Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON LEE

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

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, I'm overwhelmed and very grateful to Chairman Young, my dear friend who has done so much, as well as the ranking member, likewise, for his great service. He's done so much. Let me just conclude by saying that PTSD, as both the chairman and the ranking member have agreed, is an invisible wound that you don't often see. One of the best ways to increase access to treatment is to increase the medical facilities and also the medical professionals. These additional dollars, as I understand the intent of both the ranking member and chairman, will be used effectively. Post-traumatic stress disorder is one of the most prevalent, devastating psychological wounds suffered by the brave men and women. I ask my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Let me thank the gentlemen, and thank them for their commitment to the men and women of the United States military. And let me thank my colleagues for accepting this amendment. With that, I know that we will be safer, secure and healthier with this fight against breast cancer that continues to grow in the United States military. I ask my colleagues to support it, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, I'm hoping to convince my colleagues that, albeit what numbers you may have in this increasing and emerging epidemic of post-traumatic stress disorder, let me give a personal story that comes by way of my interaction often with veterans and, particularly, a post-traumatic stress disorder center that we were able to fund in a hospital that previously had not had the ability to serve Active Duty soldiers and veterans. It's a small hospital off the campus of our main Veterans Hospital in Houston, Texas, but we established a post-traumatic stress disorder center there that allowed veterans who may not have traditionally been at the Veterans Hospital, not because they did not have benefits, but for a variety of reasons, to find a comfort place to be treated for their post-traumatic stress disorder. And they were not just veterans of the Afghan and Iraq wars, but these were ones from the Persian Gulf, from Vietnam. And they could not thank the staff and could not thank the work that we had done to secure just a small amount of dollars, which this amendment does. This takes a small amount of dollars from a very large funding for, certainly, a commendable challenge, but it is one that I believe would benefit, as we seek to create a better quality of life for our soldiers, wherever they might be, and our veterans. This is a $500,000 deposit, if you will, on the high numbers of post- traumatic stress disorder. I have seen it in our returning soldiers, I have seen it in our veterans, and it is clearly something that is not going away. I think the poignant story that I want to share is how grateful this particular veteran was, who said he had never been to treatment and his whole life had been turned around. His wife was there with him. She said their lives have been turned around. So I ask my colleagues to consider the responsible approach that we have taken for just this amount of money to reinvest in our needy, but deserving, men and women who are both Active Duty. In the instance of the story that I gave, because this facility was able to utilize TRICARE, they could serve Active Duty, and they could serve those who were veterans as well. So I thank the chairman and ranking member and urge support of the amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Ms. JACKSON LEE. I thank the chairman of the subcommittee and I thank the ranking member of the subcommittee. Madam Chair, let me, first of all, acknowledge the hard work that it takes to provide for the men and women of the United States military and to secure America. As a member of the Homeland Security Committee, I am well aware of the combined efforts, obviously, in the military and the line of demarcation between civilian, but we all are committed to the national security of this Nation. This amendment deals with the reduction in funding of the procurement Defense-wide by $1 million. I want to give the good news. The good news is that this money would be put in deficit reduction. But I do want to acknowledge that one of the issues that we must address as we go forward in the collective intelligence agencies, as we have listened to some of the challenges that we are facing in light of the present status of the leaks that have occurred by an American citizen who was working in the capacity as a contractor--this impacts all of us. So as this $1 million would be submitted into the deficit reduction pool, I believe it is extremely important that we look very closely at the extended use of civilian contractors, the extended use of a budget that is responsible for 70 percent of the intelligence of this country. Now, I know that some of the contractors deal with issues that are not individual personnel, but are dealing with research and dealing with equipment. But I believe that it is important that we look at the question that resulted in the disclosure of leaked and highly sensitive classified information, and the continuing raising of concern of whether or not the national security of this Nation has been impacted because of the outsourcing of intelligence responsibility. In particular, I think we need to look at the outsourcing of determining top secret clearance. Obviously, the circumstances that resulted in the leaking is an individual that had an interesting resume, from the educational level of a high school GED--of which we respect and encourage people to complete their education--of the military service, and then on to top secret by a contractor who gave out top secret clearances. We hope that there was some kind of review. So my amendment is intended to highlight this issue. I would hope that as we proceed, that this question will, if you will, have the ability to slow--not halt--the use of civilian contractors out of all of our agencies dealing with the issue of intelligence. We want to assure the American people that we are concerned about the protection of this Nation's national security-- civil liberties as well, but also to prevent the leaks that have occurred. Let me conclude my remarks and let me just say that I hope this brings about a discussion that will cross jurisdictional lines of the Judiciary Committee, the Intelligence Committee, our appropriators. Let's fix this enormous use and reliance on these contractors' outsourcing. Let's develop a highly trained group of Federal Governmental professionals committed, if you will, to the ongoing service to their Nation. Respecting contractors have the same loyalty, but I think it would be better, Mr. Chairman, if we can frame the utilization of contractors in such a way that we can be assured that everything that deals with the national security of this Nation will be protected. With that, I will withdraw the amendment. Amendment No. 13 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, I withdraw amendment No. 11.