Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, I vigorously disagree with my good friend from Texas (Mr. Farenthold) because it is very clear that the bill would tip the scales of justice in favor of asbestos defendants by giving defendants access to information about victim settlements with asbestos trusts while allowing the defendants to continue hiding information about their settlements. My amendment asks for the defendants to give the same information. No matter how much my good friend tries to redirect and suggest that this bill does not do that, it does. Might I also suggest that the other side offered the suggestion that there were groups like Save Our Veterans, The Cost of Freedom, Veterans Resource, that were representing the veterans community. Again, I would take issue with that representation. I insert into the Record a whole list that has been recounted by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Johnson), my colleague. January 7, 2015. Re Veterans Service Organization oppose H.R. 1927 the ``Fairness in Class Action Litigation and Furthering Asbestos Claims Transparency Act'' Hon. Paul Ryan, Speaker of the House, House of Representatives, Washington DC. Hon. Kevin McCarthy, Majority Leader, House of Representatives, Washington DC. Hon. Nancy Pelosi, Minority Leader, House of Representatives, Washington DC. Hon. Steny Hoyer, Minority Whip, House of Representatives, Washington DC. Dear Speaker Ryan, Leader McCarthy, Leader Pelosi, and Whip Hoyer: We, the undersigned Veterans Service Organizations oppose H.R. 1927 the ``Fairness in Class Action Litigation and Furthering Asbestos Claims Transparency Act of 2015.'' We have continuously expressed our united opposition to this legislation via written testimony to the House Judiciary Committee, House Leadership, in-person meetings and phone calls with members of Congress, and most recently, an op-ed many of our legislative teams submitted to ``The Hill'', entitled ``Farenthold has his facts wrong: The FACT Act hurts Veterans''. It is extremely disappointing that even with our combined opposition H.R. 1927 stands poised to be voted on the House floor later this week. Veterans across the country disproportionately make up those who are dying and afflicted with mesothelioma and other asbestos related illnesses and injuries. Although veterans represent only 8% of the nation's population, they comprise 30% of all known mesothelioma deaths. When our veterans and their family members file claims with the asbestos bankruptcy trusts to receive compensation for harm caused by asbestos companies, they submit personal, highly sensitive information such as how and when they were exposed to the deadly product, sensitive health information, and more. H.R.1927 would require asbestos trusts to publish their sensitive information on a public database, and also include how much money they received for their claim as well as other private information. Forcing our veterans to publicize their work histories, medical conditions, social security numbers, and information about their children and families is an offensive invasion of privacy to the men and women who have honorably served, and it does nothing to assure their adequate compensation or to prevent future asbestos exposures and deaths. Additionally, H.R. 1927 helps asbestos companies add significant time and delay paying trust claims to our veterans and their families by putting burdensome and costly reporting requirements on trusts, including those that already exist. One must to ask what is the real motivation for this legislation brought forward by Representative Farenthold? Rather than pursuing legislation to make it easier and less burdensome for our veterans and their families to get the compensation they so desperately need for medical bills and end of life care, trusts will have to spend time and resources complying with these additional and unnecessary requirements at the expense of our veterans. H.R. 1927 is a bill that its supporters claim will help asbestos victims, but the reality is that this bill only helps companies and manufacturers who knowingly poisoned our honorable men and women who have made sacrifices for our country. We urgently ask on behalf of our members across the nation that you oppose H.R. 1927. Please contact Hershel Gober, National Legislative Director, Military Order of the Purple Heart at goberh@aol.com with any questions. Signed: Air Force Sergeants Association, Air Force Women's Officers Associated (AFWOA), American Veterans (AM VETS), Association of the United States Navy (AUSN), Commissioned Officers Association of the US Public Health Services, Fleet Reserve Association (FRA), Jewish War Veterans of the USA (JWV), Marine Corns Reserve Association (MCRA), Military Officers Association of America (MOAA), Military Order of the Purple Heart (MOPH), National Association of Uniformed Services (NAUS), National Defense Council, Naval Enlisted Reserve Association, The Retired Enlisted Association (TREA), United States Coast Guard Chief Petty Officers Association, United States Army Warrant Officers Association, Vietnam Veterans Association (VVA).

Ms. JACKSON LEE. The Air Force Sergeants Association, Vietnam Veterans Association, Jewish War Veterans of the USA, and others, these are the groups that are saying they are against this bill. The reason is because they are for the little guy. That is why they go to the battlefield and fight. I am standing here for the little guy. My amendment says let the big guys give you the same information and the little guys shouldn't even have to pay, if I might say. Let the big guys do it because they are the individuals who come and try to thwart the individuals. Madam Chair, let me express my appreciation to Chairman Sessions and Ranking Member Slaughter for their leadership and for making the Jackson Lee Amendment in order. Thank you for this opportunity to explain my amendment to H.R. 1927, the ``Fairness in Class Litigation and Furthering Asbestos Claim Transparency Act of 2015''. The Jackson Lee Amendment #9 would provide a balanced approach to the bill's disclosure requirements by applying the transparency rules in the bill equally to asbestos industry defendants. Specifically, this Amendment would require that an asbestos defendant seeking information from the trust about a plaintiff to first make available to the plaintiff and trust information about the median settlement amount paid by that defendant for claims settled or paid within 5 years of the date of the request, for the State in which the plaintiffs action was filed. Thus, in order for defendants to obtain the privileges of victim information disclosure as required in H.R. 1927, asbestos companies would also be required to report information about their asbestos- containing products. Without the Jackson Lee Amendment, H.R. 1927 is one-sided. If passed without this balance approach, H.R. 1927 maintains the rights of asbestos defendants to demand confidentiality of settlements and protects an asbestos defendant's right to continue to hide the dangers of their asbestos products from asbestos victims and the American public. A typical asbestos defendant who settles a case in the tort system demands confidentiality as a condition of settlement in order to ensure that other victims cannot learn how much they paid or for which asbestos products the defendant is paying compensation. These same defendants now want the victims to disclose specific settlement amounts with the trusts, along with product exposure information and work history, that they do not themselves provide nor would have provided before the trusts were created. If transparency were the true goal of this bill, then why doesn't the bill require settling defendants to reveal information important to public safety and health? The asbestos health crisis is the result of a massive corporate cover-up. For decades, asbestos companies knew about the dangers of asbestos and failed to warn or adequately protect workers and their families. Now, the same industry responsible for causing this crisis is asking Congress to protect them from liability. At the very least, this bill should require asbestos defendants to reveal information about their asbestos products, where they are in use, and how many Americans continue to be exposed to those products. Trust information is already public. Trusts already disclose far more information than solvent defendants do about their settlement practices and amounts--the settlement criteria used by a trust and the offer the trust will make if the criteria are met are publicly available in the Trust Distribution Procedures (``TDP'') for that trust. Trusts also file annual reports with the Bankruptcy courts and publish lists of the products for which they have assumed responsibility. If asbestos victims are going to be forced to reveal private medical and work history information in a public forum, to the very industry that caused their harm, asbestos defendants should at least be required to reveal which of their products contain asbestos and how many people are being exposed. H.R. 1927 seeks to override state law regarding discovery and disclosure of information. State discovery rules currently govern disclosure of a trust claimant's work and exposure history. The bill's proponents offer no explanation as to why the bill's potentially costly and burdensome information request provision is necessary or why Federal law should subvert state discovery processes. If such information is relevant to a state law claim, a defendant can seek and get that information according to the rules of a state court. What a defendant cannot do, and what this bill would allow, is for a defendant to engage in fishing expeditions for irrelevant information which has no use other than to delay a claim for as long as possible. Thus, H.R. 1927 must be amended to apply to defendants who should be required to reveal important information about their asbestos- containing products. Lastly, let me add that the asbestos defendants would not be required to disclose trade secrets under this amendment. The asbestos defendants would only be required to disclose information about which of their products contain asbestos, where they are in use, and how many people are being exposed. The Jackson Lee Amendment would not force asbestos defendants to reveal industry trade secrets or place them at a competitive disadvantage in the marketplace. Instead, this amendment ensures transparency from both the asbestos victims and asbestos defendants since transparency is the stated goal of the bill. I urge my colleagues to Support the Jackson Lee Amendment. I ask for my amendment to be supported. I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentlewoman from New Jersey for her continued leadership as she brings those of us in the Congressional Progressive Caucus to the floor to speak on issues of concern for the American people. Let me also thank the gentlewoman from Oregon for her leadership. I am delighted to be an original cosponsor of her very important legislation that is championed by the Congressional Progressive Caucus that is really demanding and calling for high quality, guaranteed, affordable, and accessible child care for every American family and a strong childcare workforce that is paid a living wage, at least $15 an hour, and has a voice on their job. I have alongside of me just a picture of children that may be any child here in America, happy and smiling. Mr. Speaker, that is why we are standing on the floor of the House today, because as Americans and as Members of the United States Congress it is our responsibility to be able to provide for the happiness and smiling of our children. So I tell a story, as I begin my remarks, on the importance of this Special Order and the importance of child care. Just a few years ago in my area in Houston, parents got a call that no parent wants to receive. These were parents of little children, and they got a call to come rushing to their daycare center. They were rushing because their daycare center was on fire. The tragedy is a young woman who had this business, whose family gave her this business so that she could have something to do and an income, had stepped away and went to a store and left little children under the age of 5 alone by themselves while a boiling pot of some form of food was on the stove. What happened was obviously that the pot caught fire and babies lost their lives, babies who could not move or help each other. She came rushing back with great remorse and emotion, but those babies were gone. That is the story of child care, Mr. Speaker. It is so very important that every child has the potential for greatness, and that is why child care is so important. In today's economy, the need for child care is a reality for the vast majority of families, but most working parents can't afford it, even while childcare teachers are not even paid enough. Childcare teachers are struggling themselves and can't provide for their own children. Low wages and a lack of benefits lead in the high turnover. In the instance of childcare centers across America, many of them are unregulated. Additionally, parents are struggling. On average, center- based child care for two children can cost more than rent or mortgage in every State. No one who works hard should have the downside as they care for other's children to not be able to care for theirs. In 2011, 49 percent of children ages zero to 4 with employed mothers were primarily cared for by a relative, their father, grandparents, sibling, other relative, or mother, primarily because they could not afford other sources. Center-based care was 26 percent. Grandparents was 21 percent. Other relatives was 6 percent. Over 8 million children live in a single-parent household. Seventy- six percent of these single-parent households were employed. Sixty- seven percent of women in the workforce had a child under the age of 6. Thirty percent of women work at night and have a child under the age of 5. Twenty-nine percent of children in need of child care have multiple arrangements for child care that can include relatives or skilled childcare services. Sixteen percent of children in need of childcare services live in poverty. The high cost of child care, the cost of full-time infant care across the United States in 2012 ranged from $4,600 to $20,000. Mr. Speaker, that is more sometimes than a part-time worker makes or even a full- time worker makes. That is saying to the American people, to women, to fathers, and to grandparents that we do not care about your children. The cost of full-time care for a 4-year-old ranged from $3,900 to $15,000, and the cost of before- and afterschool programs ranged from $1,950 to $10,000. It is important, as we stand on the floor today, to make this statement: that guaranteed child care is really a necessity. It is a right. Why? Because I remember the Declaration of Independence, though not the Constitution, that talks about the pursuit of happiness. What more pursuit of happiness is there than to ensure that the children who are pictured here on this poster board have the right and opportunity to quality child care and for parents to not have that very devastating call, the call a parent who is doing everything they can to provide for the family to rush away from their job because their babies had died in a raging fire because an unregulated childcare provider left to go shopping while a food pot was burning on the stove? Recently, the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services began a ``Don't