Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I would make the point that this is included in this bill on page 3, under ``Construction.'' I don't view this in particular as an earmark as much as I do as putting in resources necessary for the protection of our coastline. Again, it is not excessive. It does not undermine the atomic program. What it does is to help millions of Americans along the coastline and particularly those who have experienced deterioration going from the east coast to the west coast. Certainly, I believe this is one on which we can join together and support. It is constructive; it is productive; it creates jobs; it creates an economic engine; and it protects one of our most valued resources, and that is the Nation's coastline, wetlands included. It is compatible with those who are fishing, with those who are exploring, and with those who are enjoying. I think it is crucial that this amendment be passed by this House in a constructive way in order to create jobs, to move this Nation forward, and to preserve the bounty of the environment that we've been given to protect. I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment, which deals with the restoration of our coastline. I yield back the balance of my time. Mr. Chair, I rise today to offer an amendment to H.R. 5325, the ``Energy and Water Appropriations Development Act, FY 2013.'' My amendment would increase the Army Corps of Engineers Construction Account by $10 million for Texas Coastal Restoration and reduce the Atomic Energy Defense Account by the same amount. My amendment sends a strong message that gulf restoration is of national importance. In addition to all the Gulf Coast States, Texas plays a crucial role in the Gulf Coast's economic well-being and deserves funds for its restoration as well. The Importance of the Texas Gulf Coast Texas boasts a 370 mile long coastline that plays a major role in the state and the nation's economy. The state hosts three of the country's top ten ports and is ranked number one in the nation in the total value of waterborne commerce, most of which is dependent on the Gulf ports. The Texas Gulf Coast also plays a major role in the tourism industry. Texas gets over $445 million a year from cruise ships and earns a quarter of the coast's travel dollars. The state also accounts for 37 percent of the Gulf of Mexico's tourism and recreational employment. In 2008, the Gulfs oil and gas development generated about $26 billion in wages. Erosion is steadily threatening to destroy the Texas coast's success. The United States Army Corps of Engineers estimates that 60 percent of the Texas coastline is eroding. The coast loses up to 10 feet of shoreline a year with 225 acres of topsoil washing into the Gulf Coast. Funds are needed to help preserve the Texas Gulf Coast which will in turn protect the economic stability of the gulf coast region. This Congress I introduced a bill which is also designed to help restore our Gulf Coast. H.R. 3710, ``The Deficit Reduction, Job Creation and Energy Security Act.'' My bill directs the Secretary of Interior to increase the 5-Year oil and gas leasing program of lease sales designed to best meet the Nation's energy needs by 10 percent of the total acreage contained in the OCS Lands Act. This 10 percent added acreage shall be known as the Deficit Reduction Energy Security Fund. For 15 years after issuance of the first lease or receipt of the first payment coming from the Deficit Reduction Energy Security Fund, all proceeds shall be deposited into an interest bearing account for a period of 2 years. Upon expiration of the 2 year period, these proceeds shall be distributed as follows: The interest gained during 2 year period shall be placed in the Coastal and Ocean Sustainability and Health Fund; and the principle from the Deficit Reduction Energy Security Fund shall be applied directly toward deficit reduction. My bill, H.R. 3710, not only increases access to oil and gas leases it also funds programs to help with Gulf Restoration as it establishes grants for states (Coastal and Disaster Grant Program and a National Grant Program) for addressing coastal and ocean disasters, restoration, protection, and maintenance of coastal areas and oceans, including research and programs in coordination with state and local agencies. I firmly believe that we must continue to support Gulf Restoration which is why I offered the bill H.R. 3710 and why I propose the amendment today. I urge my colleagues to support my amendment which is intended to restore our nation's Gulf Coast.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I would be happy to yield to the gentleman.

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

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Will the gentleman yield?