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Again, Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Mr. Young and Mr. Visclosky for their leadership for an important responsibility in this Nation. My amendment increases funding for the Defense Health Program's research and development by $10 million. These funds will address the question of breast cancer in the United States military. The American Cancer Society calls several strains of breast cancer as a particularly aggressive subtype associated with lower survival rates; in this instance, it's a triple negative. But I raise an article that says: ``Fighting a Different Battle; Breast Cancer and the Military.'' We all know, by the way, that breast cancer can affect both men and women. The bad news is breast cancer has been just about as brutal on women in the military as combat. Let me say that sentence again. Breast cancer has been just about as brutal on women in the military as combat. More than 800 women have been wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to the Army Times; 874 military women were diagnosed with breast cancer just between 2000 and 2011. And according to that same study, more are suspected. It grows. The good news is that we have been working on it, and I want to add my appreciation to the military. This, however, will allow for the additional research. As new young women come into the United States military, as women stay longer in the United States military, as women get older in the United States military, as women ascend to leadership roles in the United States military, these dollars provide research. Not only is breast cancer striking relatively young military women at an alarming rate, but male servicemembers, veterans and their dependents are at risk as well. With a younger and generally healthier population, those in the military tend to have a lower risk for most cancers than civilians--including significantly lower colorectal, lung and cervical--but breast cancer is a different story. Military people in general, and in some cases very specifically, are at a significantly greater risk for contracting breast cancer, says Dr. Richard Clapp, a top cancer expert at Boston University who works at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on military breast cancer issues. He says life in the military can mean exposure to a witch's brew of risk factors directly linked to greater chances of getting breast cancer. So, my friends, I am asking that we do the right thing. We're on the right track, we're on the right rail, we're on the right road. But with the expansion of women in the military, I can assure you, for long life, a vital service that these men and women give, it is extremely important to move forward with this amendment. Researchers point to a high use of oral contraception that's linked to breast cancer among women that would ensure that this particular amendment would be a positive step forward. So I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment. With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as Ranking Member of the Committee on Homeland Security's Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security, I rise to support H.R. 2611, a bill to designate the new Coast Guard headquarters building as the ``Douglas A. Munro Coast Guard Headquarters Building.'' Douglas A. Munro, a signalman first class of the United States Coast Guard, died heroically on Guadalcanal Island on September 27, 1942, after succeeding in his volunteer assignment to evacuate a military unit of Marines under fire from opposition forces. Born on October 11, 1919, Munro was raised Washington State and attended the Central Washington College of Education for a year before enlisting in the United States Coast Guard in 1939. He had an outstanding record of service in the Coast Guard and was quickly promoted to signalman, first class. In the Battle of Guadalcanal, Munro was in charge of the boats that had landed the Marines at the scene. When it became necessary to evacuate the Marines, Munro volunteered to lead evacuation. He did so under heavy enemy fire, ultimately using himself and his boats as cover allowing the last of the Marines to leave. Tragically, Munro was fatally wounded in the process. Munro posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor, the Purple Heart Medal, and was eligible for the American Defense Service Medal, the Asiatic-Pacific Area Campaign Medal, and the World War II Victory Medal. Mr. Speaker, Douglas A. Munro gave his life to protect his fellow service members and defend this great Nation; it is most fitting that the U.S. Coast Guard's new headquarters is named in his honor. With its long, rich history and significant contributions to homeland security, I can see why the Coast Guard was selected to be the first occupant of the Department of Homeland Security's new permanent home-- on the campus of St. Elizabeths. I wish the Coast Guard the best as it begins a new chapter in its new headquarters. Finally, I would like to express my appreciation to the men and women of the Coast Guard who continue to serve our country today, ensuring the service lives up to its motto of Semper Paratus, or ``always ready.'' Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 2611.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Let me thank the distinguished gentleman from New York and let me thank our chairperson, the Honorable Marcia Fudge, and all my colleagues that are on the floor tonight to accept the challenge that has been given over the airways by many people. I want to thank Mr. Jeffries for pointing out--as I stand here as a mother, I would make the argument of a son, of a Black son. I can affirm that any child's life is of great value. In fact, we spent the weekend in Houston reaffirming the value of a child's life. I want to cite and compliment Bishop James Dixon and Pastor Kirbyjon Caldwell, Pastors Henderson and Nash and Lawson and many other pastors that were there, who obviously joined with so many, including my colleague who is here on the floor of the House, Congressman Al Green. I heard nothing but an affirmation of the value of life. I'm delighted as a lawyer and as a legislator that you reaffirm that African Americans do not coddle crime of any kind, a crime that happens to be between two African Americans or, in essence, two Caucasians. It is noted, if my facts are correct, that 84 percent of the crimes perpetrated on White Americans are done by White Americans. Eighty six percent of the crimes done on Black persons, on Black Americans, are done by Black people. It might be that it speaks again to the isolated, segregated neighborhoods that we travel in, but the one thing, Mr. Speaker, that is unique is that you can count on the fact that those African Americans who perpetrated crimes are incarcerated over and over again at a higher number than any other population in this Nation. Their lives, the premise of much of what we are discussing