Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Love conquers all. And I rise today, Madam Speaker, to join the celebration, for although we mourn, we celebrate the life of Julia Carson, and celebrate we must. I'm delighted to have listened to my colleagues in the Special Order led by Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones and to hear my friends and colleagues from Indiana. But for a moment I offer my sympathy to those of Julia Carson's district, to the good people of Indianapolis, to the good people of Indiana, and, yes, to the American people. For Julia Carson truly represented and will be remembered as an American hero. I believe that Julia would not mind our recalling for our colleagues why she was so keenly committed to those who could not speak for themselves and could not help themselves. For Julia Carson's history, by its very nature, directed her into the fight for those who, like herself, grew up with very little, but yet could look to this great country and actually believe that they could achieve their dreams. For Julia was born to a teenage mother, and that, from the time that she was born in the late 1930s, going into the early 1940s and World War II, was a struggle and an unsurmountable task in and of itself. They had to struggle together. Julia Carson herself raised two children as a divorcee. So first of all, she understood what a single parent, a mother with two children, had to overcome to make sure that those children saw in themselves and saw in her a future. It's likely that she was already destined for public service, and so by finding Andy Jacobs, her finding him and as well his finding her, it was a match made in heaven. But she stopped along the wayside to give support and comfort to workers, United Auto Workers, and understood what it meant, a hard day's work for a good day's pay. So early on she was on the battlefield, and her time in respective legislative bodies only spoke to her continued desire to serve. But I like something about Julia and I like something about the description of her. And my good friend and colleague from Indiana, Congressman Hill, just said a liberal in Indianapolis. I ask the question how you can walk around in Indiana and call yourself liberal and be victorious. That was Julia. Love conquers all, the love that she had for her people, but the love that they had for her stood largely to embrace her and surround her with armor against those who would try to do her political harm. I was fascinated in listening to the Congressmen speak of the vigil. Can you imagine people just gathering out of pain and joy, the pain of possibly losing Congresswoman Carson, but also the joy of having her. Going to her house. Now, we are the people's House. So Members of Congress are exposed and people know all about them. But can you imagine people feeling so comfortable that they would come to her block and just stand in silence or singing or praying or testifying just to say, We want to be near her. What a moving expression that must have been, and I'm so sorry that I missed it. But it was a showing of their own appreciation for her resilience, her astuteness, and her ability to be underestimated. I went to Indianapolis, and it was that first year, her reelection after her first term, Madam Speaker, and yes, they were all out. And it was the year of the targets, it was the year of impeachment here in this body, and people were not feeling good, they were feeling ugly. And the right wing, as it could be defined, and I don't say it in a partisan way, but the guys who were trying to get her in reelection came up with all kinds of things. Soft on crime, they accused her of, a number of issues that they thought would get her unelected. Well, I'll tell you, she had a good history with the people of Indianapolis. In fact, she even had some conservatives supporting her. Why? Because she was truthful in her belief for social services. But she also came up with the idea that welfare recipients should work for their benefits. I'm sure it was crafted around giving them hope and giving them goals and giving them the ability to believe that they could succeed, but she was applauded for that. And she was called a person who wrestled a problem to the ground. Madam Speaker, I close by simply saying that we have lost a warrior, a soldier on the battlefield, but tonight we celebrate her life. My sympathy to her family. And thank you, Julia, for being our friend and my friend.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank the distinguished chairman. I, because of my representation of the energy capital of the world, Houston, Texas, support this particular legislation, for it makes a new statement about energy. Mr. Speaker, first and foremost, I think it is imperative that we all agree on the vital importance of America achieving energy independence in the 21st century. We must end our addiction to foreign sources of oil, most of which are found in regions of the world which are unstable and in some cases, opposed to our interests. Accordingly, there is no issue more integral to our economic and national security than energy independence. The Energy Independence and Security Act is important and multifaceted legislation which will make substantial strides toward energy independence for our Nation, while also encouraging the development of innovative new technologies, creating new jobs, reducing carbon emissions, protecting consumers, shifting production to clean and renewable energy, and modernizing our energy infrastructure. I would like to begin by commending the Speaker of the House, Ms. Pelosi, for her leadership in introducing this legislation and bringing it to the floor. The bill we have before us today builds upon the New Energy Independence, National Security, and Consumer Protection Act, of which I was a supporter, which passed last summer. This new piece of legislation represents Democrats' commitment to bring a comprehensive new direction to the people of the United States, a new direction which must ensure America's energy independence as well as an America conscious of and working to combat global climate change. In addition to being from the energy capital of the world, for the past 12 years I have been the chair of the Energy Braintrust of the Congressional Black Caucus. During this time, I have hosted a variety of energy Braintrusts designed to bring in all of the relevant players ranging from environmentalists to producers of energy from a variety of sectors including coal, electric, natural gas, nuclear, oil, and alternative energy sources as well as energy producers from West Africa. My Energy Braintrusts were designed to be a call of action to all of the sectors who comprise the American and international energy industry, to the African American community, and to the Nation as a whole. Energy is the lifeblood of every economy, especially ours. Producing more of it leads to more good jobs, cheaper goods, lower fuel prices, and greater economic and national security. Bringing together thoughtful yet disparate voices to engage each other on the issue of energy independence has resulted in the beginning of a transformative dialectic which can ultimately result in reforming our energy industry to the extent that we as a nation achieve energy security and energy independence. Because I represent the city of Houston, the energy capital of the world, I realize that many oil and gas companies provide many jobs for many of my constituents and serve a valuable need. The energy industry in Houston exemplifies the stakeholders who must be instrumental in devising a pragmatic strategy for resolving our national energy crisis. That is why it is crucial that while seeking solutions to secure more energy independence within this country, we must strike a balance that will still support an environment for continued growth in the oil and gas industry, which I might add, creates millions of jobs across the entire country. We have many more miles to go before we achieve energy independence. Consequently, I am willing, able, and eager to continue working with Houston's and our Nation's energy industry to ensure that we are moving expeditiously on the path to crafting an environmentally sound and economically viable energy policy. Furthermore, I think it is imperative that we involve small, minority and women owned, and independent energy companies in this process because they represent some of the hard working Americans and Houstonians who are on the forefront of energy efficient strategies to achieving energy independence. This unprecedented piece of legislation contains numerous important provisions. Specifically, it contains provisions that will require that new cars and trucks increase their fuel economy standards to 35 miles per gallon by the year 2020. This provision alone is estimated to save American families $700 to $1,000 a year at the gas pump. Congress has not increased the fuel economy standards since 1975, illuminating the historical new direction this Congress is taking to ensure America's energy security and independence. Furthermore, this important legislation encourages and promotes the use of renewable forms of energy produced right here in the United States. Not only does it require that 15 percent of our electricity come from renewable sources, but it also provides incentives in the form of tax credits for those American's who are conscious of their energy production and consumption. With America's leading energy producers as an integral part of the solution to our current foreign energy dependence, we will be able to move forward to a new period in which America will be secure in its domestic energy supply. According to the U.S. Minerals Management Service, MMS, America's deep seas on the Outer Continental Shelf, OCS, contain 420 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, the U.S. consumes 23 TCF per year, and 86 billion barrels of oil, the U.S. imports 4.5 billion per year. Even with all these energy resources, the U.S. sends more than $300 billion, and countless American jobs, overseas every year