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Again, let me thank the chairman of the committee and the ranking member for bringing forward a bipartisan initiative, and I hope that this would add to, again, reemphasizing what we have begun to do and that we will continue to do, and that is to recognize the value of security, but also recognize what Americans hold dear--their privacy, their respect for individual rights, their civil liberties. And so this amendment speaks specifically to the importance of protecting the civil liberties of religious and ethic minorities. I can cite the moments in history where we have failed. Certainly, the Japanese interment loudly speaks in current, modern-day history of the tragedy of not respecting the civil liberties of Americans. Certainly, if we went as far back as the slave history of America, we can see that those who are on American soil who would have sought well to be Americans, their civil liberties were not protected. But America has made great progress, and I think it is important as we look at new populations that come to this country that we particularly focus on this whole concept of religious liberty. It is a concept that sometimes is very difficult to adhere to. I may not agree with your faith and your religion, but you have the right to practice it as long as you're not doing harm to the American people. For example, President George W. Bush in 2001 told the American Congress during that very difficult time that terrorists practice a fringe form of Islamic extremism that has been rejected by Muslim scholars and the vast majority of Muslim clerics, a fringe movement that perverts the peaceful teachings of Islam. And so this particular faith certainly has been one that has been most noted. I think we have all come to the conclusion that we should protect the civil liberties of those who practice their faith under the Constitution of the United States, which the First Amendment guarantees the right to the freedom of access, freedom of movement, freedom of religion, freedom of speech. I would hope that in the intelligence community, as they do their work fighting terrorism, fighting the potential of those terrorist cells that may find themselves on our soil, that they will recognize the right of individuals to practice the faith and the aspect of the faith that follows the tenets of their faith and not categorize those individuals simply because of their faith that they might be intending to do us wrong. There are many incidences where we have the kind of treatment of individuals because they happen to be of a particular background, particular ethnicity, racial background, and then, of course, faith. But I want to speak to this amendment so that people will know that it is a broad base, because many times we have disagreement with a number of subsets of different faiths, whether it's Protestant, whether it's faith that we are used to addressing. So it is a statement that says that the civil liberties of all Americans will not be deprived through the necessity of protecting this land through our intelligence community on the basis of their religion and ethnic minorities. We know that in some jurisdictions there have been incidences of individuals that believe that their privacy has been intruded upon. I would hope that in the framework of the fine work that the intelligence community has to do that there is no intimidation of making sure that civil liberties can be protected. Many of us have debated a number of bills on the floor of the House dealing with privacy questions. I think it is important in this sense of Congress to always restate that we are committed to national security, but we're committed to the civil liberties of those within our soil--American citizens. With that, I ask my colleagues to support my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I thank the chairperson of the Intelligence Committee and the ranking member and speak in the spirit of bipartisanship, and I congratulate both gentlemen for recognizing that the security and intelligence of America speaks loudly to the idea of bipartisanship. Just a few hours ago, I was in a classified briefing--for fear of anyone thinking that I will share that classified briefing, I will not. But what I will say is it is clear that intelligence is a key to the peace and security that the American people have experienced since 9/ 11. Through the work of Members of Congress and the intelligence community, of which we owe a great deal of that gratitude, we have been able to, for now some 11 years plus on our soil, experience the safety and security, although we have had many attempts. For that reason, I believe this is important work. My amendment says that it is important for the Director to consider the necessary processes to increase the recruitment and training of ethnic minorities as officers and employees of the CIA. We have done this before. We have encouraged them to do so. And we can say that there have been gradual steps. And we applaud that. But the men and women who conduct this important work certainly deserve our support and all of the resources that we can muster to make sure they are successful in their endeavors. Yet we also ensure that the CIA itself reflects the American population and that of the world. Having agents who can be deployed anywhere at any time is vital to our national security, as well as the ability to interact with foreign nationals who speak the language is truly important. A diverse workforce can make America safer and more secure. Historically, there's been an exclusion of minorities, particularly African Americans and Latinos, in the highest levels of national security. Let's continue to break that barrier. It's taken decades for minorities to make inroads into America's national security apparatus. And I know that this is a sense of Congress, but I always have faith that people will adhere to a positive statement by this body. Although the number of CIA employees remains a classified secret, the Agency has released some numbers over the years. In 1966, blacks represented 10 percent of the CIA's total workforce and only 3 percent of the Agency's officers in senior intelligence service, whereas 17 percent of the clerical staff and 22 percent of the Agency's blue collar workforce was African American. Over this past weekend, we commemorated, mourned, and celebrated our fallen soldiers. I had the privilege of having uncles who went off to war in World War II, one who served as a chief petty officer in the United States Navy. That was the integrated United States Navy. I can tell you that we are better for it when we utilize the talents of all Americans. In 1992, a declassified study of CIA personnel found that about half of all black intelligence officers reported that they had been victims of racial harassment by the Agency. As of today, of the CIA's core of case officers, which is believed to number more than 1,000, only 11 percent are minorities and 18 percent are women. The majority of the Agency's top managers are still predominantly nonminorities. According to CIA officials, one-third of the new operations officers hired in 2011 have been women, while just 11 percent have been minorities, as traditionally defined: African Americans, Asian Americans, or Latinos. Twenty percent of all new operations officers