tonight-- and I would hope that as I finish that it will also be a pleading that we have a discussion on race. Let me just cite these numbers since I started out with the idea of incarceration. Incarceration is not an equal opportunity punishment. For example, incarceration rates in the United States by race were as follows: 2,468 per 100,000 are Black; 1,038 per 100,000 are Latinos; 409 per 100,000 are White. The United States locks up its Black males at a rate 5.8 times higher than what previously has been known as one of the more racist countries in the world, which is South Africa. Under apartheid in 1993, Black males were only 851 per 100,000. In 2006, Black males were 4,789. I would say to my colleagues and to the Speaker and to my colleagues here: What are we to think when the scales of justice are unequally balanced? As my friends have said, it is the pain that we felt at the loss of Trayvon Martin and the simplicity of an arrest and then ultimately, with a Sanford jury in a State trial, that we could not even find with much evidence to prove that there was not enough commonality of cultural connection and that they could not see that something should have valued the loss of an innocent child who simply was walking to get home. Maybe it is the words of Frederick Douglass that he said on April 16, 1883: It is a real calamity in this country for any man, guilty or not guilty, to be accused of a crime. We are all upset when that happens--guilty or not guilty, perpetrator or not-- but it is an incomparably greater calamity for any colored man to be so accused. Justice is often painted with bandaged eyes. She is described in forensic eloquence as utterly blind to wealth or poverty, high or low, White or Black; but a mass of iron, however thick, could never blind American justice when a Black man happens to be on trial. I would say to my colleagues that that is something we have to move beyond in America. In an E.J. Dionne article, he said: The dignity and grace of Trayvon Martin's family should inspire all of us to keep our eyes on the future. We should not blind ourselves either to the persistence of racism or to our triumphs in pushing it back. It does not help when those who are not like those of us who are on the floor--members of the Congressional Black Caucus--want to push back and call those of us who raise questions of justice--which, by the way, if you impact and correct the criminal justice system, you're going to impact Whites and Latinos, and you're going to impact African Americans. If you address the question of mandatory minimums, if you address the question of rehabilitation funding, if you address the question of providing housing and opportunity for work for those who have come out of prison--no matter from where they come out, the Federal system or, in fact, the State system--you make it better for all. But every time we raise the question of improving issues of justice, we get called or get labeled as being racist. So I want to say to America and to our friends: Can we not be called ``Americans''? Because that is what the Congressional Black Caucus stands for. In 1997, John Hope Franklin finished a report that called itself ``One America in the 21st Century: Forging a New Future.'' I will read one sentence: America's greatest promise in the 21st century--which we're in right now--lies in our ability to harness the strength of our racial diversity. We have not done that, and that is why the Congressional Black Caucus is here on the floor of the House to be able to accept the challenge that the President made as he indicated to America, unabashedly and without fear: that it's not only that Trayvon may have been my son, but that he may have been me. The President said something very powerful. He said that we must, all of us--Members of Congress and Governors and pastors and plain civilians and young people--do some soul searching, and that we must as families and churches and workplaces find the possibility of being a little bit more honest and at least ask yourself your own questions: Am I ringing as much bias out of myself as I can? Am I judging people as much as I can based not on the color of their skin but on the content of their character? That, I would think, would be an appropriate exercise in the wake of this tragedy. So tonight, Mr. Speaker, in joining with my colleagues, I'm going to stand unabashedly and ask for that kind of discussion. I want it for those who were standing on the street corners yesterday in Houston, Texas, shouting out that people were racist because they were concerned about a court decision that they didn't think was fair. I am concerned that all of those people who were marching would be labeled across America, in all the cities in which they were--peacefully without arrest or incident--as ``un-American.'' That's when we have to ring, if you will, our souls and find that we take from it the bias that we might perceive to be blocking us from understanding the richness of our diversity. So I would argue that we are blessed because we have Asians, blessed because we have White people, blessed because we have Latinos, blessed because we have African Americans, blessed because of the diversity in sexual orientation, blessed because we have people who are short and tall, blessed because we have people who are wealthy and middle class, and blessed because as a Congress we can work on those who are impoverished, and we can stop the devastation of the SNAP and provide the opportunity for those individuals who are impoverished to do better. Finally, let me say this. This past week, we honored an icon who moved me because of the diversity of those who were honoring--from Senator Cornyn from my State and Senator McConnell, organized by Maxine Waters and Eric Cantor, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Senator Durbin, and on and on and on, Leader Pelosi and Clyburn and Hoyer--and I'm sure I've missed many others--our chairwoman and Eleanor Holmes Norton. What a vast diversity of individuals who rose to honor Madiba, Nelson Mandela. Nelson Mandela said something that should be potent as we look to fix the inequity of self-defense laws, as many of us look at racial profiling, which exists extensively in this country, as evidenced by the heinous crime that generated the hate crimes legislation in our State of Texas--the killing of James Byrd, an individual who was dismembered, who was an African American male who was minding his business while walking along a lonely rural road. Another man was killed in Mississippi, who just came to a hotel and went out to his car, and was killed tragically just because of who he was. The numbers of cases that we've had are that impact that we have not yet understood--the greatness of America. So we've got to change stand-your-ground laws, and I intend to introduce that legislation this week. I look for bipartisan support because, as Senator McCain said, maybe we need to look and to review federally what stand-your-ground laws are doing, not the Castle laws, but the extension of those that