Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record: ``Houston ICAC Task Force Records Nine Arrests for Child Exploitation'' showing that there is true evidence that this program works. [From the Texas News, July 7, 2022] Houston ICAC Task Force Records 9 Arrests for Child Exploitation (By Amy Gordon) During the weeks of June 2022, the Montgomery County District Attorney's Office (MCDAO) Cybercrimes Against Children (ICAC) Division, part of the Houston Metro ICAC Task Force, conducted a multi-day interagency operation targeting individuals who were actively children sought sexual exploitation via the Internet in Montgomery County. Multiple law enforcement agencies were involved in the operation including the Montgomery County Attorney's Office, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Texas Department of Public Safety, Houston Police Department, Conroe Police Department, Montgomery County Pct. 1, pt. 2, pt. 3 and pt. 5 Police Departments, Humble Police Department, Ft. Bend County Sheriff's Office, Missouri City Police Department and the Spring Branch Independent School District Police Department. The Houston Metro ICAC Taskforce is part of a national network of 61 coordinated task forces representing over 4,500 federal, state and local law enforcement agencies dedicated to investigating and prosecuting those who attempt to sexually exploit children via the Internet. During this multi-day operation, the Montgomery County District Attorney's Office ICAC section, moderated by Constable Ryan Gable and Montgomery County Constable's Office Precinct 3 deputies, conducted a proactive chat operation in southern Montgomery County. Task Force members also obtained an arrest warrant for Thomas J. Manno of Clarion County, Pennsylvania, and provided local authorities with essential information to execute a search warrant on his home. Task Force members contributed to the following arrests during the operation: Thomas J. Manno--39--Shippenville, Pennsylvania--Promotion of Child Pornography (F2) Robert Clarence Clayton--27--Channelview, Texas--Online Ad by a Minor (F2) Isaac Anthony Marino--30--Houston, Texas--Online solicitation by a minor (F2) Francisco Xavier Garza--29--Spring, Texas--Online solicitation by a minor F2) // Possibly with intent to supply--Methamphetamine (F1) Elijah Charles Lewis--24--Houston, Texas--Online Solicitation by a Minor (F2) Ahsan Shah--36--Houston, Texas--Online solicitation by a minor (F2) Lawrence Clayton Hopkins--55--Baytown, Texas--Online solicitation by a minor (F2) Edward Stewart Geddes--42--Houston, Texas--Online solicitation by a minor (F2) // Evidence tampering (F3) Clinton Brian Harvey--44--Dickenson, Texas--Soliciting a Minor Online (F3) // Unlawful Carrying of a Gun (MA) The above accused are still under investigation and additional charges may be brought at a later date. All accused are presumed innocent until proven guilty. During the investigation of Lawrence Clayton Hopkins, officers learned that Hopkins may have worked as a youth pastor in Midlothian, College Station and Baytown, Texas prior to his arrest. During the investigation of Clinton Brian Harvey, officers learned that Harvey worked as an officer at the Montgomery County Juvenile Detention Center. As our children are more exposed to the internet than ever before, the ICAC section of the Montgomery County District Attorney's Office and the Houston Metro ICAC Task Force encourage parents to be diligent in monitoring their children's online activities and raise concerns with law enforcement agencies and the National Center for to report Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC). Concerned parents and guardians should contact local law enforcement in the event of an emergency by dialing 911. Parents and guardians can also contact NCMEC at 1-800-THE-LOST (1-800-843-5678) or through their website at CyberTipline.org for more information and resources. Lt. Michael Atkins, Montgomery County Constable's Office Precinct 3, shared: ``The Internet provides criminals with an often unsupervised avenue to exploit child sacrifice. As parents, we need to carefully monitor our children's online activities and talk to them about the dangers they may face online.'' Shanna Redwine (MCDAO), Head of Special Victims Division, stated: ``We know the internet can be a dangerous place for children. The Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force and the Montgomery County District Attorney's Office are committed to making it legally dangerous for adults who seek to harm them. We ask parents and carers to support us in this effort by closely monitoring children and speaking with them about online risks, of which there are many.''

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I am looking forward to this legislation passing. Again, I emphasize that anything to protect our children is crucial. Mr. Speaker, there are thousands of children exploited on the internet each and every day. As the global online community continues to grow, so do the very real dangers facing our Nation's children. I do want to state that Ms. Wasserman Schultz has really developed this legislation and worked very hard on it. We have applauded her work starting in 2008. This will be a major, if you will, addition and asset to fighting the scourge that goes against our innocent children. So we have developed a vast and effective program that has continued to evolve and improve our fight against online child exploitation. Let's continue this program. We cannot allow this program to die. We must pass the PROTECT Our Children Act to reauthorize these task forces and to allow them to continue their brave and crucial work that keeps our children safe. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz) who has worked so hard on this legislation since 2008.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Florida.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to support S. 4834, PROTECT Our Children Act of 2022. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 4834, the ``PROTECT Our Children Act of 2022,'' a critical piece of bipartisan legislation that would reauthorize the Internet Crimes Against Children task force program, or ``ICAC,'' which has worked tirelessly for 14 years to protect our children from online predators. It is no exaggeration to say the internet is today one of the most dangerous places for our nation's children, many of whom spend hours each day online. Predators use social media and other online resources to groom and entice children to commit sexual acts. The internet makes it easy for sex and labor traffickers to gain clandestine access to children and teens, recruit them into their organizations, and exploit them. The internet is also the primary vehicle for distributing child sex abuse material and committing criminal acts of sextortion against minors. It also provides an open forum for cyberbullying and online harassment, which can lead victims of such conduct to withdraw, become depressed, and even commit suicide. To combat these monstrous crimes and protect our youth from exploitation, ICAC task forces work with federal, state, and local law enforcement to develop an effective, holistic response to cybercrimes against children. Their programs include forensic and investigative components, training and technical assistance, victim services, and community education. The ICAC network is made up of 61 separate task forces--three of which are in my home state of Texas. These ICAC task forces were created and authorized by the original PROTECT Our Children Act of 2008, which expired this past September, at the end of the fiscal year. Yet online threats to children, and the need for ICAC's tasks forces, are only growing. Between 2008 and 2021, the number of ICAC arrests rose from 2,500 to more than 10,000 each year. ICAC's work resulted in more than 137,000 investigations and 90,300 forensic exams in 2021 alone. Earlier this year, the Southern Texas ICAC task force received significant funding--its first--authorized by the PROTECT Our Children Act, allowing it to provide substantial investigative, prosecutorial, and victim-centered services, and to utilize tips from the national ICAC database, and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, to identify and rescue child victims. But the work of the task force, and that of the other ICAC task forces nationwide, will not be able to continue unless we fund this critical law enforcement initiative. It is, therefore, essential that we reauthorize the ICAC program by passing the bipartisan PROTECT Our Children Act of 2022. The Act would extend funding for ICAC task forces and programs through 2024. Without this crucial legislation, our children will remain vulnerable to those who seek to exploit and hurt them in the most horrific of ways, with the ease and anonymity the internet provides. I commend my colleague, Representative Wasserman Shultz, for her work on the PROTECT Our Children Act, and I urge my colleagues to support it. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 5796) to amend title 35, United States Code, to establish a competition to award certificates that can be redeemed to accelerate certain matters at the Patent and Trademark Office, and for other purposes.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the Senate amendment to H.R. 5796.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Senate amendment to H.R. 5796 which codifies a competition at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office called Patents for Humanity. The Patents for Humanity program highlights the ways that innovation and intellectual property help solve global humanitarian challenges. I applaud Representatives Jeffries and Spartz for spearheading this bill in order to ensure that special recognition permanently extends to inventors who turn their genius toward allaying or helping the world's most needy and vulnerable. The Senate amendment does away with the need for extra rulemaking before the competition can continue its operation, and, as such, is a welcome addition to help streamline the bill. The operative provisions of the bill will make permanent the Patents for Humanity awards program which encourages the development and use of inventions that address humanitarian needs in the fields of medicine, nutrition, sanitation, household energy, and living standards for impoverished people. Winning inventors are recognized in a public awards ceremony and receive a certificate that can be used to accelerate certain examination proceedings at the USPTO. Since 2012, the USPTO has recognized numerous award recipients across a wide range of technologies. The recipients have invented groundbreaking technologies that greatly improve the standard of living for so many people in need in the United States and around the world. The bill also builds on the work of Representative McBath who successfully led a bipartisan effort to pass legislation in the last Congress strengthening the program. That law allowed the awards certificate to be transferrable if the award recipient would prefer to seek its free-market value rather than accelerate a different patent application. Today, we are going a step further by ensuring that this program is a permanent feature of our innovation ecosystem. In Congress, we strive to make sure that our intellectual property laws incentivize innovation to the greatest extent possible, but this category of humanitarian inventions will always deserve special recognition. H.R. 5796, as amended in the Senate, will make sure that it will. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support it, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5796 is a straightforward but important bill that will encourage additional innovations that address humanitarian needs both in the U.S. and abroad. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the bill. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Senate amendment to H.R. 5796, which codifies a competition at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office called ``Patents for Humanity.'' The Patents for Humanity program highlights the ways that innovation and intellectual property help solve global humanitarian challenges. I applaud Representatives Jeffries and Spartz for spearheading this bill in order to ensure that special recognition permanently extends to inventors who turn their genius towards helping the world's most needy and vulnerable. The Senate amendment does away with the need for extra rulemaking before the competition can continue its operation, and as such, is a welcome addition to help streamline this bill. The operative provisions of the bill will make permanent the Patents for Humanity awards program, which encourages the development and use of inventions that address humanitarian needs in the fields of medicine, nutrition, sanitation, household energy, and living standards for impoverished people. Winning inventors are recognized in a public awards ceremony and receive a certificate that can be used to accelerate certain examination proceedings at the USPTO. Since 2012, the USPTO has recognized numerous award recipients across a wide range of technologies. The recipients have invented ground- breaking technologies that greatly improve the standard of living for so many people in need in the United States and around the world. This bill also builds on the work of Representative McBath, who successfully led a bipartisan effort to pass legislation in the last Congress strengthening the program. That law allowed the awards certificate to be transferable if the award recipient would prefer to seek its free market value rather than accelerate a different patent application. Today, we are going a step further by ensuring that this program is a permanent feature of our innovation ecosystem. In Congress, we strive to make sure that our intellectual property laws incentivize innovation to the greatest extent possible, but this category of humanitarian inventions will always deserve special recognition. H.R. 5796, as amended in the Senate, makes sure that it will, and I urge my colleagues to support it. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 8876 The Jackie Walorski Maternal and Child Home Visiting Reauthorization Act of 2022, which reauthorizes a modification and an increase in funding to the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program. Specifically, the Act would set requirements for allocating program funds, increase the percentage of funds reserved for tribal entities, establish a publicly available dashboard that reports program outcomes, and allows for vital home visits. Congresswoman Jackie Walorski, in whose honor this bill was named, was a champion for women, children, and families who inspired this pivotal piece of legislation. Her dedication and commitment to the health of children, families and future mothers will live on through the passage of the Jackie Walorski Maternal and Child Home Visiting Reauthorization Act. The Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program supports pregnant people and parents with young children who live in communities that encounter greater risks and barriers to achieving positive maternal and child health outcomes. Home visits help communities and families through development of strong relationships and trust by meeting regularly and addressing family needs. These home visitors encourage early language development and early learning at home, teach positive parenting skills, help families set goals for the future, connect families to other services and resources in their community, and support future mothers by teaching healthy pregnancy practices. These tailored programs focus on empowering the wellbeing of families and children and help reduce crime and domestic violence at home, improve family economic self-sufficiency and improve maternal and newborn health. In the U.S., two-thirds of pregnancy related deaths are preventable and for every pregnancy-related death, there are 70 pregnancy-related near-death experiences. There is a severe gap in care that is contributing to these avoidable casualties. It's extremely important that we remove barriers in health care that may be contributing to these deaths. In comparison to other industrialized nations, the United States has been trending downward when it comes to maternal health, and the numbers continue to get worse. According to the World Health Organization, from 1990 to 2015 maternal mortality rates increased by 16.7 percent in the United States. In the rest of the world maternal mortality decreased during that same period. In 2020, 861 women died of maternal causes in the U.S. That equates to 861 women who planned on living full, healthy lives and planned on being parents to the children they carried for 9 long months. That's 861 children who must grow up without their parent. That's 861 families that are forever altered. That's a medical system and society that has failed 861 women. According to the American Medical Association, Black women are three to four times more likely to die from pregnancy and childbirth than white women. Black women across all socioeconomic statuses and education levels are more likely to experience maternal mortality than white women. H.R. 8876, the Jackie Walorski Maternal and Child Home Visiting Reauthorization Act is a first step to closing these inequitable gaps. Our dear friend, Congresswoman Walorski, made it her priority in Congress to fight for American women and children. Her spirit, along with those of her two dedicated aides who perished with tragically, are with us here today. The passage of H.R. 8876 is vital to the wellbeing, health, and safety of millions of mothers, children, and families across America who live in communities that endure greater risks and barriers to achieving positive maternal and child health outcomes. A timely five-year reauthorization before the end of this year is needed to minimize service interruption, staff losses, and disruption of local programs. I urge all of my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 8876, the Jackie Walorski Maternal and Child Home Visiting Reauthorization Act of 2022 to help the millions of Americans who are most in need of this assistance.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, that is why I was glad to see my bill, the Stop Infant Mortality And Recidivism Reduction Act of 2021, or the SIMARRA Act, included in the Violence Against Women Act, which passed earlier this year. That bill established a pilot program to allow women incarcerated in Federal prisons and their babies to reside with each other while the mother is incarcerated for a period of time. Mr. Speaker, let us continue to be innovators in the treatment of those who are incarcerated, and let us make sure that we give every newborn a healthy life. I ask my colleagues to support the underlying legislation. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6878, the ``Pregnant Women in Custody Act,'' because women's lives matter, pregnant women's lives matter, their babies' lives matter--as do the lives of incarcerated women and their babies. Although women are the fastest growing segment of the incarcerated population in the United States, conversations about criminal justice reform often overlook the unique experiences and needs of women and girls within the criminal justice system. The United States has the second highest rate of women incarcerated in the world, with 64 women per 100,000 in custody, and nearly 60,000 pregnant women admitted into American jails and prisons every year, while some states have yet to prohibit the shackling of women when they are giving birth. This bipartisan legislation would establish federal policies to prohibit the use of restrictive housing on incarcerated pregnant women and develop a national standard of care to address the pregnancy- related needs of incarcerated women, including access to prenatal and post-delivery care and support. Oftentimes pregnant women lack access to appropriate nutrition while incarcerated and the use of restrictive housing can have detrimental effects on a woman's health as well as the health of her baby. And while women of color are disproportionately impacted by incarceration, they also face higher risks of both miscarriage and maternal mortality. This bill would make certain that incarcerated pregnant women receive vital prenatal healthcare and post-partum support and ensure the Bureau of Prisons and the Marshal's service protect the health and safety of incarcerated women throughout their pregnancy, when they deliver their child, and as they recover post-partum. H.R. 6878 would also require BOP to collect data on the healthcare needs of pregnant women, so that we may better understand the challenges incarcerated women face and determine how to address the needs of this vulnerable population. In Harris County, Texas, on average, there are approximately 1,000 women incarcerated in the county jail and on average 25 to 30 of them are pregnant. The jail offers specific programs for mothers to reduce recidivism and help them support their families upon release. This bill would require GAO to study state and local corrections facilities to understand the services and protections provided for pregnant women, like the program offered in Harris County. Setting national standards for the treatment of incarcerated pregnant women in federal custody would set an example for state and local facilities to follow and the data collected by BOP would farther inform Congress of the additional health and safety needs of this vulnerable population. As we endeavor to navigate a new landscape for reproductive freedom across the country, we must recognize that incarcerated women will continue to face challenges in carrying healthy pregnancies to term. That is why I was glad to see my bill, the ``Stop Infant Mortality and Recidivism Reduction Act of 2021'' (or the ``SIMARRA Act''), included in the Violence Against Women Act which passed earlier this year. That bill established a pilot program to allow women incarcerated in Federal prisons and their babies born during