Be in the Dark Campaign'' to educate the parents about the dangers of placing children in unregulated child care in Texas. The importance of regulated child care becomes unavoidably clear when one considers the fact that 13 children died in unregulated care. In 2006, 18 children died in unregulated care in the State of Texas. In order to stop deaths like this, we need universal care, we need quality care, we need teachers and workers who love what they are doing as they do, but are paid a livable wage, $15, so they too can provide for their families. Unfortunately, safe and affordable child care is not available as much as it should be in the State of Texas. Many working parents rely on State-subsidized care to meet their needs. In 2007, the Statewide waiting list for subsidized care was 17,000 in January, and it moved to 46,000 in October. So it is important to note, for example, in Austin, it costs about $43 a day to provide for full daycare for a toddler. However, the State will only pay a small amount. So this is a very important Special Order. It is to reinforce the fact that our obligation is to safely secure our children and to include our children in the constitutional rights, if you will, of providing for them the sense of a quality of life that is worthy of them as the future of our Nation. I join with my colleagues in speaking about and supporting this resolution, but I also join with them to support the full funding of Head Start. Many times we will see that those who were a part of Head Start, in fact, Head Start was very important to their growth and their progress. I also want to include these agencies in my community, AVANCE and Neighborhood Centers, and say that if we had the universal access to child care, many faith institutions and others could be part of regulated, certified, clean child care that could be made more reasonable for those working parents who work very odd hours and work into the night and early morning and need the kind of around-the-clock child care that is so necessary. So I want to thank Congresswoman Watson Coleman for her leadership, and I leave this podium again by saying every child in America is precious. Even as we hear those discussing issues of choice and issues that sometimes women have to make, we know that we love our children. Why don't we, as the children are here, as they are toddlers and infants and growing up, make sure that no child goes longing for love, for food, for resources, and no child goes longing for quality child care.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I wish to state for the Record how I would have voted on rollcall votes 7 to 23 that I missed today because I was detained in my district on official business: On rollcall vote No. 7, I would have voted ``aye,'' the Johnson amendment. On rollcall vote No. 8, I would have voted ``aye,'' the Cummings- Connolly amendment. On rollcall vote No. 9, the Lynch amendment, I would have voted ``aye.'' On rollcall vote No. 10, the Jackson Lee amendment offered by Mr. Johnson, I would have voted ``aye.'' On rollcall vote No. 11, I would have voted ``aye,'' Messrs. Cummings-Connolly amendment. On rollcall vote No. 12, I would have vote ``aye,'' Democratic motion to recommit on H.R. 712. On rollcall vote No. 13, I would have voted ``no'' on passage of H.R. 712, Sunshine for Regulatory Decrees and Settlements Act of 2015. On rollcall vote No. 14, I would have voted ``aye'' on the Johnson amendment. On rollcall vote No. 15, I would have voted ``aye'' on the Cummings- Connolly amendment. On rollcall vote No. 16, I would have voted ``aye'' on the Cicilline amendment. On rollcall vote No. 17, I would have voted ``aye'' on the DelBene amendment. On rollcall vote No. 18, the Jackson Lee amendment offered by Mr. Cicilline, I would have voted ``aye.'' And on rollcall vote No. 19, I would have voted ``aye.'' This is on H.R. 1155, the SCRUB Act of 2015. On Thursday, January 6, I was unavoidably detained in my congressional district attending to my representational duties and thus not present for rollcall Votes 7 through 23. Had I been present, I would have voted as follows: 1. On rollcall 7 I would have voted ``aye.'' (Johnson (GA) Amendment to H.R. 712, Sunshine for Regulatory Decrees and Settlements Act of 2015). 2. On rollcall 8 I would have voted ``aye.'' (Cummings/Connolly Amendment to H.R. 712, Sunshine for Regulatory Decrees and Settlements Act of 2015). 3. On rollcall 9 I would have voted ``aye.'' (Lynch Amendment to H.R. 712, Sunshine for Regulatory Decrees and Settlements Act of 2015). 4. On rollcall 10 I would have voted ``aye.'' (Jackson Lee/Johnson (GA) Amendment to H.R. 712, Sunshine for Regulatory Decrees and Settlements Act of 2015). 5. On rollcall 11 I would have voted ``aye.'' (Cummings/Connolly Amendment to H.R. 712, Sunshine for Regulatory Decrees and Settlements Act of 2015). 6. On rollcall 12 I would have voted ``aye.'' (Democratic Motion to Recommit H.R. 712, Sunshine for Regulatory Decrees and Settlements Act of 2015). 7. On rollcall 13 I would have voted ``no.'' (On Passage of H.R. 712, Sunshine for Regulatory Decrees and Settlements Act of 2015). 8. On rollcall 14 I would have voted ``aye.'' (Johnson (GA) Amendment to H.R. 1155, SCRUB Act of 2015). 9. On rollcall 15 I would have voted ``aye.'' (Cummings/Connolly Amendment to H.R. 1155, SCRUB Act of 2015). 10. On rollcall 16 I would have voted ``aye.'' (Cicilline Amendment to H.R. 1155, SCRUB Act of 2015). 11. On rollcall 17 I would have voted ``aye.'' (DelBene Amendment to H.R. 1155, SCRUB Act of 2015). 12. On rollcall 18 I would have voted ``aye.'' (Jackson Lee/Cicilline Amendment to H.R. 1155, SCRUB Act of 2015). 13. On rollcall 19 I would have voted ``aye.'' (Pocan Amendment to H.R. 1155, SCRUB Act of 2015).

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New Jersey, and I thank her for guiding us over the past couple of minutes dealing with an important issue. Let me quickly move us forward because, in just a few minutes, the President of the United States will join with a number of Americans on a very important townhall meeting dealing with the question of this very important issue of gun violence. Today I rise as the ranking member of the Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations Subcommittee of the Committee on the Judiciary, but I rise also, as my colleague, as a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus that has been at the leadership. I thank both Chairman Grijalva and Chairman Ellison for their leadership and the opportunity for this time. Again, much was made of the fact that the President, in his last term, or his last year, sought to take on this very complicated issue. Much was made of the fact that the President chose gun violence as something that he took a personal and emotional interest in. Let me be very clear. There is never a time that is too short a time to confront the horrors of gun violence in this country. Let me give you simply an example of what we face not with adults who have confronted each other with a gun, but toddlers who are getting shot on a weekly basis. For example, a 2-year-old in South Carolina found a gun in the backseat of the car he was riding in and accidentally shot his grandmother, who was sitting in the passenger's seat. I found at least 43 instances this year of somebody being shot by a toddler 3 or younger. In 31 of these 43 cases, a toddler found a gun and shot himself or herself. These stories are emotional and they are real. In one instance, a 3-year-old managed to wound both of his parents with a single gunshot at an Albuquerque motel. Shootings by toddlers have happened in 24 States so far this year. There is a story that comes to mind dealing with a little boy, a loving little boy in Kentucky who accidentally shot his 2-year-old sister to death. Why? Because someone gave him a gun made by a manufacturer who made guns for children. Now, Mr. Speaker, I am not here to make moral judgments. That is something that I would not do, give a child that is 5 years old a gun. But what I am here to speak to is how we can come together, those who advocate and use guns, those who believe in open carry, those who believe in concealed weapons, those who believe in rifle shooting and deer hunting. All of that is part of the American way. There is no angst with that. What I am saying and what the President is saying with a tearful, emotional plea that he made just a few days ago is that we in America can do better. The Constitution says we can do better. The Declaration of Independence says we can do better. The First Amendment clearly provides us the access and the rights of free speech and movement, and the Second Amendment is clear that we do have a right to bear arms. Many of us historically believe that that was, of course, an amendment put in place to protect the beginning Founding Fathers and Mothers, if you will, in these early Colonies and to make sure that they were not overrun by the British. But it is still a standing amendment, and it takes a procedure for it to be undermined, which is the argument that I make for those who continuously raise the fact that the President and those of us who believe in gun safety or gun regulation--which is not controlled--are, in fact, trying to diminish the Second Amendment. We are not. But what we are trying to do is to do as the President has suggested: keep guns out of the wrong hands through background checks. For example, unfortunately, the tragedy in South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, where a crazed individual wanted to provoke a race war, worshipped with nine parishioners at Mother Emanuel Church, sat and prayed with the pastor, a distinguished senator, and those other loving saints, then sprayed bullets and killed nine of them, that individual had items in his background that should have warranted him not getting a gun. But what happened under law? The storekeeper, the gunshop owner, after 3 days when that particular affirmation or approval had not come, he gave the gun anyway. Foolish. It is so very foolish. There should be an extensive requirement that there is a background check when you are buying a gun on the Internet or other places we are exchanging guns. The President recognizes those kind of loopholes and wishes to avoid those kind of loopholes. The ATF is making clear that it doesn't matter where you conduct business--from a store, at a gun show, or over the Internet--if you are in the business of selling firearms, you must get a license and conduct background checks. It baffles me why some people have said that won't make any difference. Yes, it will, because a lot of times in gun shows people who are here to do wrong are, in fact, going to be taking any easy way to get guns. Let me cite you an example. I always hear that those cities who have rigid gun laws, it doesn't matter. This is the argument I get from my friends in the NRA, and I call them my friends because I hope one day we will sit down at the table of engagement and collaboration because that is the American way. Let me give you the statistics that make sense. New York has strong gun laws, and Governor Cuomo implemented some stronger gun laws after certain tragedies occurred in his State. But here are the statistics that argue and refute and extinguish the argument of the NRA: 70 percent of the guns recovered by police in New York State in 2013 originated out of the State. The gun laws in New York are working, but because of their neighbors, they are suffering. That is why we need to have a regulated system that doesn't take people's guns away, but provides the safety and security that the American people determine. I didn't say, Mr. Speaker, that 70 percent of the guns found in the hands of law-abiding citizens were from out of State. I said 70 percent of the guns that the New York City, NYPD, that has a great deal of respect across this Nation as one of the top accredited law enforcement agencies, 70 percent of those that they found were black-market guns coming into that State from elsewhere. That is a tragedy. I will tell you for sure that some of those guns were used to maim and kill and to fight in gun battles in the streets because we allow the kind of selling of guns without background checks and people going off and getting gun sales in the back of cars. We know that that has happened. ATF has finalized a rule to require background checks for people trying to buy some of the most dangerous weapons and other items through a trust corporation or other legal entity. Whatever we might say, I don't believe that it is relevant for us to have the AK-47s just walking up and down the street, even if you want to say you believe in open carry. Also, overhauling the background check system to make it more effective and efficient. It is worth noting how many background checks are done. Make this 24 hours, 7 days a week. Maybe that would have prevented, I think, the tragedy in South Carolina. Make our communities safe from guns. Call on U.S. Attorneys to explain to people about gun safety. When I was on the Houston City Council, I introduced the first gun ordinance in a city--that gun safety ordinance is in place today--which was to hold parents responsible for children getting guns and shooting someone. Why? Because those guns should have been secured. There is nothing unconstitutional about regulating and saving the lives of children. Also, introducing 200 new ATF agents. I am very proud that Congresswoman Robin Kelly and myself--and we invite my colleagues to join in this legislation--introduced legislation that would, in fact, provide for 200 additional Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearm and Explosive agents and investigators to enforce gun laws. This is the very same thing that Republicans have been talking about. It is H.R. 4316. I invite my colleagues to join in that legislation to make a difference in the lives of so many. Let me say that, in addition, we want to make sure that we are highlighting the importance of receiving complete criminal history records and criminal dispositions. We want our States to be collaborative. Send to us the accurate records of those who perpetrate a crime in your community. That is making this particular background check more effective. We are going to do the heavy lifting 24 hours, 7 days a week with better technology. Make our communities safe, as I said. Teach about gun safety. Increase mental health treatment and reporting. We are talking about $500 million. The President needs our collaboration. I am very glad that we have also introduced, along with Congresswoman Bass, the authority to authorize funding to increase access to mental health care treatment in order to reduce gun violence. In the aftermath of the President's speech, I heard all of this talk about how we should be getting involved in gun violence and we should be talking about gun violence. I heard one Presidential candidate saying that we should be looking for the criminally ill. Well, what do you think this is? The President is asking for help from the ATF, and now he is asking for grants and the resources to deal with the criminally ill or those who are suffering from mental health issues and to stop them from committing gun violence, the very circumstance that occurred with respect to the horrificness of Sandy Hook. And as I hold up this poster board--the individual ultimately took his life and the life of his mother--can we imagine these babies that lost their lives? In fact, we understand that some of those law enforcement officers could barely stand up as they went in and