requirement. Mr. Chair, the wellbeing of the American People should hold the utmost importance and any act against their health and wellbeing should be strongly condemned. Since March 2020, life in Houston--like most of the world--has been upended. Houston, Texas is the 4th largest city in the country and is one of the most racially and ethnically diverse cities in the United States. In addition to Houston being a culturally diverse city and home to international students, residents, and families from all over the world, Houston also serves as an international hub for millions of people all over the world who travel to my city every year for both leisure and business. According to the Houston First Corporation, a record 22.3 million people from around the world visited Houston in 2018. Notably, the 2023 Houston Rodeo season, scheduled for Feb. 28-March 19, is the largest rodeo in the world and contributes significantly to our city's economy. In 2022, this event attracted over 2.4 million international travelers from around the world. Despite the senseless and disingenuous politicization of the COVID-19 vaccine, it has and continues to save countless lives--particularly in my home state and internationally rich travel hub of Houston, Texas. In Houston, specifically Harris County, there have been 1,058,476 confirmed COVID-19 cases, 7,839 active cases, 1,041,939 recovered, and 8,589 deaths. Furthermore, Texas as a state has recorded 8.24 million cases and 93,366 deaths. In the United States, there have been 102 million confirmed case and 1.11 million deaths. And across the globe, there have been 671 million confirmed cases and 6.83 million deaths. These statistics serve as a harrowing reminder of the gravity of this epidemic and the caution we should be taking in ensuring preventative responses and remaining vigilant against the spread of COVID-19. Rolling back critical vaccination policies put in place to protect Americans through hasty measures such as H.R. 185, undermines the national mission and unified efforts nationwide to prevent future cases infiltrating our communities. While progress has certainly been made in protecting Americans from this deadly virus, we cannot stand for the erosion of such progress through ill-conceived and politicized measures. As we continue to make strides to prevent and eradicate current and future variants plaguing our cities, states, nation, and world, let it be known that H.R. 185 would only serve to disregard the health and well-being of all Americans, foolishly jeopardizing our lives and the ongoing fight to keep everyone healthy and safe. Instead of halting vital funding and vaccine policies for international travelers, without a plan or forethought of the disastrous impact that will inevitably result, it is imperative that we stand together in planning and preparing for smart policy shifts that will allow our country to effectively and safely ease back into some sense of normalcy. Anything less is an abdication of our governmental duties and an insult and danger to the welfare of all those we are sworn to serve. With strong opposition to this bill, I urge my Republican colleagues to step back and actually work with us to lay forward common sense implementations of care and safety for our fellow Americans.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment, although I may not necessarily be opposed to the amendment.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chair, any effort to keep the existing protocols for China are appropriate, but I rise today with great concern about the underlying bill, H.R. 185, which is to terminate the requirement imposed by the director of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for proof of COVID-19 vaccination for foreign travelers. It is not the CDC, based on science, that is attempting to do this, or the administration, based on the multiple levels of science, Health and Human Services, CDC, and NIH that may contribute to this decision. It is Congress, that certainly has its role of authority, but it is not authority based on science and based on knowledge. I believe this is a hasty attempt to reverse the order issued by the Centers for Disease Control. As well, I believe it imposes important restrictions by the CDC on the entry of noncitizens into the United States by air travel unless they are fully vaccinated. We know that there are discussions going on about ending certain protocols with COVID-19. But as the President said last night, we lost a million Americans. People are still mourning their loved ones. We understand, with that in mind, we are still seeing people die of COVID- 19 and many of its, in essence, other aspects of infectious diseases, and we are seeing COVID-19 still actively exist. People with underlying conditions suffer greatly. Restrictions have been implemented and enforced worldwide, and countries like Thailand have had to re-implement such restrictions after lifting them. Now is not the time to go back on protections, only to be in a place where we will need to reimpose more onerous and unwanted lockdowns and shutdowns. Yet, H.R. 185 would nullify any successor or subsequent orders that require foreign persons traveling by air to show proof of COVID-19 vaccination as a condition of entry, as well as prohibit the use of Federal funds to administer and enforce such a requirement. Mr. Chair, this is not logical or sensible. This is a country of over 300 million persons. Again, this is a Nation that lost a million persons. I will say it again: People are still dying of COVID-19. The well-being of the American people should be our first priority. Since March of 2020, I proceeded to provide any number of testing sites and vaccination sites. We saw our hospitals teeming. We, of course, reached out to the chair of the Energy and Commerce Committee, as we were desperate to get tests and vaccines. I spoke to New York hospitals and doctors who were