are native speakers of a foreign language and 75 percent have advanced proficiency in foreign languages, many because they've lived abroad. Almost half have advanced degrees. I applaud that and I truly believe, as some may be listening and saying, Aren't we are all Americans? Yes, we are. If we are all Americans, then our CIA, one of our most storied Agencies, needs to join and continue to recruit and improve on bringing in the diverse picture of the face of America because we'll be better for it. When President Truman integrated the United States military, we became better for it. We celebrate all people who are willing to put the Nation's uniform on and die for their country. Likewise, for this wonderful intelligence Agency, we do the same. With that, I ask my colleagues to support my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I thank the gentleman. I thank the ranking member as well. In closing, let me just pay tribute to Garrett Jones, who served as a CIA station chief in Somalia during peacekeeping operations in 1993 and was cited as an African American officer who was able to work undercover for weeks in North Mogadishu, which his duty officers said would have been all but impossible by Jones' other officers. We all have a contribution to make. And I look forward to this sense of Congress not being weeded out in conference and reemphasizing the importance of this effort. With that I ask support of my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time. Mr. Chair, I rise to debate my amendment #7 to H.R. 5743 ``Intelligence Authorization Act,'' which is a Sense of Congress that the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency should take such actions as the Director considers necessary to increase the recruitment and training of ethnic minorities as officers and employees of the Central Intelligence Agency. The men and women who conduct this important work certainly deserve our support and all of the resources that we can muster to make sure that they're successful in their endeavors. Yet, we must also ensure that the CIA itself reflects the American population and that of the world. Having agents who can be deployed anywhere at any time is vital to our national security. As is a diversity of thought and perspectives that can be garnered by having a diverse workforce. Historically there has been an exclusion of minorities, particularly African Americans and Latinos in the highest levels of national security. It has taken decades for minorities to make inroads into America's national security apparatus. Although the number of CIA employees remains a classified secret, the agency has released some numbers over the years. In 1996 Blacks represented 10 percent of the CIA's total work force and only 3 percent of the agency's officers in senior intelligence service whereas 17 percent of the clerical staff and 22 percent of the agency's blue- collar work force was African American. In 1992 a declassified study of CIA personnel found that about half of all black intelligence officers reported that they had been victims of racial harassment by the agency. As of today the CIA's corps of case officers which is believed to number more than 1,000 and only 11 percent are minorities and 18 percent are women. The Majority of the agency's top managers are still predominantly White males. According to the CIA officials one-third of the new operations officers hired in 2011 have been women. While just 11 percent have been minorities as traditionally defined (African Americans, Asian Americans or Latinos), 20 percent of all new operations officers are native speakers of a foreign language and 75 percent have advanced proficiency in foreign languages, many because they have lived abroad. Almost half have advanced degrees. There have been improvements since 1992, however, more must and should be done to ensure that diversity is reflected at the highest levels of the CIA. The value of diversity in a spy service that operates in almost every country would seem to be obvious. Garrett Jones who served as CIA station chief in Somalia during peacekeeping operations in 1993, cited the example of an African American officer who was able to work undercover for weeks in north Mogadishu, which he said would have been all but impossible for Jones or any of the station's other white officers. As we must deploy CIA agents all over the world. We need agents that are able to blend into a variety of situations. We need diversity. Interest in working for the CIA rose after the Sept. 11 attacks. Between October 2001 and October 2002, the agency received 170,000 resumes. Since founding of Office of the Director of National Intelligence minority representation increased to nearly 23 percent in 2009 in FY 2009, up since FY05, when it was 20 percent. Minorities received nearly 25 percent of promotions in FY09 and over 27 percent of new hires were minority. Women earned 46 percent of promotions in FY09, significantly higher than their representation at about 39 percent. Letitia ``Tish'' Long is the first woman to head a major intelligence agency as director of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, the office responsible for collecting and analyzing overhead imagery and geospatial information. Women have held the #2 spot at several intelligence agencies, including National Security Agency, National Reconnaissance Office and NGA. CIA however has never had a woman as #2, but has had a woman in its #3 spot. My amendment is a reflection of the need to continue to place the spotlight on the intelligence community to ensure that they continue in their efforts to reflect the needs of this country by recruiting, training, and retaining qualified minorities,

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Let me capture what the chairman said. I like the terminology that says the American people must have faith in their intelligence community, but faith in the principles upon which we live. And they must know that the Constitution is a living, breathing document. And we as Members of Congress must as well. So, again, I make a plea that this sense of Congress is a reaffirmation, but also an encouragement and a statement that should be in this bill that we respect the civil liberties of racial, ethnic, and religious minorities, and in fact so will our intelligence community. With that in mind, I would ask my colleagues to support the amendment and also ask that it be maintained even in conference, the reaffirmation of this important instruction as the civil liberties protection officer operates and does the work that they need to do. I ask my colleagues to support the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time. Mr. Chair, I rise to debate my amendment #8 to H.R. 5743, ``Intelligence Authorization Act,'' which is a Sense of Congress that the intelligence community should take all appropriate actions necessary to protect the civil liberties of religious and ethnic minorities. We can obtain vital intelligence without compromising our civil liberties. As you know, risks to civil liberties are inherent in the very nature of domestic intelligence. This is because intelligence necessarily operates in secret and as a result, it is difficult to subject intelligence activities to the checks and balances that the Framers of the Constitution realized were essential