looked at the carnage. Certainly, that individual was known to have suffered from some form of mental illness. There should have been an intervention there. The President is asking for resources to help us with those who are suffering from mental health issues. He wants the Social Security Administration, as indicated, to begin a rulemaking process to include information about beneficiaries who are, in fact, suffering from mental health needs. This is not an invasion of privacy. This is information. This is not knocking on the door of those who are suffering from mental health concerns. But it is helping us be more effective if that individual seeks to purchase a gun. We want to shape the future of gun safety technology. The President directed the Departments of Homeland Security--which I am on--Defense, and Justice to conduct or sponsor research. Guns can be more safe. If a child gets a gun in their hand, there can be more detail to pulling that trigger. The little boy that shot his sister, there was one bullet left in that gun. The parents didn't know it. It was left in a corner. He picked it up. It was his toy gun. He is a child. We need to be able to be responsive and start boxing each other and get around the same circle of improvement. Keeping guns out of the wrong hands through background checks is what the President has offered. Then, of course, we need to work to make our communities safe from gun violence by hiring 230 additional NICS examiners and other staff to assist with processing mandatory background checks. I think I mentioned the mental health resources that I think are so very important. I would also suggest that we ensure federally that people keep their guns safe. It is very crucial that we insist that guns are safe. Let me also indicate that Mr. Clyburn has a very important initiative--he represents the district where the tragedy occurred in South Carolina--to get rid of this 3-day check and to make sure that everyone has a background check, no matter what is occurring. Let me finish, Mr. Speaker, with indicating the gun-related homicides in this country. The rate of gun-related homicides in the U.S. is far higher than that of other large and affluent countries. Are they any less stronger than we are? We have the highest number of homicides done by guns. We have Italy, Taiwan, Canada, Spain, Germany, Australia, the United Kingdom, France, South Korea, and Japan. Even with the terrorist activities, they are way below America. And you can see here the 353 mass shootings in America in 2015. All of those are by guns. If you are too dangerous to fly, you are too dangerous to buy a gun in America. I have the no-fly for foreign terrorists. But, more importantly, we had legislation that Mr. King sponsored, I believe, and others that just simply said: If you are on the no-fly list, you can't have a gun. I want to find common ground, but most of all, I want to save lives. Here today I am saying to my colleagues that we are not saving lives if we are not sitting at the table of involvement. I will include in the Record a whole list of legislative initiatives about gun storage and safety devices and firearms transfer reporting, which is similar to what happened in South Carolina, where this gentleman got a gun--effectively, he would not have been approved-- also, one on establishing a select committee on gun violence and gun violence research--these are by other Members--also, recognizing gun violence is a public health emergency, and coming back to allow the Centers for Disease Control to finally do research on the impact of gun violence. gun violence prevention legislation & legislative support 1. H.R. 4315 (Rep. Jackson Lee)--Mental Health Access and Gun Violence Prevention Act-authorizes $500 million for mental health treatment access and to assist in the reporting of relevant disqualifying mental health information to the FBI's background check system NICS. 2. H.R. 4316 (Rep. Jackson Lee)--Gun Violence Reduction Resources Act--authorizes the hiring of 200 additional ATF agents and investigators for enforcement of existing gun laws. 3. H.R. 47 (Rep. Jackson Lee), Gun Storage And Safety Devices For All Firearms Act, a bill directing the Attorney General to enforce that any firearm transferred to a person who is not a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer must provide a secure gun storage or safety device. 4. H.R. 3125 (Rep. Jackson Lee), Accidental Firearms Transfers Reporting Act, a bill directing the Federal Bureau of Investigations to report to Congress semiannually the number of firearms transfers resulting from the failure to complete a background check within 3 business days, and the procedures followed after it is discovered that the firearm transfer has been made to an ineligible person. 5. H.R. 3051 (Rep. Clyburn, James, SC-6) Background Check Completion Act: a bill to eliminate the requirement that a firearms dealer transfer a firearm if the national instant criminal background check system has been unable to complete a background check of the prospective transferee within 3 business days. 6. H. Res. 467 (Rep. Thompson, Mike (CA-5) Establishing the Select Committee on Gun Violence Prevention, responsible for issuing a final report and recommendations, including legislative proposals within 60 days of its establishment. 7. H.R. 3926 (Rep. Honda, Michael, CA-17) Gun Violence Research Act, to amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for better understanding of the epidemic of gun violence. 8. H.R. 224 (Rep. Kelly, Robin, IL-2) the Recognizing Gun Violence as a Public Health Emergency Act: To help us learn more about the true public health impact of domestic gun violence, and provide us with the data we need to make sound recommendations to make our communities safer. 9. H.R. 225 (Rep. Kelly, Robin, IL-2) Firearm Safety Act of 2015: to amend the Consumer Product Safety Act to remove from the definition of ``consumer product'' the exclusion for any article sold by a manufacturer, producer, or importer that would be subject to a firearms sales tax under the Internal Revenue Code for pistols, revolvers, and other firearms, including shells and cartridges, thereby permitting the Consumer Product Safety Commission to issue safety standards for such articles. 10. H.R. 226 (Rep. Kelly, Robin, IL-2) Keeping Guns from High Risk Individuals Act: A bill to amend the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act to prohibit the sale or disposition of a firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person: has been convicted of a crime of violence in the previous 10 years; is under age 25 and has been adjudicated as an adult as having committed a crime of violence; has been convicted on 2 separate occasions in any period of 3 consecutive years in the last 10 of an offense that has the possession or distribution of alcohol or a controlled substance as an element; or has been convicted of stalking. And further prohibits any such person from shipping or transporting in interstate or foreign commerce, or possessing in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or receiving any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce. 11. H.R. 1217 (Rep. King, Peter, NY-2) Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act of 2015: A bill to amend the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act to reauthorize for FY2016-FY2019 the grant program for improvements to the criminal history record system, and establishes the National Commission on Mass Violence to study the availability and nature of firearms, including the means of acquiring firearms, issues relating to mental health, and the impacts of the availability and nature of firearms on incidents of mass violence or in preventing mass violence. 12. H.R. 2767 (Rep. Johnson, Henry C. ``Hank,'' Jr., GA-4), Airport Security Act of 2015: Directs the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to establish a program to prohibit all but specified authorized individuals from possessing a firearm at a covered airport, including any individual who enters the airport, or exits public transportation at it, for air travel, meeting another individual, picking up cargo, or employment. 13. H.R. 3497 (Rep. Engel, Eliot, NY), Protect Law Enforcement Armor (PLEA) Act: To ban the sale of the FN Five- seveN and other armor-piercing handguns and ensure new weapons like it stay off our streets. 14. H. RES. 520 (Rep. Lawrence, Brenda, MI-14), Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the Federal firearms laws should be rigorously enforced, that all appropriate measures should be taken to end the flood of unlawfully purchased firearms into our communities, and that adequate resources should be provided to accomplish such purposes. 15. Member, Gun Violence Prevention Task Force 16. Panelist, Congressional Roundtable on Gun Violence in Communities of Color and Combating `Bad Apple' Gun Dealers 17. Congressional Letter, urging major news broadcasters to raise greater awareness to the high number of casualties by guns that occur every day by broadcasting a list of names and photos of victims in every state. 18. Congressional Letter, requesting a meeting with the United States Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, to discuss alternate gun crime and violence prevention policies. 19. Congressional Letter, requesting Executive Action by President Barack Obama to clarify what it means to be `engaged in the business' of selling guns in order to prevent unlicensed sellers from engaging in the sale of guns without background check.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. If we don't stand together, then the long litany of children that have died by gun violence, Mr. Speaker, will continue. The only thing that will stop this is for us to recognize that we have gun deaths, gun deaths by justified homicide and criminal homicide, mass shootings, mental health shootings with guns, and suicide, guns and domestic violence. The only thing that will happen is that it will continue. Does anyone want this kind of massacre to continue at the hands of someone using a gun? Some of the aspects of what the President has presented--background checks, mental health resources, ATF, FBI--200 more--if we join together, I can assure you America can find her comfortable place in the sun with a wonderful Constitution and democracy, where all of us, no matter what our philosophy, what our political party, can come around the issue of saving lives. I am pleased to join my colleagues of the Congressional Progressive Caucus in this important Special Order on universal child care and gun violence in America. I would like to thank Congresswoman Bonnie Watson Coleman for convening this evening's Special Order and for her dedicated leadership on critical issues impacting children and working families, including this evening's topic of universal childcare and gun safety. As we turn to the topic of gun violence in America, I would also like to thank President Obama for his leadership and for helping to bring this issue to the forefront of our national priorities. Gun violence in America can no longer be swept under the rug, ignored or irrationally justified. We are in a state of national crisis and it is time to act. Upon taking office, every Member of Congress makes a solemn pledge: to protect and defend the American people. This is the most important oath we take as elected officials--and, to honor this promise, we must do everything in our power to stem gun violence in our nation. Yet, after another mass shooting and countless acts of gun violence in communities across our country every day, House Republicans are still unwilling to act to stop gun violence and save lives in American communities. The Democrats have been calling for an immediate vote on the bipartisan King-Thompson Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act to strengthen the life-saving background checks that keep guns out of the wrong hands. This Congress has a moral obligation to do our part to end the gun violence epidemic. Now is the time for Republicans to join Democrats in protecting the lives of Americans by taking common sense steps to save lives. The Administration has announced two new executive actions that will help strengthen the federal background check system and keep guns out of the wrong hands. I have introduced two bills that will hopefully enhance these executive actions and support the President's recently announced action on gun violence. H.R. 4315--Mental Health Access and Gun Violence Prevention Act-- authorizes $500 million for mental health treatment access and to assist in the reporting of relevant disqualifying mental health information to the FBI's background check system NICS. H.R. 4316--Gun Violence Reduction Resources Act--authorizes the hiring of 200 additional ATF agents and investigators for enforcement of existing gun laws. The President included these specific requests in yesterday's announcements and these bills respond to those requests. Additionally, the Department of Justice (DOJ) is proposing a regulation to clarify who is prohibited from possessing a firearm under federal law for reasons related to mental health. And the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is issuing a proposed regulation to address barriers preventing states from submitting limited information on those persons to the federal background check system. Ending gun violence in America requires a comprehensive approach--we must come together and work towards this common goal. Too many Americans have been severely injured or lost their lives as a result of gun violence. While the vast majority of Americans who experience a mental illness are not violent. However, in some cases when persons with a mental illness does not receive the treatment they need, the result can be tragedies such as homicide or suicide. We must continue to address mental health issues by: Supporting expanded coverage of mental health services and enhanced training and hiring of mental health professionals; and Continuing the national conversation on mental health to reduce stigma associated with having a mental illness and getting help; and We must also continue to do everything we can to making sure that anyone who may pose a danger to themselves or others does not have access to a gun. The federal background check system is one of the most effective ways of assuring that such individuals are not able to purchase a firearm from a licensed gun dealer. To date, background checks have prevented over two million guns from falling into the wrong hands. The Administration's two new executive actions will help ensure that better and more reliable information makes its way into the background check system. The Administration, however, has acknowledged the need for collective action and continues to call upon Members of Congress to pass common- sense gun safety legislation and to expand funding to increase access to mental health services. I too call upon my colleagues to come together and pass legislation that will help stop the loss of innocent lives. While we have made some progress in strengthening the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), which is used to run background checks on those who buy guns from federally licensed gun dealers to make sure they are not prohibited by law from owning a firearm, we must do more. I am a strong supporter of a right of privacy and I am particularly sensitive and protective of patient privacy rights. I support the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act that was passed