then carry this power out into the public where you do not have to retreat. But I read these words of Mandela's. They say: Our struggle has reached a decisive moment. We call on people to be able to intensify the struggle on all fronts. He had another quote that I'd like to read: Honor comes when you pursue and are determined in your struggle. He mentioned the fact that, even with humiliation, even with insults and even with defeat, if you continue in your struggle, then there is honor due. Let me thank Mr. Jeffries for laying out the opportunity for the Congressional Black Caucus to answer the question: the road to equality is under construction. Also, let me thank him for allowing us to rise to the floor. I go to my seat by saying that equality will come when school districts like North Forest Independent School District will not be destroyed and closed in Houston, Texas, when we raise up education; equality will come when we focus on ridding this Nation of poverty by making sure that we have the kind of economic programs; and equality will come when we recognize that justice should roll down on all of us, and that we address the question of the criminalization of African American males and others so that justice is equally applied but, as the individuals return and have done their time, that they will come to a place that is welcoming so that they can serve their Nation. For that reason, I yield back my time with a great hope of the same message that came in the treatise by John Hope Franklin. He chaired the committee on race and said that America's greatest promise is in her diversity. I call upon my colleagues, my friends in Texas, my friends in my district: let's sit down at the table of harmony. Let's talk about race as we embrace each other and love each other, because that's what America is all about. Thank you to the Congressional Black Caucus for its vision and its leadership.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, well, as we started, the reason why the Federal Government got engaged in education is because I remember times in the South and across America when there was unequal education and we needed the U.S. Department of Education. More importantly, we needed the courts. Today I stand here and ask for a simple inquiry made by the U.S. Department of Education: Are State agencies effectively closing school districts and not seeking to improve them? A very fine example is the closure of the North Forest Independent School District in Houston, Texas. It's solvent, 50,000 registered voters, 7,000 students, had received awards, and what did the State agency do, the State agency came in, to the opposition of the community, teachers, supporters of a combined effort between a public school and charter school, proposed coming together to put forward the best proposal to keep this school teaching our children, support by Republicans and Democrats, and an autocratic State agency closed the school district. So this is a simple inquiry. It is an inquiry as to whether or not you want to boost up the taxpayers and boost up the parents who have no standing. It is a question of whether or not you want to make sure that there is a basis of a fair appeal as opposed to an autocratic process, a dictatorial process. I ask my colleagues, all of them have faced this. No one wants to interfere with the running of a school district or interfere with the administrators or educators; but what you do want to interfere with is business decisions closing rural school districts and closing urban school districts and not allowing the people, the teachers to be able to understand and to give input into the best process, Mr. Chairman. I would like to refer to the Center on Reinventing Public Education, and I would argue in closing, Mr. Chairman, that this amendment gives opportunity. I ask you to support the Jackson Lee amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to be on the floor with Mr. Tierney and the gentleman from California, and their commitment and their comments on the question of the equality of education for at-risk children. I think if there is anything that comes out of this important discussion, and from the chairman's presence on the floor, it should be that we should be focused with tunnel vision on the concern about at- risk children. My amendment is a straightforward amendment. It is an amendment that gives information. Specifically, it calls for a study and a report containing recommendations regarding the advisability of authorizing a State education authority to close a school district over the opposition of the locally elected school board, families, students, teachers, and calls for best practices governing the exercise of authority by a State education agency in monitoring, supervising, and controlling underperforming school districts, with particular emphasis on rural and underserved districts and underserved communities. Our children are our precious resource, and I have been in schools and school districts where children loved the atmosphere in which they are in. They clamor for the teachers. There is a mutual respect and coming together, and all they need is a focus of resources and improvement. But rather than getting that, authority is used to either undermine the funding of those school districts or in essence say to those school teachers and all of those who have been working--and taxpayers--that, in fact, this school will not be given dollars to improve. The Center on Reinventing Public Education assessed a number of States, and the interesting determination was that States spent less on improving school districts and schools, less on improving, but more on shutting them down or not allowing them to go forward in at-risk areas. This chart gives you the balance of distribution of performance and improvement; and many States, such as Texas, spend less than 5 percent on performance. So what does my amendment do? It provides balance between local control over schools and our State educational agencies by providing a report. It makes sure that taxpayers and locally elected officials are not ignored by the State. It also has a way of preventing communities from being blamed as the problem and engaging the community. It prevents poorly prepared State-elected officials who've been placed in positions to run schools from taking money from those schools as opposed to investing in those schools. It makes sure that minor problems are fixed before you go to drastic concerns. It allows a determination of a structure of appeal so that the appeal is allowed broadly by those who are impacted, taxpayers, for example, who are very important. And it allows a determination whether the State authorities are given the effective oversight of a rural district, an at-risk district; and then it provides the opportunity to ensure that there is fair play and that we are interested in the quality of education. I ask my colleagues to support the amendment. I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. Chair, I thank Chairman Kline and Ranking Member Miller