telling me that their hallways were teeming, their operating rooms were nonexistent, because there were COVID patients everywhere. Many of us remember the stark look of the refrigerator cars not only in this Nation but around the world. So I am hesitant that at this point we make a decision on the floor of the House, not a scientific report, not a hearing in a committee, to be able to suggest that we could go ahead and remove this particular health caution protection. Again, COVID-19 cases have been 1,058,000 confirmed in our area, 7,839 active cases now, and 1 million persons recovered. There have been 8,589 deaths. Texas, as a State, has recorded 8.24 million cases and 93,366 deaths. We are a border State, and so we have the opportunity for people to come in from foreign countries, as well as South and Central America, who come into the United States, and I am saying through legal travel. So it doesn't make sense to go to this length and to do it without further study, further science, and as well for the recognition of the importance of the Centers for Disease Control, the National Institutes of Health, Health and Human Services, and the President of the United States, who is the leader of this Nation. So in working with the executive, I believe that we should give them the opportunity to work constructively and to be able to give the right kind of guidance that will protect all of us. We should not precipitously try to overcome a disease that is evident as a major killer of Americans. Mr. Chair, I ask my colleagues to oppose the underlying bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. In redistricting across the Nation, North Carolina, Georgia, Texas were States in which voting rights were directly undermined. Some of the restrictive legislation that was passed in Georgia and Texas is evidence of the oppression of many in the party of my friends across the aisle's States to deny people of color their right to vote. Mr. Speaker, it looks as if we have an opportunity here. For champions of voting rights that seem to be evidenced across the aisle, join me in the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act. At this time in this month, we ask that you allow the citizens of Washington, D.C., one, at some point to have statehood, but, more importantly, in this instance to stay out of home rule decisions or to stay out of decisions granted to them. Those decisions are granted to them. For that reason, I am enthusiastically in opposition to H.J. Res. 24 because this legislation goes beyond the boundaries of the responsibilities, duties, and rights of this body. Leave the Government of Washington, D.C., to the people of Washington, D.C. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.J. Res. 24-- Disapproving the action of the District of Columbia Council in approving the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2022. H.J. Res. 24 will overturn the Local Resident Voting Act of 2022, a measure passed by will of the people in the District of Columbia Council. This overreaching resolution seeks to overturn the will of Washington, D.C. people, who voted to support the rights of noncitizens who fulfill residency and other requirements to vote in district local elections under the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2022. Let the record be clear, Mr. Speaker, the United States Constitution does not forbid noncitizens from casting their vote in local, state, or federal elections. At least 15 cities currently allow non-citizens to cast ballots in local elections. While voting in federal elections was made illegal for noncitizens in 1996, the legal voting of noncitizens in American elections has a long history in this nation. Noncitizens were occasionally permitted to cast ballots in local, state, and federal elections in 40 states from the time of the nation's inception until 1926. During the early years, the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1801 granted Congress sole power over the district's boundaries, depriving its citizens of the voting privileges they had previously enjoyed as residents of Maryland and Virginia. Due to its treatment as a U.S. territory rather than a state, the District of Columbia has no voting representation in Congress and is certainly not given its fair amount of federal funding--despite the fact that Washington, D.C. residents pay more federal taxes per person than citizens of any other state, and more than residents of 22 states combined. It is no secret that when politicians seek to suppress voting rights, the feared component of increased racial political power rears its ugly head in driving and motivating shifts in laws that will eliminate or stunt the political growth of minority populations in America. As we stand here today, marking the first week of Black History Month, we must acknowledge that we are standing in a building built by the hands of slaves, and we are standing in a city that is not only one of the most diverse cities in the country, but is also home to one of the largest Black populations--yes, Washington DC--our nation's capital. The underrepresentation of Blacks and minorities in our nation's capital and in our national democratic systems is a shameful stain on our morals and values as Americans. We must put an end to current and historical voter suppression and we must stop pushing oppressive and systemically racist policies if we are ever to truly be a nation united by our democratic pillars and principles. The nearly 700,000 D.C. residents, a majority of whom are Black and Brown, are worthy and capable of self-government. And Congress, which is not accountable to D.C. residents, should not interfere with legislation duly enacted by the duly elected D.C. government. Members of Congress should not substitute their policy judgment for the judgment of D.C.'s elected officials. Quite simply, Congress should keep its hands off D.C. The legislative history and