Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the significance of the Special Olympics which has established strong and lasting competitive bonds worldwide while simultaneously teaching the world that all people, regardless of their personal struggles, possess the same courage and profound joy in the face of athletic competition. The Special Olympics has dedicated itself to empowering individuals with intellectual disabilities to become physically fit, productive, and respected members of society through physical education and sport competition. The origins of this important institution began in the 1950's when Eunice Kennedy Shriver witnessed how children and young adults with intellectual disabilities were being treated by their communities, throughout our country with incredible disrespect. As her vision slowly came to reality, she began to hold special summer camps for young adults with disabilities in her own back-yard. Throughout the 1960's, Eunice Kennedy Shriver continued as the influential voice which assisted in shaping President John F. Kennedy's White House panel on people with intellectual disabilities. Through her unwavering support and avocation for our youth with intellectual disabilities to be no longer viewed as less than a full member of our society with nothing to provide, Eunice Kennedy Shriver created the first Special Olympics that were held on July 20, 1968 in Chicago, Illinois. At the first Special Olympics, thousands of participants with a variety of intellectual disabilities from 26 U.S. states and Canada competed in track and field, swimming and floor hockey. These young Americans came to prove they could compete despite their disability. It is one thing to overcome obstacles to compete in sports recreationally but it takes a genuine drive for excellence to succeed in an arena that was once thought impossible for those with intellectual disabilities. From that first Special Olympics competition in 1968, this organization began to gain the attention of the world as well as expand the sport competitions at the games. On February 5, 1977 the games marked the first International Special Olympics Winter Games, which was held in Steamboat Springs, Colorado. The Special Olympics continued to enhance the original mission of the organization through the creation of programs aimed at providing healthcare services to Special Olympics athletes worldwide. This organization attracted bipartisan support in 2004, when President George W. Bush signed the ``Special Olympics Sport and Empowerment Act.'' That piece of bipartisan legislation gave $15 million every year for five years to Special Olympics programs allowing them to continue their important work. In February of 2012 the National Basketball Association and Special Olympics, held the first annual NBA Cares Unified Sports Basketball game in Houston, Texas, which allowed Special Olympic athletes to compete alongside professional athletes. To think that a small summer day camp for intellectually challenged children and adults could evolve into a world-wide organization, is a testament to the lasting vision of Eunice Kennedy Shriver, its founder, and the commitment of volunteers, such as the 40,000 from Texas, to fulfill her dream. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to recognize the Special Olympics along with the progress this important organization has made towards teaching the world those individuals with intellectual disabilities accept the same challenges as anyone else to compete and win.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to H.R. 5, the ``Student Success Act,'' which would harm the education of our nation's youth. I thank Chairman Kline, Ranking Member Scott, and all the members of the Committee on Education and the Workforce for their work to improve education for our nation's children. Unfortunately, the bill before the House for consideration, should it become law, would harm our most vulnerable children, including those who attend urban and rural schools, and special needs children who need equal access to an excellent education. In my 18th District of Texas, over 30% of students in the Houston Independent School district (HISD) live below the poverty line. H.R. 5 threatens to cut over $17 million from HISD, one of the largest reductions in Title I funding in the state of Texas. I cannot stand by and support legislation that takes funds and resources away from children who are already struggling to meet their own basic needs. This bill allows Title I ``portability'' which would allow states to redirect funds away from high concentrations of poverty and siphon monies to low-poverty schools. This proposal, if enacted, would allow states to redirect funds away from districts with the highest concentrations of poverty, and into more affluent districts with less need for such support. The vast majority of the children affected by ``portability,'' are black or Hispanic. As legislators, as Americans, we have a generational responsibility to enhance the lives of those who will follow us, especially the most vulnerable. H.R. 5 guts education funding, while diverting funds away from high- poverty schools by freezing funding at FY 2015 levels for six years, which represents over $800 million in cuts to these programs compared to pre-sequester funding. Mr. Chair, what does it say about our commitment to our youth that we are willing to cut funding for the future leaders of America? For decades, we threw money at education without making sure our schools were actually improving, or whether we were giving teachers the tools they need, or whether our taxpayer dollars were being used effectively. And our students too often paid the price. The bill as it exists now allows for the establishment of separate, lower standards for students with developmental disabilities. As a result of these standards, opportunities available for students with disabilities later in life would suffer considerably. H.R. 5 converts much of the funding currently directed at English learners, migrant students, or at-risk students into block-grants, which would enable those funds to be spent outside the target populations. Support for these students would also be eroded by suspending requirements that school districts improve the English-speaking ability of such students. It is my concern as H.R. 5 is currently drafted abdicates the historic Federal role in elementary and secondary education of ensuring the educational progress of all of America's students, including students from low-income families, students with disabilities, English learners, and students of color. `No Child Left Behind' needs to be fixed, but Republicans are pushing a bill that would gut education funding, eliminate and weaken protections for disadvantaged students, does not provide a well-rounded education for all students, and does not support educators. The Statement of Administration Policy from the Obama administration agrees on the need for high-quality statewide annual testing as required in H.R. 5, so parents and teachers know how children and schools are doing from year to year and to allow for consistent measurement of school and student performance across the State. However the administration has stated that this bill should do more to reduce redundant and unnecessary testing, such as asking States to limit the amount of time spent on standardized testing and requiring parental notification when testing is consuming too much classroom learning time. In its current state the Obama administration recommends a veto of H.R. 5. It is sobering to me, as the founder and co-chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus and someone who has long advocated on behalf of young people from all backgrounds, to see a bill that would have such a negative impact on the very children who need our help the most. In addition to these sad truths, the bill currently under consideration would strike a devastating blow to our schools' ability to provide the variety of programs that our children deserve. It repeals dedicated funding for programs such as student safety, after and summer school programming, STEM education, education technology, arts education, literacy and block-grants support, forcing high-need districts to choose between funding vital services. It should not be overlooked that one of these programs that is considered expendable is STEM-focused education, an area of importance both nationally and to my constituents in Houston. The Houston region is one of the most important industrial bases in the world and was recently ranked the No. 1 U.S. manufacturing city by Manufacturers' News Inc. Houston is also home to the largest medical complex in the world--the Texas Medical Center--and provides clinical health care, research and education at its 54 institutions. These jobs, and truly the middle class of this decade as a whole, are dependent on workers who get the right STEM education and job training today. 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. The same report stressed that fully 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. To eliminate federal funding aimed at enhancing STEM education is to cripple an entire generation of America's youth, leaving them without skills that may be essential in securing their own future and the economic prosperity of our nation. Finally, it must be addressed that the defining characteristic of our primary and secondary education system has been to prepare our students for college. H.R. 5 does not contain any provisions that states consult with institutes of higher education in order to ensure that their academic standards are consistent with what will be demanded of those students once they graduate. As a result, many students, even after receiving a high school diploma, will find themselves unprepared to pursue a college degree if they choose to. We must look at the environments in which we are asking these students to succeed and ensure we have the best protections in place to provide safe educational institutions. Amendment #93 of this bill, Jackson Lee Amendment, supports accountability-based programs and activities that are designed to enhance school safety, which may include research-based bullying prevention, cyberbullying prevention, disruption of recruitment activity by groups or individuals involved in violent extremism, and gang prevention programs as well as intervention programs regarding bullying. H.R. 5 eliminates the current requirement that districts take action when their schools are under resourced and unable to meet the needs of all students. Together with the lack of consideration and support for at-risk and low-income youth, this will result in those students being marginalized and denied educational opportunity rather than given the support and resources they so desperately need. I urge all my colleagues to join with me and oppose the passage of H.R. 5.