Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Will the gentleman yield?

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Is the gentleman rising to support the gentlewoman's amendment with great enthusiasm?

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Will the gentleman yield?

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Will the gentleman surmise that amendments that are passed by voice vote are still strong amendments?

Ms. JACKSON LEE. And included in the bill?

Ms. JACKSON LEE. As opposed to being susceptible to being gotten rid of?

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I am always eager to work with my friends on this side of aisle, Mr. Pallone. I am always eager to work when we are moving forward. And so I would offer my amendment and offer it for a voice vote. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, let me just simply say my amendment answers many of the concerns that have been expressed on the floor of the House by giving empirical data, not 10 years and beyond, but in a period up to 10 years, to let us make further informative decisions to provide for the energy resources of the American people, the national resources, and, of course, being able to provide for the national security. With that, I ask for support of the Jackson Lee amendment. Mr. Chair, let me express my appreciation to Chairman Emeritus Barton and Ranking Member Pallone for their leadership and commitment to American energy independence and economic growth and security. I also wish to thank Chairman Sessions, Ranking Member Slaughter, and the members of the Rules Committee for making in order Jackson Lee Amendment Number 9. Mr. Chair, thank you for the opportunity to explain my amendment, which provides: Sec. 7. Report. Not later than 10 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of Commerce shall jointly transmit to Congress a report that reviews the impact of lifting the oil export ban under this Act as it relates to promoting United States energy and national security. As the Member of Congress from Houston, the energy capital of the nation, I have always been mindful of the importance and have strongly advocated for national energy policies that will make our nation more energy independent, preserve and create jobs, and keep our nation's economy strong. The Eighteenth Congressional District, which I am proud to represent is home to Shell Oil, ConocoPhillips, Chevron Phillips, BP Corporation of North America, Marathon Oil, Enterprise Products Partners (Oil and Gas Pipelines), and Halliburton (Oilfield Services), and many others. I am strongly ``pro-jobs,'' ``pro-growing economy,'' ``pro- sustainable environment and development,'' and for homeland and national security. Volatile energy prices threaten economic security for millions of middle class Americans and hits consumers hard; rising gas prices strain budgets for millions of American families. It is a familiar story, but in order to restore lasting security for middle class families we need a smart and reasonable plan for American energy, not false promises or quick fixes. That is why I carefully consider each energy legislative proposal brought to the floor on its individual merits and support them when they are sound, balanced, fair, and promote the national interest. So my constituents have a strong interest in policies that maintain or enhance the competitiveness of American petroleum energy business in the world oil markets. Where they fall short, I believe in working across the aisle to improve them by offering constructive amendments. H.R. 702 repeals the law prohibiting the exports of crude oil that has been on the books for more than 40 years, a response to the Arab Oil Embargo led by OPEC in 1973 that sent oil prices soaring and inflicted substantial damage on the American economy. But much has changed since 1973; America's unconventional oil boom changed everything. U.S. crude production bottomed in 2008 at about 7 million barrels per day; now it is now more than 11 million barrels per day and according to the U.S. DOE's Energy Information Administration, U.S. output is estimated to top 18 million barrels a day by 2040. Crude inventories are at an 80-year high, and imports have declined nearly 30% between 2005 and 2013. Mr. Chair, paradoxically, continuation of the crude oil export ban may pose one of the biggest threats to this U.S. production boom and to the economy. This is because increased production has led to a substantial decline in oil prices over the past year and the resulting decrease in revenues has forced U.S. producers in my district and elsewhere to slash investment and cancel projects. Since last autumn the industry has cut more than 125,000 jobs, including many in my district. I have met and know many of the employers and workers affected by industry job reductions. Mr. Chair, lifting the crude oil export ban would offer American crude oil producers new markets for their product and would mean fewer layoffs. Studies by the highly respected Brookings Institution and other organizations suggest that the economic benefits to the nation of repealing the ban on crude oil exports would be substantial: 1. GDP could rise by $550 billion to $1.8 trillion between 2015 and 2039; 2. U.S. oil production could rise by 1.3 million to 2.9 million barrels per day in 2020; 3. 300,000 additional jobs created by 2020; 4. $5.8 billion in estimated reduced consumer fuel costs each year between 2015 and 2035; 5. up to $70 billion in additional investment in U.S. exploration, development, and production of crude oil between 2015 and 2020; 6. $13.5 billion in additional federal, state, and local revenue in 2020; 7. $22 billion reduction in the U.S. trade deficit in 2020; and 8. 100,000 barrels per day increase in refinery throughout between 2015 and 2035. It is estimated that in my own congressional district, lifting the ban would generate an additional 500 jobs and inject an additional $275 million into the local economy, resulting in an increase in government revenues in the amount of $227.7 million. Admittedly, these are predictions, projections, and forecasts made on the basis of the best information currently available. We hope they are accurate but candor requires that we acknowledge that no one can say with certainty they will come to pass. That is why it is essential that at an appropriate juncture we review and assess the impact on the American petroleum industry, the national economy, and consumers. And that is the purpose of Jackson Lee Amendment #9, which mandates a comprehensive review of the impact of crude oil export ban repeal after a 10 year period. This 10 year time period is long enough to accumulate data sufficient and probative enough to assess the impact of H.R. 702, but not so long as to prevent irreversible damage if the evaluation does not approximate the expected benefits reveals unintended adverse consequences. In sum, Jackson Lee Amendment Number 9 will help ensure that the brave new world of unrestricted crude oil exports by American producers is more than a leap of faith. Rather, Jackson Lee Amendment Number 9 operates as a safety valve and reassures those who may be skeptical of lifting the export ban that reasonable opportunities will exist to make an informed evaluation of the effect of the ban's repeal on our economy and national security. And it is important to emphasize Mr. Chair, that this evaluation will be based on empirical data rigorously analyzed. In short, Mr. Chair, my amendment can be summed up as follows: for those who are confident of the future, my amendment offers vindication. For those who are skeptical that the new change will work, my amendment will provide the evidence they need to prove their case. And for those who believe that maintaining the status quo is intolerable, my amendment offers a way forward. I urge all members to support Jackson Lee Amendment Number 9. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to discuss H.R. 702, a bill to ``Adapt to Changing Crude Oil Market Conditions.'' H.R. 702 repeals the law prohibiting the exports of crude oil that has been on the books for more than 40 years, a response to the Arab Oil Embargo led by OPEC in 1973 that sent oil prices soaring and inflicted substantial damage on the American economy. Let me express my appreciation to Chairman Emeritus Barton and Ranking Member Pallone for their leadership and commitment to American energy independence, economic growth, national security, and expanding opportunities and diversifying the energy sector workforce. I support H.R. 702 because it holds the promise of moving our country towards energy independence, create good-paying jobs, lowering gasoline prices, promoting our geopolitical interests, and strengthening our defense capabilities. But I strongly am ``pro-jobs,'' ``pro-growing economy,'' ``pro- sustainable environment and development,'' and for homeland and national security. That is why I carefully consider each energy legislative proposal brought to the floor on its individual merits and support them when they are sound, balanced, fair, and promote the national interest. As the Member of Congress from Houston, the energy capital of the nation, I have always been mindful of the importance and have strongly advocated for national energy policies that will make our nation more energy independent, preserve and create jobs, and keep our nation's economy strong. The Eighteenth Congressional District, which I represent and is home to Shell Oil, ConocoPhillips, Chevron Phillips, BP Corporation of North America, Marathon Oil, Enterprise Products Partners (Oil and Gas Pipelines), and Halliburton (Oilfield Services), and many others. My constituents have a strong interest in policies that maintain or enhance the competitiveness of American petroleum energy business in the world oil markets. Mr. Chair, the world is very different than it was in 1973 when the ban on crude oil exports was adopted. And much of the change we see today is attributable to America's unconventional oil boom. U.S. crude production is now more than 11 million barrels per day according to the U.S. DOE's Energy Information Administration, up from 7 million barrel per day in 2008. And it is estimated that U.S. output will exceed 18 million barrels a day by 2040. Crude inventories are at an 80-year high, and imports have declined nearly 30 percent between 2005 and 2013. Mr. Chair, paradoxically, continuation of the crude oil export ban may pose one of the biggest threats to this U.S. production boom and to the economy. This is because increased production has led to a substantial decline in oil prices over the past year and the resulting decrease in revenues has forced U.S. producers in my district and elsewhere to slash investment and cancel projects. Since last autumn the industry has cut more than 125,000 jobs, including many in my district. I have met and know many of the employers and workers affected by industry job reductions. Lifting the crude oil export ban would offer American crude oil producers new markets for their product and would mean fewer layoffs. Studies by the highly respected Brookings Institution and other organizations suggest that the economic benefits to the nation of repealing the ban on crude oil exports would be substantial. Specifically, it is predicted that repeal of the crude oil export ban will: 1. generate over $1.4 billion in revenue to the federal treasury over the next 10 years from oil and gas leases, according to the Congressional Budget Office; 2. lower gasoline prices by 13 cents per gallon according to the Government Accountability Office; 3. support up to 964,000 additional American jobs; 4. allow the United States to help its allies, enhance its energy security, and weaken the influence and market power of OPEC and Russia; and 5. strengthen the 60-ship Maritime Security Fleet, assuring that United States flag ships and crews will be available to provide support to the military in defense of our national interests and our allies. The economic benefits projected to be derived from a repeal of the crude oil export ban are stunning in their magnitude: 1. 300,000 additional jobs by 2020; 2. $5.8 billion savings in fuel costs each year between 2015 and 2035; 3. $70 billion in additional investment in U.S. exploration, development, and production of crude oil between 2015 and 2020; 4. 500,000 barrels per day increase in domestic crude oil production in 2020; 5. $38 billion in additional economic activity in 2020; 6. $13.5 billion in additional federal, state, and local revenue in 2020; and a 7. $22 billion reduction in the U.S. trade deficit in 2020. It is estimated that in my own congressional district, lifting the ban would generate an additional 500 jobs and inject an additional $275 million into the local economy, resulting in an increase in government revenues in the amount of $227.7 million. Another positive impact of repealing the crude oil export ban is that the U.S. crude oil production would increase 1.2 million barrels per day average between 2016 and 2030. Additionally, manufacturing jobs are expected to increase by an average of 37,000 per year through 2025 and analysts predict that construction jobs will increase 217,000 in the peak year 2017, while related professional services jobs would grow by an average of 148,000 per year. Repeal of the crude oil export ban is expected to spur capital investment in machinery, exploration, and development by $7 billion in 2020. The gross domestic product would increase by nearly $73 billion in 2016 and by at least $134 billion in 2018. Total government revenues would increase by a combined $1.3 trillion between 2016 and 2030. The revenue generated translates to an expected average annual increase of $2,500 in disposable income per household, additional jobs for American workers, and lower gasoline prices for American consumers. As it relates to our geopolitical stance, Mr. Chair, lifting the crude export ban will enhance our national influence in international affairs because we will be stronger economically and more energy independent. This will enhance our ability to achieve our geopolitical objectives of maintaining peace and security across the globe which in turn furthers our national security interests. For all of these reasons, I support H.R. 702 and urge my colleagues to join me and also support Jackson Lee Amendments 9 and 10.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I ask that my amendment be considered by my colleagues. Mr. Chairman, my amendment requires within 180 days of enactment the Secretaries of Energy and Commerce submit a report to Congress analyzing how lifting the ban on crude oil, in particular, on exports, will create opportunities for veterans and women. Mr. Chairman, just a few days ago I went to an initiative called Stand Down. I have gone a number of years. Most military persons will understand it is where you come and stand down from battle. In this instance, they were veterans, many of them homeless, many of them in great need. Obviously, social services, substance abuse services, and others were offered there. What I heard from these men who wore the uniform in dignity is they want jobs. Mr. Chairman, I believe that this legislation will provide a strong pro-jobs agenda growing the economy. As my previous amendment said, I do not take lightly the impact of lifting the ban; therefore, my previous amendment would provide the insight on whether or not this is a positive impact. I can tell you that there is a great need, as has been discussed earlier, about collaborating with historically Black colleges and Hispanic-serving colleges. I have worked on those issues and have certainly seen the leadership of Mr. Rush and Mr. Cuellar. But I will tell you that it is indicated that State shale development supports American jobs. Mr. Chairman, $107,000 is the average salary that is provided by the energy company in energy jobs, 1.7 million employment attributed to upstream, unconventional oil and natural gas. Women fill 40 percent of the vacancies in oil and gas. Mr. Chairman, I will insert this into the Record. [Apr. 23, 2014] The Energy Revolution is Creating Career Opportunities for Women and Minorities (By Cheryl Jackson) Minorities are projected to fill an unprecedented number of jobs in the oil, natural gas and petrochemical industries-- increasing from one-quarter of total jobs in 2010 to one- third by 2030--according to a new IHS report sponsored by

Ms. JACKSON LEE. The government and the administration are working to pair up and find jobs for veterans. The unemployment rate for veterans we have seen has been a constant issue, and it is going down. But we need to provide them with other opportunities. They were higher unemployment, as we can see, than the regular workforce. So my amendment wants to ensure that, if we lift this ban, women and veterans will benefit. We know, of course, that we have been pushing our educational facilities to engage in STEM, but what we need now is a pipeline for qualified veterans and women looking for jobs right now. Mr. Chairman, I would ask my colleagues to support this Jackson Lee amendment. It causes us to focus on these vulnerable populations--women and veterans--to direct them into the industry. Might I say to my constituents, the energy companies that I represent, a long list of names that I will not name at this time, that we hope that they are focused as well on expanding opportunities in the energy industry for veterans, returning soldiers, if you will, women, and, of course, across-the-board minorities. This is an industry that is moving and growing, and the opportunities should move and grow as well. With that, Mr. Chairman, I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I thank Mr. Pallone. I hope that our colleagues have heard us to emphasize the creation of jobs along with the environment, national security, and the energy resources of America. Mr. Chair, again, let me express my appreciation to Chairman Emeritus Barton and Ranking Member Pallone for their leadership and commitment to American energy independence, economic growth, national security, and expanding opportunities and diversifying the energy sector workforce. Mr. Chair, thank you for the opportunity to explain my amendment, which provides: Sec. 7. Report. Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of Commerce shall jointly transmit to Congress a report analyzing how lifting the ban on crude oil exports will help create opportunities for veterans and women in the United States, while promoting energy and national security. I also wish to thank Chairman Sessions, Ranking Member Slaughter, and the members of the Rules Committee for making in order Jackson Lee Amendment Number 10. As the Member of Congress from Houston, the energy capital of the nation, I have always been mindful of the importance and have strongly advocated for national energy policies that will make our nation more energy independent, preserve and create jobs, and keep our nation's economy strong. I strongly am ``pro-jobs,'' ``pro-growing economy,'' and ``pro- expanding economic opportunities for women, veterans, minorities, and small business!'' That is why I carefully consider each energy legislative proposal brought to the floor on its individual merits and support them when they are sound, balanced, promote the national interest, and expand economic opportunities for everyone, particularly for women, veterans, and members of underrepresented communities. My constituents have a strong interest in policies that maintain or enhance the competitiveness of American petroleum energy business in the world oil markets. Where they fall short, I believe in working across the aisle to improve them by offering constructive amendments. That is why I have offered Jackson Lee Amendment Number 10, which recognizes the fact that veterans, minorities, small businesses and women currently are significantly underrepresented in the oil and gas industries at all levels and severely underrepresented in the senior managerial, professional, board and ownership ranks. Jackson Lee Amendment Number 10 directs the Secretaries of Commerce and Energy to submit a report to Congress within 180 days assessing the beneficial impact, if any, that lifting the crude oil export ban holds for veterans and women. This report should shed light on any additional measures that should be taken to increase the participation of women and veterans in the petroleum industry as workers, executives, and entrepreneurs. Nationally, there were 1.2 million people employed in the oil and gas industry in 2010, only 17% of which are women. Our booming energy sector has been one of the great American success stories over the last decade, and remains a bright spot in our economy as it continues to fuel job creation. To continue this success and to ensure that opportunities and benefits are shared equitably, it is critical that we have a diverse energy workforce equipped with the skills, knowledge, and experiences needed to compete and win in the global economy. And there is no better place to look than from our pool of talented veterans and women? Women make up half our population and are increasing their presence in the STEM fields vital to success in the petroleum energy sector. Veterans not only have proved their mettle and leadership skills in defense of our country but also are among the most resourceful and resilient members of our society, possessing the mission-critical ethic necessary for success in the workplace. A pipeline of qualified veterans and women looking for employment could play a key role as the energy industry seeks qualified, motivated, and skilled workers and entrepreneurs. As a nation, we must remain committed to utilizing the talents of women and veterans if our nation is to meet the challenges and take advantage of the opportunities offered by a dynamic global energy market. Jackson Lee Amendment Number 10 helps us meet this challenge by providing critical information regarding the impact of lifting the crude oil export ban will have on creating opportunities for veterans and women. I urge all members to support Jackson Lee Amendment Number 10. Mr. Chairman, with that, I ask for support of the Jackson Lee amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, today we were talking about jobs and H.R. 702, and I supported the legislation to create jobs for my district and for America, and to provide opportunities to ensure the national security and protect the environment. We also have to realize our seniors that helped build this country. Today I joined in legislation, Seniors Deserve a Raise, to be able to connect these seniors to a cost-of-living increase related to the Consumer Price Index. But there is a gross problem that is coming up, and that is the doubling of the cost of Medicare part B. For 30 percent of beneficiaries in 2016, their cost is projected to increase by 52 percent, from $154 to $159. This increase will be accompanied by an increase in the part B deductible, from $147 to $223. Congress must act to protect the approximately 6 million Medicare beneficiaries who will see a significant increase in their Medicare premiums and deductible. It is very important to realize that my State of Texas would have a $159 million increase. It is my intention to introduce legislation, a sense of Congress, that indicates that Congress must act to protect our seniors. They helped build this Nation. What are we doing to help them? Give them a raise and protect their Medicare.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 3192, the Homebuyers Assistance Act, which would delay, until February 1, 2016 enforcement of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's (CFPB) integrated rule regarding disclosures that mortgage lenders must provide to homebuyers. I oppose this legislation for two principal reasons. First, H.R. 3192 contains a provision that hurts homeowners by removing their private right of action for violations of the CFPB's Truth in Lending Act--RESPA Integrated Disclosure (TRID) regulations. Second, I oppose the legislation because it is unnecessary since the CFPB has previously announced its intention to take into account good faith efforts by lenders in evaluating compliance by lenders with the TRID regulations. Madam Speaker, it should be noted that CFPB gave the mortgage industry approximately two years notice to implement the new disclosure requirements, and this past summer extended that deadline until October 3, 2015. H.R. 3192 would revise the effective date for the Know Before You Owe rule to February 1, 2016, and would shield lenders from liability for violations for loans originated before February 1 so long as lenders made a good faith effort to comply. In extending the effective date of the Know Before You Owe rule by an additional 4 months, H.R. 3192 unnecessarily delays implementation of important consumer protections designed to eradicate opaque lending practices that contribute to risky mortgages and hurt homeowners by removing their private right of action for violations, and undercuts the Nation's financial stability. The delay of enforcement harms consumers by encouraging some lenders to attempt to evade the new rule and reduces the incentive to comply promptly. Having witnessed the economic and financial devastation inflicted on the economy, business, and households in 2008 resulting from inadequate oversight of the financial industry, we simply cannot afford to repeat that mistake. I urge my colleagues to vote to protect consumers and homebuyers from predatory and unfair lending practices by voting against H.R. 3192.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. I thank the gentlewoman from New York. Mr. Speaker, many of us have the memory of the back alley abortions and the many dead young women who cried alone without any help. None of us want that. None of us want women to have to make that choice. But we know the Supreme Court has established as the law of the land Roe v. Wade as a matter of choice, and that this procedure is a medical procedure. Planned Parenthood does not sell body parts. Planned Parenthood has a very infinitesimal amount of fetal research. Planned Parenthood is not the person who ganged up on them and planned these horribly disorderly, if you will, videos and stole the ID of his high school friend to do these horrible videos. Abortions have gone down. And so we come again to another Benghazi- like committee where we are ignoring the law. We are allowing unilateral subpoena, even if they are consulting, where we are looking at abortions that are done, but are not done by Federal money. Mr. Speaker, I would ask my colleagues to vote against this bill that is doing nothing, Mr. Speaker, but politicizing a Presidential candidate and attacking women--attacking women, attacking health care. Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the Homeland Security Committee, and Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security, I rise in strong opposition to H. Res. 461, which would establish a Select Investigative Panel of the Energy and Commerce Committee. The ostensible purpose of this Select Investigative Panel is to investigate and report on all issues related to medical procedures and practices involving fetal tissue donation and procurement; federal funding and support for abortion providers; and late-term abortions. But make no mistake, the Republican majority's real purpose in establishing this panel is (1) to open another front in their ongoing War Against Women, (2) impede women in the exercise of their right to make their own choices when it comes to their reproductive health, and (3) to persecute, smear, and demonize Planned Parenthood. We know this from our experience with the so-called ``Benghazi Committee,'' which the Republican leadership claimed was a nonpartisan inquiry into the facts and circumstances surrounding the 2012 tragedy in Libya which claimed the lives of four brave and heroic Americans. We know now, as confirmed by the Majority Leader and the Speaker- apparent, that the Benghazi Committee was in reality part of politically motivated strategy to disparage and damage the former Secretary of State and leading candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination that has wasted $4.5 million of the taxpayers' money. The Chairman of the Benghazi Committee sent to Committee Members an investigative plan that set out monthly hearings with all the different agencies involved in preparing for and responding to the attacks in Benghazi, including the State Department, the Defense Department, and the Intelligence Community. But after the New York Times' email story broke on March 2, however, the Chairman completely abandoned this plan and began focusing almost exclusively on Hillary Clinton. Since then, the Committee has not held any of the hearings on his schedule, and his upcoming hearing with Hillary Clinton is the only hearing now scheduled. Abandoned are plans for hearings that were to have been held in April with former Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary Leon Panetta. The Committee has never held even one public hearing with anyone from the Department of Defense. The only hearing the Committee has held with an intelligence official, was with the CIA's head of Legislative Affairs regarding the status of document production. Mr. Speaker, with so many pressing challenges facing our nation, wasting time and taxpayer money on another partisan witch hunt is a luxury we simply cannot afford. The structure and powers to be given the Select Investigative Panel does not inspire any confidence that it will operate in a fair and impartial manner. For example, the composition of the committee is lopsided in favor of the majority (8 Republican; 5 Democrat), instead of more equally divided as select committees usually are comprised. Second, H. Res. 461 gives the chairman of the select panel subpoena power and deposition authority, including the authority to order the taking of depositions by a member of the select panel or the panel's counsel. Third, the resolution authorized the chairman to recognize members to question witness for periods longer than the traditional five minutes and to recognize staff to question witnesses. Taken together, these unusual powers are susceptible to abuse and are valued tools to any party wishing to conduct a fishing expedition as opposed to a dispassionate search for facts. Mr. Speaker, let me save our Republican colleagues some time by pointing out the facts that an objective, fair-minded inquiry would reveal. In 2011, approximately 1.06 million abortions took place in the U.S., down from an estimated 1.21 million abortions in 2008, 1.29 million in 2002, 1.31 million in 2000 and 1.36 million in 1996. Based on available state-level data, an estimated 984,000 abortions took place in 2013--down from an estimated 1.02 million abortions in 2012. Fetal tissue research has been scientifically accepted since the Reagan Administration. In 1988 the Human Fetal Tissue Transplantation Research Panel (or the Blue Ribbon Commission) sought to separate the question of ethics of abortion from the question ethics of using fetal tissue from legal elective abortions for medical research. The report of this commission laid the foundation for the NIH Health Revitalization Act of 1993 (which passed overwhelmingly with bipartisan support), prohibits the payment or receipt of money or any other form of valuable consideration for fetal tissue, regardless of whether the program to which the tissue is being provided is funded or not. The law contains a limited exception that permits reimbursement for actual expenses (e.g. storage, processing, transportation, etc.) of the tissue. These fees generally amount to less than $l00. Less than 1% of Planned Parenthood chapters participate in this area of research. Planned Parenthood reports revenue by source (either government or non-government) rather than the manner of disbursement (income versus grants and contracts). Payments from Medicaid managed care plans are listed as ``Government Health Services Grants and Reimbursements'' to reflect the ultimate source of the funds. Planned Parenthood spends about $1.1 billion annually on 11.4 million services, 83% of which is spent on research, client services and education. Client services are divided into six categories: Cancer Prevention and Screenings, STI Testing, Contraception, Abortion Services, Other Women's Health Services & Other Services. According to Planned Parenthood financial statements from 2009-2014, 86% of Planned Parenthood's Services fall under the categories of Cancer Prevention and Screenings (12-16%), STI Testing for men and women (35-41%), and Contraception (32-35%). Only about 3% of its services fall under the Abortion category nationally. Additionally, Planned Parenthood is already prohibited from spending federal funds on abortion services anyway. Finally, Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 461 is an irresponsible diversion from tackling and addressing the following critical challenges facing this Congress and the American people, and if unresolved pose grave threats to our economy and communities across the country: The Highway & Transit Trust Fund expires on October 29, endangering good paying jobs and critical construction projects throughout America; Treasury Secretary Lew has notified the Congress that the debt limit is expected to be reached on November 5 and action must be taken to raise the limit to protect the full faith & credit of the United States and prevent interest rates for mortgages, student loans, credit cards and car payments soaring; Funding to keep the government open expires on December 11 and Congress must find a way to keep the government open in the face of irresponsible opposition from 151 Republicans who voted to shut down the government rather than allow women access to affordable family planning and life-saving preventive health care. In addition, American small businesses and manufacturers continue to suffer from Republicans' refusal to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank. Mr. Speaker, we have far more important things to do than waste more time and taxpayer money on another partisan attempt to deprive women of their right to make their own decisions regarding their reproductive health that has been recognized as constitutionally guaranteed since 1973 by the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade. I oppose H. Res. 461 and urge all Members to join me in voting against this wasteful and irresponsible measure.