their incarceration to reside together with while the mother is incarcerated. Let us continue to be innovators in the treatment of those who are incarcerated. And let us make sure women receive proper health care and humane treatment whether they are incarcerated or not--because all women deserve proper health care and to be treated with dignity--no matter their circumstance. I thank Representative Karen Bass for her steadfast commitment to addressing this important issue. I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this long overdue legislation. I include in the Record a Prison Policy Initiative document titled: ``Unsupportive environments and limited policies: Pregnancy, postpartum, and birth during incarceration.'' [From Prison Policy Initiative, Aug. 19, 2021] Unsupportive Environments and Limited Policies: Pregnancy, Postpartum, and Birth During Incarceration (By Leah Wang) Making up for a serious gap in government data collection and understanding, researchers are discovering what pregnant incarcerated women should expect when they're expecting (or when they give birth while in custody). Findings indicate that jails, prisons, and youth facilities have yet to adequately recognize pregnancy and postpartum needs either in policy or in practice. Recently published findings from the groundbreaking Pregnancy in Prison Statistics (PIPS) Project and other datasets shed light on a common but rarely discussed experience: being pregnant, postpartum or giving birth while incarcerated. Spearheaded by Dr. Carolyn Sufrin of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and School of Public Health, this series of studies is our best look yet at pregnancy prevalence and outcomes in U.S. jails, prisons, and youth facilities. In total, 22 state prison systems, all federal prisons, 6 jails, and 3 youth confinement systems participated in the PIPS Project, a systematic study of pregnancy and its outcomes among incarcerated women. Historically, the government has not collected data about carceral pregnancy on a regular basis, meaning no national effort has been made to understand maternity care for thousands of incarcerated pregnant women. The project's sample represents 57 percent of all women in prison, 5 percent of all women in jail and about 3 percent of young women in youth facilities. Our takeaway: Carceral pregnancy, whether in jail, prison, or youth confinement, is characterized by a lack of supportive policies and practices. Some of the major findings to come out of these publications are: There are an estimated 58,000 admissions of pregnant women into jails and prisons every year, and thousands give birth or have other outcomes while still incarcerated. Pregnancy rates among confined youth were similar to those among adults. In some state prison systems, miscarriage, premature birth, and cesarean section rates were higher than national rates among the general population. Only one-third of prisons and jails had any written policy about breastfeeding or lactation, and even where policies supporting lactation did exist, relatively few women were actually breastfeeding or pumping. There are an estimated 8,000 admissions of pregnant women with opioid use disorder (OUD) into prisons and jails each year, but long-term treatment using medication is the exception, not the rule. A related (non-PIPS Project) study finds paternal incarceration is also linked to adverse birth outcomes like low birth weight, which are widely known to impact long-term health. The researchers' findings add complexity to a growing body of literature and consensus linking incarceration to negative health impacts. And although PIPS Project data can't be broken down by race, ethnicity, or gender identity, measuring the scale and outcomes of pregnancies in prison and jail is a major public health research accomplishment. The fact that academic researchers had to conduct this research to fill the data gap--and the shortage of appropriate policies they found--makes it clear that many correctional agencies have yet to even acknowledge the needs of pregnant incarcerated women. every year, thousands of incarcerated expecting mothers and babies face adverse outcomes from exposure to incarceration Over the 12 months of the Pregnancy in Prison Statistics (PIPS) study period, there were nearly 1,400 admissions of pregnant women to participating state and federal prisons with over 800 pregnancies ending in custody (births, miscarriages, and others), and over 1,600 admissions of pregnant women to jails with 224 pregnancies ending in custody. Unsurprisingly, given the short length of most jail stays, more pregnant women are admitted to jails each year, but more births take place in prisons, where the average stay is longer. Based on their data, the authors estimate that, nationally, 4 percent of women entering prison (in line with Bureau of Justice Statistics 2016 estimates) and 3 percent of women admitted to jail (lower than BJS' most recent 2002 estimates) are pregnant. Pregnancy outcomes in prisons and jails in some places were worse than national trends across the general population. When pregnancy did end in custody, in some states like Arizona, Kansas and Minnesota, rates of miscarriage ranged from 19 to 22 percent, exceeding estimates of the national rate. In Ohio and Massachusetts, premature births exceeded the general population rate of about 10 percent. Among live births, which were 92 percent of birth outcomes in custody, one-third (32 percent) of these were caesarean section births, in line with the national average rate. In some states, the C-section rate was much higher, suggesting that C-sections may be taking place when not medically necessary, risking short- and long-term health problems in babies. pregnancy among confined youth is not uncommon, and better testing might reveal it's even more widespread Upon hearing about the Pregnancy in Prison Statistics (PIPS) Project, three juvenile justice systems (one state- level, and one county-level system) volunteered to complete a survey about pregnant adolescents in the custody of 17 of their ``juvenile residential placement'' facilities, providing a window into this population for the first time. One takeaway from the survey's findings was that adolescent pregnancies--both in confinement, and upon release--may risk poorer outcomes because of a lack of continuity of medical care between confinement facilities and the community. Even though all three state systems provided basic prenatal care, with the typical length of stay for young women lasting a few months or less, justice-involved youth would benefit enormously from consistency in medical care throughout pregnancy. The survey also showed that the rate of pregnancy among confined youth (3.3 percent) was similar to that of the adult incarcerated population (3.5 percent). However, the youth facilities reported less routine pregnancy testing, bolstering a 2004 study revealing that only 15-17 percent of 1,255 juvenile facilities nationwide tested youth for pregnancy at admission (with about two-thirds of facilities providing tests only if requested). Therefore, it's possible the youth carceral pregnancy rate is a very conservative estimate, and that thousands of pregnant youth are going without prenatal care when their health needs are likely complicated. Eight pregnancies ended among youth confined in the surveyed facilities during the 12-month study period, including four miscarriages, three induced abortions, and one live full-term birth. It would be misleading to view these outcomes as representative of all pregnant confined youth, but the authors advise youth confinement facilities to be prepared for high rates of miscarriage and other adverse birth outcomes, seeing as justice-involved pregnant youth are going through highly stressful life experiences. Services and policies regarding prenatal and postpartum care were variable: All three juvenile systems allowed abortion, and some covered the cost; all three systems also allowed lactation through either breastfeeding or pumping. Still, the small sample size (which represented just 2.8 percent of all confined female youth) and the potential influence of self-selecting facilities make it difficult to draw conclusions about the experience of pregnant youth in confinement. breastfeeding and lactation are not guaranteed to new mothers and babies, ignoring the enormous benefits of breast milk When the cohort of 22 prison systems and 6 jail systems described their lactation-related policies to the researchers, they painted a discouraging picture of how correctional facilities largely don't support breastfeeding, a practice chosen by some mothers for its unique benefits. To begin, only one-third of prisons and jails had any written policy on lactation, leaving many incarcerated women to the whims of facility staff who may not be trained in this area or understand its importance. Even where women were formally allowed to lactate, milk was sometimes discarded at the study sites due to mother-infant separation, providing only a benefit to the mother of maintaining milk supply. Because it is a matter of health equity to provide the opportunity to lactate and breastfeed (among other parental choices), researchers extend the ``further research is needed'' statement in order to understand the probable racial disparities within carceral pregnancy: ``. . . research in collaboration with current and formerly incarcerated women, specifically Black, Indigenous, and women of color, is needed to fully understand breadth of experiences and perspectives related to breastfeeding and lactation while in custody.'' opioid use disorder among incarcerated women is treated under some circumstances, but leaves mothers without help postpartum In addition to known medical needs during pregnancy, some women enter incarceration with other health problems. Researchers accessed six months of activity and policy related to opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment of pregnant women in the Pregnancy in Prison Statistics (PIPS) study sites and found that 26 percent of those entering prison and 14 percent entering jail had OUD. The gold standard of care for these women would be medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD), which is linked to better pregnancy outcomes and increased engagement with addiction treatment and other medical care. Twenty-two of 28 sites did offer this avenue for treatment of pregnant women in some way, but the narrow window in which they could be treated for OUD leaves much room for improvement. In most facilities offering MOUD, it would not be initiated in the facility; they would only continue someone on MOUD if they were already on it. This unfairly excludes women who were unable to begin treatment before admission; for example, if someone was in jail before being transferred to prison, their access would then depend on the jail's policy. Postpartum, most facilities providing MOUD would discontinue treatment, showing a clear disregard for the mother's well-being after birth. Still, one-third of surveyed sites