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of H.R. 6, the 21st Century Cures Act, a bipartisan piece of legislation that is vital to the future and health of our Nation's citizens and ecosystem. This thoughtful legislation is the culmination of the hard work of my dedicated colleagues who have sought out and engaged in public conversations with patients, innovators, providers, regulators and researchers about how to move advances in science and medicine into new therapies. This outreach has garnered the critical input and support of more than 370 patient and physician groups, state and local organizations, cancer centers, and research and life sciences. I'm proud to be one of the cosponsors of H.R. 6, which represents a new national effort to find treatment and cures for thousands of unknown and rare diseases. Looking to the various policies this legislation aims to address, it is important to highlight the commendable objectives and that will not only accelerate the discovery, development and delivery of new treatments and cures for thousands of serious and rare diseases, but it will also open the doors of innovation and the growth of health care system by enhancing and enriching the medical field for all Americans. The most ambitious action calls for $10 billion in mandatory funding to be delivered over the next five years to the National Institutes of Health (NIH). NIH is part of our nation's top ranked educational research institutions in the world. In order to maintain our global competitiveness in the biomedical field, we must invest in the industries that guarantee economic prosperity for our current and future economies. It has been estimated that every $1 of NIH funding generates about $2.21 in local economic growth, and, in 2012, NIH funded research supported an estimated 402,000 jobs all across the U.S. The bill's funding for NIH would provide for an annual 3% increases in the NIH budget, which has been stagnant for the past few years and which desperately needs more funding to capitalize on emerging scientific insights. This increased funding not only aims to continue the sustainability of our economy but it also supports our President's initiative to provide more resources to the biomedical field. The 21st Century Cure Act supports the President's Precision Medicine Initiative, which would advance a new model of participant-centered research to accelerate biomedical discoveries and provide clinicians with new tools and therapies tailored to individual patients' needs. The Obama Administration believes they can build on their progress in improving the drug development and approval process by: incorporating patients' voices into the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) decision- making; encouraging the development and qualification of reliable biomarkers to accelerate work on important new therapies; and reducing barriers to initiating medical device trials. In furtherance of this initiative, H.R. 6 allows for the creation of an ``Innovation Fund'' through the National Institute of Health. This ``Innovation Fund'' is a welcome effort because it promotes the maintenance of the best biomedical workforce in the world and help to increase the diversity of the biomedical workforce. In particular, the $2 billion provided for the Innovation Fund, will not only increase the number of the research projects it supports but it also increases the cap for NIH's loan repayment programs. This would include a repayment program for clinical scientists who do research in health disparities and for clinical scientist from disadvantaged backgrounds, from $35,000 per year to $50,000 per year plus a yearly inflation for adjustment. With the support of H.R. 6, underrepresented communities and those with disadvantaged backgrounds from across the country can undoubtedly provide the future researchers and workers of the biomedical workforce. The Journal on STEM Education reported in 2011 that only 8.34% of the STEM doctorates awarded in 2006 were given to underrepresented minorities, despite making up approximately 28% of the U.S. population. Furthermore, GAO noted that while the percentage of underrepresented minorities nationwide increased from 13% to 19% from 1994 to 2003, the total number of STEM doctorates awarded to the same group dropped during this period from 8,335 to 7,310. In response, the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) created the Minority Opportunities in Research (MORE) Division and similar academic intervention programs. The MORE programs are comprised of four primary components: research experience, mentoring and advisement, supplemental instruction and workshops, and financial support. In 2007, NIGMS' annual budget was $1.9 billion, of which nearly $126 million was spent on its MORE programs. This amount includes the Minority Biomedical Research Support- Research Initiative for Scientific Enhancement (MBRS-RISE) program, the Minority Access to Research Careers (MARC), Post-baccalaureate Research Education Program (PREP), and the Bridges to the Baccalaureate and Bridges to the PhD programs. The amount of funds dedicated to these programs reflects the commitment by the science and research community to the goals of the MORE Division in addressing this problem. Increased funding set forth in H.R. 6 will only strengthen NIH's focus on diversifying the biomedical workforce by requiring NIH to focus on ensuring participation from scientists from underrepresented communities. In addition to addressing the needs of underrepresented communities, H.R. 6 also calls for specific action to increase representation of racial minorities. The 21st Century Cures Act acknowledges that there are disturbing statistics on the low numbers of African Americans, Hispanics and Native Americans pursuing academic qualification and participating in scientific research. Under H.R. 6, the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities will necessarily include strategies for increasing representation of minority communities in its strategic plan. I am proud to say that H.R. 6 includes the Jackson Lee Amendment, which makes a good bill even better by ensuring that the national goals of finding and bringing more cures and treatments to patients and strengthening the biomedical innovation ecosystem in the United States is aided by an expanding pool of diverse and talented medical researchers. Specifically, the Jackson Lee Amendment provides: The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall conduct outreach to historically Black colleges and universities, Hispanic-serving institutions, Native American colleges, and rural colleges to ensure that health professionals from underrepresented populations are aware of research opportunities under this Act. Many racial health disparities stem from lack of access to effective test, treatments and cures for illnesses that have devastating consequences for African American, Hispanic and Native American populations. For example: 1. African-Americans represent 12% of the U.S. population but only 5% of clinical trial participants. 2. Hispanics make up 16% of the population but only 1% of clinical trial participants. 3. Women are under-represented in cardiovascular device trials, which have 67% male participation. The most significant barriers limiting clinical participation are race, age, and sex of participants: 1. Women and minority patients are more difficult to recruit. 2. Women and minority physicians have less experience and are relatively more costly to engage. 3. Minority patients with limited English proficiency can require costly translation services. Physicians are the gateway to the patient. Increasing diversity of those conducting research will have implications on the types of conditions that are researched and the participants in clinical trials that are seeking answers to illnesses like lupus, triple negative breast cancer, and sickle cell disease that can be difficult to detect, treat and cure. Certain medical illnesses have been known to have higher prevalence in certain demographic groups, including type II diabetes, lupus, sickle cell anemia, and Triple Negative Breast Cancer for which African Americans are more than twice as likely to be diagnosed on average. Lupus, triple negative breast cancer and sickle cell disease are of particular concern because they are often difficult to diagnose and disproportionately impact persons of color and especially women. In particular, Lupus is a chronic, complex and prevalent autoimmune disease that affects more than 1.5 million Americans. Yet, Lupus is one of America's least recognized major diseases. More than 90% of lupus sufferers are women, mostly young women between the ages of 15 to 44, and women of color are two to three times more at risk for lupus than Caucasians. Triple negative breast cancer also disproportionately impacts younger women, African American women, Hispanic/Latina women, and women with a ``BRCA1 genetic mutation, which is prevalent in Jewish women. More than 30% of all breast cancer diagnoses in African American are of the triple negative variety, and African American women are far more susceptible to this dangerous subtype than white or Hispanic women. Additionally, there are about 2 million people that carry the sickle cell trait and with about 100,000 having the disease. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, sickle cell trait is common among African Americans and occurs in about 1 in 12, and sickle cell disease occurs in about 1 out of every 500 African- American births, compared to about 1 out of every 36,000 Hispanic- American births. Treatments for Lupus, triple negative breast cancer and sickle cell disease are not progressing as quickly as desired by patients, researchers, and policy makers. We must support the advancement of legislation that will allow for the remediation and end of health care disparities and the promotion of research parity for diseases such as lupus, triple negative breast cancer, sickle cell disease, and countless other rare and serious diseases. Race and ethnicity have also been shown to affect the effectiveness of and response to certain drugs, such as anti-hypertensive therapies in the treatment of hypertension in African Americans and anti- depressants in Hispanics. Increased diversity in research trials could help researchers find better, more precise ways to fight diseases that disproportionately impact certain populations, and may be important for the safe and effective use of new therapies. As one of the most diverse cities in the country, Houston is the 4th largest city in the United States and the 5th most populated metropolitan area in the nation. Houston is home to the largest medical complex in the world--the Texas Medical Center, which provides clinical health care, research and education at its 54 institutions. The University of Houston, ranked number three out of all other colleges and universities in Texas, is an example of a premier institution that can produce students with advanced STEM degrees who would be able to join a progressing biomedical field. Another important requirement of H.R. 6 is that it would require the National Institutes of Health to publically report the number of children by race and gender who participate in NIH funded clinical trials. This legislation would help ensure that children of all races are adequately represented in clinical trials and that we can determine the safety and effectiveness of drugs on children of all demographic backgrounds. With 10,000 known diseases, 7,000 of which are rare, and treatments for only 500 of them--clear there is much work to do. Medical research saves lives and improves the quality of life for millions of Americans because the government provides a steady and reliable commitment to basic research into cures for debilitating and deadly diseases. Given the array of commendable initiatives, H.R. 6 is a necessary piece of legislation that will accelerate the discovery, development, and delivery of promising new treatments and cures for all patients while investing in our nation's ability to maintain the best and most diverse biomedical workforce in the world. Mr. Chair, I call for the support of all of my colleagues in ensuring the passage of the important legislation.