to prevent abuses of power. Even judicial reviews of intelligence activities are often given deference. Intelligence is the information we use to identify and locate individuals involved in planning terrorist acts. This information must then be used to prevent any potential attack and can be done in ways that are legally permissible. Domestic intelligence community left unchecked could pose significant dangers to open government, individual privacy, and civil liberties. My amendment is designed as a limitation for a reason. We need a bill that is strong on civil liberties, and includes protections against infringement of our constitutional right to privacy. My amendment serves as a reminder that the American people have put their faith in the intelligence community and in Congress to protect not only their security but the very essence of what makes America great . . . our freedoms. Thomas Jefferson in 1787 stated that ``[A] bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or particular, and what no just government should refuse.'' The September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on America have forced serious reflections about the institutional framework of civil society and the commitment to democratic principles. Although the balancing of the protections of citizens' rights and liberties against their peace and security is a continuous constitutional struggle. Especially during war and national crisis. According to Justice Sandra Day O'Connor ``We're likely to experience more restrictions on our personal freedom than has ever been the case in our country . . . it will cause us to re-examine some of our laws pertaining to criminal surveillance, wiretapping, immigration and so on'' (New York Times, Sept. 29 2001). Our efforts to provide for the safety and security has required Americans to accept certain restriction on their freedoms--more surveillance of their papers and communications, more searches of their belongings, possible detention without a writ of habeas corpus, and proceedings by military tribunals without the standard protections of due process of civil courts. I realize that we must give our intelligence community the proper tools to protect us while upholding the civil liberties of Americans. We must always recognize that the American people are being asked to trade off civil liberties and personal freedom for a greater sense of security from the threat of terrorist. It is no answer to these legitimate concerns that police officers or member of the intelligence community who monitor political or religious meetings, compile dossiers on political activists, or infiltrate lawful protest organizations are complying with the Fourth Amendment and are doing no more than any member of the public could do on his or her own. When government acts, it has a special obligation to respect constitutional rights--which include the First as well as the Fourth Amendment--an obligation not imposed on private citizens. My amendment is a Sense that it is the intent of this body to protect the civil liberties of the very groups that may be monitored as a direct response to our concerns about a terrorist attack. We must be led not by fear but by reason! The challenge to our intelligence community is the same as the challenge for the nation as a whole. Securing the Nation's freedom depends not on making a choice between security and liberty, but in designing and implementing policies that allow the American people to be both safe and free. Increased threats of terrorism after September 11, 2001, lightning- fast technological innovation, and the erosion of key privacy protections under the law threaten to alter the American way of life in fundamental ways. Terrorism threatens--and is calculated to threaten--not only our sense of safety, but also our freedom and way of life. Terrorists intend to frighten us into changing our basic laws and values and to take actions that are not in our long-term interests. While the government has both the power and the obligation under the Constitution to defend the nation and its security, these powers cannot be exercised in a manner that contravenes individual constitutional liberties. Among others, these include the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech, religion, and association, and the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. In addition, as with all government powers, national security and intelligence gathering powers should be subject to checks and balances, including meaningful judicial review and probing oversight by the Congress. The internment of thousands of Japanese serves as a reminder for why we must protect the civil liberties of religious and ethnic minorities.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I do not rise on the gentlelady's amendment. In the statement I made on amendment No. 7, I indicated that the CIA officer's name that was undercover, that was not the CIA's undercover agent's name, which I would not give. It was the section station director's name, Mr. Garrett Jones. The CIA agent was undercover and remains unnamed. But he was an African American who did his duty because of his background.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Let me, first of all, say how pleased I am to have Benjamin with me, who is representing and advocating for the fairness and treatment of the foster care system and foster children as they mature into adulthood. This is an important aspect of democracy. Mr. Speaker, I come this morning with a series of issues regarding rights. First of all, let me acknowledge that this was Memorial Day week, when I hope all of us were doing more commemorating than possibly celebrating with tasty food. I had the privilege of joining our community in a national Memorial Day celebration at the Houston Veterans Cemetery and then going to The Heights, a historic community, and commemorating the fallen soldiers at the World War II Monument in The Heights of the 18th Congressional District. On this past Saturday, I had a fun festival day of veterans and celebration commemorating the service of our soldiers--those who have fallen and those who live. That's why I rise today to ask and encourage--even after the NATO meeting--that we have a quick resolution of the Afghan war. And I join my colleagues, Congresswoman Barbara Lee and Walter Jones, in their discussion this afternoon of what's next in Afghanistan. We thank those soldiers on the front line. None of our commentary to bring this war to an end has anything to do with their brave, wonderful, heroic acts of service and fighting for democracy and justice. We ask President Karzai and his government to end its corruptness and to begin to transition so that the people of Afghanistan can live in peace. We want peace as well, and we want their rights to prevail. Mr. Speaker, I now move to a tragic situation of huge proportions. I joined Syrian Americans on Tuesday in my community, standing in front of the Federal courthouse, crying out for peace and justice for the Syrian people. Alongside of me were Syrian Americans whose families were in Houla and Homs and had seen the brutality. We had projections of the violence against children and bodies wrapped in white cloth. Mr. Speaker, we cry out and wonder why there cannot be more done by the world. Where is the outrage? I congratulate the