merits of the two bills enacted by D.C. that are the subject of the disapproval resolutions--the Revised Criminal Code Act and the Local Resident Voting Amendment Act--should be irrelevant to the consideration of these disapproval resolutions, since there is never justification for Congress nullifying legislation enacted by D.C. That being said, we need to set the record straight on these two bills enacted by D.C. Under the D.C. Home Rule Act, which was passed by Congress, D.C.'s legislature, the 13-member D.C. Council, is required to pass legislation twice, with at least 13 intervening days between each vote, to enact legislation. Legislation passed by the Council and signed by the D.C. mayor--or with a veto override or without the mayor's signatures--is transmitted to Congress for a review period. The legislation takes effect at the expiration of a review period, unless a resolution of disapproval is enacted into law during the review period. And yet, the House did not hold a hearing or markup on either disapproval resolution. This resolution cannot stand as a serious policy measure to be respected on the floors of this chamber, and must be opposed.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for his leadership and of course Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton for her continued consistency in refuting and rebutting wrongheaded and misdirected policies that seem to come year after year. Let me read breaking news from one of the historic newspapers in this month that we begin to focus on Black history. From ``The Washington Informer,'' the headline says, ``D.C. Council Blasts House GOP Interference in City Law.'' ``D.C. Council members have lashed out at Republicans on Capitol Hill for seeking to meddle in city affairs.'' For some reason, Ranking Member Raskin, there was some thought that our friends were riding in on a white horse because there was some disagreement on the Council. That disagreement, as you have so effectively said, with the Congresswoman as well, is that they want to handle their own matters. Let the record be clear: The United States Constitution does not forbid noncitizens from casting a vote in local, State, and other elections. At least 15 cities currently allow noncitizens to cast ballots in local elections, and particularly noncitizens were occasionally permitted to cast ballots in local, State, and Federal elections in 40 States from the time of the Nation's inception until 1926. We have had a history of local decisions being made by local voters. In this instance, local voters voted and made a decision. Whatever modifications they desire to make, they are not asking this place to implode their work. As we begin to think about voting rights, I would ask my colleagues to help join us in supporting the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act that Democrats have tried to pass here in this Congress for a long, long time. I would ask them to help us in the redistricting that skewed and denied Democrats in Texas two districts that were legitimately, based upon the Census, in fact, created by Hispanics and African Americans.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 185, to terminate the requirement imposed by the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for proof of COVID-19 vaccination for foreign travelers. H.R. 185 is hasty attempt to reverse the order issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention without any proper planning or preparation. The Amended Order Implementinq Presidential Proclamation on Advancing the Safe Resumption of Global Travel During the COVID-19 Pandemic was first published on April 7, 2022, and was implemented to save lives. The CDS order imposes necessary restrictions on the entry of noncitizens into the United States by air travel unless they are fully vaccinated against COVID-19 or otherwise attest that they will take public health measures to prevent the spread of the disease. Similar restrictions have been implemented and enforced worldwide, and countries like Thailand have had to reimplement such restrictions after lifting them. Now is not the time to roll back protections, only to be in a place where we will need to reimpose more onerous and unwanted lockdowns and shutdowns across the country. Yet, H.R. 185 would nullify any successor or subsequent orders that require foreign persons traveling by air to show proof of a COVID-19 vaccination as a condition of entry, as well as prohibit the use of federal funds to administer or enforce such a requirement. Mr. Speaker, the wellbeing of the American People should hold the utmost importance and any act against their health and wellbeing should be strongly condemned. Since March 2020, life in Houston--like most of the world--has been upended. Houston, Texas is the 4th largest city in the country and is one of the most racially and ethnically diverse cities in the United States. In addition to Houston being a culturally diverse city and home to international students, residents, and families from all over the world, Houston also serves as an international hub for millions of people all over the world who travel to my city every year for both leisure and business. According to the Houston First Corporation, a record 22.3 million people from around the world visited Houston in 2018. Notably, the 2023 Houston Rodeo season, scheduled for Feb. 28-March 19, is the largest rodeo in the world and contributes significantly to our city's economy. In 2022, this event attracted over 2.4 million international travelers from around the world. Despite the senseless and disingenuous politicization of the COVID-19 vaccine, it has and continues to save countless lives--particularly in my home state and internationally rich travel hub of Houston, Texas. In Houston, specifically Harris County, there have been 1,058,476 confirmed COVID-19 cases, 7,839 active cases, 1,041,939 recovered, and 8,589 