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the ranking member and the manager of this legislation. I have had the privilege of being here during the mighty leadership of Jim Oberstar, and I would really call him America's Congressperson. He would be an eloquent spokesperson today for not isolating his advocacy for his own region or State, but he would rise up on the floor of the House to speak eloquently about the need for the refurbishing, the rebuilding, the restoration of America's infrastructure, transportation infrastructure, from highways and bridges and dams to airports and train stations and tracks. Mr. Speaker, I just came in today from Philadelphia on Amtrak, and as you know, on trains, we engage with our fellow travelers. I guess we are called passengers, but we are fellow travelers. It was interesting to engage with these constituents of America who were using this mode of transportation. They made a very valuable point. They said it is not the equipment of Amtrak or whether the Acela can move faster than any other train, it is the infrastructure upon which the train travels. It is the train tracks. It is the investment in that infrastructure to make Amtrak what it needs to be. Now, Congressman Oberstar certainly did not live in this part of the country, but he could see the general landscape of what America needed. I was very interested in hearing my colleague from Minnesota speak of that time when the bridge collapsed. What a tragic incident. All of us were appalled and saddened, and it was amazing how ``General Oberstar,'' if you will, took the leadership role to help America. So I rise today to support this underlying legislation and to simply thank him and to thank his family for sharing Jim Oberstar, the Frenchman, as he would like to say. And in concluding my remarks, might I say ``merci beaucoup'' to you, to the late Jim Oberstar, a man who loved America and could be called America's Congressperson.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the managers of this very Special Order and my words to them and to this House. I want you to take note of the spirit in which these Members have come. If our constituents are seeing us and watching us, if those who agree with us are watching, no one has come with anger and a cry of hysteria. They have come with a reasoned request and pronouncement of the wrongness of the present situation in this House. Let me say that it was in 1864 that the States were given the call to send forward two statutes to come to represent their States in the United States Congress. In addition, we know that the United States Congress has a number of flags representing various States. This was to be the people's House, and the people's House would reflect the people of the United States of America. History should be something that grows with the Nation and reflects the goodness of the Nation. Yes, there is history that should be taught, such as the ugliness and violence of the slave history; but it is not to be honored. I join my colleagues today to be able to call for the taking down of signs of Confederacy in the United States Capitol--in particular, as I am in the House of Representatives, in the people's House. Let me give you a credible basis upon which to do so, why this Supreme Court decision has been so ignored. Let me cite it for my colleagues, Walker III v. Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans, issued on June 18, 2015--ironically, the day after the martyrdom of nine wonderful African Americans practicing their Christian faith. This particular decision indicates that the State of Texas was to be supported. This was a case that engaged many of our constituents in Texas. We organize and galvanize. I want to thank Dr. Clark, the president of the Missionary Baptist General Convention of Texas, and Reverend Max Miller, who came up as we argued this case. We were convincing. The Texas Department of Motor Vehicles board agreed that a Confederate license plate issued by the State of Texas would be offensive and would be considered, in essence, a public action or public speech. For those who want to raise the question of the First Amendment, this cry that we, as members of the Congressional Black Caucus, are making is perfectly constitutional and legitimate. We are talking about flags that are flown on State property or Federal property. This caucus should be congratulated. It is succinct in its argument; it is detailed in its argument, and no First Amendment opposition can be raised because the Supreme Court of the United States has said that we can deny utilizing the Confederate flag that may be considered State action as it is placed on Federal lands on the Federal property here. Our colleagues, in particular Hakeem Jeffries and Mr. Huffman and others, understood that when they acted last week. Now, the considerate thing to have done is there are amendments to stay in place, the Interior bill to be voted on, and the right thing would have been done because they argued the point that this was State or Federal action. We now come again to try and clarify for our colleagues that these flags should come down. In the privileged resolutions that have gone on last week, they made the point very clear that it was an insult to the dignity of the House. I have introduced H. Res. 342 that I hope will complement, and it is one that talks about the enhancement of unity in America and stands on the Walker decision and, in particular, makes it very clear that divisive symbols--license plates, specialty license plates, replicas, and flags--on public buildings or government property and symbols on State or Federal action, State public speech--that is a speech of those you represent--should not be allowed. How divisive is that point of view? It is not. The divisiveness is those that stand on a false sense of history, yet want to offend those who likewise have great leadership. Let me make this point about the battle flag, this Confederate flag. Might I ask the question: Have southerners not fought in the War of 1812, in World War I, in World War II, in the Korean war, in the Hungarian war in the fifties, and in Vietnam and shed their blood under this flag, have they not been honored when they have shed their blood? Not only that, when Confederate soldiers died, they were honored appropriately in graves where those who desired to honor that shedding of the blood were allowed to do so. We did not run into the funerals of those Southern fallen soldiers and cast upon them and curse them and deny them. They were allowed to be honored appropriately, and they now go into the annals of history. When you understand what grounds they stood on, what their general stood on, such as Jefferson Davis, who called the individuals who were slaves as unprofitable savages--that is what one general who has been honored has called them, ``unprofitable savages''--is that the history that we should be honoring? Is that what we should be lifting up? Is that what should be placed in the place of honor in the United States Congress? Is that engaged in the uplifting of the dignity of the House? Or is it insulting the dignity of the House? To my colleagues, I stand with you today to join in trying to create an understanding of the rightness of the work of our colleagues last week on the Interior bill, of the rightness of the Congressional Black Caucus going, as someone would say, on and on and on about this flag; and my good friend from New Jersey said it is symbols, and we need to bridge the gap of the inequity and wealth, we need education, we need jobs. Let me be very clear, Mr. Speaker, the Congressional Black Caucus and my colleagues and the Democratic Caucus and good will Republicans are fighting for jobs--or should be--fighting for education. We are not languishing along the side highway of life. We fought to maintain the ObamaCare or the Affordable Care Act. We are not ignoring the other desires of our constituents. Let me close on this final point, and I am glad that my colleague from the District of Columbia raised it, and Congresswoman Kelly has been a leader, and Congresswoman Kelly, let's rise again, and that is the horror of gun violence. Let me say to Director Comey, since I am on the Judiciary Committee, thank you for your honesty, but let me make it very clear that we suffered this loophole because of the opposition to the sensibleness of the Brady anti-gun violence legislation. Imbedded in it was this nonsensical point that, if I don't hear from you, then I am going to sell it. Who is selling it? The gun store. I have no opposition to our fellow citizens who make their living and provide for their families by selling guns. I do have opposition to the evil and vile perpetrator who went into that Mother Emanuel Church and killed illegally with a gun that he should not have had. He did so because the 3-day time had expired, because there was a time when the NICS was closed--that is the entity that the FBI relies upon--and the 3 days expired, and the owner said, ``I am going to sell the gun.'' This week I will be introducing a single piece of legislation--and I ask my colleagues to join me--I know there are many other bills--to eliminate the 3-day period of discretion, that no discretion will exist. They either answer the question that he or she is eligible or it is denied. So on the graves of these wonderful martyrs, I stand in honor of them. I mourn them, and I mourn for their families. I say to them: We will never forget. Once and for all, bring the flag down and remove these items in this place of honor that have denigrated and considered one race of people vile and unequal.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. In reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I thank Mr. Upton. I certainly thank Mr. Fattah, Mr. Pallone, and, again, my dear friend from Texas (Mr. Green) for his great leadership. Let me indicate that certain medical illnesses have been known to have a higher prevalence amongst certain demographic groups, including type 2 diabetes, lupus, sickle cell anemia, triple-negative breast cancer, and many other forms of diseases impacting our children, ones with early birth. So I ask my colleagues again to support this because increased diversity in research trials could help researchers find better, more precise ways to fight diseases that disproportionately impact certain populations and may be important for the safe and effective use of therapies. Again, I think this is a historic day, and I join with Mr. Upton to say that we have been friends. We started with the first bill together, and all of these Members have come together to put a historic mark on this Nation to say that we will not take a back step to any nation on research and on improving the quality of life for all of our citizens. I must say that this is a historic day as well for minorities. I thank Mr. Rush for his constant service, and I take note of the fact that increased in this is the ability to raise the FDA loans that people might get to $50,000, which will help many minorities. I hold this chart to show that minorities don't volunteer for clinicals without the outreach. Finally, I am delighted to have a letter from United Negro College Fund President Michael Lomax, who indicates that 25 percent of African American graduates with degrees in science, technology, engineering, and math come from our Historically Black Colleges. They are waiting in line to be a part of these clinicals, to be doctors and researchers, and we must give them that opportunity. It is a historic day. United Negro College Fund, Inc., Washington, DC, July 9, 2015. Hon. Sheila Jackson Lee, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Representative Jackson Lee: On behalf of UNCF (the United Negro College Fund), our 37 member private historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) and the students we serve, I write to express our strong support for your amendment to H.R. 6, the 21st Century Cures Act, which would require the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to increase its outreach to underrepresented health professionals and researchers regarding federal research opportunities. As you know, Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) are making strong contributions to the nation's scientific, technological, and research workforce. HBCUs enroll 10 percent of African American undergraduates, but produce 25 percent of African American graduates with degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. According to the National Science Foundation (NSF), ten of the top eleven baccalaureate institutions producing African American STEM doctorate recipients are HBCUs. Four HBCU medical institutions supply over 50 percent of African Americans who receive doctoral degrees in medicine, dentistry, and the biomedical sciences each year. Despite these contributions, federal efforts to tap into this talent pool in the dissemination of federal research grants at the National Institutes of Health, the NSF, and other federal science agencies continues to lag behind. Your amendment will help draw greater attention to the disproportionately low representation of minority researchers in U.S. Department of Health and Human Services-supported biomedical and behavioral research. We are grateful for your recognition of the vital need to diversify and strengthen the nation's scientific and research workforce and thank you for your ongoing advocacy to drive improvement. Sincerely, Michael L. Lomax, Ph.D., President and CEO, UNCF.