managed OUD among pregnant women through detoxification, some with and some without medication to manage symptoms. Detox, or ``medically supervised withdrawal,'' can be a painful process and has a high rate of failure for pregnant women, increasing the risk of future overdose. These exclusionary policies and practices are troubling given the fact that opioid overdose is a major cause of death for pregnant and postpartum women in the United States, and remains a huge concern for formerly incarcerated people. In Rhode Island, where MOUD has been implemented comprehensively in their unified prison-jail system, there has been a huge reduction in post-release overdose deaths; replicating their initiative would have a great impact on carceral pregnancy and postpartum outcomes. the incarceration of fathers is also linked to worse birth outcomes As if it's not bad enough that incarceration prevents expecting mothers from receiving care and providing care to their babies, another recent study finds that incarcerating fathers during pregnancy or at the time of birth is also harmful to babies' health. In another recent study--unrelated to the Pregnancy in Prison Statistics (PIPS) project--Youngmin Yi and fellow researchers matched hundreds of thousands of birth records to jail records in New York City between 2010 and 2016, observing trends in birth weight, preterm (premature) birth, admission to the NICU (neonatal intensive care unit), and more. Paternal incarceration was associated with nearly all adverse outcomes, even after other characteristics of mother and father were accounted for statistically. ``Exposed'' to their fathers' incarceration--even for as little as one day-- babies were born with these vulnerabilities, such as low birth weight, known to have an impact later in life. incarcerated pregnant people and their babies deserve better care that is codified in policy The findings by Sufrin, Asiodu, Kim and fellow researchers offer a desperately-needed look into pregnancy during incarceration. And the findings by Yi et al. contribute to an even more holistic picture of what it means to be a growing family entangled in the criminal legal system. Families experiencing pregnancy are impacted by incarceration whether the mother or the father is incarcerated, and whether or not the baby is born during the mother's incarceration. Both adolescents and adults in confinement should be afforded comprehensive prenatal care, including education, lactation support, and opioid use disorder treatment that continues beyond the end of pregnancy. And babies born right after or during their parents' incarceration, who risk health issues like lower life expectancy and social and emotional challenges, deserve the chance to begin life with one or both parents as much as possible. These efforts and programs should be clearly written into agency policy so that facility staff can be trained and expected to provide care. One way that prisons and jails can begin to assess and improve their care for pregnant women is by reviewing the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' recently updated comprehensive set of guidelines for carceral reproductive health care. Facilities should also consider subscribing to the National Commission on Correctional Health Care's standards for health services, which have clear ways of addressing many of the above topics. Prisons and jails should make their policies publicly available, and create ways to keep healthy mothers and their babies together. note about the language used Throughout these publications, the terms ``pregnant women'' and ``mother'' described those people who were pregnant in custody during the study period. While we've deferred to the terminology used by the authors, we acknowledge that pregnancy can overlap with multiple gender identities, and our conclusions and recommendations apply to all pregnant people.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6878, the Pregnant Women in Custody Act, because women's lives matter, pregnant women's lives matter, their babies' lives matter, as do the lives of incarcerated women and their babies. I have worked on this issue for a very long time and am delighted to be able to support this legislation introduced by my friend and colleague, Congresswoman Bass. This works to ensure that we recognize the increasing population of women incarcerated. Unfortunately, women are the fastest-growing segment of the incarcerated population in the United States. Conversations about criminal justice reform often overlook their unique experiences and the needs of women and girls within the criminal justice system. For instance, Mr. Speaker, the United States has the second highest rate of women incarcerated in the world, with 64 women per 100,000 in custody and nearly 60,000 pregnant women admitted into American jails and prisons every year. That is a lot. Some States have yet to prohibit the shackling of women when they are giving birth. We have to do something. This bipartisan legislation would establish Federal policies to prohibit the use of restrictive housing on incarcerated pregnant women and develop a national standard of care to add to the pregnancy-related needs of incarcerated women, including access to prenatal and post- delivery care and support. My legislation, the SIMARRA Act, also complements this by creating a pilot program in the Federal system for mothers to stay with their infants for a period of time. This humane response and the humane response of this bill are what we need to do. Oftentimes, pregnant women lack access to appropriate nutrition while incarcerated, and the use of restrictive housing can have detrimental effects on a woman's health, as well as the health of her baby. While women of color are disproportionately impacted by incarceration, they also face higher risks of both miscarriage and maternal mortality. This bill would make certain that incarcerated pregnant women receive vital prenatal healthcare and postpartum support and ensures the Bureau of Prisons and the Marshals Service protect the health and safety of incarcerated women through their pregnancy, when they deliver their child, and as they receive postpartum care. They should not be shackled, and they should not be intimidated or frightened. The one thing I want to say, Mr. Speaker, even though many of us have different views--and I am an avid supporter of the right to choose-- this is not an abortion bill. This is a healthcare bill. We also know that the prisons make their determinations on how they help women in their contraceptives. H.R. 6878 would allow BOP to collect data on healthcare needs of pregnant women so that we may have a better understanding. Let me clearly say that separating a newborn from its mother gives it less chance for both survival and success in life. We know in Harris County, Texas, there are approximately 1,000 women incarcerated in the Harris County Jail. This bill would require a GAO study, setting national standards, and endeavor to do a landscape to understand reproductive freedom in this country.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. My concluding remarks include programs in Boulder County that can be done. Finally, Mr. Speaker, once you are convicted of a felony and have fulfilled your sentence, you will still pay for the rest of your life. We need to find a way where these individuals can contribute and not be those who enter out and then go in. It is important to learn from their mistakes, but we have got to help them. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to support the underlying legislation. Again, I thank those who cosponsored it and the main cosponsor, Congresswoman Karen Bass. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3372, the ``One Stop Shop Community Reentry Program Act of 2021,'' is a public-safety minded bill that would create a grant program within the Department of Justice to support community reentry intake and coordination centers. The centralized centers opened pursuant to this bill would offer those leaving incarceration the resources necessary to successfully rejoin and reintegrate into our communities through DOJ and community- funded reentry programs. There exists a great need for the programs envisioned in this legislation, as more than 600,000 people return to their communities each year after serving time in state and federal prisons, as do nearly nine million people from county jails, while more than 2.5 million people complete parole or probation each year. Individuals with criminal convictions face daunting challenges upon release. The overwhelming majority of those released from custody receive minimal preparation during their incarceration and inadequate assistance to get back on their feet after they are released, while their convictions may limit employment prospects, educational and training opportunities, public housing assistance, and access to social services. Even a minor criminal conviction can erect substantial barriers and trigger far-reaching collateral consequences. Due in part to the difficulty of overcoming these barriers, five out of six people who have spent time in a state prison will be arrested for a new crime within nine years of their release. That is why policies designed to improve reentry outcomes have broad bipartisan support, as demonstrated by passage of the First Step Act, which incentivizes education and recidivism-reduction programs for people in federal prisons. While the First Step Act, Second Chance Act, and other initiatives have been successful at the federal level, the majority of returning citizens are exiting state and local facilities, and there is an overall need for a more comprehensive approach to address the challenges of reentry. An example of the type of community reentry center supported by this legislation is in Tulsa, Oklahoma where community organizations offer a comprehensive model of reentry services. The services offered through the Tulsa Reentry One-Stop have significantly reduced recidivism and increased employment. In 2015, 77% of the individuals who successfully completed their reintegration program remained employed after exiting the program. H.R. 3372 would establish a grant program to support community reentry centers like the Tulsa Reentry One-Stop and ensure support is made available for all individuals the moment they are released. Support would include assistance with transportation, housing, and skills training. One Stop reentry centers would also assist reentering individuals in obtaining identification and applying for eligible public benefits. And those who have formal reentry plans would be able to find case management assistance and court directed, wrap-around support at the reentry centers. In addition to the One Stop reentry centers, this bill would authorize a second mechanism to assist individuals reentering communities that do not have large enough populations of reentering individuals to maintain a standalone reentry center. In these communities, H.R. 3372 would provide grants to operate free, reentry hotlines that operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, to assist those recently released from incarceration with reentry services near their homes. This element of the bill is particularly important for rural and smaller communities. Some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle might argue that the funding authorized in this bill is too high. But we know that the high rates of recidivism of individuals leaving incarceration are far more costly to American communities. This bill would address a pressing nationwide need, providing individuals with the tools and support they need to successfully reenter society, ultimately, making our communities safer. I thank our colleague, Representative Karen Bass, for her leadership on this issue, as well as her bipartisan cosponsors, for introducing this important legislation, and I urge my colleagues to support it. Recognizing the high rates of recidivism in our communities and the lack of access to reentry resources, H.R. 3372 would establish a new grant program within DOJ to support One Stop Community Reentry Centers. When individuals lack access to reentry services such as housing, job training, and mental health resources, they are more like to be rearrested and reincarcerated. This bill would improve public safety by reducing recidivism. I urge my colleagues to support it. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1499, I call up the bill (H.R. 3372) to authorize implementation grants to community-based nonprofits to operate one-stop reentry centers, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 3372.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, H.R. 3372, the One Stop Shop Community Reentry Program Act of 2021, is truly a public safety-minded bill that would create a grant program within the Department of Justice to support community reentry intake and coordination centers. The centralized centers opened pursuant to this bill would offer those leaving incarceration the resources necessary to successfully rejoin and reintegrate into our communities through DOJ and community- funded reentry programs. Now, let me be very clear: I am delighted that there are the kind of sensitive community efforts across America, spotty in different States and different cities, who believe in reentry. That is why we believe this legislation is so important, because it federalizes and increases the opportunity for all Americans facing the daunting responsibilities of what reentry is to have a lifeline. There exists a great need for these programs envisioned in this legislation as more than 600,000 people return to their communities each year after serving time in State and Federal prisons, as do nearly 9 million people from county jails, while more than 2.5 million people complete parole and probation. We can't deny these people an opportunity to be again contributing citizens in a positive way. Individuals with criminal convictions face daunting challenges upon release. The overwhelming majority of those released from custody receive minimum preparation during their incarceration and inadequate assistance to get back on their feet after they are released. Their convictions may limit employment prospects, educational and training opportunities, public housing assistance, and access to social services. They should not, but they do. Even a minor criminal conviction can erect substantial barriers and trigger far-reaching collateral consequences, maybe even access to college education. Due in part to the difficulty of overcoming these barriers, five out of six people who have spent time in a State prison will be arrested for a new crime within 9 years of their release. We cannot waste human resources or talent in this way. That is why policies designed to improve reentry outcomes have broad bipartisan support, as demonstrated by the passage of our First Step Act and the Sentencing Reduction Act, which incentivizes education and recidivism reduction programs for people in Federal prisons. While the First Step Act and Second Chance Act, first introduced by my good friend, Danny Davis, and other initiatives have been successful at the Federal level, the majority of returning citizens are exiting State and local facilities, and there is no overall and comprehensive effort to address the challenges of reentry. An example of the type of community reentry center supported by this legislation is in Tulsa, Oklahoma, where community organizations offer a comprehensive model of reentry services. The services offered through the Tulsa Reentry One-Stop have significantly reduced recidivism and increased employment. In 2015, 77 percent of the individuals who successfully completed their reintegration program remained employed after exiting the program. There is the proof. H.R. 3372 would establish a grant program to support reentry centers like Tulsa and ensure support is more available for all individuals across the Nation from the moment they are released. Support would include assistance with transportation, housing, skills training, and even advanced education. One-stop reentry centers would also assist reentering individuals in obtaining identification and applying for eligible public benefits. Those who have formal reentry plans would be able to find case management assistance and court-directed wraparound support at the reentry centers. This, again, would be a lifeline for a new direction, not for the individual only, but for their family, their neighbors, their neighborhood, and where they live. In addition to the one-stop reentry centers, this bill would authorize a second mechanism to assist individuals reentering communities that do not have large enough populations of reentering individuals to maintain a standalone reentry center. In these communities, H.R. 3372 would provide grants to operate free reentry hotlines that operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, to assist those recently released from incarceration with reentry services near their homes. Madam Speaker, the Judiciary Committee has a responsibility not to look only at urban crises, urban crime, and urban solutions. We must look at the hamlets, villages, suburbia, and elsewhere. Rural communities need our assistance. We specifically thought it was important to have this hotline to be able to assist them. This element of the bill is particularly important in our smaller communities. Some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle might argue that the funding authorized in the bill is too high, but we know that the high rates of recidivism equal this amount of money, leaving individuals coming out of incarceration as having nowhere to go. Their actions can become more costly to Americans than our investment in changing their lives. This bill would address a pressing nationwide need, providing individuals with the tools and support they need to successfully reenter society, ultimately making our community safer. Now, I have had the privilege of serving alongside of Representative Karen Bass for a number of years. I take this moment to publicly, on behalf of her colleagues, congratulate her for her next step in life: Becoming the first woman to ever become mayor of the great city of LA. I can say that because there is another great city, Houston. But I give her my congratulations and I know her colleagues would do so, as well. Representative Bass worked with leadership on this issue, as well as joining with bipartisan cosponsors. We know it has widespread support and, therefore, we are looking forward to introducing this important legislation, and I urge my colleagues to support it. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, my dear friend, Ranking Member Jordan, speaks to a particular point that I just have to respond. I am so glad he cited positive examples of what a reentry program can do, but he is giving evidence, comfort, and advocacy for this legislation. Because isolated programs will not help Americans. We now give a broad-based opportunity for cities, hamlets, villages, and counties across America--rural and urban, North, South, East and West-- to look at their landscape of those reentering and accessing this one- stop program. We have already said 600,000 are released, and we have already said that these persons want to rehabilitate themselves. Why would anybody oppose this legislation? And it is bipartisan. Let me remind my friends that these are individuals who have served their time. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline), a distinguished member of the committee and the subcommittee chair.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. There lies the key element to my friends who are ignoring the fact that this one-stop legislation has bipartisan support. It means that someone who was in opposition to my party, my caucus, supports this. The work that Ms. Bass did with all of us was a bipartisan effort. And the reason is because this is an investment. And my friends keep talking about grants. And so it is the grant that continues to be the line of argument and the--how should I say it--the bee sting. And they are wrong because grants have oversight. Grants require these organizations to apply and present the best practices, the best evidence. And so I am very glad that it is a grant. But it also gives those with broad needs across the land the fair opportunity to apply for a grant to be able to have these kinds of programs. The one-stop model that this legislation promotes would aim to provide complete reentry services to address the critical elements of the reentry process that promote long-term reentry success, which as I said, is housing, employment, education, and healthcare. The bill will ensure that returning citizens can effectively access the services funded through the many bills that we have tried to work on. Now let me just be very clear. One of my good friends called off a list of offenders that really triggers fear, apprehension, and distaste. Well, those are the very individuals that we would hope that through treatment, medical care and otherwise, and getting them into a proper program, that they can be contributing, that their families do not have to be fearfully looking over their shoulder as to what have they done next. We have to try. And these programs will hire those who have a difficult time finding employment. But you can be assured that working with the program they will be screened prior to their employment; their employment will reduce their likelihood to recidivate. Mr. Speaker, I think it is extremely important that we take the tough questions and give good answers. Tough questions about: What do you do with those who are trying to reenter? What you do is you have a good program that is tough and that it works. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, just in a moment let me indicate that you can always find just a sliver on which to oppose. I hold in my hand a whole list of Republicans that believe the bill works and should work. So that, we should take off the table. Republicans and Democrats support this legislation. And then I can assure you that people answering the phone will not be randomly answering the phone. They will be under a supervised program, as this program relates. We would hope and expect that they would be the kind that can listen and take the intake of those who are desperate and trying to find a way not to go back to crime. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close. Mr. Speaker, I always like a words game with my good friend from Ohio, so let me clarify. An isolated program means that a program in Tulsa and a program in Pennsylvania do not help someone in Idaho. And so what this one-stop program does is it gives the good works of the people of Pennsylvania and Tulsa, it gives Americans the opportunities in cities, hamlets, urban centers, and rural hamlets the opportunity to have the same exact program and to invest in the 600,000, those who are coming out of incarceration, give them the same opportunity for ensuring that they will have that access to this program That is what our intent was on the Judiciary Committee, and that is what the intent was on the many individuals, if you will, who were trying to craft something that will work for all of America. Now, let me share with you, Mr. Speaker, an article titled: ``To keep people from returning to jail, Mesa County follows other communities' reentry roadmap.'' Many people transitioning from jail or prison struggle to reenter society. So here is Mesa County's new program with housing, jobs, transportation, and mental health services. What we simply want to do is to get this program out. I will just share you with the story of Richard Gallegos who was locked up in the Mesa County jail for the first time at age 18. He spent the next 8 years in and out of jail--typically drug- and alcohol- related misdemeanors that sometimes led to more serious incidents, including nonviolent domestic disputes and resisting arrest. He said that at 27 he was sentenced to prison for a drug and firearms violation. Altogether, Gallegos, was born and raised in Grand Junction and now 45 years old, has spent 5 years in State prison, and 3 years in county jail, and for the past 4 years he has been on probation. He now works at a job where he is learning masonry, a switch from the oil and gas industry work he did previously. ``I am staying honest, humble,'' he said. ``I try not to walk with too much shame. The best thing in my favor is I have been forgiven by those I have wronged. They understand my drug addiction.'' These are individuals whom we don't want to throw by the wayside. We want to make sure they get into this program. Mr. Speaker, I include this article in the Record. [From the Colorado Sun, Nov. 8, 2022] To Keep People From Returning to Jail, Mesa County Follows Other Communities' Reentry Roadmap (By Sharon Sullivan) Richard Gallegos was locked up in the Mesa County Jail for the first time at age 18. He spent the next eight years in and out of jail--typically drug and alcohol-fueled misdemeanors that sometimes led to more serious incidents, including (nonviolent) domestic disputes and resisting arrest, he said. At 27, he was sentenced to prison for a drug and firearms violation. Altogether, Gallegos, born and raised in Grand Junction and now 45 years old, has spent five years in state prison and three years in county jail. For the past four years, he has been on probation. He now works at a job where he's learning masonry, a switch from the oil and gas industry work he did previously. ``I'm staying honest, humble,'' he said. ``I try not to walk with too much shame. The best thing in my favor is I have been forgiven by those I've wronged. They understand drug addiction.'' Gallegos shares an apartment with an adult daughter, but many formerly incarcerated friends are not so lucky, he said. ``People are coming out of jail with no resources,'' Gallegos said. ``You better hope you have a support system. Resources are slim to none coming out of county jail. ``You're on your own, facing what put you in there in the first place. People's first thought is often, `I want to do what's right--but where do I go?' '' Mesa County officials have long recognized that many people transitioning from jail or prison struggle with substance abuse, mental illness or both--compounding the multiple other challenges they face when reentering society, and often lacking much-needed resources like Gallegos did. The Mesa County Sheriff's Office compared names of frequent users of the jail with frequent visitors to emergency rooms at Grand Junction's two acute care hospitals, Community Hospital and St. Mary's Medical Center. (To protect patient privacy, the two hospitals did not disclose names, but confirmed that many people appeared on both lists.) They identified 60-90 frequent users of both the jail and emergency rooms. Most of these frequent users face challenges related to mental health diagnoses or substance abuse, said Mesa County Commissioner Janet Rowland, who has led an effort to address the issue. In September, Mesa County launched a new multiagency collaboration (county officials refer to it as MAC), aimed at helping people successfully transition from incarceration. The collaboration connects people to agencies that can assist with employment, housing, transportation and other basic needs, as well as access to mental health services or rehabilitation programs to combat drug or alcohol addictions. Reentering society In April 2021, 50 percent of people held in the Mesa County Jail were on mental health medications, Mesa County Sheriff Todd Rowell said. Mental health and/or substance abuse issues are a significant factor in recidivism rates at the jail, said Rowell. While people can receive treatment for these conditions while incarcerated, they often lack continuity of care once they leave jail and, thus, can be prone to reoffending, he said. In 2020, when overall arrests were down due to the COVID-19 pandemic, one man was arrested 19 times, Rowell noted. A dozen other people were arrested four to eight times each. ``I was frustrated. I felt people had almost zero chance to succeed after jail,'' Rowell said. ``Life is hard anyways, particularly after spending three months in jail. Finding work is almost impossible. It's a benefit to any county to understand those challenges to change the recidivism.'' Mesa County did not have a transition coordinator at its jail until it hired Julie Mamo in 2019. She visited jails in Boulder and Douglas counties to learn about their reentry programs while creating Mesa County's program. The new multiagency collaboration builds on the program Mamo founded. Thus far, Mesa County has enlisted three agencies to provide services to help people with reentry: Amos Counseling, a Grand Junction-based counseling service; Foundations 4 Life, an organization that provides substance use disorder and mental health services to people involved in the justice system; and the Freedom Institute, a nonprofit that offers WAGEES (Work and Gain Education and Employment Skills), a community reentry program within the Colorado Department of Corrections. The Freedom Institute has already been providing WAGEES services for prison parolees in Grand Junction. Its new county contract now allows the Freedom Institute to offer those same services to the jail population. Lisa Mills, Mesa County's behavioral health strategies manager, decides which agency can best meet the specific needs of a person leaving jail. Case managers are given no more than 10 clients--the goal is to meet with people daily if necessary--to ensure they are adhering to prescription medications, able to access food assistance, acquire bus passes, find employment and housing. Upon release, people are met at the jail by an agency staff member for rides to where they are staying or wherever else they need to go. The agencies work closely with the jail's two transition coordinators. The county secured a $400,000 grant from the Colorado Department of Human Services' Office of Behavioral Health to fund the program. St. Mary's Medical Center and the Mesa County Sheriff's Office each pitched in another $300,000 for a total of $1 million. ``It's a long overdue program,'' said Lieutenant Henry Stoffel of the Mesa County Sheriff's Office. ``A lot of people leave our facility and don't have basic human needs, and so they often reoffend. We want to get them out of that cycle.'' Returning to prison for minor offenses It's taken 45-year-old Gary Swenson 20 years to get out of that cycle. His involvement with the justice system began at age 12 when he was sentenced to a Colorado juvenile detention center for a burglary he committed with a relative and two friends. By age 18 he was addicted to methamphetamine. He has spent half his life in and out of state prison. Swenson said he found it challenging to meet his parole obligations without a reliable source of transportation. Public transit didn't exist in the Grand Valley when he needed it, and he wasn't allowed to drive until he had fulfilled parole obligations. Employers were annoyed that he asked to leave work a couple times each week to attend mandatory substance abuse classes. He also had to take time off to submit weekly urine samples for drug screenings--which he was required to pay for himself, along with the classes. ``Your employer has to be real understanding, which they're usually not,'' Swenson said. He said most of his time behind bars was for parole violations, including once for receiving a speeding ticket, or on other occasions for missing those classes--all violations for which he'd be sent right back to prison. ``It was always a prison sentence,'' as opposed to probation or a halfway house, Swenson said. ProPublica (a national nonprofit media outlet that receives funding from The Colorado Trust) recently reported on how easy it is to be sent back to prison for minor offenses. The number of people in Colorado who return to prison within three years is 50 percent, one of the worst recidivism rates in the nation, according to a 2018 Virginia Department of Corrections report cited by ProPublica. Douglas County's reentry program includes a jail medication-assisted treatment program that helps people with opioid use disorder. The county had a 42 percent recidivism rate in 2021, which is lower than the statewide average, said Nicole Beckett, the jail-based behavioral health services administrator in Douglas County. Its reentry program includes working with probation officers, pretrial officers, public defenders and community behavioral health professionals. ``It's definitely our goal to disrupt the cycle of incarceration,'' Beckett said. ``People with substance use disorders face risk of relapse, making them a challenging population to help.'' Boulder County's reentry program added a housing coordinator, Kim Smith, in 2019 to focus specifically on helping people find housing in the city's extremely tight market. People on probation are prohibited from leaving Boulder County to seek more affordable housing elsewhere. With such a competitive housing market, landlords can easily choose not to rent to