by Congress in 1996, and includes privacy protection for medical records, which includes mental healthcare information. However, there are specific areas under federal law that allow the disclosure of medical information to authorities, and in these instances there should be an agreement that when a person poses a threat to themselves or others (as determined by a court or adjudicative authority with the medical and legal knowledge and authority to make a determination that a person poses a threat to themselves or to others) should not be allowed to purchase a fire arm. Technology that could be deployed to access court records and arrest records as they relate to mental health and violent behavior should not rely upon a list that may become outdated or could be used in ways that are not consistent with the intent of enhancing gun safety. The ability to access information that is accurate and available for the limited purpose of affirming or rejecting a request to purchase a firearm without indicating the source of the decision or the reason for the rejection would still protect privacy rights while also protecting the public. The president's proposal on mental health and gun violence is to enforce the laws already in place. Under a federal law enacted in 1968, an individual is prohibited from buying or possessing firearms for life if he/she has been ``adjudicated as a mental defective'' or ``committed to a mental institution.'' A person is ``adjudicated as a mental defective'' if a court--or other entity having legal authority to make adjudications--has made a determination that an individual, as a result of mental illness: 1) Is a danger to himself or to others; 2) Lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs; 3) Is found insane by a court in a criminal case, or incompetent to stand trial, or not guilty by reason of lack of mental responsibility pursuant to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. A person is ``committed to a mental institution'' if that person has been involuntarily committed to a mental institution by a court or other lawful authority. This expressly excludes voluntary commitment. It should be noted, however, that federal law currently allows states to establish procedures for mentally ill individuals to restore their right to possess and purchase firearms (many states have done so at the behest of the National Rifle Association, with questionable results). It is undoubtedly true that people who are a danger to self and/or others because of mental illness should be prohibited from owning firearms. It is less clear, however, how to tailor new policies to better protect the American public while at the same time avoiding the stigmatization of Americans with mental illness. Any strategy to address the lethal intersection between guns and mental illness should focus of the key facts: On average, more than 100,000 people in America are shot in murders, assaults, and other crimes. More than 32,000 people die from gun violence annually, including 2,677 children under the age of eighteen years old. Suicide is the leading cause of gun related deaths in America. 60 percent of deaths by guns in America are the result of individuals using these weapons as a means to commit suicide. Some of these deaths might have been prevented if there were adequate background checks. Each year hundreds of law enforcement officers lose their lives to gun violence been shot to death protecting their communities. Millions of guns are sold every year in ``no questions asked'' transactions and experts estimate that 40 percent of guns now sold in America are done so without a background check. National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) was created in 1998 to require potential gun buyers to pass an instant screening at the point of purchase. Ensures that purchasers are not felons, domestic abusers, mentally ill, etc. NICS has blocked sales to more than 2 million prohibited people. NICS stops 170 felons and 53 domestic abusers from purchasing guns every day. The most serious issue facing NICS is the ``private sale loophole''. This allows anyone who is not a federally-licensed dealer to sell guns without a background checks. An estimated 40% of gun transfers--6.6 million transfers--are conducted without a background check. Armslist.com is the largest online seller of firearms. 66,000 gun ads are posted by private sellers on a given day, 750,000 per year. Nearly 1/3rd of gun ads on Armslist.com are posted by high-volume unlicensed sellers (approx. 4,218 people). High-volume sellers posted 29% of the gun ads. High-volume sellers posted 36,069 gun ads over 2 months. This would equate to around 243,800 guns each year by unlicensed sellers. 50% were familiar with federal laws but decided they didn't apply to them. 1/3rd of ``want-to-buy'' ads are posted by people with a criminal record. More than 4 times the rate at which prohibited gun buyers try to buy guns in stores. Approximately 25,000 guns are in illegal hands. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, what the new year gives us is an opportunity to refresh, to regroup, to look forward to opportunities in this instance and in this august body to protect the American people. So today I rise with a great deal of applause and enthusiasm, words that I think do not connote the presentation made by President Obama yesterday, for it is not often the American people can see the deepness of our hearts, the affection we have for them, and the concern that we have over loss of life. The President did all of that. In his teary expressions, he pierced the hearts of Americans, and he should have pierced the hearts of the Members of Congress, Republicans and Democrats. There is no doubt that thousands are dying from gun violence. There is no doubt that people with guns kill. There is no doubt that more people get guns who should not have guns. I am particularly excited by the President's thoughtful and collaborative work, along with that of Attorney General Lynch and a number of my colleagues, and of, certainly, the House Judiciary Committee, in particular our ranking member, John Conyers, those of us Democrats on the committee, and particularly those on the Crime Subcommittee, on which I have the privilege of serving as the ranking member. We have worked together to have an agenda on criminal justice. The issues dealing with guns deal with criminal justice. Why should we run away from the wide and well-known proposition that there are people who are getting guns without their having had background checks? Tragically, in my own community, an off-duty officer was attempting to sell guns in an open parking lot or in an open area in which he thought he would be protected. What ensued? A gun battle. I don't know how those individuals purchasing those guns could have had background checks, but I would say that that is certainly not representative of the many in law enforcement with whom I have engaged who have already said that guns kill and that so many guns in America-- more guns, we understand, than there are people--provide for a deadly mixture. So I think it is important for the American people to know that the Federal Government has been working, unlike some have said. In 2015, NCIS received more than 22.2 million background checks, an average of more than 63,000 per day. By law, a gun dealer can complete a sale to a customer if the background check comes back clean or has taken more than 3 days. I think, in this instance, we need to look at the legislation of Mr. Clyburn, who indicates you must have a background check. I also think we should look and work legislatively with the President. Why would we be against hiring 200-plus more ATF officers? Why would we be against putting more resources in mental health? I am very proud that I have introduced H.R. 4316--this bill is the Gun Violence Reduction Resources Act--just last evening to add those 200-plus ATF officers. I ask my colleagues to join me. I introduced that with Congresswoman Robin Kelly. I introduced, with Representative Karen Bass and Congresswoman Napolitano, H.R. 4315, the Mental Health Access and Gun Violence Act of 2016, to increase the resources necessary, yesterday. Mr. Speaker, how many more need to die? Do we still need to have an amnesia check on Connecticut, San Bernardino, Columbine, or Oregon, and many places beyond? Guns must be restrained. The President's mission is correct--more data for secure technology, more NCIS data in order to run through those background checks appropriately. Remember Charleston, South Carolina? Remember the message? He got the guns because 3 days had passed. And he killed nine people worshipping in a church. So it is important, Mr. Speaker, that Congress owns up to its own responsibility, not one that says the Second Amendment is being undermined. It is not. You can never undermine our Constitution. It is a procedural structure that we are not engaged in. We are only trying to provide a guidepost to save lives of children and families. I am looking forward to working with the Judiciary Committee in the House and the Senate to look at constructive legislation. Finally, Mr. Speaker, let me say that I am saddened that again we come on the floor with Planned Parenthood legislation that talks to the very heart of America, quality of health care, protecting women in terms of cervical cancer. This is a nonstarter. Vote against it. Protect American women. Protect families and children against gun violence. Mr. Speaker, upon taking office, every Member of Congress makes a solemn pledge: to protect and defend the American people. This is the most important oath we take as elected officials--and, to honor this promise, we must do everything in our power to stem gun violence in our nation. Yet, after another mass shooting and countless acts of gun violence in communities across our country every day, House Republicans are still unwilling to act to stop gun violence and save lives in American communities. The Democrats have been calling for an immediate vote on the bipartisan King-Thompson Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act to strengthen the lifesaving background checks that keep guns out of the wrong hands. This Congress has a moral obligation to do our part to end the gun violence epidemic. Now is the time for Republicans to join Democrats in protecting the lives of Americans by taking common sense steps to save lives. The Administration is announcing two new executive actions that will help strengthen the federal background check system and keep guns out of the wrong hands. The Department of Justice (DOJ) is proposing a regulation to clarify who is prohibited from possessing a firearm under federal law for reasons related to mental health, and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is issuing a proposed regulation to address barriers preventing states from submitting limited information on those persons to the federal background check system. Too many Americans have been severely injured or lost their lives as a result of gun violence. While the vast majority of Americans who experience a mental illness are not violent, in some cases when persons with a mental illness do not receive the treatment they need, the result can be tragedies such as homicide or suicide. The Administration takes a comprehensive approach to mental health issues by expanding coverage of mental health services so care is affordable, launching a national conversation on mental health to reduce stigma associated with having a mental illness and getting help, directing funds we have now to improve mental health facilities, and proposing more funds be used for efforts such as training additional mental health professionals. At the same time, the Administration is committed to making sure that anyone who may pose a danger to themselves or others does not have access to a gun. The federal background check system is the most effective way to assure that such individuals are not able to purchase a firearm from a licensed gun dealer. To date, background checks have prevented over two million guns from falling into the wrong hands. The Administration's two new executive actions will help ensure that better and more reliable information makes its way into the background check system. The Administration also continues to call on Congress to pass common-sense gun safety legislation and to expand funding to increase access to mental health services.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, this past week in Harris County, Texas, we lost a giant of a man in the name of Commissioner El Franco Lee, who served the Harris County Commissioners Court and the people he loved for 30 years. One could never describe Commissioner Lee as a typical politician. As he walked through his district, I truly believe his giant footsteps touched everyone and everyone's heart. He was a lover of seniors and created opportunities for them to enjoy their life and swim in a fantastic pool at the Hester House. More importantly, he coddled and nurtured and created the Lyndon Baines Johnson Hospital that has served so many from all over the county and State. The Baylor Teen Clinic called him a guardian angel, providing healthcare services for vulnerable teens. And, yes, he believed in something called the Olympics, not around the world, but right in Harris County; 10,000 children during the summer would have the opportunity to test their athletic prowess. And he was an athlete as well. He was a friend of Mickey Leland and Craig Washington. More importantly, his beautiful family, wife, and children lived in his beloved community, Fifth Ward. He was a friend of the community. He did so much as a county commissioner. He left behind wonderful parks and the opportunity for trails. He was a man in our community who knew about flooding. He was a strong, strong proponent of making sure that the infrastructure in Precinct 1 was the kind that would give a better quality of life. Mr. Speaker, as I close on this wonderful public servant, let me say may he rest in peace, working until his tragic death, and offering to the people who were left behind our praise for him. May he rest in peace. Thank you, Commissioner El Franco Lee, for being the giant of a man who reached low and touched all, loved us all, and brought us to a day in Harris County where we can be so proud of all that you have done.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, a picture is always worth a thousand words, and this is a picture of words. It is very clear that the Affordable Care Act has been a lifesaver for many Americans. And this budget reconciliation act is obviously misdirected, wrong directed, and the 62nd time this body has tried to gut ObamaCare. Thank you, Mr. President, for vetoing it, no matter whether it came from the Senate or the House. We worked, without ceasing, to get a bill that would cover millions of Americans. It was a deliberative process, and everyone had a right to vote. The Republicans refused to vote for good health care, and here we are, 13 million Americans benefitted from $1.1 billion in rebates for health insurance; 105 million Americans, including 71 million Americans in private plans and 34 million in Medicare. Last August, millions of women began receiving free coverage for comprehensive women's care; 17 million children with preexisting conditions have insurance; 6.6 million young people have insurance; 6.3 million seniors. And, of course, they want to attack Planned Parenthood, which provides vulnerable women with health care. I don't know what they view the budget reconciliation act, but I call it the Anti-New Year's Celebration. Now that we have a new year, we have this horrible bill. Vote against it, and vote for a thousand words right here. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule for H.R. 3762, the Restoring Americans' Healthcare Freedom Reconciliation Act of 2015. I oppose the rule for H.R. 2762 for three reasons: 1. The rule only allows one hour of debate equally divided between the supporters and opponents of the rule; 2. This is not an open rule that would allow for amendments that could have been offered improve the bill; and 3. The President has communicated to the House that he will veto this bill if it is not amended. The House needs more time to debate this bill because it could mean a return to the days when nearly 20% of Americans had seriously deficient healthcare coverage or none at all. Unfortunately this rule for the underlying bill is the latest GOP attempt to end the Affordable Care Act guarantee of access to health insurance for millions of Americans and not an attempt to improve the lives of working men and women or their families. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that H.R. 3762, would result in 22 million Americans losing their health coverage after 2017. The impact of the bill should it become law is significant and should have more than an hour of debate prior to a vote. The worse thing about this bill is that the authors are well aware of the public reaction should it become law, and this is why it would not go into effect during 2016, but 2017 after the general election and would remove health coverage for those who are the most vulnerable such as those who have coverage under the Medicaid expansion. I also object that this is a closed rule that does not allow amendments that could provide support for bipartisan efforts to improve the bill. Instead of attempting to repeal and undermine this law, we should use our time to work together to make improvements where necessary such as ending the so called ``Cadillac Tax'' and making sure that health insurance is focused on providing the care prescribed by doctors and not health insurance plans. Finally, I oppose the rule and the underlying bill because the Administration has made it clear that this bill will be vetoed if presented for signature by the President. The House has important work it should be doing such as voting on legislation to create new infrastructure to support the 21st century need for universal high-speed broadband access and; closing the gap in STEM employment opportunities and skills that has over 1 million positions that are going unfilled; and strengthening gun safety by increasing the number of agents at the ATF to ensure that all gun dealers are following the law; and promoting greater access to mental health services. Instead we continue to waste time on fighting the Affordable Care Law in ways that would hurt Americans who need affordable, assessable and available healthcare we could be engaged in productive legislative work. Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues reject this bad rule and the flawed underlying legislation.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the manager, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen), for his leadership. I also thank my good friends on the other side of the aisle. Mr. Speaker, I now understand what the issue is. We are talking apples and oranges. My friends on the other side of the aisle don't care about the fact that, in 2013, 18 percent of Americans were uninsured; in the State of Texas, 28 percent; California, 23 percent; and Georgia, 22 percent. Now we have found that we are at a point where we have lowered that amount and we have lowered the uninsured rate in this country to 11.9 percent. Those are vulnerable Americans and women and families. We also don't seem to understand that, when our constituents come to us and talk about premiums, all we need to do is do the constituency service and kind of assure them and show them the direction into the marketplace because, in shopping around, you can lower your premium. But the real issue is whether or not we care about making sure that those with preexisting conditions can actually get health insurance, that those in Medicare can actually protect the Medicare system and make it insolvent in 2030 instead of 2017. The other question is: Does this bill even have a plan? Is there an alternative healthcare plan that the Republicans have put in the budget reconciliation? No, they have not. Then they want to take away Planned Parenthood. This is not about disliking Planned Parenthood. It is telling women that they do not have a choice to choose their own doctors. That is what they are doing when they defund Planned Parenthood. Mr. Speaker, it is apples and oranges. They are talking one thing. I am talking about saving lives and helping Americans keep their health insurance. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3762, the Restoring Americans' Healthcare Freedom Reconciliation Act of 2015. In 1949, Harry Truman became the first sitting President to propose universal healthcare for all Americans as part of the ``Fair Deal.'' On March 23, 2010, President Obama aided by a Democratic Congress delivered on this promise. Before the enactment of the Affordable Care Act, 50 million people in the United States had no health insurance coverage, with many losing insurance as a result of the recent recession. This is the 62nd vote by the GOP since its enactment to end the Affordable Care Act law. In 2013, key provisions of the Affordable Care Act began to take effect and have significantly improved the lives of millions of Americans. In 2013, the states with the highest percentage of uninsured were: Texas with 28.8 percent; Louisiana with 24 percent; Nevada with 23.3 percent; California with 23.2 percent; Florida with 22.8 percent; Georgia with 22.5 percent; Arkansas with 21.9 percent; Mississippi with 21.7 percent; and Oklahoma with 21.4 percent. In 2013, when Gallup first began tracking health insurance coverage just before the Affordable Care Act went into effect, the number of persons not insured has declined by 5.2 points. Gallup reported that the percentage of uninsured Americans increased from nearly 14 percent in 2008 to over 17 percent in 2011, and peaked at 18.0 percent in 2013. According to Gallup the uninsured rate among U.S. adults declined to 11.9 percent for the first quarter of 2015, but this fact has not deterred efforts by the GOP of the House to end this important lifesaving law. Mr. Speaker, this steady decline in the number of Americans without health insurance means that today only about 10 percent of our citizens do not have coverage. Many of those most in need of the healthcare coverage provided by the Affordable Care Act live in the Districts of many members on both sides of this argument. Texas, my own state, leads the list of states with the highest percentages of uninsured residents. The highest concentrations of the uninsured are the poor and unemployed. The uninsured rate among Americans has dropped sharply since the implementation of the Affordable Care Act, which provides: access to healthcare to the poor through expansion of Medicaid; prevents health insurance companies from denying healthcare coverage based on pre- existing conditions; stops health insurance companies from discriminating against women by charging them higher rates for coverage, and extends the time children can remain on their parents' health insurance to age 26. The Affordable Care Act provides to states at no cost options for residents to enroll in healthcare programs through Medicaid. Unfortunately, some states like my state of Texas have rejected this important component of the Affordable Care Act for those in the state in most need of healthcare. Instead of focusing on protecting and caring for the health of our constituents, we are allowing partisan games to interfere with serving the best interest of our Districts. At the end of healthcare insurance enrollment for 2015, more than 8.5 million consumers signed-up for health coverage through the HealthCare.gov platform or had their coverage automatically renewed. Of the about 6 million Marketplace consumers whose coverage was renewed, about 3.6 million actively renewed and 2.4 million consumers automatically renewed their health insurance coverage. The 2015 health insurance enrollment period had 29 percent new participants and 71 percent return participants. In my state of Texas 1,096,868 individual plans were selected by visitors to the HealthCare.gov platform. In 2015, unfortunately Texas remains the state with the highest health uninsured rate among the 50 states, with 25.7 percent or over 4.2 million residents without health insurance. Instead of focusing on the issues that the American people want addressed, we are having the same discussion to repeal the Affordable Care Act in the efforts of my colleagues to repeal, obstruct and undermine this law. What is even more frustrating is that while there is so much energy in trying to repeal the Affordable Care Act, there has been no plan or suggestions posed on how to replace it. I want to once again highlight the benefits of the Affordable Care Act so we can once and for all end the attempts to try and repeal this law that benefits so many Americans. Because of the Affordable Care Act, Americans are seeing lower costs, better coverage, and patient protections that Republicans want to repeal: The average premium for employer-provided family health coverage went up 3 percent in 2014, continuing the trend of lower annual increase, which means that over the 5 years the healthcare law has been in place it has saved employers over $1,800 dollars in premiums for employee family health insurance coverage. Medicare spending growth per beneficiary was approximately flat in fiscal year 2014, a significant contributor to extending the solvency of the program. The Medicare Trustee now projects because of the Affordable Care Act that the Medicare Trust Fund will be solvent until 2030 instead of 2017. Health insurance consumers have saved 9 billion since 2011 because Obamacare requires insurance companies to spend 80 cents on every premium dollar on consumer healthcare and empowers States to review and negotiate premium increases. 129 million Americans, including 17 million children, are no longer at risk of losing health insurance coverage because of their health. 76 million Americans with private coverage are eligible for expanded preventative services coverage, which includes 30 million women and 18 million children. Since the Affordable Care Act went into effect insurers have paid customers over $1.9 billion in rebates because they did not spend 80 cents on each dollar of premium on healthcare. Nationwide, nearly 11.7 million consumers selected a plan or were automatically enrolled in Marketplace coverage. In 2014, of the 5 million uninsured Texans: 874,000 are eligible for Medicaid/CHIP; 1,046,000 are in the coverage gap; 1,756,000 are eligible for tax credits; 1,264,000 are ineligible because of their income or access to employer benefits. In 2014, access to affordable healthcare for the self-employed or those who decide to purchase their own coverage became easier because of Affordable Insurance Exchanges. In Texas, 1,205,174 consumers selected or were automatically re- enrolled in quality, affordable health insurance coverage through the Marketplace as of February 2015. The Federal Marketplace Signups and Tax Credits in Texas meant that: 85 percent of Texas consumers who were signed up qualified for an average tax credit of $239 per month through the Marketplace. 68 percent of Texas Marketplace enrollees obtained coverage for $100 or less after any applicable tax credits in 2015, and 92 percent had the option of doing so. In Texas, consumers could choose from 15 issuers in the Marketplace in 2015--up from 12 in 2014. Texas consumers could choose from an average of 31 health plans in their county for 2015 coverage--up from 25 in 2014. 468,797 consumers in Texas under the age of 35 are signed up for Marketplace coverage (39 percent of plan selections in the state); and 348,593 consumers 18 to 34 years of age (29 percent of all plan selections) are signed up for Marketplace coverage. Texas has received $1,000,000 in grants for research, planning, information technology development, and implementation of its Marketplace. Open enrollment for 2016 coverage runs from November 1, 2015 to January 31, 2016. There are now one stop marketplaces where consumers can do what Federal employees have done for decades--purchase insurance at reasonable rates from an insurer of their choice. There are also opportunities for small employers to form pools to use their collective bargaining potential to find the best deals for employee health plans. This Congress has work that needs to be done, and it has work that should be taken up to increase financial security for workers, their families and communities as the economy continues to recover, and not play partisan political games. I urge my Colleagues to put partisan politics aside and join me in voting no on the passage of this bill.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise with great pride to commend the University of Houston's Cougars momentous 38-24 victory over the Florida State Seminoles in the 2015 Chick-fil-A Peach Bowl on December 31, 2015 at the GeorgiaDome in Atlanta, Georgia. The Cougars were coached by Tom Herman and led by star quarterback, Greg Ward Jr., who dazzled a national television audience by running for two touchdowns and throwing for another touchdown. Greg Ward Jr. also made history by becoming the first player in UH history to run and throw for 1,000 yards in a season. Florida State trailed 21-3 at halftime, tried to rally with two fourth-quarter touchdowns but it was not enough to overcome the mighty Cougars defense, which held the Seminoles' star running back, Dalvin Cook, to just 33 yards and forced 5 turnovers. The 38 points scored by the Cougar offense was the most points allowed this season by the mighty Seminole defense. Mr. Speaker, the impressive victory in the Chick-fil-A Bowl is a wonderful capstone to a season for the ages and establishes the University of Houston as one of the Nation's great athletic and academic institutions.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, it is with a deep sadness and a heavy heart that I rise today to pay tribute to Natalie Cole, a woman who touched the hearts of millions of Americans. Natalie Cole passed away, December 31, 2015 in Los Angeles, California; she was only 65 years old. Natalie Cole's musical career began in 1975 when her debut album, Inseparable, was released and she became an instant star in the music industry. With hit songs such as ``This Will Be (An Everlasting Love),'' Natalie Cole exploded onto the music scene, earning the young starlet her first two Grammy Awards--for best new artist and best female R&B performance. In 1976 not long after Inseparable was released Cole married producer Marvin Yancy, with whom she welcomed her son Robert Adam Yancy into the world. Natalie Cole's career began to climb to new heights throughout the 1970's, releasing four gold and two platinum records. In 1979, Natalie Cole was honored on the Hollywood walk of fame, with a star of her very own. Although this strong woman struggled with her own personal demons, she was able to face and overcome them and in the mid-1980's was back on top of the musical charts with the megahit, ``Pink Cadillac.'' In 1991, Natalie Cole released her career-defining Unforgettable . . . with Love, which paid tribute to her beloved father, the legendary and inimitable Nat King Cole. Unforgettable sold more than 7 million copies and garnered several honors, including the coveted Grammy for Album of the Year. Natalie Cole continued to release many other popular albums, including Snowfall on the Sahara and The Magic of Christmas, an album of holiday standards recorded with the London Symphony Orchestra. Mr. Speaker, truer words were never spoken than when Natalie Cole's family said that ``Natalie fought a fierce, courageous battle, dying how she lived . . . with dignity, strength and honor.'' Natalie Cole leaves behind a legacy as one of the most celebrated recording artists in history. I ask the House to observe a moment of silence in memory of Natalie Cole who will forever remain Unforgettable in the hearts of her legions of fans around the world.