for their work to improve education for our Nation's children. I thank the Rules Committee for making in order Jackson Lee Amendment #24 for full consideration by the House of Representatives. My amendment to H.R. 5, the ``Student Success Act,'' is simple and is an important addition to this bill. I believe that my amendment to H.R. 5 can be supported by every member of the House. Jackson Lee Amendment #24 This amendment directs the Secretary of Education to conduct a study and produce a report to Congress with recommendations regarding the advisability of authorizing a state education authority to close a school district over the opposition of a locally elected school board, and regarding best practices governing the exercise of authority by a state education agency in monitoring, supervising and controlling underperforming school districts with particular emphasis on rural and underrepresented school districts. The purpose of the amendment is to create an opportunity for states to receive information guidance on what is happening around the Nation regarding forced school district mergers or closures. Forced school district mergers and closures by a state without careful consideration of the sensitivity of the communities impacted can result in unintended consequences. A report can provide recommendations regarding the advisability of an authorized state education authority to close a school district over the opposition of a locally elected school board. Having access to the knowledge and experience of other state education agencies to factor into the decision to close or merge a school board can be of benefit to the 24 states with laws that allow these types of actions. A report is not intended to suggest that there are no circumstances when a state may need to exercise its authority to intervene and act in the best interest of children or communities if the school district is unable to do so. The report can provide easy access to lessons learned and a list of voluntary best practices that may be of great benefit to states that have the authority to close a locally elected school board. The 24 states with the authority to close or merge a school district include: Alabama, Mississippi, Kentucky, Tennessee, Texas, South Carolina, North Carolina, Missouri, Arkansas, California, and New Mexico. There are important reasons why states need to have the report proposed by this amendment as resources they can reference when making a difficult decision regarding a school district's future. Much of the reason for such a report flow from the same arguments many of my colleagues make regarding the power of the federal government. When states close or merge local school districts their actions: reduce local control over schools and increases state authority over school districts; imply that the community has the problem and the states have the answers, and assumes that states have the ability to effectively run school districts; routinely place poorly prepared state-selected officials in positions to run school districts, which means there is little possibility of any meaningful change occurring in the classroom; usually focus on cleaning up minor problems and incompetent administration but do not go to the root of the social problems facing disadvantaged students in urban and rural school districts; foster negative connotations and impressions that hinder self-esteem of school board members, administrators, teachers, students and parents; and produce unnecessary showdowns between state and local officials which slow the overhaul of management practices, drain resources from educational reforms and reinforce division between impacted citizens and state government. Another damaging impact of forced school district closures are the foreseeable hardened negative feelings toward state government that result. The parents, students or elected school boards have no voice in the decision by the state to close or merge a school district. This amendment does not assume that there is no role or circumstance under which the 24 state governments with laws that allow intervention and closure of school districts should not be able to act. The amendment seeks to provide information to these states on the experience of other states with the power to close a school district. The benefit of the report can be accessed by all states who may want to weigh the pros and cons of pursuing action against school districts as well as provide guidance on best practices. Due process that is transparent and supports the principle that all school districts within a state will be treated the same would be a strong step forward in raising public confidence in the decisions of state government. It would be very prudent to be sure that when a state decides to act to help a failing school they can recruit the best experts in the field. Finally, local engagement in the decision making process removes tension and raises the possibility of a successful outcome. My Congressional district once included the North Forest Independent School District, which was closed by the Texas Education Agency on July 1, 2013. The decision to close North Forest Independent School District by the Texas Education Association displayed a reckless disregard for the children, parents, teachers, and administrators of the North Forest Independent School District. There was no reason to close the school district and many reasons to work with the elected school board and engaged community to address the issues raised by the Texas Education Association. The decision to deprive the community served by the school district did not give parents any say or control over the decision to dissolve the locally elected 7-member North Forest Independent School District board and was not in the interest of the education of the students served by the schools in that district. All of the members of the former North Forest Independent School board were African American. The North Forest School District was 70% African American and 29% Hispanic. In making the decision to close the district, the Texas Education Agency took a ``guillotine'' approach to resolving the problems associated with the North Forest Independent School District--an approach that was wholly unnecessary given the progress the district has made as well as the availability of viable and less disruptive alternatives, including a proposed partnership between North Forest Independent School District and local public charter schools that was announced on March 8, 2013. There must be a remedy to prevent this from happening to any other school districts. Jackson Lee Amendment #24 is designed to prevent this from happening by providing Congress with much needed information on the impact to school districts that face closure or merging. The practice of closing and merging school districts is disproportionally happening to school districts serving rural and underserved students. This amendment is intended to provide Congress with more information about what happens to these school districts and discover better