Secretary of State and the President of the United States and other Western countries and others who have expelled the Syrian envoys. Get them out now because, obviously, Dr. Assad does not recognize that people are valued. And so I call upon the Arab League to put pressure on China and Russia. Let us not put our individual needs of energy--oil and gas, oil in particular--over the deadly violence that is going on in Syria. Shame on you. I ask the U.N. Security Council that is now blocked by China and Russia to institute a U.N. Unity of Peace Resolution No. 377, which was done during the Korean War, where you go to the General Assembly and put forward recommendations that would engage or provide for peace and provide for the involvement of other countries providing for the assistance of the Syrian free army. No, I'm not asking for war. I'm asking for the end of the violence in Syria. How can we stand by as we once stood by looking at Darfur, as we once stood by looking at Rwanda? How can we stand by? I cry out for this Congress to issue sanctions. I cry out for actions. Let me conclude by simply saying today we will have on the floor of the House a bill by the name of PRENDA. As I've heard from my colleagues, not one of us disagree with the idea of forced abortions, meaning that we do not disagree that that is heinous and horrific. I fear the PRENDA legislation because it is not thoughtful and has not been drafted in a way that distinguishes the rights of women in this Nation to have choice. And what it does, Mr. Speaker, is it criminalizes a doctor and criminalizes a relationship between a patient and a physician. In this country, we have the right of choice. That choice is between a woman, her God, her faith, her family, and her physician. And what you do in PRENDA is that you taint and stigmatize the relationship between the doctor and the patient. Because how do you get in the mindset and the psyche of a physician who is doing his job providing the care that the woman has asked--her choice--and begin to demonize and suggest that she is forcibly deciding to abort because she is forcibly deciding what gender she wants? Then, of course, you add insult to injury by profiling various countries. As my colleague has previously said, why can't we look for more positive ways of providing women's rights and discerning or educating people that women are equally valuable as human beings as men? But the PRENDA bill demonizes the patient-physician relationship. We cannot have that. I ask for a ``no'' vote.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, faced with a number of challenges, I have lived through hurricanes Rita, Katrina, Ike, Storm Allison; and I realize the importance of emergency radio and television giving us the information as a lifeline, and I rise to thank Charity Productions going on in my district right now, the Sixth Annual Ecumenical Hurricane Forum. Thank you so very much for educating our public. I also wanted to rise today to congratulate CNBC and the Congressional Black Caucus Faith Forum that has been going on for the last 2 days. We realize that America's faith institutions, and in this instance African American denominations, are crucial, coming together to reach out for empowerment, for social justice, and certainly freedom. We thank them so much for the work that they do. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, let me say that in this particular body, and in the Judiciary Committee, we are facing the question of FISA and the impact of the FISA amendments, as it has reversible impact on spying on Americans. We must look to get the data and insist that we are securing the homeland, but we must also ensure that Americans are not in essence spied upon, are not surveilled by the impact of international needs.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank you for yielding, and I thank the chairman of the full committee and the ranking member. As a ranking member of the Transportation Security Subcommittee, it's my privilege to rise to support H.R. 3670. Let me thank the author of the bill, the gentleman from Minnesota, for his leadership--he is always speaking eloquently but fighting for our veterans, and we thank you very much both for your service and your leadership--and also to thank the gentlelady from Florida for her kind and astute remarks regarding the importance of TSA. In the last 24 hours, there was a breach of security in San Diego when an individual went through a secured door and boarded a plane. The immediate response of some of the commentators was: What was TSA doing? I think the only comment is: They were doing their job. And that breach obviously occurred before any entering into the secured area, but it tells us how important TSA really is and being on the front line of securing this Nation and being part of the team that has allowed us to not have a tragic incident on our soil since 9/11. It is important to have the TSA comply with the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act. The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, USERRA, ensures that our valued citizens who have served in the Armed Forces, Reserves, National Guard, or other uniformed services are not disadvantaged in their civilian careers because of their service. They deserve this protection. Under current law, the TSA is not required to comply with certain provisions of Federal labor laws, including USERRA. This is not right. Currently the TSA, which has more than 50,000 employees, is not required to hold positions and promotions for employees who are called away for military service. Ten thousand veterans serve on the TSA's workforce. That is one-fifth, or 20 percent, of their entire workforce.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. The head of my airport, Bush Intercontinental Airport, Colonel Testa, is retired military. The law specifies certain rank for individuals who serve in the uniformed services, including those in the Reserves or the National Guard who are called to duty. I join with my colleagues to support this legislation to ensure that TSA complies with USERRA. Just 2 days ago we celebrated Memorial Day, and I would offer to say that we must continue to support our veterans but also mourn those who are lost, but in their name, it's important to support this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to debate H.R. 3670, ``To require the Transportation Security Administration to comply with the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act.'' The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) ensures that our valued citizens who serve or have served in the Armed Forces, Reserves, National Guard or other ``uniformed services'' are not disadvantaged in their civilian careers because of their service. Under current law, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is not required to comply with certain provisions of federal labor laws, including USERRA. This is not right. Currently the TSA, which has more than 50,000 employees, is not required to hold positions and promotions for employees who are called away for military service. 