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to inform the House of an ongoing problem in the former CIS countries involving the banking industry that requires the attention of the Congress and the Administration. In the aftermath of 9/11 the United States took decisive action to implement stronger financial controls to disrupt, impede, and prevent the flow of funds to terrorists around the world. But recent events indicate the need for sustained vigilance and additional action. One example of this involves the countries of Moldova and Latvia, two members of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) formed in 1991 upon the dissolution of the former Soviet Union in 1991. In Moldova more than $1 billion was stolen from the Moldovan national treasury and a large portion of that money appears to have ended up in three EU banks in Latvia: ``ABLV, Latvijas Pasta Banka, and Privatbank.'' Mr. Speaker, these banks appear to be financial institutions controlled by associates and friends of Russian President Vladimir Putin who have a demonstrated history of plundering the national treasuries of the former CIS countries. I call upon the Administration and the Congress to investigate whether assets of the national banks of countries of the former Soviet Union are not being plundered and used, knowingly or unknowingly, to benefit terrorist organizations.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak on the underlying bill, H.R. 2029, the ``Omnibus Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2014.'' I want to thank Chairman Rogers and Ranking Member Lowey for their constructive work in fashioning this bipartisan and bicameral legislation to fund the government for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2016. The bill before us is not perfect--far from it--but it is a modest and positive step toward preventing Republicans from shutting down the government again and manufacturing crises that only harm our economy, destroy jobs, and weaken our middle class. As with any compromise there are some things in the agreement that I support and some things that I do not. The bill provides a total of $1.067 trillion for the operation of the federal government, a substantial and necessary increase of $80 billion in sequestration relief. The bill contains all 12 regular appropriations bills for fiscal year 2016, with no area of the government functioning under a Continuing Resolution, thus allowing every program to be considered on its own merits and prioritized, rather than be subject to arbitrary across the board cuts. Mr. Speaker, let me say at the outset that I am very pleased that Section 208 of the Omnibus (Division N) incorporates the Jackson Lee Amendment to Cybersecurity Act of 2015, which creates a voluntary cybersecurity information sharing process that will encourage public and private sector entities to share cyber threat information, without legal barriers and the threat of unfounded litigation--while protecting private information. The Jackson Lee Amendment incorporated in the Cybersecurity Act and included in the Omnibus also includes provisions to improve federal network and information system security, provide assessments on the federal cybersecurity workforce, and provide reporting and strategies on cybersecurity industry-related and criminal-related matters. I also strongly support the James Zadroga 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund Reauthorization contained in Title IV of Division O, which reauthorizes the 9/11 Victims Compensation Fund for an additional five years, provides an additional $4.6 billion to fully fund the VCF; and makes technical adjustments to VCF payment schedules to ensure the provided funding is sufficient to pay all claims. In addition, Title IV creates a fund, modeled along the lines of the ``Victim of the Terror Fund'' I proposed in H. Res. 528, to compensate U.S. victims of terrorism who either hold a final judgment issued against a state sponsor of terrorism under the terrorism exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, or were taken hostage (or are a spouse or child of someone who was taken hostage) from the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, Iran in 1979. This program is funded with an initial allocation of $1.025 billion and will be augmented in future years through criminal and civil penalties levied against state sponsors of terrorism and their co- conspirators. Mr. Speaker, the Omnibus provides increases in funding for several programs that I have strongly supported and fought for throughout my tenure in Congress. Let me list just a few of the more important ones.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. Today is the last day that the House will be in session this year and it is imperative that we pause for a moment before we depart to our various homes to reflect on the fact that 612 days have passed since the Chibok girls were kidnapped from their dormitories in the middle of night. To keep these girls on our minds, all of us here in Congress have worn red every Wednesday to signal the urgency of rescuing, recovering and reintegrating these young women back into the arms of their parents. I have met with the Nigerian President and was part of a delegation to Nigeria to engage local leaders, activists, businesses and families of the kidnapped girls on strategies for recovering and reintegrating the Chibok girls and many others who have been kidnapped. These girls are not throwaways and the world cannot and should not forget them. We must continue to press on in our concerted efforts to assure these daughters of the world that we still care, that we are committed to bringing them back home and will work to reintegrate them back into our community with open arms. As founder and Co-Chair of the Caucus on Nigeria and Co-Chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus, the rescue, return and reintegration of the kidnapped Chibok girls continue to be my top priority. I believe that with our commitment, just as the Aboke girls were recovered after being kidnapped in Northern Uganda by the Lord's Resistance Army, the Chibok girls will be rescued, returned home and reintegrated back into the human family. This is why I have introduced H. Res. 528, legislation that enjoyed bipartisan support of my colleagues including Representatives Chu of California, Lee of California, Dold of Illinois, Hahn of California, Kelly of Illinois, Fudge of Ohio, Watson-Coleman of New Jersey, Sewell of Alabama, Brown of Florida, Thompson of Mississippi and my good friend Ms. Wilson of Florida. My resolution seeks to create a Victims of Terror Protection Fund for the protection of the Chibok girls when they return home as well as provision of much needed support for them and other displaced refugees, migrants and victims of Boko Haram's terror in the region. The Chibok girls have the fundamental human right to freedom of movement, to education and to the full realization of their human potential. Last week, in our celebrations of the United Nations Human Rights Day, the global community rededicated itself to the key International Covenants on Human Rights: the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Covenants that serve as the bedrock of the International Bill of Rights: protecting the rights of all human beings. Indeed, we must continue to always fight for the freedoms of the least among us whether those for whom we fight are out of sight such as the kidnapped teenage girls from a boarding school in Chibok or educated medical doctors fleeing violent extremism in Syria. The bottom line is that our obligations in the human family must revolve around and be grounded in our conviction and commitment to the rights to freedom of movement, freedom of speech, freedom of worship, freedom from want, and the freedom from fear or terrorism, among others. We must remain steadfast in guaranteeing these fundamental freedoms and protect the human rights of all to achieve peace and prosperity in our world. When they were kidnapped, the Chibok girls were 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17 year olds who are now turning 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18-- living out the formative years of their lives in captivity in the claws of thugs. Our silence is a waste of time and this is why we must keep speaking, keep tweeting, keep seeking to recover our daughters. This cannot be the fate or the end of the story of their lives. We must not and cannot forget Blessing Abana, Deborah Abari, Rebecca Mallum, Naomi Luka, Esther Markus, Zara Ishaku, Ruth Joshua, Grace Paul, Rebecca Luka and the others. Chibok girls, daughters of the world, this holiday season, you remain in our thoughts and prayers. Notwithstanding your captivity, let me assure you that your spirits, souls and bodies are sacred to us, no matter what attacks the enemies of peace may have perpetrated upon you. Like your sister from Pakistan, Malala, who was shot in the head for seeking her education and who continues to fight for your recovery, your best days are ahead because we know that when you girls thrive our world thrives. This is why we are counting on you to keep holding on and be assured that help is on the way.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, we face a real problem in America as it relates to the rights of women and how this will one day impact our young girls. We live in a great country founded on principles of liberty, justice and equality. Throughout history, we have grown and developed into a nation where women hold some of the most prestigious and powerful positions in our country and throughout the world, as scientists, astronauts, businesswomen, educators, government officials, Supreme Court justices, and hopefully one day soon, the President of our United States. However, as a global champion and advocate of international human rights and the rule of law, the United States still has a long ways to go guaranteeing equal access to legal rights and protections for all women in America. The United Nations Working Group on Discrimination against Women in the Law and Practice (U.N. Working Group) recently issued a sobering statement and assessment, with a full report to follow in June 2016, delineating an infringement on the rights of women in America. Upon visiting several states throughout the country, including my home state of Texas, the U.N. Working Group concluded that women in the United States inexplicably lag behind international human rights standards. Pointing to data and research on public and political representation, economic and social rights, and health and safety protections, experts in the U.N. Working Group boldly acknowledged that there is a myth that women in the United States already enjoy all of the expected standards of rights and protections because they live in America. A woman's fundamental reproductive right is tied to their economic independence, empowerment and wellbeing of her family. The reality is, women in the United States are experiencing continued discrimination and daunting disparities that curtail their ability to fully participate as equal members of society. The primary areas and statistics noted, include the following: Women have risen to some of the highest levels of legislative and executive representation over the years, yet with only 4 of 15 cabinet members, 19.4% of Congressional Members and an average of 24.9% of state legislatures, the U.S. ranks at only 72 in the global market of women represented in public and political positions. While the number of women justices has significantly increased, women litigants' access to justice is severely limited. Although women vote in higher percentages than men, women's access to voting is under attack in states like Alabama where increased voter ID requirements pose unprecedented barriers. Women constitute nearly half of the US labor force, at a participation rate of 57%. Yet, equal economic opportunity is severely lacking given deficient or nonexistent mandatory standards for workplace accommodations for pregnant women, post-natal mothers and persons with care responsibilities. What also remains a shameful truth in America, is the gender wage gap which has remained at or near 21% over the past decade. Shockingly, women with higher levels of education experience the largest earning gaps, as do minority women regardless of educational attainment. The percentage of women in poverty has increased over the past decade, from 12.1% to 14.5%, with a higher rate of poverty than men. As such, women are exposed to higher rates of homelessness and violence without adequate protections in place in shelters and housing support options. Women in detention facilities throughout the country are also experiencing increasingly high rates of over-incarceration, sexual violence, shackling while pregnant, solitary confinement, lack of alternative custodial sentencing for women with dependent children, and inadequate access to health care and re-entry programs. Migrant women traveling to the U.S., many victims of trafficking and violence, including sexual violence, are kept in detention centers with children for prolonged periods of time. Notably, the criminalization of women in prostitution places them in unjust, vulnerable and stigmatized situations that are contrary to international human rights law. The U.N. has also pointed out that women, particularly black and LGBTQ women, in the U.S. experience deplorable police brutality and increased incidents of homicide by police. Even though women own over \1/3\ of firms in the U.S., primarily in small and medium sized businesses, these businesses face greater barriers in obtaining low cost capital from sources such as the Small Business Administration--which awards less than 5% of federal contracts to women-owned business. Lastly, one of the most alarming deficiencies for women in America is the lack of access to basic health care and the imposition of devastating barriers to reproductive health and rights. Too many women are suffering dire and deadly consequences. Between 1990 and 2013, the maternal mortality rate for women in the U.S. has increased by 136%. Black women are nearly 4 times more likely to die in childbirth, and states with high poverty rates have a 77% higher maternal mortality rate. Our global experts and allies acknowledge that even though women's reproductive rights in America are constitutionally protected, access to reproductive health services are severely abridged by states' imposition of sweeping barriers and restrictions. For instance, in many states, women must undergo unjustified and invasive medical