for energy we can create at home. I believe that we should mandate environmentally safe and efficient exploration techniques in the gulf coast which energy companies have demonstrated a willingness and capacity to utilize. By ensuring access to increasing sources of energy in an environmentally conscious way, I believe we can decrease our dependence on foreign oil. This bill also contains a crucial international component. Global climate change is a truly global problem. It is real; it is imminent; and it is our responsibility to work with the rest of the international community to develop a coordinated global response to this potentially devastating phenomenon. Because this legislation contains an unprecedented fuel efficiency standard as well as a renewable electricity standard in conjunction with a myriad of energy efficiency provisions, it will significantly reduce the carbon dioxide emissions of the United States that lead to climate change. Furthermore, I support innovative solutions to our national energy crisis, such as my legislation which alleviates our dependence on foreign oil and fossil fuels by utilizing loan guarantees to promote the development of traditional and cellulosic ethanol technology. This legislation significantly strengthens and extends existing renewable energy tax credits, including solar, wind, biomass, geothermal, hydro, landfill gas, and trash combustion. Furthermore, it will bolster research on geothermal, solar, and marine renewable energy, providing us with the information we need to move forward in the trajectory of clean, renewable, and domestically produced energy. The Energy Information Administration estimates that the United States imports nearly 60 percent of the oil it consumes. The world's greatest petroleum reserves reside in regions of high geopolitical risk, including 57 percent of which are in the Persian Gulf. Replacing oil imports with domestic alternatives such as traditional and cellulosic ethanol can not only help reduce the $180 billion that oil contributes to our annual trade deficit, it can end our addiction to foreign oil. According to the Department of Agriculture, biomass can displace 30 percent of our Nation's petroleum consumption. Along with traditional production of ethanol from corn, cellulosic ethanol can be produced domestically from a variety of feedstocks, including switchgrass, corn stalks, and municipal solid wastes, which are available throughout our Nation. Cellulosic ethanol also relies on its own byproducts to fuel the refining process, yielding a positive energy balance. Whereas the potential production of traditional corn- based ethanol is about 10 billion gallons per year, the potential production of cellulosic ethanol is estimated to be 60 billion gallons per year. In addition to ensuring access to more abundant sources of energy, replacing petroleum use with ethanol will help reduce US carbon emissions, which are otherwise expected to increase by 80 percent by 2025. Cellulosic ethanol can also reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 87 percent. Thus, transitioning from foreign oil to ethanol will protect our environment from dangerous carbon and greenhouse gas emissions. With its commitment to American biofuels, this legislation calls for a significant increase in the Renewable Fuels Standard. It encourages the diversification of American energy crops thus ensuring that biodiesel and cellulosic sources are key components in America's drive to become energy independent. This legislation goes further than any previous attempt at securing America's energy security by providing incentives and rewards for the population for their use and production of renewable energy. It will also help the American family in its production of over 3 million green jobs over the next 10 years as well as increasing the loan limits that will help small businesses develop energy efficient technologies and purchases. Mr. Speaker, this comprehensive legislation addresses the full range of concerns raised by global climate change. It offers wide-ranging solutions to the serious problems we, as a nation and as an international community, face. It demonstrates the ongoing commitment of this Democratic Congress to address these important issues, and to provide tangible and beneficial solutions. I am proud that through our efforts at compromise, this legislation reflects an improvement from H.R. 2776, the Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act of 2007, which we passed in August. However, I am concerned that this legislation still contains provisions repealing tax incentives for oil and gas companies which may have a negative effect on access to important sources of energy. In particular, I am concerned that the domestic manufacturing deduction could discourage new domestic oil and natural gas investment by making these investments comparatively less competitive than competing foreign investments. Moving forward, I think it would be prudent for this Congress to consider linking an increase on taxes with an increase in access to domestic exploration of available sources of energy, such as the gulf coast. I urge my colleagues to be balanced and prudent in their approach in addressing our energy needs. By investing in renewable energy and increasing access to potential sources of energy, I believe we can be partners with responsible members of America's energy producing community in our collective goal of reaching energy independence.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support H.R. 1593, the Second Chance Act of 2007. I would like to thank my dear colleague Mr. Danny Davis of Illinois for sponsoring this very important legislation that addresses the prison warehousing crisis in this country. H.R. 1593, a bill of which I am an original cosponsor, addresses the very serious concerns about the compromised state of warehousing prisoners. Earlier this year, the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security of which I am a member, held hearings to address the state of certain conditions within the United States prison system. In one of those hearings, my colleagues and I considered the merits of the Second Chance Act, and my amendment which I offered in the last Congress was included in the base bill this year. The Second Chance Act is designed to reduce recidivism, increase public safety, and help State and local governments better address the growing population of ex-offenders returning to their communities. The bill focuses on four areas: development and support of programs that provide alternatives to incarceration, expansion of the availability of substance abuse treatment, strengthening families, and the expansion of comprehensive re-entry services. Nearly two-thirds of released State prisoners are expected to be re- arrested for a felony or serious misdemeanor within 3 years of their release. Such high recidivism rates translate into thousands of new crimes each year and wasted taxpayer dollars, which can be averted through improved prisoner re-entry efforts. The Second Chance Act of 2007 allocates funding towards a variety of re-entry programs. One of the main components of the bill is the funding of demonstration projects that would provide ex-offenders with a coordinated continuum of housing, education, health, employment, and mentoring services. This broad array of services would provide stability and make the transition for ex-offenders easier, in turn reducing recidivism. Another reason why I strongly support this legislation is because it includes a provision contained in an amendment I offered during the Judiciary Committee markup of this bill in the 109th Congress. That amendment, incorporated in H.R. 1593 as section 243 of the bill, requires that the: Attorney General shall collect data and develop best practices of State corrections departments and child protection agencies relating to the communication and coordination between such State departments and agencies to ensure the safety and support of children of incarcerated parents (including those in foster care and kinship care), and the support of parent-child relationships between incarcerated (and formerly incarcerated) parents and their children, as appropriate to the health and well-being of the children. My amendment provides for a systematic means of ensuring the safety and support of children of incarcerated parents and the support of children of release for nonviolent offenders who have attained the age of at least 45 years of age, have never been convicted of a violent crime, have never escaped or attempted to escape from incarceration, and have not engaged in any violation, involving violent conduct, of institutional disciplinary regulations. The Second Chance Act seeks to ensure that in affording offenders a second chance to turn around their lives and contribute to society, ex- offenders are not too old to take advantage of a second chance to redeem themselves. A second benefit of the legislation is that it would relieve some of the strain on Federal, State, and local government budgets by reducing considerably government expenditures on warehousing prisoners. Madam Speaker, some of those who are incarcerated face extremely long sentences, and this language would help to address this problem. Releasing rehabilitated, middle-aged, nonviolent offenders from an already overcrowded prison population can be a win-win situation for society and the individual who, like the Jean Valjean made famous in Victor Hugo's Les Miserables, is redeemed by the grace of a second chance. The reentry of such individuals into the society will enable them to repay the community through community service and obtain or regain a sense of self-worth and accomplishment. It promises a reduction in burdens to the taxpayer, and an affirmation of the American value that no nonviolent offender is beyond redemption. Madam Speaker, the number of Federal inmates has grown from just over 24,000 in 1980 to 173,739 in 2004. The cost to incarcerate these individuals has risen from $330 million to $4.6 billion since 2004. At a time when