people with criminal records, said Smith. The reentry program has seen an 80 percent success rate of people avoiding recidivism. Mesa County officials say reentry programs are rare in rural areas due to a lack of resources. County Sheriffs of Colorado, a nonprofit that provides programs and support to sheriffs statewide, does not track the number of counties offering transition programs. While Mesa County Jail offers some programs in-house, it needs more space, and continuity of care has been an issue once people leave jail, Stoffel said. He would like the jail's transition program to double or triple in size, and said he expects reentry programs to increase across Colorado. ``They're in treatment for 45 days; recovery is for life,'' Mamo said. Readjusting to life In July, Mamo launched a program similar to one she witnessed in Douglas County that helps people acquire identification cards. A Department of Motor Vehicles mobile unit comes to the jail twice a month to issue IDs. ``Most people need two forms of ID,'' said Lory Villumsen, a second transition coordinator hired in June. ``We process the application to help with getting them their Social Security card.'' The transition team is additionally working on finding birth certificates for people. Mamo has created partnerships with transitional sober living spaces, reunited people with family members who reside outside the community, and enrolled people in treatment programs--sometimes out of town. The challenges of reentry are similar, whether transitioning from jail or prison, except lengthier prison sentences often means a person has become more ``institutionalized,'' making it more difficult to adjust to life on the outside, Mamo said. People who are incarcerated are told when to eat, when to sleep, what to wear and what to do; ``when people leave jail, we need to empower them to make all these decisions,'' Stoffel noted. Freedom Institute executive director Micah Espinoza hopes that working with people leaving county jail will keep them out of prison. ``Once you're convicted of a felony, and have fulfilled your sentence, you still pay for that the rest of your life,'' Espinoza said. As part of the multiagency collaboration, ``we're targeting people going in and out of jail for typically petty offenses. Why are they committing these crimes? It's usually poverty, homelessness, substance abuse, mental health.'' Swenson said he's learned from his mistakes; he's been out of prison for almost two years and is on unsupervised probation for the first time. He works as a peer specialist for the Circle Program, a residential treatment program in Grand Junction for men age 18 and older with concurrent substance abuse and mental health disorders. ``There are people in this program I've been in prison with, gotten high with,'' Swenson said. ``They see 'if Gary can do it,' they can. It's me not forgetting where I came from. ``Instead of locking people up for possession, give us an opportunity first to work with them,'' he continued. ``A lot of guys don't want to be high, live on the streets, be homeless--it's just all they know. Being part of this program is a chance to see an opportunity.''

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, let me rise in great enthusiasm for an important amendment that calls for an evaluation and a determination as to whether or not this is impacting positively those who are in the program. I have already read stories about Robert and a number of others; if this program spreads across America to urban hamlets, villages, counties, and rural communities, then we need to know how effective it is. I am almost positive it will be very effective as a worthwhile investment for the 600,000 people who are released, but this amendment will ensure that we have the right kind of amendment for best practices and best evidence.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I want to thank you all for being here today at the NMAC Capitol Hill Champions Reception to commemorate World AIDS Day and celebrate our progress over the years. It is invigorating to be among a room full of leaders fighting the good fight against AIDS worldwide; and as so many here have contributed mightily to this effort, it is an honor, and quite humbling, to be this year's recipient of the John Lewis Good Trouble Award from NMAC. I first want us to remember our deal friend and long-time colleague, Congressman John Lewis. He was a true warrior fighting for a more just, equitable, fairer, and better world. John Lewis earnestly believed that healthcare is a human right. Through his indefatigable leadership, he demonstrated the urgency of elevating the U.S. commitment to protect people worldwide from HIV and AIDS. He was a role model in so many respects, including his persistence in combating AIDS globally. World AIDS Day provides us the opportunity to reflect on the AIDS epidemic and where progress has been made. This day also allows us to rededicate ourselves to eradicating the disease once and for all. Since the first World AIDS Day in 1988, we have greatly increased our investments in HIV/AIDS prevention, care, treatment, and research. When the HIV/AIDS epidemic started, the outlook was very grim. There wasn't an understanding of the disease, antivirals were not available, and life expectancy for those diagnosed was frighteningly short. Today, there is a better understanding of HIV/AIDS, how it spreads, and how to treat it. There are medications such as PrEP, which is taken daily to prevent HIV, and PEP, which is taken up to 72 hours potential HIV exposure. Treatment has advanced tremendously to the point where many HIV patients have viral loads that are so low that they are undetectable. The U.S. government has worked hard to combat the spread of this devastating disease. Through legislation like the Ryan White CARE Act and the U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), we have been able to improve HIV/AIDS education, quality of care, and distribution of resources to those who need them most, both domestically and globally. The NIH provides the largest public investment in HIV/AIDS research globally. Dr. Anthony Fauci deserves credit for a large part of our country's AIDS response as Director of the Office of AIDS Research. As we all know, racial and ethnic minorities are disproportionately impacted by HIV/AIDS, both in the United States and globally. In the U.S., African Americans account for higher proportions of HIV diagnoses and people living with HIV, in comparison to other races and ethnicities. In my home of Houston, Texas, 6 out of every 10 diagnosed HIV infections are among African Americans. It is estimated that 1 in 90 Houstonians are living with HIV/AIDS. Racism, HIV stigma, homophobia, poverty, and barriers to health care exacerbate disparities and pose obstacles that prevent people from proper testing and treatment that would reduce the spread of HIV/AIDS. I am proud to fight against racism, discrimination, and other societal deformities that cause disparities in health status and keep people from seeking urgently needed health care. I have worked to declare HIV/AIDS a state of emergency among our African American community, which faces an infection rate nearly eleven times that of white Americans. Internationally, I have worked to support PEPFAR in all they have done and continue to do to help those who struggle to combat the brutal HIV/AIDS virus. It is estimated that there are 38.4 million people worldwide living with HIV. In 2021, 1.5 million individuals acquired HIV, which is a 32 percent decline in new infections since 2010. This decline shows the impact that access to testing, treatment, care, and support services have on transmission and new diagnosis. In 2021, around 650,000 people died from AIDS-related illnesses worldwide, compared to 2 million people in 2004 and 1.4 million in 2010. Through the work of the CDC, the NIH, and the UN's World Health Organization, we have made great strides in reducing the transmission of HIV through antiretroviral therapies (ART) that reduce detectable viral loads. Those who take ART as prescribed are often able to have undetectable viral loads, live long healthy lives, and not transmit HIV to partners through sex. In fiscal year 2021, PEPFAR provided HIV testing services for more than 50 million people and supported ART for nearly 19 million men, women and children globally. Because of PEPFAR, 2.8 million babies in 2021 were born HIV-free to parents living with HIV. But there is still much work to be done. The United Nations reports that progress on HIV treatment and prevention in the last three years has flatlined. As a leader in the global fight against HIV and AIDS, the United States must continue to support HIV/AIDS prevention, care, treatment, and research. My hope is that, through bipartisan support, Congress will continue to pass legislation that expands resources to reduce the spread of HIV/ AIDS both in the U.S. and globally. Beyond our borders, our efforts have extended care to millions in the developing world, through increased resources for PEPFAR and the Global Fund. This collective progress reflects the heights that can be reached when all stakeholders work together to achieve common goals. I look forward to working with my colleagues, federal agencies, foundations and philanthropists, the NGO sector, community partners, and other global leaders to put an end to this epidemic that continues to plague us. I want to thank everyone here today for supporting this extremely important issue. This is something that impacts us all and it should be a priority for all of us. And again, I want to thank NMAC for awarding me with this year's John Lewis Good Trouble Award. I will do my best to continually earn this award by persistently supporting efforts to eradicate HIV/AIDS and advocating for minorities in Houston, the United States, and across the globe. May we all ``never, ever be afraid to make some noise and get in good trouble, necessary trouble''.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, today is World AIDS Day, and lest we forget, it is not over yet. In 2021, 1.5 million persons became infected with AIDS and 600,000 died; a pandemic or an epidemic. As we fought and scurried to save lives against COVID-19, let us not forget. I rise to thank all the AIDS advocacy groups and my particular center, the Thomas Street Clinic, which will hold a World AIDS Day ceremony today, one that I never miss except when in Washington. I remember the days of standing at the bedsides of those who were dying alone. We must continue to research, we must continue to acknowledge, and we must continue to eliminate the stigma, for all of those infected and affected AIDS must have human dignity. I am reminded of my early engagement standing with the late Senator Orrin Hatch and, of course, the late Senator Ted Kennedy when they announced the Ryan White CARE Treatment Act, and what an amazing impact. We have lost many souls. Many families have suffered, but as Americans, let us continue to fight against the scourge of AIDS and to embrace those who are fighting and living with AIDS. World AIDS Day. We should never forget. It is not over yet.