10,000 veterans serve on the TSA's workforce. That is \1/5\ or 20 percent of their entire workforce. The law specifies certain rights for individuals who serve in the uniformed services, including those in the reserves or the National Guard who are called to active duty. In particular, USERRA prohibits employers from discriminating on the basis of military service or obligation and protects covered individuals' rights to be reemployed upon returning from duty. H.R. 3670 requires the TSA to comply with USERRA. According to TSA, the agency's existing policies regarding individuals who leave TSA to undertake uniformed service are already consistent with USERRA. We want to make absolutely sure that our veterans, servicemen, and future soldiers are protected by the laws that govern our great Nation. We have to ensure that they are taken care of. They are courageous enough to defend, and sometimes give their lives for the United States. We should do what we can to honor their bravery. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that H.R. 3670 would not significantly affect the TSA's costs nor would enacting the bill affect direct spending or revenues. I strongly support our troops and the brave men and women who have served in our armed forces. After their honorable service they should not have to face obstacles in finding civilian employment due to their service. We must do everything in our power to ensure Members of our Armed Services are discriminated against based upon past, present, or future military service. They have sacrificed for their country and when they return to their civilian life that sacrifice should be honored not viewed as a negative. The federal government should be a ``model employer'' under USERRA, which is why H.R. 3670 is such a vital piece of legislation. Again, I urge you to honor the sacrifice of our troops.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4201, ``Servicemember Family Protection Act.'' This legislation amends the Servicemember Civil Relief Act and provides protection for servicemembers who lose temporary custodial responsibility for a child from court due to deployment or anticipated deployment. Upon return from deployment, the court must reinstate the custody order that was in effect preceding the deployment provided that the reinstatement is in the child's best interest. H.R. 4201 would prevent previous and future deployment from being considered in the determination of a child's best interest in a motion seeking a permanent order to modify custody. In addition, it also creates a uniform nationwide standard for dealing with servicemembers and deployment. Just as our service men and women are stationed around the world fighting for our rights and freedom, we must protect their rights here at home. According to a report from USA Today, military divorces reached an all time high in 2011. When children are involved, these divorce proceedings face even greater complications. It is unfair to say the least, to use a servicemember's previous service to this country and possible future service against them in child custody battles. Not only does this create division in family households, it also creates negative feelings towards military service in the minds of the dedicated men and women who protect our freedom. Past problems in these court cases have centered on a lack of uniformity of the law. Many states even lack laws concerning deployment as a criterion by courts. In previous cases this has caused servicemembers to fight custody suits in up to three states: the state where the suit began, the state where the child is residing and the state where the servicemember is stationed. Dealing with child custody battles is difficult even in civilian life. With the additional stress many in our military face, sometimes it can become unbearable. The Department of Defense and Service has even observed a connection between child custody battles and military suicides. There must be justice and uniformity when deciding child custody disputes for our servicemembers. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 3140 ``Mass Transit Intelligence Prioritization Act.''

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3140, ``Mass Transit Intelligence Prioritization Act.'' This legislation would amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002. It calls for the Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS) to make it a priority to assign DHS officers and intelligence analysts, including from the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), to participating state and urban area fusion centers located in high-risk jurisdictions with mass transit systems to enhance the security of these systems. These officers would help local enforcement authorities identify and investigate any threats to homeland security. The DHS officers and analysts will also be responsible for creating mass transit intelligence products that will: (1) assist law enforcement agencies in deploying their resources most efficiently to help detect and interdict terrorists, weapons of mass destruction, and contraband at U.S. mass transit systems; (2) promote more consistent and timely dissemination of mass transit security-relevant information among jurisdictions with such systems; and (3) enhance DHS's situational awareness with respect to the threat of terrorist acts at or involving U.S. mass transit systems. As a Ranking Member on the Subcommittee for Transportation, ensuring the safety and security of the nation's public transportation system is one of my top priorities. Mass transit systems across the world have continually been a target for terrorist threats, namely the 2004 terrorist attack on a packed commuter train in Madrid, Spain that killed 191 people. There was also the suicide bombing attack in London that left 50 dead in 2005. While we have so far been fortunate to have not had any incidents of terrorism in our mass transit systems, we know of the threat planned by al-Qaeda to commemorate the 10th anniversary of 9/11 by attacking US mass transit systems. Thankfully, a Naval SEALS raid on Osama bin Laden's compound discovered and thwarted this plot. Rising gas prices have caused metro transportation systems to be used now more than ever, creating an additional urgency to keep citizens safe on the daily commute. According to the American Public Transportation Association (APTA), Americans made 10.4 billion trips on public transportation in 2011. This is the second highest annual ridership since 1957. Houston's Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County accounted for 5.2 percent of that gain and has seen six consecutive months of increased ridership. In Houston, we understand the importance of a secured public transportation system. Our metro transit system is closely partnered with the US Department of Homeland Security. It is equipped with surveillance capabilities and our officers are trained in counterterrorism measures as well as in the latest law enforcement techniques. In addition officers regularly check bus and rail lines and perform sweeps through the Transit Center as well as through the Park & Ride lots and bus stops. As the city grows and new metro employees are hired, it is my goal that the Houston public transportation system maintains its high level of security and a strong relationship with Homeland Security. I desire this same level of security for all of the public transportation systems in the US. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 3140 ``Mass Transit Intelligence Prioritization Act.''