deaths. Furthermore, Texas as a state has recorded 8.24 million cases and 93,366 deaths. In the United States, there have been 102 million confirmed cases and 1.11 million deaths. And across the globe, there have been 671 million confirmed cases and 6.83 million deaths. These statistics serve as a harrowing reminder of the gravity of this epidemic and the caution we should be taking in ensuring preventative responses and remaining vigilant against the spread of COVID-19. Rolling back critical vaccination policies put in place to protect Americans through hasty measures such as H.R. 185, undermines the national mission and unified efforts nationwide to prevent future cases infiltrating our communities. While progress has certainly been made in protecting Americans from this deadly virus, we cannot stand for the erosion of such progress through ill-conceived and politicized measures. As we continue to make strides to prevent and eradicate current and future variants plaguing our cities, states, nation, and world, let it be known that H.R. 185 would only serve to disregard the health and well-being of all Americans, foolishly jeopardizing our lives and the ongoing fight to keep everyone healthy and safe. Instead of halting vital funding and vaccine policies for international travelers, without a plan or forethought of the disastrous impact that will inevitably result, it is imperative that we stand together in planning and preparing for smart policy shifts that will allow our country to effectively and safely ease back into some sense of normalcy. Anything less is an abdication of our governmental duties and an insult and danger to the welfare of all those we are sworn to serve. With strong opposition to this bill, I urge my Republican colleagues to step back and actually work with us to lay forward common sense implementations of care and safety for our fellow Americans.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.J. Res. 24--Disapproving the action of the District of Columbia Council in approving the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2022. H.J. Res. 24 will overturn the Local Resident Voting Act of 2022, a measure passed by will of the people in the District of Columbia Council. This overreaching resolution seeks to overturn the will of Washington DC people, who voted to support the rights of noncitizens who fulfill residency and other requirements to vote in district local elections under the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2022. Let the record be clear, Mr. Speaker, the United States Constitution does not forbid noncitizens from casting their vote In local, state, or federal elections. At least 15 cities currently allow non-citizens to cast ballots in local elections. While voting in federal elections was made illegal for noncitizens in 1996, the legal voting of noncitizens in American elections has a long history in this nation. Noncitizens were occasionally permitted to cast ballots in local, state, and federal elections in 40 states from the time of the nation's inception until 1926. During the early years, the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1801 granted Congress sole power over the district's boundaries, depriving its citizens of the voting privileges they had previously enjoyed as residents of Maryland and Virginia. Due to its treatment as a U.S. territory rather than a state, the District of Columbia has no voting representation in Congress and is certainly not given its fair amount of federal funding--despite the fact that Washington DC residents pay more federal taxes per person than citizens of any other state, and more than residents of 22 states combined. It is no secret that when politicians seek to suppress voting rights, the feared component of increased racial political power rears its ugly head in driving and motivating shifts in laws that will eliminate or stunt the political growth of minority populations in America. As we stand here today, marking the first week of Black History Month, we must acknowledge that we are standing in a building built by the hands of slaves, and we are standing in a city that is not only one of the most diverse cities in the country, but is also home to one of the largest Black populations--yes, Washington, DC--our nation's capital. The underrepresentation of Blacks and minorities in our nation's capital and in our national democratic systems is a shameful stain on our morals and values as Americans. We must put an end to current and historical voter suppression and we must stop pushing oppressive and systemically racist policies if we are ever to truly be a nation united by our democratic pillars and principles. The nearly 700,000 D.C. residents, a majority of whom are Black and Brown, are worthy and capable of self-government. And Congress, which is not accountable to D.C. residents, should not interfere with legislation duly enacted by the duly elected D.C. government. Members of Congress should not substitute their policy judgment for the judgment of D.C.'s elected officials. Quite simply, Congress should keep its hands off D.C. The legislative history and merits of the two bills enacted by D.C. that are the subject of the disapproval resolutions--the Revised Criminal Code Act and the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act-- should be irrelevant to the consideration of these disapproval resolutions, since there is never justification for Congress nullifying legislation enacted by D.C. That being said, we need to set the record straight on these two bills enacted by D.C. Under the D.C. Home Rule Act, which was passed by Congress, D.C.'s legislature, the 13-member D.C. Council, is required to pass legislation twice, with at least 13 intervening days between each vote, to enact legislation. Legislation passed by the Council and signed by the D.C. mayor (or with a veto override or without the mayor's signature) is transmitted to Congress for a review period. The legislation takes effect at the expiration of a review period, unless a resolution of disapproval is enacted into law during the review period. And yet, the House did not hold a hearing or markup on either disapproval resolution. This resolution cannot stand as a serious policy measure to be respected on the floors of this chamber, and must be opposed.