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. I cannot conclude my remarks without saying that just a few minutes ago, by video, I witnessed the flag of South Carolina--the rebel flag--being taken down. I would only say that it is a unifying factor. This bill is a unifying factor, and it is going to help all of us. I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk. It is listed in the Rule as Jackson Lee #8. I wish to thank the Chair and Ranking Member of the Committee on Rules for making the Jackson Lee Amendment in order. I thank Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Upton and Ranking Member Pallone for their collaborative effort that resulted in this bipartisan legislation being reported favorably to the House by a vote of 51-0. I thank them all for this opportunity to explain the Jackson Lee Amendment, which makes a good bill even better by ensuring that the national goals of finding and bringing more cures and treatments to patients and strengthening the biomedical innovation ecosystem in the United States is aided by an expanding pool of diverse and talented medical researchers. Specifically, the Jackson Lee Amendment provides: The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall conduct outreach to historically Black colleges and universities, Hispanic-serving institutions, Native American colleges, and rural colleges to ensure that health professionals from underrepresented populations are aware of research opportunities under this Act. Many racial health disparities stem from lack of access to quality healthcare and proper health awareness. Unfortunately this means that incidence of disease does not always match trial populations. For example, consider that: 1. African-Americans represent 12% of the U.S. population but only 5% of clinical trial participants. 2. Hispanics make up 16% of the population but only 1% of clinical trial participants. 3. Sex distribution in cardiovascular device trials is 67% male. Other significant barriers to diversified clinical trials, which are the key to sound medical research and the foundation for medical cures and breakthroughs, as reported by investigators and coordinators are insurance status, patient inconvenience costs, availability of transportation, distance to the study site, and patient and family concerns about risk. But the most significant barriers limiting clinical participation are race, age, and sex of participants: 1. Women and minority patients are more difficult to recruit. 2. Women and minority physicians have less experience and are relatively more costly to engage. 3. Minority patients with limited English proficiency can require costly translation services. The first step in engaging women and minorities in clinical trials is finding them. Research has shown that minority patients seek physicians of their own race, so bringing these doctors into trials is critical. ``Physicians are the gateway to the patient''. There are disturbing statistics on the number of African Americans, Hispanics and Native Americans pursuing academic qualification and participating in scientific research. Many barriers exist that account for the low rate of participation among diverse communities, including patient fear of experimentation and lack of understanding or education with regard to the importance of clinical trials in creating new treatments and cures. The Jackson Lee Amendment is intended to aid in the necessary effort to diversify the pool of doctors and medical researchers conducting clinical trials, and thereby helping to diversify the participants in the clinical trials. In short, the Jackson Lee Amendment seeks to open the ``physician gateway'' to the patient. The Journal on STEM Education reported in 2011 that only 8.34% of the STEM doctorates awarded in 2006 were given to URMs, despite making up approximately 28% of the U.S. population. Furthermore, GAO noted that while the percentage of underrepresented minorities nationwide increased from 13% to 19% from 1994 to 2003, the total number of STEM doctorates awarded to the same group dropped during this period from 8,335 to 7,310. In response, the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) created the Minority Opportunities in Research (MORE) Division and similar academic intervention programs. The MORE programs are comprised of four primary components: research experience, mentoring and advisement, supplemental instruction and workshops, and financial support. In 2007, NIGMS' annual budget was $1.9 billion, of which nearly $126 million was spent on its MORE programs. This amount includes the Minority Biomedical Research Support- Research Initiative for Scientific Enhancement (MBRS-RISE) program, the Minority Access to Research Careers (MARC), Post-baccalaureate Research Education Program (PREP), and the Bridges to the Baccalaureate and Bridges to the Ph.D. programs. The amount of funds dedicated to these programs reflects the commitment by the science and research community to the goals of the MORE Division in addressing this problem. Certain medical illnesses have been known to have higher prevalence in certain demographic groups, including type II diabetes, lupus, sickle cell anemia, and Triple Negative Breast Cancer for which African Americans are more than twice as likely to be diagnosed on average. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, sickle cell trait is common among African Americans and occurs in about 1 in 12, and sickle cell disease occurs in about 1 out of every 500 African- American births, compared to about 1 out of every 36,000 Hispanic- American births. Race and ethnicity have also been shown to affect the effectiveness of and response to certain drugs, such as anti-hypertensive therapies in the treatment of hypertension in African Americans and anti- depressants in Hispanics. Increased diversity in research trials could help researchers find better, more precise ways to fight diseases that disproportionately impact certain populations, and may be important for the safe and effective use of new therapies. But before we can engage more women and minorities to participate in clinical trials, we must be able to find them. And the key to finding minority patients is to find more physicians from their racial and ethnic groups because research has shown that physicians are the gateway to the patient. The Jackson Lee Amendment opens that gateway. I urge support for the Jackson Lee Amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, how much time is remaining?

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I am delighted to yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), the distinguished ranking member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

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

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, this gives me an opportunity to not only thank the gentleman for his very astute amendment, but to thank the sponsors of this bill, Mr. Pallone, Mr. Green, Ms. DeGette, Mr. Upton, for all the work that has been done. Having served a number of years on the House Science Committee, I want to thank the gentleman from Texas because all we heard very often was the value of investing in minorities and women as the new cutting edge of scientific research. We know that this bill is expansive, but we are delighted with your emphasis on the recruiting of women and minorities, particularly for the young emerging scientists, and primarily because they begin to fuel the next generation of research and the next generation of the solving of problems, which is the American Cures Act. So I rise to support the gentleman's amendment and say to you that the documentation is long, that these individuals will then fill the laboratories of America and begin to do cutting-edge research to be able to create a better life for all of us. I thank the gentleman. I support his amendment.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, let me add my appreciation to Mr. Upton, Ms. DeGette, Mr. Pitts, Mr. Pallone, and Mr. Green, and I ask the simple question: When have we had a historic opportunity on the floor of the House to have such a major investment--major investment-- in the lives and health of Americans, quality investment involving a mandatory fund that will open America's labs and put more people in labs and be able to give people relief on some of the issues that we have heard discussed today? I thank Mr. Barton for raising the sadness that comes of parents that cannot find answers. Many of them are my constituency who have children with sickle cell, as we have been attempting to research this disease for many, many years; or the lupus that took advantage of a very active civic leader and caused the hospitalization for months; or this issue of triple negative breast cancer that many people are not aware of. The amendment I have today is to emphasize the importance of outreach to our Historically Black Colleges, Hispanic-Serving, Indian, Native American, and rural colleges. Let me explain for a brief moment the importance of this particular message. Physicians are a gateway to the patient. In short, the Jackson Lee amendment seeks to open up the physician gateway for patients and to researchers. It is to emphasize STEM education. It is to talk about the different medical illnesses and how important it is to reach out to these particular institutions to produce more medical professionals. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, sickle cell trait is common among African Americans and occurs in about 1 in 12. Additionally, race and ethnicity have also been shown to affect the effectiveness in response to certain drugs. We need these students from these colleges to be in our labs, to be physicians, and to welcome minorities into the clinical labs; because we have evidence to show of the short numbers of individuals who volunteer for clinicals, and minorities are at the low end. I encourage my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment. Open the doors of research and patient care through doctors, and open the doors of solving some of these very difficult diseases. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I think it is important to again note what a historic day this was, with the passage of the 21st Century Cures Act, which opens the opportunity for billions of dollars to be invested in the Nation's clinics and laboratories to make America healthy and make America better. This bill is from the Energy and Commerce Committee. I am very proud to be one of its cosponsors. And I would like to say back to my constituents in Texas, the Texas Medical Center, and all of the research that is being done: Here is an opportunity to work on those unique and special diseases impacting children with lupus and other diseases. That is why change is not bad. Additionally, I join with the arguments in my district for changing the names of high schools that are not reflective of the Nation today, those named after confederate generals. The names of these high schools are not reflective of a unifying America. Frankly, I believe that the school board should address this question and teach the children that that is the past history that was not a positive history and that we should reflect positively on unifying America and carrying the American flag. Lastly, again, I say on the floor what a very special day, the solemnity in the way the rebel flag was finally put to rest, put to rest, and taken to a relic museum, where it belongs. And we can stand here under this shining American flag saying that we, too, are Americans.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey for his kindness. Might I rise, really, to follow up to ask America to be unified and to be able to have a debate on the floor of the House on a resolution that I offered, H. Res. 342. To the gentleman from New Jersey, it says ``the enhancement of unity in America.'' What it speaks to is for this body to go on the record for saying that divisive emblems and symbols--swastikas or a rebel flag, a fighting flag--does not even represent the flag that most people think it is--the Confederate flag, this is the rebel flag--to put all those away; to be able to educate our children about the excitement of how diverse we are; to be reminded of the history of Reconstruction-- African Americans who are Senators and Congresspersons; to look at schools who now carry names of people who really might be considered treasonists; to be able to stand on the floor today or next week, as those in South Carolina did, in a civil way, so that our children will know that these symbols that divide are not history; and to be able to stand together and support the diversity of America. That is what I stand for, and I stand with Houston, who is reconsidering many school names at this time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, we have children to educate, and we have children to love and to have them to understand what America is all about. We are southerners and northerners. We come from the East and the West. We love our cooking, we love our culture, but we are Americans. So today I ask this body to allow us to debate this question to a resolution that enhances American unity. The Supreme Court issued a statement in Walker v. Sons of Confederate Veterans, a Texas case. Before the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles, early on, as just a civilian, I argued against Confederate license plates. We won that case. The Supreme Court said that public speech that offends or oppresses is not allowed. I am not talking about the flag on your car or your home, but I am saying that this rebel flag does not represent America, does not teach our children, and it does not heal. And I would offer to say that we are long overdue for a debate like that in the senate in South Carolina, to follow Reverend Pinckney's words that we have to know how to break the cycle and of a roadway toward a better world. He knew that a path of greatness involves an open mind, but more importantly, an open heart. I hope we can debate H. Res. 342, which enhances the unity of our country, not this flag.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. I thank the gentleman from the great State of Massachusetts for yielding. Mr. Speaker, this is an emotional time for many of us. This is an important bill. But we have just gone through an emotional time on this floor, again, raising up the ugliness of the rebel flag. I stand again to try and educate both the public and our colleagues about the damage that this flag has done to so many, for under that flag many were killed in the name of slavery. Interestingly, this is the 150th year of the elimination of slavery. I think about health care, and I spoke last evening about lupus, sickle cell anemia, and triple-negative breast cancer all falling discriminantly on minority populations. In life, there are still issues that face you because you are different. I call upon this House to recognize that, although we have many issues to debate, when you pierce the heart of someone because you believe he is inferior or different--when you want to coddle and protect the rebel flag--I hope we will get to the point between now and next week, as I introduce H. Res. 342 as a privileged resolution to ban all signs of hate, that we will rise to be unified together and stand under the American flag.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, many of us have not spoken on the floor of the House on the horrific tragedy that occurred in Mother Emanuel Baptist church, our respect for our colleague from South Carolina; our respect for our assistant leader, Jim Clyburn; and our respect for the families that have buried their dead over the last week. Many of us joined the President in Charleston, South Carolina, for the funeral of Reverend Dr. Pinckney. Today, I rise to ask this body, reflecting on two amendments that were offered last night regarding the Confederate flag that were voted on by voice vote in the Interior bill, but I ask today the leadership to allow this House to look at three legislative initiatives that have been offered by Members based upon the Walker III v. Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans case. I want my colleagues to know that the Supreme Court, including Justice Clarence Thomas, ruled that government speech did not warrant the utilization of the rebel flag. Finally, let me read to you the words about senator Pinckney. This is warranted. The President said: My liberty depends on you being free, too. History must be a manual for how to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past, how to break the cycle, a roadway toward a better world. He knew that the path of grace involves an open mind but, more importantly, an open heart. We need to debate on the floor of the House the symbols of hate in this Nation, and we need to do it now. I ask my colleagues, Republicans and Democrats, to join us in the legislative initiatives we have for this to be placed on the floor of the House for all of us to stand and debate what is positive about America.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, let me thank the committee, both the staff and the gentlewoman from Minnesota, the gentleman from California, and the gentleman from Idaho who are now managing this appropriations bill. I call this the good health appropriations for the quality of life of many Americans, both urban and rural. I ask my colleagues to consider my amendment, which deals with the urban reforestation program. I live close and personal to both urban areas and rural areas in my congressional district. Given close to 80 percent of the population of the conterminous United States lives in an urban area, the benefits provided by urban forests touch most U.S. citizens. My amendment specifically reinforces the importance of urban reforestation, as well as preserves our ability to return urban areas to healthy and safe living environments for our children. I offered these amendments in years past. I know it from a real-time experience. Over the last couple of years, when the drought hit Houston and many other areas in Texas, millions of trees were lost. Millions of trees were lost. Today, now, we face the large and very challenging effort of trying to reforest parks like Memorial Park, MacGregor Park, and many parks in the northeast part of my district. In the past 30 years alone, we have lost 30 percent of all of our urban trees, a loss of over 600 million trees. I have certainly seen neighborhoods in Houston benefit from urban reforestation. In fact, many Members will remember that throughout our careers, we have been involved in planting of trees. There are major efforts throughout our community. I want to cite, for example, those who have worked in Houston, Texas, doing the reforestation work: Houston Wilderness, Student Conservation Association, the Buffalo Bayou Partnership, the Greater East End Management District, Houston Parks and Recreation Department, and Texas Parks & Wildlife Department, along with many civic clubs of which I have had the privilege of working with. Several years ago, American Forests, a leading conservation group, estimated that the tree-covered loss in the greater Washington metropolitan area from 1973 to 1997 resulted in an additional 540 million cubic feet of storm water runoff annually, which would have taken more than 1 billion in storm water control facilities to manage. We know that the green effect in the middle of the city can have a beneficial effect on a community's health, both physically and psychologically. A healthy 32-foot-tall ash tree can produce about 260 pounds of oxygen annually. Trees help reduce pollution. Trees help combat the effects of greenhouse gases. Trees help cool down the overall city environment by shading asphalt, concrete, and metal surfaces. Buildings and paving in city centers create a heat island effect. A mature tree canopy reduces air temperatures by about 5 to 10 degrees. Let me give a personal story on the importance of reforestation. A few years ago, I helped create a memorial plaza for a Martin Luther King monument in MacGregor Park. There was a tree of life that was presented to that park by Martin Luther King's father. In the course of urban development, that tree had to be moved. It caused an emotional uprising in our community. Ovide Duncantell tied himself to the tree. Ultimately, we resolved that the tree had to be moved, and that tree was potentially a tree that would die. With the right kind of nurturing and reforestation and treatment by the foresters who came, that tree is now a shining example of a unified community. I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment to ensure that our programs dealing with urban reforestation continue. Mr. Chair, thank you for this opportunity to speak in support of my amendment to H.R. 2822, the Interior and Environment Appropriations Act of 2016 and to commend Chairman Calvert and Ranking Member McCollum for their leadership in shepherding this bill through the legislative process. Among other agencies, this legislation funds the U.S. Forest Service, the National Park System, and the Smithsonian Institution, which operates our national museums including the National Zoo. Mr. Chair, my amendment is simple but it sends a very important message from the Congress of the United States. The Jackson Lee amendment emphasizes the importance of urban forests, and preserves our ability to return urban areas to healthy and safe living environments for our children. Identical amendments were offered and accepted in the Interior and Environment Appropriations Acts for Fiscal Year 2008 (H.R. 2643) and Fiscal Year 2007 (H.R. 5386), and were adopted by voice vote. Mr. Chair, surveys indicate that some urban forests are in serious danger. In the past 30 years alone, we have lost 30% of all our urban trees-- a loss of over 600 million trees. Eighty percent (80%) of the American population lives in the dense quarters of a city. Reforestation programs return a tool of nature to a concrete area that can help to