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the Homeland Security Committee, I rise in support of H.R. 3510, the ``Department of Homeland Security Cybersecurity Strategy Act of 2015,'' which amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002, to require the Secretary of Homeland Security to develop a cybersecurity strategy for the Department of Homeland Security. The strategy must include information on the programs, policies, and activities that are required to successfully execute the full range of the cybersecurity programs, policies, and activities in furtherance of the Department of Homeland Security's mission regarding the National Cybersecurity and Communication Integration Center. The National Cybersecurity and Communication Integration Center addresses cybersecurity risks faced by federal and non-federal entities. In July of this year it was reported that the Office of Personnel Management lost personal information on 21.5 million current and former federal employees and their families. In 2014, the following agencies reported breaches: The State Department revealed that its unclassified email network had been breached in a cyberattack; the U.S. Postal Service reported that 800,000 personnel files were potentially affected by a cyber breach; the Department of Health and Human Services reported cyber intruders had accessed a server used to test code for the healthcare.gov website and installed malicious software; and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the agency that oversees the U.S. nuclear power industry, revealed a number of attempted intrusions and three successful intrusions into its computer systems. In cyber time, which is near the speed of light--federal computer networks will not get a warning from a determined enemy that an attack is occurring. Our nation's critical infrastructure and civilian government agencies depend on the cybersecurity talent and resources that the Department of Homeland Security can provide on the frontline to defend against attacks. As with other threats that this nation has faced and overcome, we must create the resources and the institutional responses to protect our nation against cyber threats while preserving our liberties and freedoms. We cannot accomplish this task without the full cooperation and support of the private sector, computing research community and academia. This level of engagement requires the trust and confidence of the American people that this new cyber threat center will be used for the purpose it was created and that the collaboration of others in this effort to better protect computing networks will be used only for protection and defense. There are people with skills and those with the potential to develop skills that would be of benefit to our nation's efforts to develop an effective cybersecurity defense and deterrence posture. It is my hope that as we move forward the Committee on Homeland Security will continue in a bipartisan manner to seek out the best ways to bring the brightest and most qualified people into the government as cybersecurity professionals. Toward that end, I am hosting a Town Hall on Wednesday, October 7, 2015, Town Hall'' on Minority Representation in the Cybersecurity Workforce. I am pleased to have the Chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus join me in support of this important Town Hall. The message from the federal government to the public regarding the employment opportunities available in STEM careers that include cybersecurity. It is my commitment that Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Hispanic Serving Institutions, Native American Colleges and Women's Colleges and Universities should be actively engaged when agencies conduct outreach and program development on cybersecurity. The Brookings' Metropolitan Policy Program's report ``The Hidden STEM Economy,'' reported that in 2011, 26 million jobs or 20 percent of all occupations required knowledge in 1 or more STEM areas. Half of all STEM jobs are available to workers without a 4 year degree and these jobs pay on average $53,000 a year, which is 10 percent higher than jobs with similar education requirements. There will be STEM winners and losers, but not because the skills needed are too difficult to obtain, but because people are not aware of the jobs that are going unfilled today, nor do they know what education or training will create job security for the next 2 to 3 decades. I am very aware of the importance of STEM job training and education. A third of Houston jobs are in STEM-based fields. Houston has the second largest concentrations of engineers (22.4 for every 1,000 workers according to the Greater Houston Partnership.) Houston has 59,070 engineers, the second largest populations in the nation. STEM jobs are at the core of Houston's economic success, but what we have done with STEM innovation and job creation in the city of Houston is not enough to satisfy the regions demand for STEM trained workers. We anticipate that in the next 5 years the gap in the number of people with STEM skills and training will not keep up with the number of positions requiring those skills. I ask my colleagues to join me in support of H.R. 3510, the ``Department of Homeland Security Cybersecurity Strategy Act of 2015.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the Homeland Security Committee, I rise to speak on H.R. 3102, the ``Airport Access Control Security Improvement Act of 2015,'' which amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to reform programs of the Transportation Security Administration, and streamline transportation security regulations. The objective of the bill is to establish a risk-based, intelligence- driven model for the screening of employees at airports based on level of access and employment positions at domestic airports. The model is intended to ensure that only those individuals authorized to have access to secure areas of a domestic airport are permitted such access. The model must be able to differentiate between individuals authorized to have access to an entire secure area and those who are not permitted access. The Director of the FBI and Director of the Aviation Security Advisory Committee are directed to review the disqualifying criminal offenses in the Code of Federal Regulations to determine the adequacy for an individual to have continued access to Secure Identification Display Areas of airports. The review based on the current language of the bill would consider whether the list of disqualifying offenses should be amended to include other offenses. As House Judiciary Committee's Ranking Member on the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Investigation, I am concerned that the bill contains this language. At a time when we are discussing the rights of non-violent offenders to have an opportunity, if their conduct and records dictate to be able to fully reintegration into society, that there may be other efforts to make this process more difficult without a serious review of why such measures should be taken and for whom should they be applied? I would offer to work with my fellow members on the House Committee on Homeland Security to consider carefully the reasons for any expansion on this list, especially if the expansion only involves the Department of Homeland Security. There are similar concerns regarding language in the bill that may extend the period of time that may be considered between a particular situation and the life a person is currently leading. Considering behavior of a teenager when considering the conduct of a 35 year-old adult, the weight of the consideration should be on the life of the adult and the seriousness of the offense. Any new model that may be developed that would impact the employability of current persons who hold access credentials and future employees should be further reviewed by the full committee prior to becoming policy. The bill's goals are important--the House should consider every aspect of airport security to improve aviation safety. I will continue to work in my capacity on both the House Committee on Homeland Security and the House Committee on the Judiciary to improve aviation security.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, this is a very difficult time for Americans as we mourn with our fellow citizens in Oregon. I offer my deepest sympathy to the congressional delegation here in the Congress, as we join them in their expression of deep sympathy to those who were injured and those who lost their lives, to the families of those individuals. I spoke to a member of the United States military, and he indicated that in battle he had two guns. We understand that the perpetrator of this horrible act had at least 14 guns, or double-digit guns. I have heard the refrain: ``What else will have to happen before we address the question of gun regulation and gun safety?'' Mr. Speaker, it is time now to ask the question of an extended waiting period so that someone would not amass 14, 15, 30 guns, more than the United States military, and a serious background check dealing with any issues that would impact a person's stability in having guns. Yes, people do kill, not guns, but they use guns to kill. I have been through too many of these, Mr. Speaker, from Columbine to this incident. Every single one I have been through since being in the United States Congress. It is time for the Congress to act.