tight budgets have forced many States to consider the early release of hundreds of inmates to conserve tax revenue, early release is a commonsense option to raise capital. The rate of incarceration and the length of sentence for first-time, nonviolent offenders have become extreme. Over the past two decades, no area of State government expenditures has increased as rapidly as prisons and jails. According to data collected by the Justice Department, the number of prisoners in America has more than tripled over the last two decades from 500,000 to 1.8 million, with States like California and Texas experiencing eightfold prison population increases during that time. Mr. Chairman, there are more people in the prisons of America than there are residents in States of Alaska, North Dakota, and Wyoming combined. Over 1 million people have been warehoused for nonviolent, often petty crimes. The European Union, with a population of 370 million, has one-sixth the number of incarcerated persons as we do, and that includes violent and nonviolent offenders. This is one-third the number of prisoners which America, a country with 70 million fewer people, incarcerates for nonviolent offenses. The 1.1 million nonviolent offenders we currently lock up represents five times the number of people held in India's entire prison system, even though its population is four times greater than the United States. As the number of individuals incarcerated for nonviolent offenses has steadily risen, African-Americans and Latinos have comprised a growing percentage of the overall number incarcerated. In the 1930s, 75 percent of the people entering State and Federal prison were white, roughly reflecting the demographics of the nation. Today, minority communities represent 70 percent of all new admissions--and more than half of all Americans behind bars. This is why for the last several years I have introduced the H.R. 261, the Federal Prison Bureau Nonviolent Offender Relief Act. H.R. 261 directs the Bureau of Prisons, pursuant to a good time policy, to release a prisoner who has served one-half or more of his or her term of imprisonment if that prisoner: (1) has attained age 45; (2) has never been convicted of a crime of violence; and (3) has not engaged in any violation, involving violent conduct, of institutional disciplinary regulations. Over 2 million offenders are incarcerated in the Nation's prisons and jails. At midyear 2002, 665,475 inmates were held in the Nation's local jails, up from 631,240 at midyear 2001. Projections indicate that the inmate population will unfortunately continue to rise over the years to come. To illustrate the impact that the Second Chance Act will potentially have on Texas, the Federal prison population for the years 2000, 2001, and 2002 reached 39,679, 36,138, and 36,635 persons respectively; the State prison population for the same years reached 20,200, 20,898, and 23,561 persons. These numbers have grown since 2002, so the impact is indeed significant and the State of Texas is an important stakeholder. I am also concerned about the rehabilitation and treatment of juvenile offenders in my home State of Texas as it appears that the administrators of TYC have neglected their duties. The April 10, 2007 Dallas Morning News, reported that ``two former Texas Youth Commission administrators were indicted on charges that they sexually abused teenage inmates at the state juvenile prison in Pyote.'' The same article also cited the 2005 investigative report by Texas Rangers' Sgt. Burzynski which found that the two indicted TYC administrators, Brookins and Hernandez, had repeatedly molested inmates in the Pyote prison. The report is cited as saying that Mr. Brookins, who during some periods was the top official, had shown sex toys and pornography in his office, while Mr. Hernandez molested inmates in classrooms and closets. I hope that all of my colleagues would join me in supporting the Second Chance Act. Passage of H.R. 1593 would be the start of a long overdue process to eliminate unnecessary costs that result from warehousing prisoners.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the distinguished gentlelady from New York, the chairwoman of the Rules Committee. I rise in a somewhat curious posture, and that is, to support the job that has to be done on behalf of the American people. So I would call this the responsible serving of the American people's spending bill. That's what Democrats have attempted to do today. I remind my colleagues that most of the appropriations bills, I would say all of them, have been passed out of this body, and certainly the predicament that we find ourselves in is because of the administration's refusal to prioritize on behalf of the needs of veterans; the needs of major research institutions; a failing job market that needs increased job training dollars; the young people of America who want a future and, therefore, college assistance; and then recognizing the importance and the crucialness of access to health care; a good energy policy; and certainly the needs of repairing the transportation system of America. I'm grateful that we have reprogrammed dollars to include money for research, job training, college assistance, access to health care, and as well, that we're reminded that we must ensure the safety of this Nation, while fighting, of course, to preserve the transportation centers of excellence, the letter that I wrote to ensure that funding for that would be included. And though we talk sometimes without understanding about the concept ``earmark,'' it is for the community of Houston, Texas, and the 18th Congressional District more early childhood education, more homeland security dollars for a constable's office. It is more dollars for a mental health facility, and it is recognition of more technology for our local first responders. So I rise today to express the dilemma, when we have three branches of government, to refute any accusations of the postures that Democrats are in. Democrats are fighters. It is because of a budget mark and a stance by this administration to demand $120 billion for a war that is not working that puts us in a position not to be able to service the needs of the American people. So we will continue this fight and we will stand strong and tall for those who are in need. And I look forward to the Military Success Act of 2007 that I have authored being debated on this floor to acknowledge that the military has finished their work, it's time to bring them home and to reward them in honor and medals for what they have done in Iraq and to ensure that the people of America receive a spending bill that serves the needs of the American people.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. This is a season for joy and for giving, and it is a season where children's eyes particularly sparkle. I rise today, Mr. Speaker, to pay tribute and thank the many, many volunteers that joined me on this past Saturday to provide, again, for the 13th Annual Toys for Kids Annual Holiday Program and Christmas Giveaway in the 18th Congressional District. So many volunteers came from so many parts of our community. The faith community; fraternity and sorority community; the women's organizations; and schools came out to celebrate with our kids. NASA participated. Four astronauts came to celebrate and to compete, if you will, with Santa Claus. Over 3,000 children came to receive gifts, fellowship, to eat. But this could not have been done without all of the supporters and certainly all of the volunteers. I tip my hat to all of you for bringing joy to the children's hearts and minds this past Saturday, December 15, 2007. Again, a great success for the Kids Annual Holiday Program in Houston, Texas.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3179, the Local Preparedness Acquisition Act, introduced by my distinguished colleague from New York, Representative Towns. This important legislation amends title 40 of the United States Code to authorize the use of Federal supply schedules for the acquisition of law enforcement, security, and certain other related items by State and local governments. In the post-September 11 era, with the advances in technology, communication and transportation, the likelihood of a situation escalating from an emergency to a disaster to a catastrophe has increased. This Nation is dependent upon the services of its first responders, and as such we cannot shirk responsibility for their well being when we put them in harm's way. Since the catastrophe of September 11, 2001, the need to anticipate and provide necessary resources to our emergency workers has been brought to Federal attention. The Federal Government has a responsibility to plan ahead and develop a strategy of what will occur should a catastrophic event ever take place. As can be seen with the World Trade Center Worker and Volunteer Medical Monitoring Program, which was established in 2004 by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, it has been insecure in its funding since its inception and is estimated to be out of outpatient awards by the end of FY 2007. This type of haphazard funding and insecurity about the program's future is not what our first responders risked their lives for. In order to enact any meaningful change, we must understand and identify the unique situations that face our first responders and then try to address any preventative pre-emptive actions that are possible. This includes Federal inquiry into the recognition and management of mental health defects, plans for short- and long-term health monitoring, quality of personal protective equipment, proposed research or lack thereof, and the national response plan. The necessity of inquiry into and improvement and solidification of these issues cannot be overstressed in looking to the future and how our Nation will deal with caring for the first responders during a disaster. Mr. Speaker, as we witnessed in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 and Hurricanes Rita and Katrina, our Nation's first responders were not prepared for the realities of the catastrophes they faced. We can ensure future safety and protection of our first responders by making sure their personal protective equipment is sufficient to handle any future risks. It is our obligation to make sure the funds for the proper equipment is being received through Federal grant programs so that in the case of a catastrophe, they will be able to safely respond to hazardous materials, biological agents, and other harmful materials. This legislation is important because it amends title 40 of the United States Code to provide necessary equipment to our Nation's first responders. In the wake of the tragedies of September 11 and Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the necessity for the provision of appropriate technologies, including interoperable communications and the availability of emergency equipment, became painfully apparent. This legislation calls for the availability and provision of alarm and signal systems, facility management systems, firefighting and rescue equipment, law enforcement and security equipment, marine craft and related equipment, special purpose clothing, and related services. By amending title 40 of the United States Code, this legislation is an important step towards ensuring that America's first responders are adequately prepared for any situation that may arise. Mr. Speaker, I support the passage of H.R. 3179 and call on my colleagues to do likewise because I strongly believe that it will strengthen our Nation's efforts to confront the disasters.