remove air pollution, filter out chemicals and agricultural waste in water, and save communities millions of dollars in storm water management costs. I have certainly seen neighborhoods in Houston benefit from urban reforestation. In addition, havens of green in the middle of a city can have beneficial effects on a community's health, both physical and psychological, as well as increase property value of surrounding real estate. Reforestation of cities is an innovative way of combating urban sprawl and/or deterioration. Mr. Chair, a real commitment to enhancing our environment involves both the protection of existing natural resources and active support for restoration and improvement projects. Several years ago, American Forests, a leading conservation group, estimated that the tree cover lost in the greater Washington metropolitan area from 1973 to 1997 resulted in an additional 540 million cubic feet of storm water runoff annually, which would have taken more than $1 billion in storm water control facilities to manage. Trees breathe in carbon dioxide, and produce oxygen. People breathe in oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide. A typical person consumes about 38 lb of oxygen per year. A healthy tree, say a 32 ft tall ash tree, can produce about 260 lb of oxygen annually--two trees supply the oxygen needs of a person for a year. Trees help reduce pollution by capturing particulates like dust and pollen with their leaves. A mature tree absorbs from 120 to 240 lbs of the small particles and gases of air pollution. Trees help combat the effects of ``greenhouse'' gases, the increased carbon dioxide produced from burning fossil fuels that is causing our atmosphere to ``heat up.'' Trees help cool down the overall city environment by shading asphalt, concrete and metal surfaces. Buildings and paving in city centers create a heat-island effect. A mature tree canopy reduces air temperatures by about 5-10 degrees Fahrenheit. A 25 foot tree reduces annual heating and cooling costs of a typical residence by 8 to 12 percent, producing an average annual savings of $120 per American household. Proper tree plantings around buildings can slow winter winds, and reduce annual energy use for home heating by 4-22%. Mr. Chair, trees play a vital role in making our cities more sustainable and more livable. The Jackson Lee amendment simply provides for continued support to programs that reforest our urban areas. For all these reasons, Mr. Chair, I urge adoption of the Jackson Lee amendment and thank Chairman Calvert and Ranking Member McCollum for their courtesies, consideration, and very fine work in putting together this legislation. Mr. Chair, I yield to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum), the ranking member of the Appropriations Subcommittee on the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, let me conclude by simply saying what a great difference life will be in many urban areas with our commitment to reforestation of urban areas and creating more opportunities for trees to grow in those areas. I ask for support of the Jackson Lee amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, again, let me offer my appreciation to the gentlewoman from Minnesota, the gentleman from California, and their staff who have worked with us. Let me remind my colleagues that just a few days ago, I offered this amendment dealing with museums and dealing with my concern for the funding and the Smithsonian, to provide for the Nation's museum. Let me also say to my colleagues that I have offered this amendment in the past because I have a particular interest in the museums of America and their ability to do outreach. I imagine I am not alone standing here amongst appropriators to again say and call for the end of sequestration to be able to provide the appropriators and to provide the people of America the full funding to address these quality of life issues from the various lands and Federal parks and, as well, the historic trails, of which I will talk about, but museums, urban reforestation, all elements of the beauty of this Nation. And I frankly believe that museums, likewise, are that form of beauty. My amendment specifically says: ``None of the funds made available in this Act may be used to limit outreach programs administered by the Smithsonian Institution.'' In order to fulfill the Smithsonian's mission, the increase and diffusion of knowledge, the Smithsonian seeks to serve an even greater audience by bringing the Smithsonian to enclaves of communities who otherwise would be deprived of the vast amounts of cultural history offered by the Smithsonian. Our museums of the Nation are in trouble. The Smithsonian has a beautiful array of museums that are here that millions of Americans have the opportunity to visit. But the outreach program serves millions of Americans, thousands of communities, and hundreds of institutions in all 50 States through loans of objects, traveling exhibitions, and sharing of educational resources via publications, lectures and presentations, training programs, and Web sites. Allow me to mention just a few in my own district: The Holocaust Museum, unique in its presentation of a horrible time in history, but it also serves as a very unifying entity in our community; The Children's Museum, as one of the original board members and founders, now the Children's Museum is one of the major children's museums in the Nation. But again, it needs the impact of the outreach of the Smithsonian; And then, of course, the Museum of African American Culture, headed by a dear friend, but also a champion of holding this museum together, and that is John Guess. He needs a fuller embrace by the Smithsonian, including its expertise, its experts, its Ph.D.s, traveling efforts, and again, its encouragement of corporate communities to recognize the value of participating in museums. The Smithsonian's outreach activities include the Smithsonian Institution traveling exhibition, the Smithsonian Center for Education and Museum Studies, National Science Resources Center, the Smithsonian Institution Press, the Office of Fellowships, and the Smithsonian Associates. Who are we if we do not value preserving those items that tell the varied and diverse history of America, the good history of America, the history that is unifying and purposeful in citing us as a country that recognizes our wonderful diversity? So I ask my colleagues to support this amendment that deals specifically with allowing the outreach to the kinds of museums that really need the help of the Smithsonian. The Smithsonian, in concluding, Mr. Chairman, is very important to urban areas and rural areas alike, and its ability or its affiliation is to build a strong national network of museums and educational organizations in order to establish active and engaging relationships with communities throughout the country. Again, allow me to salute, in particular, John Guess, with the Museum of African American Culture in Houston. He has literally put that museum together, along with his board members. The Smithsonian--I hope they are hearing me as I am talking on the floor of the House--we need your help in Houston, Texas. We probably need your help in Washington State, in California, Minnesota, New York, and beyond to preserve and help these small museums throughout the Nation. I ask my colleagues to support not only this amendment, but the museums of this Nation. And I say to Mr. Calvert, we had discussed this before. This amendment now is a placeholder, hopefully, for our discussion going forward dealing with the preservation of our museums. Let me thank Mr. Calvert, Mr. Simpson, and Ms. McCollum. I yield back the balance of my time. Mr. Chair, thank you for this opportunity to speak in support of my amendment to H.R. 2822, the ``Interior and Environment Appropriations Act of 2016.'' Let me also thank Chairman Calvert and Ranking Member McCollum for their leadership in shepherding this bill to the floor. Among other agencies, this legislation funds the Smithsonian Institution, which operates our national museums, including the Air and Space Museum; the Museum of African Art; the Museum of the American Indian; and the National Portrait Gallery. The Smithsonian also operates another national treasure: the National Zoo. Mr. Chair, my amendment is simple but it sends a very important message from the Congress of the United States. The Jackson Lee Amendment simply provides that: ``Sec. __. None of the funds made available in this Act may be used to limit outreach programs administered by the Smithsonian Institution.'' This amendment is identical to an amendment I offered to the Interior and Environment Appropriations Act for FY2008 (H.R. 2643) that was approved by voice vote on June 26, 2007. Mr. Chair, the Smithsonian's outreach programs bring Smithsonian scholars in art, history and science out of ``the nation's attic'' and into their own backyard. Each year, millions of Americans visit the Smithsonian in Washington, D.C. But in order to fulfill the Smithsonian's mission, ``the increase and diffusion of knowledge,'' the Smithsonian seeks to serve an even greater audience by bringing the Smithsonian to enclaves of communities who otherwise would be deprived of the vast amount of cultural history offered by the Smithsonian. The Smithsonian's outreach programs serve millions of Americans, thousands of communities, and hundreds of institutions in all 50 states, through loans of objects, traveling exhibitions, and sharing of educational resources via publications, lectures and presentations, training programs, and websites. Smithsonian outreach programs work in close cooperation with Smithsonian museums and research centers, as well as with 144 affiliate institutions and others across the nation. The Smithsonian's outreach activities support community-based cultural and educational organizations around the country. They ensure a vital, recurring, and high-impact Smithsonian presence in all 50 states through the provision of traveling exhibitions and a network of affiliations. Smithsonian outreach programs increase connections between the Institution and targeted audiences (African American, Asian American, Latino, Native American, and new American) and provide kindergarten through college-age museum education and outreach opportunities. These outreach programs enhance K-12 science education programs, facilitate the Smithsonian's scholarly interactions with students and scholars at universities, museums, and other research institutions; and disseminate results related to the research and collections strengths of the Institution. The programs that provide the critical mass of Smithsonian outreach activity are: 1. the Smithsonian Institution Traveling Exhibition Services (SITES); 2. the Smithsonian Affiliations, the Smithsonian Center for Education and Museum Studies (SCEMS); 3. National Science Resources Center (NSRC); 4. the Smithsonian Institution Press (SIP); 5. the Office of Fellowships (OF); and 6. the Smithsonian Associates (TSA), which receives no federal funding. To achieve the goal of increasing pubic engagement, SITES directs some of its federal resources to develop Smithsonian Across America: A Celebration of National Pride. This ``mobile museum,'' which will feature Smithsonian artifacts from the most iconic (presidential portraits, historical American flags, Civil War records, astronaut uniforms, etc.) to the simplest items of everday life (family quilts, prairie schoolhouse furnishings, historical lunch boxes, multilingual store front and street signs, etc.), has been a long-standing organizational priority of the Smithsonian. SITES ``mobile museum'' is the only traveling exhibit format able to guarantee audience growth and expanded geographic distribution