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to advise the House that this Saturday, October 10, is Double Ten Day, Taiwan's national day. I urge all Members to join me in congratulating the people of Taiwan on this momentous occasion. Our great friend in Asia, Taiwan, will be celebrating its 104th anniversary on October 10. Also known as Double Ten Day since it falls on the 10th day of the 10th month, this is Taiwan's National Day and is revered and celebrated in the same fashion as we do the Fourth of July here in America. Mr. Speaker, Taiwan today is a multi-party democracy with a strong economy that is working to ease tensions with Mainland China, while preserving both its political existence and its vibrant national life. This Double Ten Day marks the 102nd anniversary of China's Wuchang Uprising, a significant development in the Xinhai Revolution. Mr. Speaker, Taiwan and my home city of Houston have shared a special bond since 1961 with the establishment of the sister-city relationship between Houston and Taipei. For more than 50 years, economic, cultural, and educational exchanges between these sister cities, and between the United States and Taiwan have flourished, aided significantly by the ease of travel resulting from commencement in June 2015 of direct flights between Houston and Taipei on EVA Airway, a Taiwanese airline company. Mr. Speaker, Taiwan has been a great friend and partner of the United States, and I have no doubt that this important relationship will continue to be a source of strength to our peoples as this new century continues to unfold. I congratulate the people of Taiwan as they commemorate Double Ten Day.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as founder and Co-Chair of the Congressional Caucus on Nigeria, I rise in joyful celebration of 55 years of Nigeria's Independence. I continue to have a deep appreciation of the patriotism, resilience, and commitment of the Nigerian people under the leadership of their newly elected President Muhammadu Buhari. As an emerging democracy, Nigeria is a country that has faced its set of challenges, conflicts, and contradictions analogous to the human condition itself. From the civil war from 1967 to 1970 that almost ripped the country apart to the current state of violent extremists' terror wreaked on the Nigerian people. Setbacks and challenges seek to keep this bulwark of a country down. But Nigeria has always proven itself a capable leader in the region, notwithstanding its challenges. For example: Nigeria was instrumental in facilitating the peace process in Liberia. Nigeria played a seminal role in reenergizing and repositioning the African Union. Nigeria facilitated the establishment of the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) and the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM), designed to promote democracy and good governance in Africa. Nigeria was instrumental in empowering the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and the Co-prosperity Alliance Zone incorporating Benin, Ghana, Nigeria and Togo. Nigeria helped mediate conflict in the continent from Angola to Burundi to Namibia to Mozambique to South Africa and the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo, to name a few. In 2014, in the wake of the Ebola virus, according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), Nigeria was instrumental in containing the spread of the virus--preventing a serious public health epidemic which could have had catastrophic implications in the over 180 million person country. Indeed, in Nigeria and in the Diaspora, we have seen Nigerians contribute enormously to the economy of the United States and across the globe. The Nigerian economy is $573 billion--the largest in Africa and ranked 21 in world according to 2014 GDP reports. Nigeria is the ninth most populated country on the planet with arable land, water, forests, oil and gas, coastline, and solid minerals, just to name a few resources. As the most populous nation in Africa, according to archeologists, human habitation in Nigeria dates back to 9000 BC. Nigerians have innovated in various disciplines, from the arts to the sciences and everything in between. Nigerians are very hardworking people who through their hard work have been instrumental in helping to champion innovations, like Sulaiman Bolarinde Famro who found Farmking Mobile Multi-crop Processor to reduce both the time it takes to process tuber food such as cassava, sweet potatoes, soy, shea nuts, grains and cereals, and the amount of waste produced in processing--helping to promote food security while addressing environmental waste. Then there is Okwui Enwezor, the first black and Nigerian curator of the 56th International Art Exhibition entitled All the World's Futures, at the Giardini della Biennale and at the Arsenale in Italy. Resiliency flows through the veins and into the hearts of the Nigerian people. That is why Nigeria has emerged from so many trials and tribulations stronger, more united, more focused, and committed to reestablishing the stability, peace, security, growth, and development of the country. Indeed, October 1 is a day for joy and celebration for Nigerians. In my view, Nigeria as the regional giant in Africa has the attributes of a great nation and with unity of purpose Nigeria's fullest potential will be achieved. This is proven by the recent year's democratic development of free and fair elections--which is reflective of the Nigerian people's commitment to cohesion and unity of purpose. Market women, college students, business men, teachers, doctors, and lawyers flocked to the polls to exercise their right to vote. Notwithstanding the security issues that persisted, the citizens of Nigeria showed up to the polls because they understood what was at stake: the economic, social and political empowerment of the children, women and men of Nigeria. With this, the country elected President Buhari who assumed power without incident--owing to his predecessor's graceful transfer of power. Having inherited a country facing insecurity, I commend President Buhari's effort to double down on efforts to restore peace and security in Nigeria. He hit the ground running visiting us here in the United States--an important ally of Nigeria. He met with President Obama and Members of Congress who have been doing important work in Nigeria--myself included. He also visited neighbors of Nigeria with the eye towards marshalling a coalition of armed forces of the five nations in the Lake Chad Basin to confront, degrade and defeat Boko Haram. President Buhari also reached out to and met with the G-7 leaders and other friendly presidents with the eye towards building an international coalition against Boko Haram. President Buhari has moved swiftly to combat Boko Haram, commenced efforts to recover the Chibok girls and address the issue of the growing number of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs). To succeed at these objectives, Nigeria must have continued U.S. support in technical training, logistical and infrastructural capabilities and professionalizing its military force to battle Boko Haram. And we can see substantial gains thus far, with the regional military task force and the Nigerian military closing in and killing members of Boko Haram and rescuing innocent Nigerians and other Africans who have been kidnapped and terrorized by Boko Haram. I commend President Buhari's commitment to Nigerian security and his directive to local authorities to tighten vigilance in vulnerable places. With oil being one of the greatest resource and cause of harm and corruption in the country, I commend President Buhari's directive to sanitize the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) in order to obliterate inefficiency and corruption in that industry and in Nigeria. I also commend President Buhari's directive of a complete audit of the country's revenue generating agencies such as the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), Customs, and the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC). With all of President Buhari's initiatives to help get Nigeria's house in order, I implore the people of Nigeria to bear with the President even as he works to appoint his cabinet, implement the rule of law, facilitate security in the country, move the country's economy forward and empower the youth of Nigeria. In the words of President Buhari, I encourage the people of Nigeria to ``value order over speed'' and precision over mediocrity, unity over division, inclusion over alienation and above all, I ask the Nigerian people to be their brother's and sister's keepers. I urge the Nigerian people to support President Buhari in his careful strategic and deliberate decision making approach, which hopefully will have positive results on the future of Nigeria and the Nigerian people. Mr. Speaker, looking ahead of the future of Nigeria, I encourage the Nigerian people to remain committed to visionary change, progress and empowerment of Nigeria at the backdrop of successful democratic elections, under the leadership of a President committed to transparency, peace, coalition building, addressing grievances, negotiations, clear communication, infrastructure building and political intellectual capital building. Happy Independence Day Celebration to Nigeria and my congratulations to the people of Nigeria. Long live the Federal Republic of Nigeria!