procedures; endure groundless waiting periods; be subjected to harassment, violence or other threatening conditions that remain constant throughout all reproductive health care clinics; and forced to forgo treatment or engage in lengthy and costly travel due to closure of clinics faced with burdensome licensing conditions. These restrictions disproportionately discriminate against poor women. The United States can and should do better. It is unacceptable that women in America are facing a reproductive health care crisis so dire that the global community is denouncing it as a human rights violation. Sadly, the direction States are taking will only further dismantle women's access to affordable and trustworthy reproductive healthcare. Clinics are shutting down at alarming rates throughout the country as a result of devastating restrictions and barriers imposed throughout Texas. A Texas statute known as HB2 (House Bill 2), was enacted several years ago claiming to promote women's health, when in fact it only set in motion dangerous restrictions on women's access to reproductive health care. In addition to constant attacks on funding for reproductive health care clinics, abortion providers in Texas were forced to undergo impossible million dollar renovations and upgrades. Denying hundreds of thousands of women health care services in Texas, nearly half of all reproductive health care clinics were forced to shut down, and now only 10 remain in the second largest state in the country. Another moment will occur when the Supreme Court decides Whole Woman's Health v. Cole, which will decide the fate of the remaining clinics in Texas and throughout the nation. No woman in America should be denied the dignity of being able to make choices about her body and healthcare. Access to safe, legal and unhindered healthcare must be realized by all women. A woman's right to choose to have an abortion is a constitutionally protected fundamental right. More than 40 years ago in the landmark decision in Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, (1973), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that the right to privacy under the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment extends to a woman's decision to have an abortion. More recently, in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992), the Supreme Court upheld Roe v. Wade and further explained that states could not enact medically unnecessary regulations meant to create substantial obstacles for women seeking abortion services. Yet, fairness and access to exercise constitutionally protected fundamental rights is trampled on and denied to millions of women. We cannot ignore the unfairness of imbalanced protection and access to fundamentally protected rights for women in America when it is easier to purchase and lawfully possess a firearm--even for a person on the terrorist watchlist--than it is for a woman to exercise her constitutional right to terminate a pregnancy. Mr. Speaker, this is neither fair nor right and it should not be rewarded. As our nation continues to push back against horrific acts of violence at the hands of dangerous and irresponsible gun owners and gun dealers, and our nation's number one provider of women's healthcare continues to experience violent and deadly attacks on its personnel and facilities, it is time we find common ground. A woman's right to choose to have an abortion and an individual's right to possess a firearm are both constitutionally protected fundamental rights. I will be working with my colleagues to find ways to address the unfair and unjust disparity by reviewing and responding to unwarranted restrictions that result in disparate access to these constitutionally protected rights. Certainly, if the state has a legitimate interest in requiring a woman to wait several days, undergo a physical examination, receive counseling and education about alternative options before making the decision to terminate a pregnancy, then it has an equally compelling interest in requiring a person seeking to obtain a firearm to demonstrate the mental, physical, and emotional fitness to possess an instrument that is used to kill more than 30,000 Americans annually. I hope that one day soon in America it will not be harder for a woman to exercise her fundamental right to choose than it is for a person on the terrorist watchlist to lawfully purchase and possess firearms. At a minimum, I urge the Congress to rededicate itself to the critically important but unfinished task of ensuring equality of opportunity and protection of law for women.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, my first task, a wonderful task, is to wish all the men and women of the United States military a happy holiday. For your unselfishness in putting on the uniform, without question, standing in the gap, protecting the American people, we thank you, we thank your families, and we are greatly appreciative. We ask you to be safe during this holiday season as you put yourself on the front lines of defense. Recognizing the Service of the United States Capitol Police and Private First Class Thomas Wisseman

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Let me also rise today, Mr. Speaker, to thank the United States Capitol Police, founded in 1828. We know how vital they were during the tragedy, horrific incident of 9/11, and, certainly, in 1998. I come in contact with them every day, but I rise today to particularly thank an officer and a gentleman. Over the years, after initially greeting each other every day, the greeting became a genuine friendship of respect and kindness, and even a joke or two. I am honored today to recognize one of our first responders, Capitol Police Private First Class Tommy Wisseman. Officer Wisseman exemplifies a model officer who takes his job very seriously, but finds the time to get to know Members of Congress on a more personal level. Officer Wisseman has given the Capitol Police 29 years of service, all 29 at the Capitol building. He has worked every Presidential inauguration since 1989; was the lead officer for the construction of the Capitol Visitor Center; one of the head trainers for the Capitol Visitor Center officers; received multiple awards and citations. He is the father of four daughters, and married to a lovely wife, who is with the Capitol Police. Let me thank him and salute him as I salute all of the police. Mr. Speaker, since 1828, the United States Capitol Police have provided protection for our Congress, ensuring a safe and open environment to facilitate the legislative process and the security of Congressional Members, staff and employees, and visitors and members of the public. This protection was magnified in 1998 when a shooter entered the Capitol killing Officer Gibson and Officer Chestnut who was protecting Majority Whip Tom DeLay and also in 2001 during the 9-11 attacks when our men and women in uniform literally moved our leadership and Members of Congress to safe havens away from the Capitol. We are grateful to all of them and the more than 2000 sworn and civilian employees who serve and protect the Congress. As Members of Congress, we come in contact with Capitol Police every day and in the course of our days on this campus and years in Congress we get to know many of them on a first name basis. That is the case with an officer and a gentleman I have gotten to know and which started initially from just a simple greeting to each other. Over the years that initial greeting has evolved into a genuine friendship of respect and kindness and even a joke or two. I am honored today to recognize one of our first responders, Capitol Police, Private First Class Thomas Wisseman. Officer Wisseman exemplifies a model officer who takes his job very seriously, but finds the time to get to know Members of Congress on a more personal level. Officer Wisseman has given the Capitol Police 29 years of service-- all 29 at the Capitol Building. He has worked every Presidential Inaugural since 1989, was the lead officer for the construction of the Capitol Visitors Center, one of the head trainers for Capitol Visitor Center officers, and has received multiple awards and citations for his leadership and tenure of service. He is the proud father of four daughters and is married to his lovely wife Amber who is also a Capitol Police officer here at the Capitol. Mr. Speaker, I ask the House to recognize our first responders and men and women in uniform today. Officer Wissemann is an example of the dedicated men and women in uniform.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as the Ranking Member of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3750, the ``First Responders Passport Act of 2015.'' I thank Representative Darrell Issa and the House Foreign Affairs Committee Leadership, Chairman Royce and Ranking Member Engel for shepherding this legislation along. This bill amends the Passport Act of June 4, 1920 to waive passport fees for an individual who has contracted with the U.S. government, including a volunteer, to aid a foreign country suffering from a qualifying natural disaster. As the African proverb goes, ``in moments of crisis, the wise build bridges--'' this is what our first responders do: they build bridges for those caught in natural disasters. In today's world fraught with natural disasters from Storm Desert that our friends in the U.K. are facing to cyclones, hurricanes and tornadoes across the globe, more than ever, it is very important that we build bridges by equipping our first responders dedicated to aiding countries across the globe suffering from natural disasters. According to scientists, the first half of this decade featured deadly climate-related disasters, among them the great floods in Thailand in 2011, Hurricane Sandy in the United States in 2012, and Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines in 2013. Moreover, the year 2014 was the earth's warmest in 134 years of recorded history, and 2015 could well turn out to be even hotter. According to some scientists, it is difficult to not draw a nexus between climate change and some of the natural disasters we have suffered on planet earth in this decade alone. In the end, climate related and natural disasters have cost the world a lot in lives as well as economically. In fact, according to the World Meteorological Organization, 1,300 climate-related natural disasters have been recorded in Africa between 1970 to 2012. In this time frame, these natural disasters in Africa have caused the loss of 700,000 lives and caused economic damage worth U.S. $26 billion. Experts inform us that in 2012 there were 99 natural disasters in Africa--twice the long-term average. The passage of H.R. 3750 is very timely, especially in light of recent talks in Le Bourget, France at the Conference of Parties (COP 21), with the objective of achieving a legally binding and universal agreement on climate, from all the nations of the world. In other words, the conveners at COP 21 seek to protect our precious earth, address the nexus between our protection of precious earth to some of the natural disasters we are suffering and reach a consensus on how we leave our children their inheritance of the earth better than we found it. Every day, hundreds of thousands of first responders heed the call during natural disasters to protect and serve the people of planet earth who find themselves at the mercy of mother-nature during natural disasters. I hold in high regard the service of our first responders: firefighters, law enforcement officers, emergency response technicians, nurses, emergency room doctors, and the dozens of other professionals and volunteers who are the ultimate public servants. From Katrina to earthquakes in Haiti and Nepal, time and time again, first responders have put their lives and comfort on the line in order to rescue survivors, care for those in need, and prevent the further loss of life. H.R. 3750 is very critical because it aims to reduce personal costs borne by first responders--people who help others in their time of need. According to the Global Increase in Climate-Related Disasters, we face more frequent floods, storms, heat waves, and droughts which are connected to greater extremes in temperatures and rainfall. Moreover, recent warnings by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, inform us that the global temperature is already halfway to the ``two degree warming'' threshold for limiting catastrophic climatic impacts. As the evidence shows, unequivocally, the dedication of first responders is an integral part of bringing relief to parts of the world where natural disasters have struck. I support this legislation and hope that as we move forward, we continue to engage in dialogue about the fact that: Climate impacts are not just concerns for the distant future, but are already being felt by us and our children; All countries, rich and poor are casualities of natural disaster, but the death toll is higher among the poor who are more likely to live in harm's way, such as in flood-prone areas; and It is important to create structures that facilitate the swift deployment of first responders to people in dire need of disaster relief.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I speak in support of H.R. 3878, the Strengthening Cybersecurity Information Sharing and Coordination in Our Ports Act. I thank Chairman McCaul and Ranking Member Thompson for their bipartisan work and stewardship of the Committee on Homeland Security's work, which includes H.R. 3878. Congresswoman Torres should be commended for her hard work that led to the introduction of the Strengthening Cybersecurity Information Sharing and Coordination in Our Ports Act. H.R. 3878, requires the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to seek to enhance cybersecurity situational awareness and information sharing between maritime security stakeholders, the maritime industry, port owners and operators, which include maritime terminal owners and operators. This bill requires DHS to: consult with the Coast Guard to enhance participation by the Maritime Information Sharing and Analysis Center in the National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center; and request that the National Maritime Security Advisory Committee report and make recommendations to DHS on methods to enhance cybersecurity and information sharing between stakeholders. The bill also assures DHS leadership in port security by requiring the agency's maritime security risk assessments to include cybersecurity risks to ports and the maritime border of the United States. Ports serve as America's gateway to the global economy. The nation's economic prosperity rests on the ability of containerized and bulk cargo arriving unimpeded at U.S. ports to support the rapid delivery system that underpins the manufacturing and retail sectors. My service in the House of Representatives has focused on making sure that our nation is secure and prosperous. A central component of national security is the ability of our International Ports to move goods into and out of the country. The Port of Houston is critical infrastructure: According to the Department of Commerce in 2012, Texas exports totaled $265 billion. The Port of Houston is a 25-mile-long complex of diversified public and private facilities located just a few hours' sailing time from the Gulf of Mexico. In 2012 ship channel-related businesses contributed 1,026,820 jobs and generated more than $178.5 billion in statewide economic impact. In 2014, the Port of Houston was ranked among U.S. ports as the 1st in