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4299, which revises and extends the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA) for 15 years. I commend Chairman Frank and Congressman Capuano for their fine work in shepherding this critical legislation to the House floor. This act reminds us that the true measure of our homeland's preparedness against terrorist attack is our ability to prepare for such an attack comprehensively and that includes the insurance industry which is an essential part of our economic landscape. Mr. Speaker, the horrendous events of September 11, 2001, tested our nation's ability to defend itself in many ways. Along with the human and emotional toll these events took on all Americans, we noticed that not only our government but also our private industries were not sufficiently prepared to deal with the implications of a terrorist attack. Terrorist activity since September 1, 2001, has come to prove that our enemies are becoming more agile and technologically sophisticated. There is no doubt in my mind that terrorists are targeting not only our fellow citizens but also our critical infrastructure including our financial services sector, since they are determined to undermine the United States in the most fundamental of ways. History has shown that Al Qaeda and other extremist organizations will explicitly direct their efforts against American citizens and property in an effort to inflict economic harm. According to a RAND policy brief, ``there is reason to believe that al Qaeda is interested in continuing its efforts to disrupt the fiscal base of the United States by attacking its borders.'' If al Qaeda and others are determined to strike our financial targets, public policymakers need to examine possible financial mechanisms to mitigate these effects. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4299 is a critical and timely legislative response to the fact that after the terrorist attacks of September 11, many insurance companies excluded terrorism events from their policies. After the 9/11 terrorist attacks, many insurance companies excluded terrorism events from their insurance policies. As a result, Congress passed the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act as a three year temporary program in 2002. The act created a federal backstop to protect against terrorism related losses. In 2005, the measure was extended until 2007. TRIA is now set to expire at the end of this year, unless we today extend the law. Since its enactment, TRIA has ensured the availability of affordable terrorism risk insurance in the marketplace and thereby fostered continued urban development and real estate development in the United States. While the TRIA program has successfully kept terrorism insurance affordable, the President's Working Group on Financial Markets' most recent report concluded that a private market for terrorism reinsurance is virtually nonexistent--especially with regard to nuclear biological chemical and radiological (NBCR) acts of terrorism. Mr. Speaker, I support H.R. 4299 because it provides federal backstop for private terrorism insurance. One of the strongest features of the bill is that it comes at no cost to the American taxpayer unless there is a terrorist attack. The security of our country can not be ensured unless we make certain that the U.S government works hand-in-hand with the private sector to confront terrorist threats. H.R. 4299 exemplifies this idea. The bill before us is based on the idea that it is in the best interest of our country that the federal government coordinate with insurers to provide financial compensation to insured parties for losses from acts of terrorism. It will contribute to the stabilization of the United States economy at a time of national crisis. Mr. Speaker, I also support this bill because I believe that extending TRIA for 15 years will contribute to the long-term stability of two critical American industries, the construction and real estate industries. The long-term stability it provides will allow both industries to engage in large-scale building projects in areas considered high-risk for terrorism. Mr. Speaker, terrorist attacks target our country as a whole and not individual cities or states. I support the bill because it also exemplifies the critical idea that the risk from such attacks should be dealt at national level. H.R. 4299 should be seen as part of our broader efforts to confront and defeat the terrorist enemy. No legislative initiative, especially in such a critical field related to the security of our country, can become really effective unless it enjoys the support of the private industry it affects. Mr. Speaker, I understand that H.R. 4299 is broadly supported by insurance companies, insurance agents and brokers, policyholders, commercial developers, and construction companies. Another important provision in the bill is that it extends TRIA to cover both foreign and domestic terrorism. Currently it covers only foreign terrorism. It also adds group life insurance to the types of insurance for which terrorism insurance coverage must be made available by insurers. It also sets the ``trigger'' level--the size of an attack at which the federal government would provide aid to insurers--at $50 million. Current law (P.L. 109-44), enacted in 2005, sets the level at $50 million in 2006 and $100 million in 2007. Yet another strong feature of the bill is it requires continuation of studies of the development of a private market for terrorism and risk insurance. Mr. Speaker, I support the passage of H.R. 4299 and call on my colleagues to do like wise because I strongly believe that it will strengthen our nation's efforts to confront the terrorist threat in a more comprehensive way and will provide long-term stability for critical American industries.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening for two important matters. And I believe that when we listen to our colleagues speak about fairness, as my good friend from Texas, Congressman Poe, just did, I happen to agree with him that there are instances where we must respond to the unfairness of the justice system in the instance of these two Border Patrol agents who are incarcerated while the drug dealer goes free. But there are also commonsense approaches that we must make to address the question of the overall unfairness in the system. Today, I introduce H.R. 4545, which is the Drug Sentencing Reform and Cocaine Kingpin Trafficking Act of 2007, and it responds to the cry of the U.S. Sentencing Commission and the U.S. Supreme Court, by no means liberal bastions, that have argued and have been convinced that the disparities in sentencing between crack cocaine and cocaine is patently unconstitutional and unfair. And it was the Supreme Court on December 10 that restored the broad authority of Federal District judges to sentence outside the sentencing guidelines and impose shorter and more reasonable prison sentences for persons convicted of offenses involving crack cocaine. Right now, we know it takes $20,000 to incarcerate someone in the prison. But these justices and the U.S. Sentencing Commission said that it is important to end the disparity and not to give more for crack used, unfortunately, by the poorest of Americans, and allow those who use the high-priced cocaine, not really that different, to get off almost scot-free. This bill tracks the Supreme Court decision, but, more importantly, it includes an offender drug treatment incentive grant program, and it places and increases an emphasis on certain abrogating factors such as selling drugs to children. And it has penalties for the real bad guys, and those are the major drug traffickers. We must get a grip on the inequity of the justice system that allows some who can sit in their living room and smoke cocaine to get off easier than those who are on the streets with crack. We want to get rid of all uses of drugs, but we have to be fair in the justice system. I also rise, Mr. Speaker, and I hope my colleagues will join me in cosponsoring H.R. 4545. We introduced it today with 20 sponsors, including a member of the leadership, and we are grateful and hopeful that we will get a hearing on this legislation. But I also join my good friend, Congressman John Larson, to be able to step on the line, to stomp out the violence that our children are participating in. Some few years ago, I was on the select committee against violence headed by my former colleague Martin Frost. Let me just say to you that homicide is the second leading cause of death among 15- to 