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to stop the government from shutting down. What we are doing today is budgeting or appropriating but a desperate Hail Mary to save thousands of jobs and prevent another waste of $24 billion in lost economic productivity like we saw the last time House Republicans succeeded in shutting down the government. Today I will vote for H.R. 719 even though it goes against sound fiscal practice by including the budget gimmickry known as sequestration, a fiscal bludgeon that makes across the board cuts in funding for the valuable services depended upon by American children, seniors, workers, veterans, students, and small businesses. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 719, ``Continuing Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2016,'' which extends current Fiscal Year 2015 government funding for nearly all agencies through December 11, 2015, at a rate equal to an annual level of $1.017 trillion, a level consistent with the combined top-line post-sequester discretionary spending caps for Fiscal Year 2016 set by the Budget Control Act. H.R. 719 also provides funding for Overseas Contingency Operations, which are exempt from the BCA caps, at a rate of $74.8 billion, an amount roughly equal to a continuation of the Fiscal Year 2015 level. Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed that we have again been placed in the position of having to fund the government through the device of a continuing resolution rather than through the normal appropriations process of considering and voting on the twelve separate spending bills reported by the Committee on Appropriations. Although the House considered and passed several of the annual spending bills, none of them received consideration in the Senate because of the refusal of the House leadership to reach agreement with the Senate on an appropriate framework for all appropriations bills that does not harm our economy or require draconian cuts to middle- class priorities. Without such an agreement, House Republican appropriation bills will result in: 1. hundreds of thousands of low-income children losing access to Head Start programs, 2. tens of thousands of children with disabilities losing federal funding for their special education teachers and aides, 3. thousands of federal agents who will not be able to secure the border, enforce drug laws, combat violent crime or apprehend fugitives; and 4. thousands of scientists without medical grants to conduct research to find new treatments and cures for diseases like breast cancer and Alzheimer's. As a result of the failure to reach a budget agreement, we now find ourselves facing the Hobson's choice of rejecting the Continuing Resolution now pending which likely will result in a cessation of government operations or approving the Continuing Resolution and continuing adherence to the draconian spending limits imposed by the Budget Control Act of 2011. Faced with this dilemma, I reluctantly will vote for H.R. 719 because in the circumstances it would be irresponsible to do otherwise. H.R. 719 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. The government shutdown of 2013, which was manufactured by the Republican majority lasted 16 days and cost taxpayers $24 billion. The cost to federal employees and the people they serve cannot be calculated. Mr. Speaker, as with any compromise there are some things in the agreement that I support and some things that I strongly oppose. For example, I support the provisions in the Continuing Resolution ensuring that funding for appropriated entitlements continue at a rate maintaining program levels under current law. I also support the provisions allowing the State Department, USAID, BBG, and related agencies to expend funds in the absence of an authorization, and authorizing continuation of certain intelligence activities. I support the provisions in H.R. 719 that provide $700 million in emergency funding for government efforts to fight wildfires in Western states and that give the VA budget flexibility to finish construction of a facility in Denver. Finally, I am very pleased that House Republicans have jettisoned any serious efforts to shut down the government over the obsession with defunding Planned Parenthood and opposition to women's reproductive rights. On the other hand, I am very disappointed that the Continuing Resolution again misses the opportunity to reauthorize two critical programs: the Export-Import Bank and the Land and Water Conservation Fund. The Export-Import Bank provides critical financing assistance--at no cost to taxpayers--to small, medium, and large-sized U.S. businesses, helping them to create jobs at home and sell products overseas. The Land and Water Conservation Fund is a bipartisan, popular, 50- year program that uses royalties from federal oil and gas leases for land acquisition and parks across the country. The LWCF program supports more than 6 million U.S. jobs connected with outdoor recreation at no cost to taxpayers. Without action by Congress, LWCF will expire on September 30, authorization for the Ex-Im Bank expired June 30, 2015, and has been hurting U.S. exporters and workers daily ever since. I also strongly disapprove of the rescission of $1.7 billion from the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) and the across the board reduction in funding levels for most programs and activities from their FY 2015 levels by 0.21%. Nevertheless, the agreement allows Congress to keep the federal government open to serve the American people and gives the Congress and the Administration ten weeks to reach agreement on a fair and balanced budget that provides the funds for the investments in human capital and physical infrastructure needed to maintain American competitiveness in the global economy of the 21st century. And one of the most important things we can do is end the draconian sequestration that has been in effect since 2011. Mr. Speaker, to illustrate how strongly I feel about the need to end sequestration, let me chronicle the severity of the suffering and pain inflicted by sequestration on the most vulnerable residents of Texas and the constituents that I serve. Head Start and Early Head Start services were eliminated or severely impacted with approximately 4,800 children being impacted throughout the state of Texas. Families in my district who rely on Federal Government programs like Head Start are hurting. The pain did not start with the 2013 shutdown, but with sequestration which hit Head Start programs for 3 to 4 year olds in the Houston area hard: $5,341 million cut; 109 Employees cut; 699 Slots for children cut. Head Start and Early Head Start Programs were further stressed by the federal government shutdown. My support of Head Start and Early Head Start is based on what I have seen and heard about programs like the AVANCE-Houston Early Head Start program serving parents and children in the 18th Congressional District. The AVANCE-Houston Early Head Start is a program serving low income families in my Houston Texas District. I have visited with AVANCE-Houston administrators many times to get an update on how low-income families with infants and toddlers and pregnant women served by the program were doing. The AVANCE-Houston Early Head Start's mission is simple: AVANCE- Houston works for healthy prenatal outcomes for pregnant women, enhances the development of very young children, and promotes healthy family functioning. AVANCE-Houston serves nearly 1,800 children city wide; each of these families and their children are suffering the effects of the sequestration. Sequestration has cost AVANCE-Houston over $842,518 Head Start and Early Head Start in lost funding and put on hold the head start on the future our children deserve. As I stated, Mr. Speaker, this Continuing Resolution is not perfect and it only funds the government until December 11, 2015, but it is better than the alternative we faced in 2013 when House Republicans shut down the government for 16 days and cost our economy $24 billion in lost economic productivity. For that reason, I will vote for H.R. 719 and renew my call that all members of the House and Senate work together and with the President to reach agreement on an appropriate budget framework that ends sequestration but does not harm our economy or require draconian cuts to middle-class priorities.