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to H.J. Res. 26 a resolution disapproving the action of the District of Columbia Council in approving the Revised Criminal Code Act of 2022. This resolution is not only a brazen and misguided measure seeking to uphold decades of racially systemic policies of criminal injustice, it is an insulting attempt to trample on the rights and the will of the people in the District of Columbia. By subjecting thousands of Black residents of Washington D.C. to criminalization and incarceration, the Revised Criminal Code Act of 2022 was the first comprehensive revision of the D.C. code since the year 1901, something that should've been revised long before. However, in contrast to the majority of other states, D.C. did not update its criminal statues throughout the 1960s and 1970s. As a result of the antiquated legislation, which had been in place for decades, the human rights and freedoms of Washingtonians has been compromised, resulting in D.C. having one of the highest imprisonment rates in the nation, whereby Black males account for more than 95 percent of those who are behind bars. The 2022 revision was a necessary push forward, and for the Republicans within this congress to attempt to undo these revisions, shows the true opinion and intentions of the party. The revisions helped to correct many of the faults that the District of Columbia continuously ran into with the district itself making the necessary corrections with the support of the public. The D.C. Criminal Code Reform Commission was formed by the D.C. Council to revise the statutes to guarantee that the revisions of offenses and punishments are precise, consistent, reasonable, and constitutional. The District of Columbia Public Defender Service, the District of Columbia Attorney General, legal professionals, and the general public were among the sources of input that the Commission consulted. Members of Congress should not use their own policy judgment to replace that of the elected officials within D.C. Prior to these revisions simple assault carried a sentence of less than six months in prison, while the threat of simple assault carried a 20-year sentence. Possession of self-defense spray and possession of a fully automatic machine gun carried the same maximum penalty of one year. Some offenses can be traced back to the District's Black Codes and Slave Codes and others that were introduced by segregationists from states outside D.C. The almost 700,000 individuals who live in Washington, D.C., are capable of self-government and through the Revised Criminal Code Act of 2022, proved themselves as such. Congress is not judge, jury, and executioner and should not overstep its place within Washington, D.C.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, let me just say we will all have an opportunity to debate this legislation in general debate. I do think it is important to frame the challenges that all of these particular initiatives have. Frankly, let me, first of all, say that I am disappointed that the Rules Committee did not let a very straightforward amendment which I think expresses the view of many of us to strike the entire text of H.R. 185. During the pandemic, I organized a bipartisan COVID-19 task force. We worked very hard; included a Republican, a doctor, and other Members. We held meetings with doctors. We held meeting with scientists, hospital administrators. They were very grateful. Many of you may have heard me say that I did over 70-plus testing sites and over 70-plus vaccination sites, going up to 150 in my community. It is about the science. People understood the science and they gravitated toward vaccines. That means that any elimination of the requirement of foreign travelers should be on the science, not to be on the whims of individuals who believe that they are helping to unify families. It is about the science. The reason why we are where we are today, even though there are 500 people getting COVID, and there are people dying every single day, is because more Americans believed in the science than did not. That is why we developed this protection. So I think this is wrongheaded to have this legislation. Finally, H.J. Res. 24 and H.J. Res. 26, disapproving the actions of the District of Columbia on voting rights and on the criminal code is, again, undermining local rule, and they have the right to local rule. Constitutionally, everyone should have the right to equal protection under the law in the place where they are. Washington, D.C., Mr. Speaker, should not have the intrusion of the United States Congress.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the distinguished gentleman from the great State of Maryland, Congressman Ivey, and the distinguished gentlewoman from the great State of California (Ms. Kamlager-Dove), for leading such an important Special Order. Let me also thank Chairman Horsford for immediately capturing the pain and sentiment of the American people. When I say that, I am speaking of all the American people, Mr. Speaker, because I believe more than any part of our constitutional rights, the right to be free and safe in this Nation is one that Americans crave. For no matter whether they are in the beauty of Utah, in the richness of Mississippi, in the smart and urban life of New York, or in the beauty of the West Coast, Republican or Democrat, Independent and any other affiliation, we are concerned about safety. The reason is because safety involves the coming and going of our family members and our children. For any of us who have ever