24-year- olds. Twenty-seven thousand young African Americans were murdered in this country over the last 5 years of the Iraq war; there have been fewer than 1,500 killed in Iraq. The murder of a teenager costs about $1 million in loss and accrued costs. A teenager disabled by gunshot costs about $2 million. Seventy-one percent of police chiefs and sheriffs and prosecutors nationwide agree that there must be programs for preschool children and after-school programs. But, more importantly, parents and teachers and the faith community and Members of Congress must stand against this violence. The killing of Sean Taylor by those under 20 years old. The killing of Deputy Constable in my district, Odom, whose funeral I went to, killed by those who were 11th and 12th graders in one of Houston's high schools. We have to stand and denounce violence, but we must intervene with proactive preventative programs. And I would call upon this leadership to establish a select committee against youth violence. It is that much of a crisis. The question of the proliferation of guns in the hands of youth, the kind of youth that would go in and commit suicide but kill eight individuals or more in a Nation's shopping mall, or the kind of youth that would leave his Christian home of homeschooling and shoot those innocent persons at a missionary training school in one of the Nation's churches. What is going on in America? What is going on is silence. And, therefore, we are here today joining with Congressman Larson and my colleagues to stand against silence. Let us establish a youth commission, a youth select committee against youth violence in the United States Congress, and let our voices ring out so that we can save our children. Madam Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues to support the Drug Sentencing Reform and Cocaine Kingpin Trafficking Act of 2007. I am introducing this important legislation today so that we may finally eliminate the unjust and unequal Federal crack/cocaine sentencing disparity in America. The time has come to finally right the wrongs created with the original drug sentencing legislation in 1986. As a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, I have always been an outspoken advocate for justice and equality in our criminal justice system. For the last 21 years, we have allowed people who have committed similar crimes to serve drastically different sentences for what we now know are discredited and unsubstantiated differences. For the last 21 years, the way we have punished low-level crimes for crack cocaine and powder cocaine have been unjust and unequal. In 1986, Congress linked mandatory minimum penalties to different drug quantities, which were intended to serve as proxies for identifying offenders who were ``serious'' traffickers (managers of retail drug trafficking) and ``major'' traffickers (manufacturers or the kingpins who headed drug organizations). Since 1986, the severity of punishment between those sentenced for crack cocaine offenses and powder cocaine offenses has been extremely disproportionate, a 100 to 1 ratio to be exact. This has resulted in not only an unequal and unjust criminal justice system, but also a prison system which is overflowing and overburdened with individuals who were not in actuality major drug traffickers. The U.S. Sentencing Commission recently issued a report that unanimously and strongly urged Congress to: (1) act swiftly to increase the threshold quantities of crack necessary to trigger the five- and ten-year mandatory minimum sentences so that federal resources are focused on major drug traffickers as intended in the original 1986 legislation; and (2) repeal the mandatory minimum penalty sentence for simple possession of crack, the only controlled substance for which there is a mandatory minimum for a first time offense of simple possession. The Sentencing Commission also unanimously rejected any effort to increase penalties for powder since there is no evidence to justify any such upward adjustment. Moreover, numerous reputable studies comparing the usage of powder and crack cocaine have shown that there is little difference between the two forms of the drug, which fundamentally undermines the current quantity-based sentencing disparity. Accordingly, I am introducing this legislation based on these recommendations and after the U.S. Supreme Court released two opinions in 7-2 decisions this past Monday, December 10th, restoring the broad authority of federal district court judges to sentence outside the Sentencing Guidelines' range and impose shorter and more reasonable prison sentences for persons convicted of offenses involving crack cocaine. In the most high-profile of the cases, Kimbrough v. United States, the Court held that sentencing judges could sentence crack cocaine defendants below the Guidelines' range to reflect a view that crack sentences have been set disproportionately high in comparison to cocaine sentences. Additionally, the U.S. Sentencing Commission has been urging Congress to drop its 100-1 crack-to-cocaine ratio approach, and the Court held that judges may take into account the evolving view that both drugs merit equal treatment when calculating prison time. It is time for Congress to act. This bill will eliminate the disparities in cocaine sentencing and the current mandatory minimum for simple possession. In addition, this bill will increase emphasis on certain aggravating and mitigating factors, create an offender drug treatment incentive grant program and increase penalties for major drug traffickers. Most importantly, thjs resolution will enact the measures that the U.S. Sentencing Commission has requested from Congress. This legislation will also fundamentally change the way we punish drug traffickers. This legislation dramatically increases the monetary punishment for those convicted of trafficking drugs and at the same time creates grants for States to create incentive based treatment programs for low-level drug offenders. Blatant and unjust inequality under the law must end. This bill will ensure that those individuals who have violated the law will be punished fairly, relative to the punishment. We cannot allow this injustice to continue, and I urge you to support this timely resolution, which is supported by the Open Society Policy Center, the Sentencing Project, the ACLU, the American Bar Association, and the Drug Policy Alliance. I also want to thank Senator Biden for introducing the companion to this legislation in the Senate earlier this year. Madam Speaker, I rise today to join Congressman Larson and a number of my other colleagues to discuss the very serious issue of youth violence. As Chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus, I have placed the protection and promotion of the rights of our nation's children at the forefront of my legislative agenda, and I am deeply troubled and concerned about the rising tide of violence among America's children. Madam Speaker, news stories in recent weeks and months have illustrated a painful fact: that violent crime is again on the rise in the United States, and that the specter of violence is increasingly affecting our nation's children. Earlier this year, we were all stunned by the shooting spree that transpired on the campus of Virginia Tech, and only last week we witnessed the tragic rampage by a 19-year old young man in a Nebraska shopping mall. Only yesterday, according to media reports, six students were injured, two critically so, when their school bus came under gunfire in Las Vegas, in an attack which investigators believe may have been linked to a school fight earlier in the day. These tragic anecdotes are emblematic of a larger problem: the rising prevalence of violent crime in our society. According to news reports, the past two years have seen a trend of increased violence; last year violent crime rose 2 percent in the United States. Children are not immune to this brutality. Homicide is now the 2nd leading cause of death among 15- to 24-year olds. Gang violence is certainly linked to many of these cases, and youth-gang related homicides have risen by more than 50 percent since 1999. Madam Speaker, according to the Centers for Disease Control, in 2003, 5,570 people between the ages of 10 and 24 were murdered. This works out to a shocking average of 15 young people killed every single day. Of these victims, 86 percent were male, and 82 percent, a clear majority, were killed with firearms. Some sectors of our society are more vulnerable to this rising tide of violence. Homicide is now the leading cause of death for African Americans between the ages of 10 and 24, and the 2nd leading cause of death for Hispanics in that age range. For American Indians, Alaska Natives, and Asian/Pacific Islanders, it is the 3rd leading cause of death. Over the past five years, there have been 27,000 young African Americans murdered in our nation, as compared to less than 1,500 African Americans killed, in the same period of time, in the Iraq war. These disparities are evident in my home state of Texas. In 2003, the child death rate in Texas was 24.4 deaths per 100,000, a slight increase over the previous year. The rate of death for African American children in Texas was significantly higher than the rate for their White or Hispanic peers. In addition, in 2003, all Texas children were most likely to die from accidents, but while the second most prevalent cause of death for White and Hispanic children was disease, the second most common cause of death for African American children was homicide. For teenagers, deaths by accident, homicide, and suicide accounted for the majority of deaths among 15-19 year olds. While White teens were 50 percent more likely to commit suicide than their Hispanic peers, and almost 2.5 times as likely as their African American peers, African American teens were over twice as likely to die of homicide as Hispanic teens, and seven times more likely than White teens. Our children should not have to grow up under a shadow of fear. In a nationwide survey of high school students