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Let me thank my good friend from Colorado for managing this bill. Let me also thank the majority manager as well for coming to the floor and doing the people's bidding. Although we disagree in both the purpose of the underlying bill and its effectiveness, there is no doubt that this bill has a good cause. None of us take a backseat to protecting the American people, to seeking compensation, to bringing those who are missing or those who have been captured on false terms back home to American soil. And I stand here to make that commitment. As well, I recognize that we are going down the trail, Mr. Speaker, that we have done for the Affordable Care Act, one more attempt to undermine a legitimately debated initiative--the Iran nonnuclear proliferation--where Members made a conscious decision, personal decision, on reflecting on the best direction for the American people. In both the Senate and the procedures set out for this Congress to determine whether this bill, this initiative, will be turned back, it did not work. So it is the law of the land. It is an effort to ensure peace, to reconcile in the area, to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons by Iran. It does not in any way diminish the United States' stance on Iran's terrorist activities. It does none of that. But this legislation, under the pretense of not allowing the sanctions to be relieved, has a very key component and a number of measures in that initiative. It has a number of measures, another roadblock, before those sanctions will be removed. It is under the pretense of dealing with the individuals who we all want to be brought home. I don't know how this Congress does not know of the negotiations and the engagement that is going on, but they know that this is legislation that will be vetoed by the President. I say this in the backdrop of the Madison Papers, No. 51, that says, ``Justice is the end of government.'' It means that we on this floor must do things that really get us in the direction of justice, the end result for the American people. The reason why I am so disappointed is I listened to my two colleagues speak eloquently about the Export-Import Bank. I can tell them that I was in Africa with the President, and an American stood up and pleaded that he was going to lose 400 jobs if we could not get that Export-Import Bank. I hesitate to think that his contract and his engagement--what we asked him to do--has collapsed. Mr. Speaker, let me repeat again, ``Justice is the end of government.'' So here we are on a bill that is going to be a copycat of what we are doing with the Affordable Care Act.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. I am so disappointed, Mr. Speaker, because here I am on the floor discussing justice and we have yet another disappointing representation of this Congress when a leader of the Congress can speak and say that the Benghazi Committee is only a farce, it was only used to besmirch a public servant. That is not what Madison wanted for this Nation. They didn't want us to stop the economic engine for the Export-Import Bank. They didn't want us to over and over attack the Affordable Care Act that has been passed and upheld by the Supreme Court. They didn't want us to pass a bill like the underlying deal blocking the Iran sanctions process of the bill that we passed to stop nuclear proliferation. They didn't want us to do that, Mr. Speaker. They wanted us to have justice established, and they wanted us to do what is right for the American people. I ask for a vote against the rule and the underlying bill. Justice should be the end of government, not what we are doing here today.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 3457, the ``Justice for Victims of Iranian Terrorism Act.'' If enacted into law, H.R. 3457 would prevent the United States from implementing its sanctions relief commitments under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) reached between the P5+1 countries, the European Union (EU), and Iran by tying the Administration's ability to fulfill its commitments to non-nuclear issues that are outside the scope of the JCPOA. Mr. Speaker, this bill has absolutely no chance of becoming law because President Obama has already announced he will veto it if presented to him for signature. And that is as it should be since this ill-considered and unwise bill comes to floor without being vetted by any of the committees of jurisdiction. The bill was not considered by the Judiciary Committee or its Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations, of which I serve as Ranking Member and which has jurisdiction over issues federal lawsuits and compensation involving victims of terrorist acts. Nor was the bill considered by the Committee on Foreign Affairs, even though that committee has held several hearings relating to violent extremism and terrorists acts. In the month of September alone, the Committee on Foreign Affairs held six hearings that addressed some aspect of terrorism and violent extremism, not one of which involved H.R. 3457 or the subject matter raised in the legislation. Given its adverse impact on the JCPOA, one would have thought that this legislation would have been fully vetted before being rushed to the floor, and this lack of careful scrutiny is sufficient in itself to vote against this bill. Mr. Speaker, let me be clear: I am, and long have been, a strong supporter and advocate for adequate compensation for victims of terrorism sponsored or supported by foreign states. For example, I have fought for compensation for the victims of Boko Haram, the Lord's Resistance Army, ISIL and Al-Shabaab from Nigeria, to Syria, to Kenya, to name just a few. I have requested the Attorney General of the United States to take action to secure relief for thousands of victims of terror from different regions of the world. But I have never advocated or supported actions to achieve this result that puts the national security at risk. And that is why I cannot support H.R. 3457. By obstructing implementation of the JCPOA, H.R. 3457 would greatly undermine our national security interests and likely would result in the collapse of the comprehensive diplomatic arrangement that peacefully and verifiably prevents Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. This would in turn allow for the resumption of a significantly less constrained Iranian nuclear program, lead to the unraveling of the international sanctions regime against Iran, and deal a devastating blow to America's credibility as a leader of international diplomacy. This would have the collateral effect of jeopardizing both the hard work of sustaining a unified coalition to combat Iran's destabilizing activities in the region and America's ability to lead the world on nuclear non-proliferation. Mr. Speaker, the Administration supports efforts by U.S. terrorism victims to pursue compensation, consistent with our national security. It bears pointing out that nothing in the JCPOA prohibits or impedes those efforts. Mr. Speaker, we have called Iran untrustworthy because it has not always lived up to its commitments. What would it say about the United States and its reputation of being an honest broker and trustworthy partner if we reneged on a carefully and painstakingly negotiated agreement before the ink barely had time to dry? The single and overriding purpose of the JCPOA was to address the international community's concern over Iran's nuclear program and the need to verifiably prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. This goal is achieved by the JCPOA this objective is undermined by H.R. 3457. After all our hearings and thoughtful deliberations on the JCPOA, it defies reason to collapse the historic and landmark diplomatic success that created the framework for a peaceful and verifiable methodology to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. For these reasons, Mr. Speaker, I strongly oppose H.R. 3457 and urge all Members to join me in voting against this unwise measure.