foreign tonnage; largest Texas port with 46 percent of market share by tonnage and 95 percent market share in containers by total TEUS in 2014; largest Gulf Coast container port, handling 67 percent of U.S. Gulf Coast container traffic in 2014; and 2nd ranked U.S. port in terms of total foreign cargo value. The Government Accountability Office (GAO), reports that this port, and its waterways, and vessels are part of an economic engine handling more than $700 billion in merchandise annually. A Maritime Cyber-RISKS report published in 2014 outlined examples of cybersecurity vulnerabilities that are specific to ports. The Cyberattacks examined included: Theft of money by deceiving a company into transferring large amounts of funds to a bank account owned by criminals; In 2013, the FBI issued a warning to maritime companies warning them of a fraud committed against several companies using a man-in-the- middle cyberattack that resulted in $1.65 million in losses. In this attack an impersonation occurs when the email address of a trusted party is co-opted or taken over by an unknown 3rd party. The trusted 3rd party makes a request to change banking information that should be used to provide payment for legitimate services provided an established business relationship. The legitimate business is not aware of the request to change bank payment information. When the payment is sent, thieves receive it and quickly close the account so that the funds cannot be retrieved. Another malicious attack that does not involve theft of funds can occur if the location of cargo information is deleted by a cyber- attacker. According to CyberKeel this type of attack happened to a shipping company in 2011. In this attack data related to rates, loading, cargo number, date and place were corrupted. This cyberattack meant that no one at the port could identify where containers were, whether they loaded, nor identify which containers were on ships. Cyberattack that targeted technology used by companies who are taking receipt of cargo at port locations. The Firmware software code on handheld scanning technology that reads barcodes on containers was corrupted by malware. When the scanners were plugged into the company's network the corrupted code started a series of automated cyberattacks that searched the company's network for financial information. After finding the information, a connection was established with a computer in China. Cyberattack at the Port of Antwerp was run by a drug smuggling ring. In this attack the cyber criminals were able to gain control of the port terminal system that allowed them to release containers to their own trucks without the knowledge of port authorities. This attack is particularly chilling when considering our efforts to protect against weapons of mass destruction in the form of biological, nuclear and chemical weapons from being brought into the country undetected. This type of attack also has implications for persons entering the country undetected. The same attack carried out against port worker automated identification systems would open the door on a host of domestic security issues. Our nation has thousands of miles of coastlines, lakes, and rivers and hundreds of ports that provide opportunities for legitimate travel, trade, and recreation. At the same time, these waterways offer opportunities for terrorists and their instruments, and drug smugglers to enter our country. Cybersecurity at ports must be national priority, for this reason, I ask my colleagues to join me in voting in favor of H.R. 3878.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I have had both the sobering and serious responsibility of serving on the Homeland Security Committee since the heinous acts of 9/11. I rise today to give comfort to and to thank the Los Angeles Consolidated School District for its swift response. I know that the reports of its actions received conflicting commentary, but it had the responsibility for over 600,000 children. I believe, when administrators act seriously, competently, and thoughtfully, they need to know that we appreciate it. We live in very difficult and challenging times. It is a horrific person who sends false threats and who frightens the general public; but it is a wise leader who takes it seriously to protect his constituents. In this instance, the Los Angeles Consolidated School District, its superintendent, and all of those involved in making the decision to protect those children did the right thing. We live in very difficult times, and we here in the United States are continuing to try and define and refine our alert system and to do the kind of intelligence work to provide our local authorities with the right information; but, as a parent, I congratulate them for standing up for the children and making sure that those children and teachers and others were safe. God help us that we will purge out the horrificness and horribleness of terroristic acts.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, Congressman Ted Poe from Texas for his work on H.R. 3654, Combatting Terrorists' Use of Social Media Act of 2015. The proliferation of terrorism is an existential threat to our homeland greater than ever before because of the viral spread of extremism on the world-wide web. The challenge before us is balancing civil liberties such as freedom of speech with our national security interests. Various social media platforms are being utilized by Daesh leaders and their affiliates across the globe to reach, engage and radicalize-- instantly and for free. One only needs to view the gruesome propaganda videos put online by Daesh with evocative music, clearly edited to inspire violence with imagery that conjures an ``us vs. them'' emotion. The world-wide web was intended as a platform to share productive and creative knowledge and ideas. The sensory impact of the violent propaganda video is so powerful that a powerful counter-narrative is imperative. Through its online campaign, Daesh instantly gains access to vulnerable and impressionable minds, whether teenagers going through teenage angst or unemployed educated women and men who have limited economic prospects and feel disenfranchised from society. So what we have is a melange of Daesh recruits, copycats and wannabes all inspired vis a vis the worldwide web, ready to carry on and die for an ideology they don't fully grasp its gravity on them and their future. The evidence of this is tens of thousands of foreign fighters from all over the world who have left their homes and joined Daesh in Iraq and Syria. But then we also have those who do not even leave the comforts of their homes in carrying out their crimes. Part of what our government and governments across the globe must do is to fight back by cutting off terrorist bank accounts, Twitter, Facebook, Google and other social media accounts. Whereas money is the currency for compensating Daesh's recruits, social media is being utilized as a currency and tool for engaging and brainwashing these recruits. I commend our powerful military's might and professionalism of neutralizing Abu Salah who has been described as one of the most senior and experienced members of Daesh's financial network and in fact has been referred to as the organization's finance minister. I hope that our friends in Silicon Valley and the tech industry will join us in our fight against Daesh with their genius as we continue our collective efforts of addressing the role that social media will play in defeating enemies of the peace on the traditional battlefield as well as on the contemporary battlefield of the web. The past few months have been marked by senseless threats or actual violence and tragedy across the globe from the most recent details of the threat triggering the Los Angeles Public School District shut down, to the San Bernardino shootings, to Boko Haram attacks in Nigeria, shootings in Bamako, Mali, at the Bartaclan Theatre and other social venues in Paris, to attacks in Beirut, Lebanon and the downing of a plane claiming innocent lives of Egyptians and Russians. Violent extremism cannot be the ``new-normal'' in our nation and in our world. To combat the scourge of violent extremism, and make sure this is not our ``new normal'' it is important that we adapt to the capabilities of adversaries of peace through a multipronged approach, which is why I support H.R. 3654. Specifically, this bill requires the President to transmit to Congress a report on U.S. strategy to combat terrorists' and terrorist organizations' use of social media. This bill is in tandem with the President's comprehensive strategy to counter terrorists' and terrorist organizations' use of social media, encapsulated in the President's 2011 Strategic Implementation Plan for Empowering Local Partners to Prevent Violent Extremism in the United States. Among other things, the President's robust plan seeks to protect our communities from violent extremist recruitment and radicalization. This is a top national security priority for the Administration and those of us here in Congress. The President's strategic plan and H.R. 3654 facilitate the creation of a report which will enable our country in our efforts at combatting violent extremism through: evaluation of the role social media plays in radicalization in the United States and across the globe; analysis of how terrorists and terrorist organizations are using social media; recommendations to improve the federal government's efforts to disrupt and counter the use of social media by terrorists and terrorist organizations; a classified assessment of the intelligence value of terrorists' social media posts; and a classified overview of training available to law enforcement and intelligence personnel to combat terrorists' use of social media and recommendations for improving or expanding existing training opportunities. Part of what the Bill seeks to achieve is information on our nation's policy that enhances the exchange of information and dialogue between the federal government and social media companies as it relates to the use of social media platforms by terrorists. Finally, among other things, the Bill also calls for our updated comprehensive strategy to counter terrorists' and terrorist organizations' use of social media, as committed to in the President's 2011 Strategic Implementation Plan for Empowering Local Partners to Prevent Violent Extremism in the United States. As a nation, we must work together, private and public sector to prevent all types of extremism regardless of who inspires it. At the same time, countering ISIS, better to be referred to as Daesh, Boko Haram, al-Qa'ida and other extremists' violent ideologues requires our coordinated social media, intelligence sharing, law enforcement and community engagement strategy that will enable us to thwart violent extremism, saving many American lives.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Let me thank the gentleman from Colorado and let me thank the gentleman from Oklahoma for the thoughtful discussion and for the tone in which it is offered. Mr. Speaker, I think all of us certainly are interested in coming to a place next week that embraces, really, the values of America and all of our concerns, and, obviously, riders that are toxic are obstacles we need to continue to discuss. In my district, I have senior citizens with blue tarps on the tops of their homes, blue tarps that have been there since the terrible Hurricane Ike. Obviously, we need the Housing and Urban Development to have funding that not only addresses affordable housing, but senior housing repair. It comes down through community development. In the manner in which we are going through this, we are looking for that kind funding to make sure that the plus-up of $80 billion that came about through the budget agreement gets evenly distributed, if you will. What happens is that, with the extenders of tax provisions that are unpaid for, the blue tarps in my district continue to exist. Seniors have roofs that are falling in. I think that is an important issue at which many of us will be looking this weekend, and we will be looking to the appropriators to do what is right by the American people. We wrote a letter regarding the Minority HIV/AIDS Program, which was gutted out. Mr. Speaker, let me tell you that HIV/AIDS is resurging among young people and among minorities. This is no time to zero out that funding. As we go through this process, we are asking the question whether you are putting in toxic riders, but are not focusing on funding that is needed. The Thomas Street Clinic in my district needs the minority HIV funding. I know that my good friends Mr. Polis and Mr. Cole are certainly interested in making sure that transportation funding matches the funding that came about through the bill. Then, certainly, I hope that, as I listen to the calm discussion by Mr. Polis, we can find a way to eliminate the prohibition from the Centers for Disease Control to not do their work. Why are we preventing them from discerning the impact of gun violence on suicide? of the impact of gun violence on young people who are committing suicide? We have done research on drunk driving. We have done research on cancer. We have done research on diabetes. We have done research to move the country forward in a healthy manner. Why are we blocking the CDC from assessing what the impact is from gun violence? As a member of the Judiciary Committee, I now understand that the Internet Tax Freedom Act is in this legislation and it is in this legislation permanently. There was no hearing. I remember this bill on the floor of the House in June.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a Certificate of Congressional Recognition to Bonita ``Bonnie'' Shepherd on the occasion of 48 Years of public service at the U.S. House of Representatives. Bonita L. Shepherd, ``Bonnie'' commenced her career as a public servant on Capitol Hill on June 18, 1967 and met everyone who crossed her path with her signature ``Good Morning. How are you?'' Bonnie worked for the U.S. House of Representatives, with a starting per hour salary of $1.51, providing service to Members of Congress, staff, citizens and visitors who traversed our nation's Rayburn Cafeteria. On January 28, 1988, having served 21 years in the House, Bonnie continued her public service for another 27 years in the House of Representatives with the Architect of the U.S. Capitol as an Elevator Operator, playing an instrumental role in facilitating the safe and flawless movement of Members as they worked to make and pass federal laws affecting our nation. Every year for 48 years, Bonnie served 435 Members who served the 50 states of our nation, serving the interest of the United States' population when the House was in session. When the House was out of session, Bonnie also served at the House Flag office where on average more than 100,000 American flags fly over the U.S. Capitol every year, commemorating birthdays, retirements, anniversaries and other special occasions of everyday heroic Americans. For almost half a century Bonnie has served our nation through wars, recessions, seminal national occurrences and celebrations. On behalf of the U.S. House of Representatives and the constituents of the Eighteenth Congressional District of Texas, I take great pride in congratulating Bonita L. Shepherd, ``Bonnie'' for her work as an American public servant and keeping a smile on her face while serving Members working to serve the interests of the United States. I hope my colleagues will join me in congratulating Bonnie for her public service.