published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, about 6 percent of respondents reported not going to school on one or more days in the 30 days preceding the survey because they felt unsafe at school or on their way to or from school. Madam Speaker, this is absolutely unacceptable. We cannot tolerate our children being scared away from the classroom by the threat of violent crime. We cannot allow violence to keep the young people of our Nation from receiving the education they need to fulfill their goals and dreams. Our Nations' cities are paying a high cost for their violent crime. While I am extremely wary of attaching monetary value to the lives of our children, I believe it is worth noting that every murder of a teenager, according to estimates, costs the city in which it is committed roughly one million dollars. I mention this statistic only to highlight the economic benefit of working to prevent youth violence, on top of the obvious social and humanitarian motivations. Analysis has shown that for every dollar spent on youth violence prevention, $14 is saved that would be spent in the justice system. If prevention is made a priority, studies show, preemptive programs will reap dividends in the future. The rising rate of incarceration is of great concern to me, particularly as it harshly affects communities of color. According the Justice Department, if the 2001 rates of incarceration were to continue indefinitely, a white male born in the U.S. would have a 1 in 17 chance of going to state or federal prison during his lifetime, a Latino male would have a 1 in 6 chance, and a Black male would have a 1 in 3 chance of going to prison. These disturbing statistics speak to the ongoing racial divides in our society, as well as to the lack of opportunities for young men in many of these communities. I believe that, in this Congress, we have made some progress toward creating and proliferating opportunities for all the young people of our nation to improve their potential; I also believe we have a great deal of work left to do in this regard. Madam Speaker, despite a spate of recent shootings that have demonstrated the prevalence of school violence, the news is not all bad. Studies have shown that school-associated violent deaths account for less than 1 percent of homicides among school-aged children and youth. However, even if schools are the safest place for our children, it remains indisputable that young people are increasingly the victims of violent crime, and that crime and violence in schools remains far too prevalent. In 2004, over 750,000 young people, ages 10-24, were treated in emergency departments for injuries sustained due to violence, according to the Centers for Disease Control. In a CDC survey conducted in 2004 of high school students across the nation, 33 percent reported being in a physical fight at least once in the year preceding the survey. Seventeen percent reported carrying a weapon on one or more of the 30 days preceding questioning. Another survey estimated that 30 percent of 6th to 10th graders were involved in bullying, either as a bully, a target, or both. Madam Speaker, Americans pay $90 billion in taxes every year for the criminal justice system. They pay an additional $65 billion annually in total private security costs. This works out to approximately $535 a year for every man, woman, and child in America. I would suggest that addressing the causes of youth violence in our country, and working to prevent it in the future, would be a much better direction to concentrate our efforts. Doing so will save American taxpayer dollars, but, far more importantly, it will save the lives of our sons and daughters. Madam Speaker, youth violence has a profound affect on communities across our nation. In addition to tragic injury and death, youth violence escalates the cost of health care, reduces productivity, decreases property values, and disrupts social services. I look forward to working with my colleagues to make a reduction in youth violence a reality. According to 71 percent of police chiefs, sheriffs, and prosecutors nationwide, providing more pre-kindergarten programs for pre-school age children, as well as after-school programs for school-age children, would be the most effective strategy for reducing youth violence. I believe we, as a Congress and as representatives of the American people, must ensure that the protection of our children is at the forefront of our legislative agenda.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, isn't this the season of giving? My colleagues, the Democratic majority has worked without stopping to provide funding for the health insurance of our children in America. Isn't it a shame that the minority and the administration want to be the scrooge of the season and deny millions of children health care in the Children's Health Insurance Plan; 966,000 children in the State of Texas, innocent children who cannot fend for themselves, now suffering because we have a veto on the SCHIP. Madam Speaker, isn't this a season of giving? I'm grateful that the Democrats prevailed on the AMT, giving middle-class taxpayers a bounty this holiday season, but who will care for the children? Again, Mr. President, sign the SCHIP bill. Don't take away Christmas from millions of children here in America.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker. I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 842, expressing sympathy to and pledging the support of the House of Representatives and the people of the United States for the victims of Cyclone Sidr in southern Bangladesh, introduced by my distinguished colleague from New Jersey, Representative Rothman. This important resolution reaffirms the commitment of the United States to the people of Bangladesh in the wake of the devastation of Cyclone Sidr. Mr. Speaker, Bangladesh has long been a valued ally of the United States; and a key Muslim democracy in a region where adherence to democratic principles is at a premium. Recently, I met with Mr. Don Haque, nephew of former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia. After listening to his concerns and insights, it is my hope that Bangladesh will move swiftly toward regaining its status as a thriving, emerging democracy and set an example for its neighbors and the rest of the world. The region has been undergoing serious political and economic changes, with several nations undergoing significant political upheaval. Key among these is Bangladesh, where emergency rule was declared by President Iajuddin Ahmed following opposition protests during the run-up to the January 2007 elections. This military-backed caretaker government, currently headed by Fakhruddin Ahmed, is expected to continue to hold power through 2008, though some observers have estimated that elections will not actually take place until 2009 or later. It is my sincere hope that the military-backed caretaker government currently in power in Bangladesh will promptly lift the state of emergency and move expeditiously toward holding free and fair elections. It would also be my expectation that the caretaker government will abide by internationally recognized standards of human rights and due process in its activities. I am personally concerned by reported events in Bangladesh, including the ban on political and union activity; the restrictions on free movement, free assembly, free association, free speech and a free press; and the denial of bail and other due process rights to more than 200,000 jailed individuals, according to some accounts. In this key period of political change, one that will hopefully ensure a more free and fair democratic Bangladesh, the nation has been hit by an unthinkable natural disaster that has affected all ways of life. On November 15, the southern coast of Bangladesh was struck by Cyclone Sidr with raging winds of 155 miles-per-hour smashing tens of thousands of homes, damaging roads and buildings, and causing a 16 foot tidal surge that has destroyed thousands of hectares of crops. This natural disaster is estimated to have affected over 4 million people thus far, with millions being evacuated from their homes due to loss or damage. The Bangladesh Disaster Ministry now estimates that some 750,000 homes were damaged or destroyed in the aftermath of Cyclone Sidr. As a Member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and Chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus, I am especially concerned by the internal displacement of millions of Bangladeshis, over 400,000 of whom are children below the age of five. The catastrophic death toll has already reached 3,500, though the Bangladesh Red Crescent has warned that the number of deaths may climb as high as 10,000 in what is being called the greatest destruction from a cyclone in Bangladesh in 16 years. It appears we are only just beginning to see the effects of this great human catastrophe. While Cyclone Sidr is responsible for widespread destruction, the five provinces of Patuakhali, Barguna, Bagerhat, Barisal, and Pirojpur that sit on the southern coast of Bangladesh were the most drastically affected. The nation's capital, Dhaka, which is located over 130 miles away from the country's devastated coastline, still lost access to power and food for days following the storm. Hundreds of thousands of people in southern Bangladesh's remote areas have been cut off from relief operations leading to massive suffering and starvation due to the current lack of access to drinking water and medicines. One relief worker in Bagerhat went so far as to say that the region looked like a ``valley of death.'' Unfortunately, the worst may be yet to come. Health officials have begun to warn against the serious threat posed by cholera, dysentery, and other waterborne diseases as a result of the limited access to water supplies and sanitation facilities that millions of Bangladeshis will face. As a member of the international community, the United States must offer its support and assistance to a nation that has been devastated by such a tremendous natural disaster. The United Nations World Food Program has appealed to the international community to provide aid to the peoples of Bangladesh, noting that food supplies have been severely disrupted by the cyclone leading to an increased and very real threat of famine. This resolution is significant because it reaffirms the commitment of the United States to provide relief aid to the victims of Cyclone Sidr as its effects continue to unfold. Furthermore, this resolution calls upon the United States to immediately make available any and all appropriate assistance that has been requested by the Bangladeshi authorities. I believe that it is imperative that the United States government express its heartfelt sympathy and support to the people of Bangladesh in the wake of this terrific disaster, which is why I am a proud cosponsor of this legislation. I urge my colleagues to join me in strongly supporting this legislation, and to call for still more to be done.