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Coming from Texas, I want to thank the gentleman from Texas, the ranking member of the subcommittee, for this legislation. I rise in support of H.R. 915. We have heard that there has been a constant intrusion of activity over the border, specifically dealing with drug cartels. We recognize that it is important to utilize the combination of resources, and fusion centers represent an excellent logistical use of that, as they have been in our urban centers. Let me support and salute the utilization of fusion centers because it is extremely important that we provide a safe and secure border in the United States and on border States.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2764, ``WMD Intelligence and Information Sharing Act of 2011.'' This legislation amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 would direct the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), through the Office of Intelligence and Analysis (OIA), to undertake various activities to combat the threat of weapons of mass destruction. Those efforts would include assessments and analyses of threats and the sharing of such reports with federal, state, local, and tribal authorities. While our intelligence community is strong and sophisticated, it is made even more powerful through the sharing of information between federal, state, and local officials as well as across bureaus. We are all working towards a common goal--to keep the US and its citizens safe. In order to ensure we are working with all of our available resources and information, we must continue to advance regulations that allow for the sharing of information between our officials. This also includes ensuring that local law enforcement officers across the nation are trained to identify any potential threats and contact the correct authorities. A partnership between DHS analysts and local law enforcement can enhance situational awareness with respect to the threat of terrorism to the millions of Americans who rely on mass transit systems, including the threat of an attack involving a weapon of mass destruction. Mass transit systems across the world have continually been a target for terrorist threats, namely the 2004 terrorist attack on a packed commuter train in Madrid, Spain that killed 191 people. There was also the suicide bombing attack in London that left 50 dead in 2005. While we have so far been fortunate to have not had any incidents of terrorism in our mass transit systems, we know of the threat planned by al-Qaeda to commemorate the both anniversary of 9/11 by attacking US mass transit systems. Thankfully, a Naval SEALS raid on Osama bin Laden's compound discovered and thwarted this plot. Past incidents that were looked over by federal authorizes have been resolved by local enforcement officers. It is imperative that they continue to assist the efforts of the DHS and that the DHS is open and accessible to these officers via the communication of appropriate information.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Chair I rise in support of amendment No. 46 to H.R. 4310 ``National Defense Authorization Act,'' NDAA, offered by Ranking Member Adam Smith and Rep. Justin Amash. It would strike section 1022 of the FY2012 NDAA and amends Section 1021 of same Act to eliminate indefinite military detention of any person detained under AUMF authority in U.S., territories or possessions by providing immediate transfer to trial and proceedings by a court established under Article III of the Constitution of the United States or by an appropriate State court. This amendment would bar any President or any other government official from ordering the military to put anyone in the United States, or its territories or possessions, into indefinite detention without charge or trial, or to put anyone in the United States on trial before a military commission. Federal criminal courts are open, operating, experienced, and secure--and are the appropriate venue for any proceedings here in the United States itself. The Bill of Rights applies to all persons within the United States and its territories, this amendment is consistent with 232 years of constitutional precedent as it does not pick and choose between which persons on located on U.S. soil will receive constitutional protections. Further, the amendment bars the transfer of anyone in the United States to the military for indefinite detention without charge or trial. This provision is consistent with the Posse Comitatus Act, and would provide an additional protection against any misuse of civilian law enforcement as a way to put suspects into military detention without charge or trial. It is fully consistent with the Constitution, with the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, and with the Non-Detention Act of 1971. It will reinforce the protections that most Americans assume apply--and do apply--within the United States. Since 2001, this executive power has only been utilized 3 times which makes it clear that it is not necessary to protect our national security; however, creates a gap in our civil liberties. This amendment would repeal section 1022 of last year's NDAA. Section 1022 requires the military to put some civilian suspects into military detention. The current Administration has waived application of section 1022 to many groups of potential suspects, it has not foreclosed the possibility of section 1022 being applied to all categories of civilians, including even within the United States itself. To ensure this provision will not be used against those living in the United States under section 1022 of last year's NDAA is to repeal it. Our military is designed to fight our battles overseas and to protect our borders they are not designed to enforce domestic laws. The military has not been required to enforce domestic laws since the Civil War. We have a Department of Justice, State and Federal Prosecutors, and local law enforcement that have been successful for hundreds of years. The amendment reaffirms the importance and availability of due process protections for all persons within the United States. It prohibits the NDAA detention provisions from providing any authority for the military to detain persons under any claim of authority under the NDAA or the Authorization for Use of Military Force of 2001. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting civil liberties and upholding the constitution by supporting this amendment.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. It will abandon those who are fighting for democracy, with the Pakistani President heading to participate in NATO with Ambassador Sherry Rehman here, who interacts with Members of Congress. Let me tell the American people, Pakistan is an effective ally with challenges, and we should not deny them the opportunity to correct and turn the corner. I ask my colleagues to recognize the value of Pakistan's alliance. It is better to be engaged than to not be engaged. Let us oppose this amendment. It is the wrong direction to go.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Let me thank the gentleman for his hard work, and let me have an open letter to our friends in Pakistan, Pakistani Americans, that your friendship is appreciated. The hard work that we have done together is appreciated. But we are looking to begin the reopening of those borders that are crucial to the survival and the efforts of our men and women who are presently in Afghanistan and on that border. And I would also say that with the leadership of the new ambassador, with the efforts that have been made by the Foreign Minister of Pakistan, they understand, and have made announcements that they would begin the opening of those lines, not only of communication but travel, and we would hope that that would happen soon. Again, I emphasize working with the Pakistani people is crucial. Developing allies is crucial in that very difficult neighborhood where Pakistanis themselves are subject to terrorist acts.