during sustained periods of economic retrenchment, but also because it is imperative for the many exhibitors nationwide who are struggling financially yet eager to participate in Smithsonian outreach. For communities still struggling to fully recover from the economic downturn, the ability of museums to present temporary exhibitions, the ``mobile museum'' promises to answer an ever-growing demand for Smithsonian shows in the field. A single, conventional SITES exhibit can reach a maximum of 12 locations over a two- to three-year period. In contrast, a ``mobile museum'' exhibit can visit up to three venues per week in the course of only one year, at no cost to the host institution or community. The net result is an increase by 150 in the number of outreach locations to which SITES shows can travel annually. And in addition to its flexibility in making short-term stops in cities and towns from coast-to-coast, a ``mobile museum'' has the advantage of being able to frequent the very locations where people live, work, and take part in leisure time activities. By establishing an exhibit presence in settings like these, SITES will not only increase its annual visitor participation by 1 million, but also advance a key Smithsonian performance objective: to develop exhibit approaches that address diverse audiences, including population groups not always affiliated with mainstream cultural institutions. SITES also will be the public exhibitions' face of the Smithsonian's National Museum of African American History and Culture, as that new Museum comes online. Providing national access to projects that will introduce the American public to the Museum's mission, SITES in FY 2008 will tour such stirring exhibitions as NASA ART: 50 Years of Exploration; 381 Days: The Montgomery Bus Boycott Story; Beyond: Visions of Planetary Landscapes; The Way We Worked: Photographs from the National Archives; and More Than Words: Illustrated Letters from the Smithsonian's Archives of American Art. To meet the growing demand among smaller community and ethnic museums for an exhibition celebrating the Latino experience, SITES provided a scaled-down version of the National Museum of American History's 4,000- square-foot exhibition about legendary entertainer Celia Cruz. Two 1,500-square-foot exhibitions, one about Crow Indian history and the other on basket traditions, will give Smithsonian visitors beyond Washington a taste of the Institution's critically acclaimed National Museum of the American Indian. Two more exhibits, ``In Plane View'' and ``Earth from Space,'' provided visitors an opportunity to experience the Smithsonian's recently opened, expansive National Air and Space Museum Udvar-Hazy Center. For almost 30 years, The Smithsonian Associates--the highly regarded educational arm of the Smithsonian Institution--has arranged Scholars in the Schools programs. Through this tremendously successful and well-received educational outreach program, the Smithsonian shares its staff--hundreds of experts in art, history and science--with the national community at a local level. The mission of Smithsonian Affiliations is to build a strong national network of museums and educational organizations in order to establish active and engaging relationships with communities throughout the country. There are currently 138 affiliates located in the United States, Puerto Rico, and Panama. By working with museums of diverse subject areas and scholarly disciplines, both emerging and well-established, Smithsonian Affiliations is building partnerships through which audiences and visitors everywhere will be able to share in the great wealth of the Smithsonian while building capacity and expertise in local communities. The National Science Resources Center (NSRC) strives to increase the number of ethnically diverse students participating in effective science programs based on NSRC products and services. The Center develops and implements a national outreach strategy that will increase the number of school districts (currently more than 800) that are implementing NSRC K-8 programs. The NSRC is striving to further enhance its program activity with a newly developed scientific outreach program introducing communities and school districts to science through literacy initiatives. In addition, through the building of the multicultural Alliance Initiative, the Smithsonian's outreach programs seek to develop new approaches to enable the public to gain access to Smithsonian collections, research, education, and public programs that reflect the diversity of the American people, including underserved audiences of ethnic populations and persons with disabilities. For all these reasons, Mr. Chair, I urge adoption of my amendment and thank Chairman Calvert and Ranking Member McCollum for their courtesies, consideration, and very fine work in putting together this excellent legislation.

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

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I rise with my appreciation to the managers of this bill and their staffs; but I also want to thank them for the very civil discussion that occurred earlier by two of my colleagues who offered amendments regarding the exhibition of Civil War artifacts, or the rebel flag, and I thank them for their courtesy in those amendments of those individuals. I also make a statement on the floor that I look forward to the opportunity given to us by the leadership of this House to have a full discussion on various entities that did not unify but divide, and I think a civil debate on this is warranted in this House as we watched the very moving and very honest debate that took place in South Carolina. My amendment, however, is one that, I hope, is embracing and is a show of unity about what America stands for, and that is the National Heritage Area-Corridor designation. I just want to show this map, and I am certainly quite pleased that a number of these National Heritage Areas do exist. There are 49 of them--none in the State of Texas, none but possibly one in Minnesota, maybe one between Arizona and California, but very few in the West, including in the State of Idaho, and I can name a number of other States. My amendment is to highlight the value of these national trails. This is particularly important because this tells the story of America. 16 U.S. Code 461 provides that: ``It is declared that it is a national policy to preserve for public use historic sites, buildings, and objects of national significance for the inspiration and benefit of the people of the United States.'' Again, I want to emphasize that--the inspiration. Texas has, starting in Galveston, history referring to the Emancipation Proclamation. We commemorate something called Juneteenth, and out of Juneteenth was the time when Captain Granger came to the shores of Galveston, in Texas, and announced that the slaves had been freed. However, there are a number of other historic sites following the trail from Galveston through Houston to include Emancipation Park, MacGregor Park, and then sites going up through Austin. We really understand that this idea of historic trails can create an economic impact. For example, in 2012, a nationally respected consulting firm completed a comprehensive economic impact of six national historic sites in the northeast region that also included an extrapolation of the economic benefit of all 49 NHAs. It was $12.9 billion. The study quantified the economic impact of the individual NHAs and based it upon a case study approach and found that the economic impact of three National Historic Areas in Arizona, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania showed: in Massachusetts, $153.8 million in economic impact, 1,832 jobs, and generates $14.3 million in tax revenue; in Pennsylvania, $21.2 million in economic impact, 314 jobs, and generates $1.5 million in tax revenue; in the Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area in Arizona, $22.7 million in economic impact, supports 277 jobs, and generates $1.3 million in tax revenue. This is, Mr. Chairman, an important and very vital part of America's history, and as we approach the anniversary of this legislation that was created in 1966, I think it is important to reinforce the ability for these particular sites. We need to increase the ability for feasibility studies; we need the support of legislative action and designation; and we need to be able to introduce people to the importance of these sites. Let me make very quick mention of the emancipation part. In 1872, in Houston, four former slaves raised $800. That would be part of it, but I would just simply say that this is a very important part of America's history. I ask my colleagues to support the creation of a national heritage site across America by supporting the Jackson Lee amendment so that we can expand the 49 sites to other States that do not have one single site, and Texas is one of them. Mr. Chair, Thank you for this opportunity to speak in support of the Jackson Lee amendment and to commend Chairman Calvert and Ranking Member McCollum for their leadership in shepherding this bill to floor. Among other agencies, this legislation funds the U.S. Forest Service, the National Park System, and the Smithsonian Institution. Most Americans do not know that this bill also funds a very special program, the National Recreation and Preservation. Mr. Chair, the Jackson Lee Amendment is simple but it sends a very important message from the Congress of the United States. The Jackson Lee Amendment provides: Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act for the ``DEPARTMENT 0F THE INTERIOR--NATIONAL PARK SERVICE--NATIONAL RECREATION AND PRESERVATION'' may be used in contravention of section 461 of title 16, United States Code. And 16 U.S. Code 461 provides that: It is declared that it is a national policy to preserve for public use historic sites, buildings, and objects of national significance for the inspiration and benefit of the people of the United States. This is important, especially as it relates to National Heritage Areas (NHAs). NHAs both preserve our national heritage and provide economic benefits to communities and regions through their commitments to heritage conservation and economic development. Through public-private partnerships, NHA entities support historic preservation, natural resource conservation, recreation, heritage tourism, and educational projects. Leveraging funds and long-term support for projects, NHA partnerships generate increased economic impact for regions in which they are located. In 2012, a nationally respected consulting firm (Tripp Umbach) completed a comprehensive economic impact study of six NHA sites in the Northeast Region that also included an extrapolation of the economic benefit of all 49 NHA sites on the national economy. The annual economic impact was estimated to be 12.9 billion. The economic activity supports approximately 148,000 jobs and generates $1.2 billion annually in Federal revenues from sources such as employee compensation, proprietor income, indirect business tax, households, and corporation. The study quantified the economic impacts of individual NHAs based upon a case study approach and found that the economic impact of the three National Historic Areas in Arizona, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania showed: 1. Essex National Heritage Area (MA) generates $153.8 million in econonic impact, supports 1,832 jobs, and generates $14.3 million in tax revenue. 2. Oil Region National Heritage Area (PA) generates $21.2 million in economic impact, supports 314 jobs, and generates $1.5 million tax revenue; and 3. Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area (AZ) $22.7 million in economic impact, supports 277 jobs, and generates $1.3 million in tax revenue. Mr. Chair, as I said there are 49 NHA across the nation but, surprisingly, none in my state of Texas. We hope to rectify this in the not too distant future. Texas is the largest and second most populous state in the nation and has a unique story in American history with its diverse geographic landscape, natural resources, and population. From Galveston's port, East Texas' farms and forestry, and the Buffalo Soldiers, Texas has a rich multi-cultured heritage and history. To honor Texas' heritage, I will be working with my colleagues to establish a National Heritage Area Corridor designation that stretches across historically significant and landmark sites from Galveston to Houston and East Texas into Central Texas. This cultural corridor would focus on historic, cultural and natural sites, as well as roadways, businesses, residential and farm districts that unite Texas' rich heritage from the first settlers to modern times. Mr. Chair, as we approach the anniversary of the passage of the 1966 National Historic Preservation Act, we want to preserve and unite the legacy stories of some of our state's most revered sites. Currently underway in Houston is the revitalization of the historic Emancipation Park, a pivotal site in the state's social and cultural development and African American legacy. The future Emancipation Park, if brought to fruition and designated as a part of a National Heritage Corridor, represents a unique opportunity to tell a comprehensive story about the great State of Texas. To conclude, National Heritage Areas (NHAs) are both a good investment and national treasure providing economic benefits to communities and regions through their commitment to heritage conservation and economic development. For all these reasons, Mr. Chair, I urge adoption of the Jackson Lee Amendment. I thank Chairman Calvert and Ranking Member McCollum for their work in putting together this legislation. The Creation of a National Heritage Corridor for Emancipation Park and Surrounding Historic Sites in Texas: I.) Why a National Heritage Corridor: 1. Opportunity to share the unique story of Emancipation Park In 1872, four former slaves raised $800.00 to purchase 10 acres of land as a gathering place to celebrate their new found freedom. This land has played a prominent role in America's rich cultural heritage, from slavery, to the false hopes of Emancipation, a safe haven under Jim Crow, a site for mobilization and activism during the Civil Rights movement and will now serve as a local, national and international destination for many years to come for all people for the discussion of modern day race relations and for the celebration and exploration of African American history and culture. 2. Link Related Historical Sites to create the Heritage Corridor From the Slave Ships landing in Galveston, to slaves traveling into Ft. Bend and Harris County, up the Brazos into Washington County and from East Texas into Central Texas. 3. Provides Opportunities for Access to Federal Funding for the Region 4. Serves as a Catalyst for Economic Development 5. Encourages Tourism in the Region Emancipation Park can serve as the Welcoming Center and the Conservancy can provide the oversight for the NHC 6. Raises the Profile of the Project for the Capital Campaign

Ms. JACKSON LEE. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, forty six years ago, on July 20, 1969, millions of Americans and other people around the world, sat glued to their televisions and radios to witness a human being walk on the surface of the moon, one of the signal events in world history. This astounding technological achievement could not have come at a better time because in July 1969, the United States was in need of a unifying event following the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and Senator Robert Kennedy, and Malcolm X, and social divisions resulting from America's involvement in the Vietnam War, a war that cost the nation dearly in blood and treasure. In 1969, the world was still caught in the grip of the Cold War, divided by ideology, separated into opposing blocs of countries aligned with either the Soviet Union or the United States. Today the world stands connected in a variety of ways unimaginable 46 years ago. The step onto the surface of the moon by Neil Armstrong, left more than a mere foot print in the moon sand, it spurred a technological revolution that has resulted in many of the devices that help shape our lives today. On September 29, 1962 at Rice University in Houston, Texas, President John F. Kennedy inspired the nation to accept the challenge of sending a man to the moon and bringing him safely home before the end of the decade. President Kennedy said, ``We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.'' In July 1969, through the combined determination and efforts of the American people, the United States made good on President Kennedy's prediction. From the inspiration of a young President who challenged us to set our sights on the moon, scientists developed new materials, engineers manufactured innovative equipment, and factory workers assembled cutting edge transport crafts. Together, Americans proved that by working together, toward a common purpose, there is nothing beyond our reach. And let us not forget the crew of American heroes, who made President's Kennedy's promise a reality for the world, and whose courage and daring embodied the virtues and ideals of the American spirit: astronauts Neil Armstrong, Edwin ``Buzz'' Eugene Aldrin Jr., and Michael Collins. The words spoken by Neil Armstrong when he stepped off Eagle 1 onto the surface of the moon perfectly captured the significance of that moment in human history: ``This is one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind.'' This giant step forward in world history reflected the ground breaking research, development, inventions, and discoveries of thousands of Americans who successfully opened a new path in frontier of space exploration.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the 51st anniversary of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, one of the consequential governmental actions since the issuance of the Emancipation Proclamation. On July 2, 1964, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the act that would profoundly change our country and brought about the greatest reduction in economic and social inequality among Americans in history. Mr. Speaker, today it is difficult to imagine there once was a time in our country when blacks and whites could not eat together in public restaurants, use the same public restrooms, stay at the same hotels, or attend the same schools. It is hard to believe today that just 51 years ago, discrimination on the ground of race was a legal and socially accepted practice. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 changed that. The Civil Rights Act outlawed discrimination and segregation in employment, public accommodations, and education on the ground of race, gender, religion or national origin. This act became the soil from which our country flourished; opportunities were bred and dreams were born. This change did not happen overnight or by accident. It took hard work and courage and an unwavering faith that America could live up to the true meaning of its creed. With American leaders embodying faith and courage the Civil Rights Act signifies battles fought over many years that our champions finally won. Leaders like the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Whitney Young, Rosa Parks, and John Lewis are just a few of the many noble champions who took a stand for freedom and risked their lives to make real the promise of America for all Americans. Today, 51 years later, we continue to preserve the rights and freedoms that so many fought for and could only dream of before the Civil Rights Act. On the evening of June 11, 1963, President John F. Kennedy addressed the nation and uttered these words that would echo in history: ``It ought to be possible for every American to enjoy the privileges of being American without regard to his race or his color. But this is not the case. We are confronted primarily with a moral issue. It is as old as the Scriptures and is as clear as the American Constitution. The heart of the question is whether all Americans are to be afforded equal rights and equal opportunities, whether we are going to treat our fellow Americans as we want to be treated. One hundred years of delay have passed since President Lincoln freed the slaves, yet their heirs, their grandsons, are not fully free. They are not yet freed from the bonds of injustice. They are not yet freed from social and economic oppression. And this Nation, for all its hopes and all its boasts, will not be fully free until all its citizens are free. Now the time has come for this Nation to fulfill its promise.'' And a better country, we have become. Although we have come a long way, we must not become complacent on the issues of civil rights. Our nation is a growing melting pot, and we must continue to make sure American citizens, regardless of their religion, race, or gender, are granted the right to freedom and equality. This nation prides itself on the abundance of individual freedom. Through the Civil Rights Act of 1964, we have nurtured a land where every American citizen is born free, and with the opportunity to chase their own American dream. Mr. Speaker, before signing the Civil Rights Act of 1964, President Lyndon Baines Johnson addressed the nation on the significance of the bill he was about to sign: ``We believe that all men are created equal. Yet many are denied equal treatment. We believe that all men have certain unalienable rights. Yet many Americans do not enjoy those rights. We believe that all men are entitled to the blessings of liberty. Yet millions are being deprived of those blessings--not because of their own failures, but because of the color of their skin. The reasons are deeply imbedded in history and tradition and the nature of man. We can understand--without rancor or hatred--how this all happened. But it cannot continue. Our Constitution, the foundation of our Republic, forbids it. The principles of our freedom forbid it. Morality forbids it. And the law I will sign tonight forbids it.'' Our fight for civil rights is not over. Victories such as the Supreme Court decision on marriage equality do not overshadow the fact that those who identify as LGBT can get married on Monday, be fired by Friday, and be kicked out of their apartment by Sunday. The fight is not over. Mr. Speaker, we still have members of minority communities being killed based on the color of their skin and not the content of their character. Our fight is not over. Symbols of hate hang on government buildings in the form of a flag that inspires deplorable actions, leaving 9 dead after a church Bible study. America's fight for civil rights is not over. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 sought to fulfill the promise of the fourteenth amendment that ``no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.'' Fifty-one years ago we as a nation moved forward to accept that all American citizens have the same inalienable rights regardless of religion, race, or gender. The language of the 14th Amendment and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 guarantees protection for all citizens' rights and it is our job as representatives of the people to make sure we continue to defend those rights. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to acknowledge the progress we have made since the Civil Right Act of 1964 and I pledge to continue fighting for all Americans so that we may keep the promises written in law by our founding fathers.