remedies when there are goals that are established by States that can mean the closing or merging of a school district. A study conducted by S.L. Bowen in 2007, titled ``Is bigger that much better? School district size, high school completion, and post- secondary enrollment rates in Maine,'' published in the Maine View suggests the best interest of students are not being served. This study supported by the Maine Heritage Policy Center compared high school completion rates of the 15 largest and 15 smallest school districts in Maine and found that the graduation rate for smaller districts was six percent higher than for larger districts. Another study, by A. Howle & C. Howley conducted in 2006 on the subject of small schools and the pressure to consolidate is available in the Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 14(10), 1-23. This report on school size reviewed the research on the effects of small schools. The report states that children from economically disadvantaged families have higher achievement in small schools and small districts; the relationship between aggregate student achievement and socioeconomic status is consistently weaker in smaller schools and districts (equity effects of size); dropout rates are lower in smaller schools; students' school activity participation is higher in smaller schools; and smaller high schools can offer adequate curriculum. There is research to indicate that this would be a worthwhile amendment that the full House can support. I urge all members to vote in favor of Jackson Lee Amendment #24. Seven Reasons Why the Jackson Lee Amendment is Needed The Jackson Lee Amendment would: Balance local control over schools with state authority over school districts; make sure that taxpayers and locally elected officials are not ignored by the State; prevent communities from being blamed as the problem and the states as having all of the answers; prevent poorly prepared state-selected officials from being placed in positions to run school districts; make sure that minor problems and incompetent administration issues can be dealt with without merging or closing school districts; make sure that state appointed heads of school districts have effective oversight to be sure that a fair and impartial process for decision making is established and maintained; and prevent unnecessary showdowns between state and local officials which slow the overhaul of management practices, drain resources from educational reforms and reinforce division between impacted citizens and state government. In Support of Jackson Lee Amendment #24--North Forest Independent School District The facts about NFISD: The closure of North Forest Independent School District was unnecessary given the progress the district had made as well as the availability of viable and less disruptive alternatives, including a proposed partnership between North Forest Independent School District and local public charter schools that was announced on March 8, 2013. The North Forest Independent School District electoral district had 50,000 registered voters whose voting power was diluted because they will be absorbed into the Houston Independent School District but no additional seats will be added to the Houston Independent School District board. There was no reason to close the North Forest Independent School District since it was solvent; had received awards for excellence and had received significant outside funding to continue. The North Forest Independent School District proposed a sound alternative plan to the Texas Education Agency that was applauded by the U.S. Department of Education and supported by experts like Dr. Rod Paige, former Secretary of the Department of Education. The North Forest Independent School District was the victim of an unfair process since there was no provision for an appeal of an adverse decision by the Governor, who appears to have unfettered discretion. The State appointed official that made the decision to close North Forest was the only person to hear opposition to their plan. There was no appeals process to check the discretion of the state appointed official. When states close or merge local school districts, their actions: Reduce local control over schools and increase state authority over school districts; imply that the community has the problem and the states have the answers, and assumes that states have the ability to effectively run school districts; routinely place poorly prepared state-selected officials in positions to run school districts, which means there is little possibility of any meaningful change occurring in the classroom; usually focus on cleaning up minor problems and incompetent administration but do not go to the root of the social problems facing disadvantaged students in urban and rural school districts; foster negative connotations and impressions that hinder self-esteem of school board members, administrators, teachers, students and parents; and produce unnecessary showdowns between state and local officials which slow the overhaul of management practices, drain resources from educational reforms and reinforce division between impacted citizens and state government.

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

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I thank Chairman Kline and Ranking Member Miller for their work to improve education for our Nation's children. I thank the Rules Committee for making in order Jackson Lee Amendment #5 for full consideration by the House of Representatives. My amendment to H.R. 5, the ``Student Success Act,'' is simple and is an important addition to this bill. I believe that my amendment to H.R. 5 can be supported by every member of the House. Jackson Lee Amendment # 5 Jackson Lee Amendment #5 would direct States with insufficient funding to target funds to schools serving neglected, delinquent, migrant students, English learners, at-risk students, and Native Americans, to increase academic achievement of such students. The purpose of the Amendment is to make the best use of the funds available to focus resources on students with the greatest need. According to research conducted by Chester Hartman, titled, High Classroom Turnover: How Children Get Left Behind, found that a disproportionate number of schools with predominantly low-income African American and Hispanic students have low stability, and that such students are much more likely than others, to switch schools in the middle of the year. High student mobility has consequences for students, teachers, and schools and can result in lower achievement levels, slower academic pacing, and lower teaching satisfaction. Poor families move 50-100 percent more often than non-poor families. Welfare reform has resulted in residential mobility. Migrant children typically move from community to community. Foster children often change schools each time they are removed from a home. The education administrators' role in education should emphasize meeting the needs of disadvantaged students, and students who are mobile are among the