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Lodged in between our commemoration of Memorial Day and our fallen loved ones and heroes and Flag Day, which we stand proudly to wave the flag, I really stand here as a friend that is deeply saddened by something that I think has never occurred, and that is to allow Americans, through the McGovern-Smith amendment, to really speak to all of our Members. And I think America would agree: None of us should be challenged with our patriotism. But if we raise the question of what are the next steps in Afghanistan, it is not a diminishing of the service of our men and women. It is not the eliminating of our responsibility to be able to assure the safety and security of the Afghan people. It is to allow Members of Congress to represent their constituents on both sides of the aisle to raise the question: What are the next steps and how will we bring our troops home safely? This amendment should be allowed to be discussed, just as we're discussing the potential removal and where we are eliminating the language and the ability to remove citizens and to hold them indefinitely. It is the American way, Madam Speaker. I beg of us to do this in a bipartisan way and to allow the McGovern-Smith amendment to go forward. Madam Speaker, I rise to support my amendment to H.R. 4310 ``National Defense Authorization Act,'' which would require the Secretary of Defense prior to the awarding of defense contract to private contractors, to conduct an assessment to determine whether or not the Department of Defense has carried out sufficient outreach programs to include minority and women-owned small business. Throughout my tenure in Congress, I have sponsored legislation that promotes diversity. I stand proudly before you today to call for renewed vigor in advocating and constructing effective policies that will make the United States the most talented, diverse, effective, and powerful workforce in an increasingly globalized economy. This amendment will require the Department of Defense to consider the impact that changes to outsourcing guidelines will have on small minority and women owned business by requiring them to engage with these businesses. Promoting diversity is more than just an idea it requires an understanding that there is a need to have a process that will ensure the inclusion of minorities and women in all areas of American life. Small businesses represent more than the American dream--they represent the American economy. Small businesses account for 95 percent of all employers, create half of our gross domestic product, and provide three out of four new jobs in this country. Small business growth means economic growth for the nation. But to keep this segment of our economy thriving, entrepreneurs need access to loans. Through loans, small business owners can expand their businesses, hire more workers and provide more goods and services. The Small Business Administration, SBA, a federal organization that aids small businesses with loan and development programs, is a key provider of support to small businesses. The SBA's main loan program accounts for 30 percent of all long-term small business borrowing in America. I have worked hard to help small business owners to fully realize their potential. That is why I support entrepreneurial development programs, including the Small Business Development Center and Women's Business Center programs. These initiatives provide counseling in a variety of critical areas, including business plan development, finance, and marketing. My amendment would require the Department of Defense to assess whether their outreach programs are sufficient prior to awarding contracts. The Department of Defense should investigate what impact their regulations have on minority and women owned small businesses. Outreach is key to developing healthy and diverse small businesses.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I thank the ranking member of the Transportation Committee, and I thank him for his leadership. Many Members have firsthand experience in addressing some of the angst of our constituents, whether it's in West Virginia or in the State of Texas, California, Ohio, maybe even Utah. We recognize that we have an obligation as part of the international family to engage in trade. That it's part of the economic fabric of this construct in which we work together. But Mr. Rahall's motion is both instructive and vital. For those who have had the opportunity to receive most recently Federal transportation dollars, the city of Houston has waited a mighty long time. But in the course of doing that, unfortunately, over two decades of trying to secure funding for a light rail project, we have seen the steel industry in America decimated. The story of the San Francisco bridge is not only tragic, it is with great sadness that one would lose jobs and opportunities because of the way that particular project was bid. It is no insult to China for America to stand up and demand that we Buy American. It is no insult to our other allies for, Mr. Speaker, that is what everyone does. This motion creates an even playing field in a new world matrix where every man and every woman on the international field of trade is for themselves. Let me tell you the story of dealing with Federal funding. I've made every effort to press for the building of railcars. We don't make railcars. What we have are companies that are based here in the United States, owned elsewhere, but are based here and therefore they make these particular railcars in the United States. That's at least halfway because it does create jobs. I frankly believe that if we are giving Federal funding, those same companies should try to relocate the rail-making process in the area where the light rail or the rail system is going. The prohibiting of the segmentation of highway transit and Amtrak projects is brilliant because what it does, again, it creates an even playing field for the construction companies, for those who are in essence experts on making the aspects of highway and transit, and allows them the even playing field of bidding. To require opportunities for public notice is crucial to give our companies an even playing field. Why should we be ashamed of trying to rebuild manufacturing, to try to put life back into the steel industry, because nothing is ever final until you make the effort to do so.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. This gives us the opportunity again to match what is being done in other countries. There will be American companies that will tell you that bribes are passed, while they are trying to negotiate, by others trying to do business overseas. I had a constituent in my office today that said that they engaged with a Korean company. They went in with an agreement; they had a signed agreement. They gave them their intelligence and proprietary information. They said that we will match this and do this together. When they got to the endpoint, that Korean company said, well, we've got to go out for bid, when they had been promised, the American company, that that would not be the case, that they would be partnering all the way. Mr. Speaker, let me tell you what the final results were. The Korean company didn't go out for bid. They took the proprietary information and they did the job themselves--never did this kind of work, don't know how to do the work, but the American company was left out the door. Not exactly fitting what Mr. Rahall is saying, but as an example of why we have to match the kind of intensity on the international arena. We have to match it by protecting American companies. I would say that this is an important, vital motion to instruct, and I want Federal dollars to be utilized for American companies. I believe this is the right approach to Buy American.