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 922, ``Condemning the use of hunger as a weapon of war and recognizing the effect of conflict on global food security and famine Act''. This resolution condemns the use of starvation of civilians as a weapon of warfare. It also calls on the U.S. government to prioritize diplomatic efforts to call out and address instances where hunger and intentional deprivation of food is being utilized as a weapon of war, including efforts to ensure that security operations do not undermine livelihoods of local populations to minimize civilian harm. The United States has always been a nation that espouses human rights. That's a central tenet on which we were founded. So when we see starvation being used as a weapon of warfare, it is reprehensible to us. Global food insecurity is of great importance to me because, not only am I a longtime Member of the House Hunger Caucus, I represent the same Congressional District that had been represented by iconic leaders who fought to end hunger in the U.S. and globally. I am proud to continue the historic legacy of Congresswoman Barbara Jordan, who was a champion for human dignity and fought for the rights of all people regardless of race, gender, heritage, or economic status, and Congressman Mickey Leland, who worked tirelessly to raise awareness of, and fight for, policies to end food insecurity around the globe and who, tragically, died in a plane crash while working to end world hunger on a relief mission in Ethiopia. Starvation is a brutal and inhumane way to force someone to surrender. It's a slow and agonizing death, used by the immoral to gain leverage in a war of attrition and aggression. Starvation tactics typically target innocent, vulnerable civilians who are not directly a party to the conflict; instead they are merely caught in the crossfire of conflict. That is why we must adopt this legislation. The United States government must prioritize diplomatic efforts to call out and address instances where hunger and intentional deprivation of food is being utilized as a weapon. We must show the world that we do not condone this type of behavior and that we will not stand for it. The United States should prioritize diplomatic efforts to call out and address instances where hunger and intentional deprivation of food is being utilized as a weapon. We must do everything in our power to protect innocent civilians from this barbaric practice. Starvation is a terrible thing. It's something that nobody should have to go through. And yet, there are people in this world who are starving right now as a consequence of war, or, perhaps worse, as a tool of warfare. The people of Ethiopia's Tigre Province are being subjected to a truly vile and malicious use of food deprivation in this way. The region was already suffering from drought, and when compounded by forced starvation from denial of access to food as a weapon of war, the effect is heinous and the consequences are unforgiveable. In Pakistan, food deprivation is compounded by the human toll from recent floods and other natural disasters. Using drought to strategically exacerbate starvation is unacceptable. Russia's aggression against Ukraine is a global food insecurity tragedy on multiple levels. As Putin wages his war against the people of Ukraine, he uses food as a weapon by destroying the food production and transportation capacity of the country he invaded. At the same time, since Ukraine grows grains and crops that feed much of the world, Putin's devastation of Ukraine's food production infrastructure and takeovers of Ukrainian food exports cause food insecure populations of countless countries to suffer, especially in Africa. Finally, I condemn the use of government blockades as a weapon of war to deliberately increase starvation. Government blockades are nothing more than collective punishment, and they're a violation of the human rights of the people who are suffering under them.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, this is an enormously important initiative, and I rise today to support the Pro bono Work to Empower and Represent Act of 2021, or the POWER 2.0 Act. This has to be one of the more important bills on the floor, among many. This is a bill that saves lives, and I certainly want to, at the very beginning, acknowledge certainly the Senator, but as well, I want to acknowledge our friend and colleague in the House and thank her so very much, Congresswoman Peltola, for her great work that has generated something that is very close to my heart. The POWER Act will give a lifeline to domestic violence sufferers, those who have been abused by domestic violence. As the author of the Violence Against Women Act in the House over a number of Congresses, I know how important any legislation is dealing with domestic violence and domestic abuse. I speak to law enforcement and often say to them that domestic violence calls are the most dangerous that law enforcement engage in. Remember, as I started on this floor, I indicated that as Democrats, we know how to bring down crime and also engage in social justice. We understand that it is extremely important that those in the criminal justice system deserve due process. But the victims of domestic violence, more often than not women, suffer greatly. In Texas, 40.1 percent of women and 34 percent of men experience intimate partner physical violence, intimate partner rape, and/or intimate partner stalking in their lifetimes. Thousands of incidents are reported every day. On a single day in 2020, domestic violence hotlines across the country receive 21,321 calls. The provision of legal services through the southern district or through the various Federal districts that train over 600,000 lawyers and then send them out to be able to give assistance to State and local governments is a lifeline. It is a lifesaver. Less than one-third of domestic violence victims successfully obtain protective orders. Protective orders can be the cause of saving life, keeping a mother to protect her children, keeping an aunt or a grandmother. The POWER Act has an indelible impact on the lives of the most vulnerable Americans, and I stand here in grand support of this important effort. As a former board member of the Houston Area Women's Center, I know what it means to get calls late into the night and calling the executive director and asking for relief for a woman who is running for her life. Over this past Thanksgiving weekend, unfortunately, in my own community, there were a series of domestic violence killings of women who suffered at the hands of an ex. It is important to eliminate the sunset of this provision and to be able to say that no one should be left alone without the idea or the help of ensuring that there is legal protection and that you have access to legal protection. Again, I want to commend Congresswoman Mary Sattler Peltola, a friend and someone who I appreciate her leadership. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the following articles, The Justice in Government Project and HAWC. [From the Justice in Government Project] Key Studies and Data About About How Legal Aid Assists Domestic Violence Survivors The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that in the U.S., 36.4 percent of women and 33.6 percent of men experience sexual or physical violence or stalking perpetrated by an intimate partner in their tifetimes. Individuals who have experienced domestic violence display a multitude of legal needs. They may require assistance with filing protection orders, custody issues, housing, identity theft, and employment (Lee & Backes, 2018; Allen et al., 2004).

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2521, DOULA for VA Act of 2021--to require the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to establish a pilot program to furnish doula services to veterans. Doulas provide emotional and physical support to pregnant people during pregnancy, childbirth, and postpartum. A doula will assist during birth by providing a positive and safe birthing experience. Studies show that when doulas are present in the birthing process labors are shorter, it is less likely that a C-section will be needed, there are less requests for pain medication, and there is a more positive childbirth experience. In 2013, the Journal of Perinatal Education conducted a study which found that expectant mothers matched with a doula had better birth outcomes than did mothers who gave birth without involvement of a doula. Doulas work to develop birthing plans, help the parent understand labor and delivery procedures, communicate preferences to the medical staff, and teach relaxation and breathing skills, along with many other non-clinical tasks that improve the birthing experience. Currently, Veterans Affairs benefits do not cover doulas. Improving the childbirth experience should be a priority for us all. Veterans and their family members deserve to have positive birthing experiences, just as all Amencans do. Maternal mortality is an issue that continues to plague the United States health care system. In 2020, 861 women died of maternal causes in the United States. In the U.S., two-thirds of those pregnancy- related deaths are preventable and for every pregnancy-related death, there are 70 pregnancy-related near-death experiences. It's extremely important that we remove barriers in health care that may be contributing to these deaths. Maternal mortality is caused by several issues such as cardiovascular problems, high blood pressure, blood clots, and complications of labor and delivery. One step to removing health care barriers is to provide more services such as doulas who can advocate for the parent and provide positive birthing experiences. From 2010 through 2015, the use of maternity services from the Veterans Health Administration increased by 44 percent. If doula services are improving care for the general public, then veterans should be provided with the opportunity to utilize doula services as well. A study in 2010 found that veterans returning from Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom who experienced pregnancy were twice as likely to have a diagnosis of depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder, bipolar disorder, or schizophrenia as compared to those who had not experienced a pregnancy. H.R. 2521, Doula for VA Act of 2021 is important because we should be working to improve the lives of women and children in the United States. This bill directly impacts the health of veterans and their families. I know that this bill is important to my constituents in Houston. Over 282,000 Veterans live in the Houston area, and almost 25,000 Veterans in Houston are women. Improving the birthing experience for these women is a top priority to me. I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting this critical bill that will direct the Department of Veterans Affairs to establish a pilot program to furnish doula services to veterans.