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1413, to direct the Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security (Transportation Security Administration) to address vulnerabilities in aviation security by carrying out a pilot program to screen airport workers with access to secure and sterile areas of airports, introduced by my distinguished colleague from New York, Representative Lowey. As a member of the Committee on Homeland Security and Chair of the Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure Protect, I believe that this important piece of legislation, of which I am a proud cosponsor, is absolutely imperative for insuring the protection of our nation. Today, aviation security is high on the list of priorities of air travelers, the Federal Government, and the international air community. Since September 11th we have made many improvements in the security of our nation's transportation infrastructure. However our job is far from over, whether it's more improvements to be made or gaps to close. In matters of security, we must not become complacent--as our enemies adapt, so must we. And we did, we now have a federal screening workforce, we screen 100 percent of the checked baggage, we are in the process of moving to 100 percent screening of air cargo and we are constantly trying to find new technology to help all of these functions. In addition we armed pilots and barricaded the cabin door, still there is much more that needs to be done and this legislation is an important step in the direction of making our nation more secure. This important legislation includes a number of provisions that will make American airports safer by directing the Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security to implement a number of new programs. In this day and age when Presidential candidates and Members of Congress must go through airport security and screening, it is unfathomable that airport employees with access to sterile areas of the airport are still excused from such screening. This legislation calls for the implementation of a pilot program at five commercial service airports that will screen all airport workers with access to sterile areas of the airport. This program calls for screening of airport employees to be conducted under the same standards as apply to passengers at security screening checkpoints and to be carried out by private screeners at a designated screening lane for their exclusive use at a minimum of two airports. This will ensure that airport employees are held to the same standards as all other people wishing to enter an airport. In order to further ensure security, this bill requires that each airport participating in said program is subject to a vulnerability assessment by the Department of Homeland Security. An endemic problem in the national security system is the lack of specificity of legislation that is meant to secure our nation's airports. This bill escapes that by specifying that at least two of the participating airports be large hub airports, with the remaining airports representing different airport security risk categories, therefore ensuring a holistic assessment of our airports current security risks. This legislation further specifies that each participating airport operator conduct an assessment of the screening technology used at the airport and to submit the results to the Assistant Secretary. Following this comprehensive program, the United States will be able to better assess the real security of its nation's airports. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to cosponsor H.R. 1413 and I call on my colleagues to support this important piece of legislation because I strongly believe that it will strengthen our nation's efforts to confront the existing vulnerabilities our current airport security system and consequently make our nation more secure.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, all of us are interested in moving this country forward on a defined energy policy. And we had, just an hour ago, an open debate on how we could move America forward. I'm delighted that part of the effort in the legislation just passed by this House emphasized new CAFE standards so that there can be greater mileage on vehicles that Americans may purchase, and, yes, a lowering of the cost of gasoline, but also a lowering of the utilization of gas by getting greater mileage; compromise between the energy industry and, of course, those who make automobiles in Detroit. In addition are the emphasis on alternative fuels, the research to help us expand greening of America and the emphasis on creating new jobs and looking at alternative fuels. But I also believe that we must focus on the existence of fossil fuels, oil and gas, and be able to develop oil and gas domestically, particularly, in the gulf region. And so I hope that we will expand that debate as we go forward in making America independent as relates to energy.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I have been unavoidably detained and away on official business on a number of rollcalls which I would like to place in the Record at this time. In particular, I'd like to take note of December 5, 2007. Due to the tragic death of Reserve Deputy Constable Odom in my district, I was attending his funeral. On rollcall vote No. 1127, if I was present, I would have voted ``no.'' Rollcall vote No. 1128, I would have voted ``no.'' Rollcall vote No. 1129, I would have voted ``aye.'' Rollcall vote No. 1130, I would have voted ``aye.'' Rollcall vote No. 1131, I would have voted ``aye.'' Rollcall vote No. 1132, I would have voted ``aye.'' And Rollcall No. 1133, I would have voted ``aye.'' That is on December 5, 2007. For September 20, 2007, on rollcall vote 890, I would have voted ``aye''; No. 889, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall vote No. 888, I would have voted ``aye.'' Rollcall vote No. 887, I would have voted ``aye.'' And on rollcall No. 886, a motion to adjourn, I would have voted ``no.'' On July 16, 2007, rollcall vote No. 632, I would have voted ``aye.'' Rollcall vote No. 631, I would have voted ``aye.'' Rollcall vote No. 630, I would have voted ``aye.''

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4043, the ``Preserving and Expanding Minority Depository Institutions Act''. Minority-owned financial institutions are vitally important to the economic development and revitalization of urban and minority communities. Businesses and residents in these traditionally underserved communities rely on minority-owned financial institutions to serve their banking and other financial services needs. They have always been there when we needed them--making homeownership a reality for many for whom homeownership was elusive, providing capital for the neighborhood grocery and barber shop, financing housing rehabilitation, providing consumer credit counseling services, providing jobs, and revitalizing communities. However, minority-owned financial institutions face many challenges. By and large much smaller than other banks, minority banks have difficulty competing with larger institutions for deposits and other business. It is often difficult to diversify their geographical and credit risk exposures. They also face challenges associated with operating in economically depressed markets. Despite these challenges, minority-owned financial institutions are committed to providing capital, promoting economic revitalization, and creating jobs. They are committed to serving the urban and minority communities in which they are located and the people and businesses that reside there. We need them. Minority-owned financial institutions comprise only about two percent of all financial institutions and a significantly lower percentage of total industry assets. We must do all that we can to support, protect and promote these institutions. This bill, H.R. 4043, the Preserving and Expanding Minority Depository Institutions Act, is an important step. Existing law requires that the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) consult with the Department of the Treasury on methods to preserve, encourage and promote minority ownership of depository institutions and provide technical assistance, training and education programs. H.R. 4043 would direct the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Comptroller of the Currency to help preserve, encourage and expand minority-owned financial institutions by participating in those activities. In addition, the bill would require each of the participating agencies to submit an annual report to the Congress on actions taken to implement the law.