most disadvantaged. In the past, the government has taken limited steps to address this issue. Jackson Lee Amendment #5 is intended to support schools educating children who are neglected, delinquent, migrant students, English learners, at-risk students, and Native American youth. The topic of delinquency also presents challenges to schools and educators. Children live in their own worlds, which can present threats to their health, safety and emotional well being. Children become delinquent or can become at-risk for a number of reasons including school bullying and violence. Consequences of bullying: 15 percent of all school absenteeism is directly related to fears of being bullied at school. According to bullying statistics, 1 out of every 10 students who drops out of school does so because of repeated bullying. Suicides linked to bullying are the saddest statistic. Statistics on Houston Independent School District and Large School Districts 1. HISD has over 200,000 students, 80 percent of which are eligible for free and reduced price lunch. This means that, 80 percent of students come from low socioeconomic households. HISD has approximately 25 percent African American students, 63 percent Hispanic students, and 30 percent students with limited English proficiency. 2. The 100 largest districts represent less than 1 percent of all school districts in the nation, yet enrolls 21 percent of all students, including 25 percent of the Census poverty students, 33 percent of the black students, 32 percent of the Hispanic students, and 31 percent of all minority students. Houston Independent School District's challenge in providing a world class education faces many of the challenges that Jackson Lee Amendment #5 would address. The Nation's first line of national defense is a well educated population. Much of the Nation's defense depends on what is developed and created by STEM jobs. It is also important that men and women serving in the Armed Forces have a basic working knowledge of STEM to succeed. For these reasons, it is vital that every child have the best education that this Nation can provide. There is no one size fits all, and there are changes with each generation of teachers and students, but the one constant are the needs of all children are not the same. There is no deterministic model that decides which child will succeed and which will fail. What we do know is that given the right learning environment with teachers with the right training and support we can graduate students who can create, innovate, lead and succeed in life. I urge all members to vote in favor of these amendments.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the gentleman from Virginia for his courtesy, and I thank the Speaker. Yesterday was the 95th birthday of former President Nelson Mandela. What a joy to be able to hear that during the time of celebration that we had here in the United States Congress, President Mandela, who had been ill for a period of time, had earphones on and was looking at television. The words that came from the minority and majority leader, Republicans and Democrats, the Speaker and leader, Republicans and Democrats and various leaders of the House, commended and recognized that a man who had come from the tyranny of separation and apartheid, who had to be against his government in order to free his people, could be recognized and applauded, because when he walked out of Robben Island, he walked without bitterness. And one of the greatest opportunities that he gave to the world was the idea that there could be a democratic election in South Africa. And from that time, he has been a man who promoted peace and promoted love and led his nation out of the devastation of separation and bitterness with kindness and love. I'm delighted to stand on the floor today and say: happy birthday, Madiba; happy birthday, President Nelson Mandela. And if it's God's will, may you live forever onward in better health.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. I thank the gentleman for his expression on this particular amendment. Let me frame it, as I close, thanking my colleagues and expressing my commitment to the concept that no child should be thrown away. With formulas changing, block grants being promoted, the idea of a State being shortchanged in its awards means that there needs to be focus and refocus, and that is, from my perspective, to look at those children, whether they're rural or urban communities that need to be educated who could be considered neglected, delinquent, migrant students, English-learners, at-risk students, Native American youth, and to determine again, to find a way to focus those dollars in a way that will lift, in essence, all educational boats. Sometimes that will be an enormous challenge, as this formula has evidenced. And I would like to see that no matter what happens in the underlying bill, that we have these children protected, many of whom are in the school districts that I represent, including formerly the North Forest Independent School District, that could have benefited from those resources, having given to them a number of rural school districts in Texas that could have benefited from targeted dollars, to be able to keep them as existing viable school districts, teaching their children, not closed school districts. So I hope that as we proceed that the message that comes, ultimately, from Members of Congress is that we promote education first, and the children at risk will never be lost in the debate, but we'll always support them. I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the Chairman very much. I am reminded in my amendment of the high calling of Chairman Miller and President Bush some many years ago with the name Leave No Child Behind. My amendment could be called ``Throw No Child Away'' or ``No Child is a Throwaway,'' for that is the necessity of where we are today with the underlying bill. We must restore and help those children who are considered throughout America as at-risk children. Research shows that a disproportionate number of schools with predominantly low-income African American and Hispanic students have low housing stability and that such students are more likely than others to switch schools in the middle of the year. High student mobility has consequences for students, teachers, and schools, and could result in lower achievement levels, slower academic pacing, and lower teaching satisfaction. My amendment expands that concept; and it indicates that States with insufficient funding should find a way to target funds for schools serving neglected, delinquent, migrant students, English learners, at- risk students, and Native Americans to increase academic achievement of such students, all with the idea that there are no throwaway children. Children and education are one and the same. That is the work of children. When children are at work and are fully educated--and when I say that, at their work, a combination of education and play--what you create is a greater America. Poor families, for example, move 