been parents, we have always had a little trepidation when that little one leaves home for the first time to go to pre-K or kindergarten that they would be safe. We are appalled at the unsafe conditions that we face in our schools today: Uvalde, Sandy Hook, Santa Fe, and beyond. We know that violence permeated those safe spaces. At the same time I think, as I thank the Congressional Black Caucus for its recognition, that as it speaks here on the floor today it is embracing an American issue: public safety. I will be looking for Republicans who are going to admit that even as we want those who protect and serve to go home to their families, we cannot deny American mothers and fathers the right to expect their young people to come home. We can walk, if I might say, and chew gum at the same time. We can uplift the urgency of the importance of law enforcement at all levels: first responders, EMTs, and firefighters, as I do, as a member of the Fire Services Caucus, former chair of the Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security Subcommittee and now ranking member. We have worked in the House Judiciary Committee and worked with the Congressional Black Caucus on major legislation that deals with answering all of these concerns. Mr. Speaker, I would be remiss to think that there are not Republicans who will not join us in this whole idea of crafting a 21st century approach to police-community relations. There is no one that could in any way accept the murder of a man on the streets in video, as was my constituent's brother. Philonise Floyd is here, and he will join me at the State of the Union. His brother, George Floyd, big George, who grew up in Cuney Homes, was everybody's friend. Their mother and their family was everybody's family. They opened their doors to children who may not have a good hot meal, and they gave it to them. However, like every American who leaves their hometown and looks for a greener space, as what he looked for in Minneapolis, Minnesota, he found a deadly end. No one could accept that. The reason, Mr. Speaker, that I know that is because the people who took to the streets nonviolently and walked shoulder to shoulder with us were from all walks of life. Out of that was crafted a combination of Republican-supported ideas, things that were embraced in the Trump executive order, now embraced in the Biden executive order dealing with a reconstruct of police- community relationships, which would include the idea of making sure that random stops that caught Tyre Nichols in the throngs of violence, that lasted for an hour on videotape; or the tragedy of Breonna Taylor; or the tragedy of Eric Garner; or the tragedy in the early stages under color of law, Trayvon Martin, by someone who was supposed to be a civil patrol, and a young boy lost his life; or the young boy in Cleveland, Ohio, who lost his life at age 12 or 13 years old; or the cafeteria worker who lost his life; or Pam Turner, who lost her life; or Sandra Bland, who lost her life. We can construct under the Constitution a reasonable response to traffic stops included in the early premise of legislation. We can deal with the right way to, in essence, address a human being, and chokeholds when you are not in danger basically are without place. No knocks that come to, in essence, a wrong person's home or someone entering the wrong home. All of that is reasonable to deal with in a new construct of which we hope the President of the United States will join us in a bipartisan, bicameral effort. That would include training and accountability as well. It would include dealing with mental health concerns or violence intervention as well as the necessity of wearing body cams, which were the element of truth and have been. I was very proud in the small cities that I represent, Mr. Speaker, to be able to provide grant money for our cities to get body cams, small cities that don't have it. Just think if we passed legislation that allows all departments to seek body cams for truth for all that are involved. I rise today to capture the essence of the importance of this Congressional Black Caucus Special Order because it is laying the footprints for the day tomorrow, as the President speaks to the Nation on many issues. There is no doubt, as someone who went to the funeral of Tyre Nichols as a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, to be able to say that we can do this together. Public safety is an American issue. It is an American families' issue. It is the issue of those who are entrusted to protect and serve. It is the issue of local government, State government. It is the issue of moms and dads. It is the issue of teenagers and young families and senior citizens. It does not leave one person untouched. I believe that the work that was done in the last years with legislation that carried the name of George Floyd has the ability to embrace a wide perspective of diversity and new changes and inspiration and, of course, working as one would with all persons concerned and even respecting the other body. The Congressional Black Caucus has taken up the light, and I am grateful for that leadership. I look forward that we continue to work because we are not a nation of laws and values if we do not adhere as a nation to the belief that every person deserves the dignity of their humanity and does not deserve, under the Constitution, to be denied their equal protection of the law, their due process in the workings between law and community. I thank my very important coleaders of this Special Order. I wish them well. I know that they will be a dynamic team. I had the privilege of doing this in the last session. I can tell you, you will have a moment of joy every time you rise on this floor and are joined by the esteemed members of the Congressional Black Caucus. Each and every one of them have their own special story. We do make a difference. We can change lives, and we can change laws.