50-100 percent more often than nonpoor families. Migrant children typically move from community to community. Foster children often change schools each time they're removed from a home. Right now, as I speak, we in Houston are trying to establish one of those homes for aged-out children who are still in high school who've aged out of foster care. Those children typically are at risk. We can't shortchange them, as the underlying legislation does. Student mobility has consequences with students and teachers and, therefore, we need to help build higher achievement levels because there is a possibility of lower achievement levels, lower academic pacing, and lower teacher satisfaction. Take the school district that I represent, HISD, 200,000 students, 80 percent of which are eligible for free and reduced-price lunch. Children can not learn if they are hungry. HISD has a diverse population. But, 100 of the largest districts represent less than 1 percent of all school districts in the Nation. Yet it enrolls 21 percent of all students, including 25 percent of census poverty students, 33 percent of Black students, 32 percent of Hispanic, and 31 percent of all minority students. But the real point is that, in addition to these large school districts, this amendment respects the rural communities of America and deals with at-risk children in those areas, and deals with migrant students in those areas, and indicates that a State should not shortchange those individuals if their grant money is, in fact, shortchanged. Don't shortchange the children. Again, there are no throwaways. So I think my amendment balances great needs in the underlying legislation by saying to my colleagues that the understanding of education is that it should be equal to all. And the quality should be equal to all, and therefore, whether you are a student that moves frequently, or a migrant student, or an English-learner student, you should not be denied an excellent education. I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to President Nelson Mandela and to commemorate the 5th anniversary of ``Nelson Mandela International Day.'' On this special day, the thoughts, prayers, and wishes of all Americans, and peace loving people the world over, are with Nelson Mandela and his family. In 2009, the United Nations dedicated this day in recognition of Nelson Mandela's commitment to humanity as a human rights lawyer, a prisoner of conscience, an international peacemaker, and as the first elected president of a free, democratic, and multiracial Republic of South Africa. Nelson Mandela dedicated his life to serving humanity in the fields of conflict resolution, race relations, the promotion and protection of human rights, reconciliation, gender equality, the rights of children and other vulnerable groups, the uplift of poor and underdeveloped communities, and the struggle for democracy internationally and the promotion of a world culture of peace. In honoring these dreams, hopes, goals, and acts, the United Nations calls upon people everywhere to devote 67 minutes today to helping others, one minute honoring each year that Nelson Mandela devoted to us, humanity. Through our service to others, we honor the achievements and sacrifices of Nelson Mandela. Today we honor the life and work of a man who by his courage, commitment to justice, grace in the face of unearned suffering, and capacity to forgive continues to inspire the world. In the words of Nelson Mandela: ``For to be free is not merely to cast off one's chains, but to live in a way that respects and enhances the freedom of others.'' Happy birthday to one of the greatest men of our time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Thank you to the manager--Dr. McDermott, I like to call him--who has been a mainstay of good health care in this Congress for a very long time. He is managing as well with the gentleman from Georgia, who has practiced medicine. But we can have a disagreement. The vigorous disagreement that we have, I must say, Mr. Speaker, is with the weight of truth that falls on what we have done on behalf of ObamaCare, the Affordable Care Act. I enjoy sledding. I enjoy the snow. When you get on a sled, it rolls down and you're happy, and you come to a successful end. We've rolled down, and we keep on rolling because the Affordable Care Act is allowing young people to have insurance. It's reducing the cost of prescription drugs for our seniors. It's allowing a State like Texas, which has the highest number of uninsured--some 121,000-plus in my district--to now have insurance. It allows about 10 community health facilities to be able to begin enrollment this coming September and to be able to outreach to those families, who will now have coverage for them and their children. Let me be very clear. How many times do I have to say, no, you cannot have your way? The Supreme Court has ruled. This is the law of the land, and there is no reason whatsoever to go back on a plan that has allowed the New York insurance rates to go down on health care. There is nothing wrong with the President engaging business. These are large companies that have said we just need to look at it so we can streamline it. That's to make it better. If they undermine the individual mandate, 13 million Americans will not have insurance. How many times do I have to say ``no''? The Affordable Care Act is going well. People are insured and Americans are healthier. Let's keep the Affordable Care Act. Vote ``no'' on the underlying bills. When will you ever understand that it's over? It's over.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to oppose the rule and the underlying bill because it takes health care away from America's children, seniors, and others. Again, getting a sound bite for America.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. As a mother and an American, I am well aware that this Nation is a nation of laws. And our system of justice speaks, and the reason why we are a democracy is because we adhere to that. But I'm proud of my constituents and others in Houston, Texas, who saw the need to petition and to be able to join the family of Trayvon Martin in praying to petition their Federal Government. That is America, Mr. Speaker--that all Americans have a right to come and petition their government. Thank you for being peaceful. Thank you for being prayerful. Thank you for being ready to speak in tones seeking justice, but doing it in a way that is respectful of our system, and ready to be able to achieve what your desires are through continuing to pray and be peaceful. In Houston, Texas, that is what occurred. And I want to say thank you for that peace and that respect of the dignity and democracy that America is, and the respect for Trayvon Martin's family.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Is the bill not flawed, as the ranking member has said, for it has left out what has traditionally been a major component of the farm bill, which is the supplemental nutrition program, which deals with feeding hungry Americans and hungry children?