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of S. 888, the Genocide Accountability Act of 2007, introduced by Senator Durbin. I would like to thank my colleague Representative Berman for introducing this resolution in the House, where I am proud to join over 10 of my colleagues as a cosponsor of this important legislation. May I also take this opportunity to thank Chairman Conyers for his leadership in guiding this legislation through the Judiciary Committee. Mr. Speaker, it is a tragedy that the 20th century, which excelled in technological innovation and great accomplishments in arts and letters, could also be remembered for events symbolizing man's inhumanity to man. Genocide in Rwanda, the former Yugoslavia, Cambodia, Germany, and the Ottoman Empire, to cite a few examples, showed us the monstrous potential of totalitarian regimes determined to annihilate entire ethnic, racial and religious groups. Sadly, though the 20th century has been called ``the Age of Genocide'' by at least one prominent scholar, the crime has already been seen in the new 21st century, with the deplorable situation in Darfur. Over the recent August recess, I led a congressional delegation to Darfur, where, together with two of my colleagues, I had the tragic opportunity to see the plight of the people of Darfur, victims of the systematic annihilation attempt supported by the Government of Sudan. Not since the Rwandan genocide of 1994 has the world seen such a systematic campaign of displacement, starvation, rape, mass murder, and terror as we are witnessing in Darfur for the last 3 years. At least 400,000 people have been killed in Darfur; more than 2 million innocent civilians have been forced to flee their homes and now live in displaced-persons camps in Sudan or in refugee camps in neighboring Chad; and more than 3.5 million men, women, and children are completely reliant on international aid for survival. Unless the world stirs from its slumber and takes concerted and decisive action to relieve this suffering, the ongoing genocide in Darfur will stand as one of the blackest marks on humankind for centuries to come. In 1948, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the ``Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.'' As its title suggests, the treaty imposes two core obligations on participating states: first, state parties undertake to prevent genocide; and second, they commit to punish genocide as well as several related acts, such as attempting to commit genocide. The Genocide Convention establishes our core obligations in combating the genocide phenomenon--preventing and punishing Genocide. The document gives the U.N. a broad license to deal with genocide. In addition, individual states are expected to do all they can to prevent genocide. It also gives responsibility to state parties to prosecute the perpetrators of genocide. In 1987, Congress enacted legislation to bring U.S. law into conformity with the Genocide Convention. The ``Proxmire Act'' (The Genocide Convention Implementation Act of 1987) is the key U.S. law implementing the Genocide Convention. When read together with other provisions of the federal criminal code concerning conspiracy and complicity, the Proxmire Act addresses the explicit obligation set forth in Article VI of the Genocide Convention concerning prosecution of genocide and related criminal acts in courts of the State where genocide occurs. In addition, the Proxmire Act makes it a federal crime for a U.S. national to commit genocide anywhere. The proliferation of civil wars accompanied by ethnic cleansing and outright genocide which characterized the end of the 20th century, from Bosnia and Herzegovina to the civil wars in Somalia and Liberia, produced a number of perpetrators of genocidal acts who later ended up on American shores. This revealed a shortcoming in our current laws, under which the United States cannot indict someone for genocide committed outside the United States, even when the victim is an American citizen, unless the perpetrator is a U.S. national. In contrast, laws on torture, material support for terrorism, terrorism financing, hostage taking, and many other federal crimes allow for extraterritorial jurisdiction for crimes committed outside the United States by non U.S. nationals. In light of this legal gap in our obligations to prosecute perpetrators of genocide, I commend my colleagues Mr. Berman and Mr. Pence for introducing the Genocide Accountability Act., H.R. 2489 in May of 2007. Mr. Speaker, this legislation would close a legal loophole that prevents the U.S. Justice Department from prosecuting people in our country who have committed genocide. The bill specifically amends Title 18 to establish federal criminal jurisdiction over the crime of genocide wherever the crime is committed. This jurisdiction should be exercised when the alleged offender is present in the United States and he or she will not be vigorously and fairly prosecuted by another court with appropriate jurisdiction. Many countries have adopted or enforced legislation establishing jurisdiction over certain international crimes, including genocide, wherever committed if the alleged perpetrator is in their territory and any additional requirements are satisfied. This legislation will be a further step toward bring the United States into line with its international obligations, and toward ensuring that no perpetrator of genocide living on U.S. soil can go unpunished. I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important legislation.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2517, the Protecting Our Children Comes First Act of 2007, introduced by my good friend and colleague Congressman Lampson. I would like to thank him for his ongoing commitment to the extremely important issue of protecting our children, and I would also like to thank Chairman Miller for his leadership in guiding this legislation through the Committee on the Education and Labor. I am extremely proud to join over 90 of my colleagues in cosponsoring this crucial, bipartisan legislation. Mr. Speaker, the Protecting our Children Comes First Act of 2007 reauthorizes the Missing Children's Assistance Act through FY 2013, and it will increase federal resources for protecting and assisting missing children and their families. This legislation will provide the resources to ensure that the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children can continue its important work to combat child abduction and exploitation. As Chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus, I have been an outspoken advocate for the protection of our children against all predators, be it disease, natural disasters, or sexual deviants. While we may not be able to avoid natural disasters, there is nothing but a lack of political will and Congressional action that prevents us from protecting our children from known sexual predators. I am appalled that while the Department of Justice knows the location of hundreds of thousands of sexual predators that prey on our Nation's children within the U.S. at this very moment, the Department of Justice has consistently refused to take action or ask Congress for help despite the fact that law enforcement is investigating less than 2 percent of this criminal activity. I applaud this important piece of legislation for the accountability it will create by building the largest law enforcement army ever created for the protection of children. While the child exploitation industry is global in scale, the majority of both supply and demand is based right here, within the United States. Due to the lack of attention to this issue by the Department of Justice, it is hard to quantify the number of child pornography traffickers that are involved in this gross violation of our children's rights; the best estimates are that this practice involves 485,000 perpetrators in the United States alone. A 2005 Justice Department study found that: 80 percent of child pornography possessors have images and videos depicting sexual penetration. Twenty percent of child pornography possessors have images of bondage, sadistic abuse, and torture. Eighty-three percent of child pornography possessors have images of children aged 6-12. Nineteen percent of child pornography possessors have images of infants or toddlers. Only 1 percent of child pornography possessors restricted their ``collecting'' to images of nude children. Law enforcement reports of websites providing live ``pay-per-view'' rape of very young children. Mr. Speaker, we must act now to protect our children from these atrocities and this legislation is an important first step in doing so. The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children's' (NCMEC) mission is to help prevent child abduction and sexual exploitation; help find missing children; and assist victims of child abduction and sexual exploitation, their families, and the professionals who serve them. Established in 1984, NCMEC is a nonprofit organization that provides crucial services nationwide for families and professionals in the prevention of abducted, endangered, and sexually exploited children. Mr. Speaker, as technology continues to evolve, there are continuously a new range of tools available to NCMEC to employ in its important work. In recent years, the Center's workload has expanded exponentially, largely due to the growth of the Internet. Ernie Allen, president and CEO of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, stated that it anticipates in excess of 110,000 reports through the CyberTipline, which the public may use to report Internet- related child sexual exploitation, and provides technical assistance to individuals and law-enforcement agencies in the prevention, investigation, prosecution, and treatment of cases involving missing and exploited children, among other tasks. This is an increase of around 3,500 from last year. Mr. Speaker, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children has proven a crucial tool in combating the exploitation and abduction of our Nation's children. It is vital that we continue to ensure that it continues to receive the funding that it needs to carry out its mission. This Congress has taken a firm stance on supporting legislation that protects our children, as can be seen by the passage of numerous pieces of legislation that binds our government to take meaningful action towards the protection of our children. I was a proud cosponsor of the PROTECT Our Children Act of 2007, introduced by my distinguished colleague from Florida, Representative Wasserman-Schultz, which passed the House 415-2 last month. Our children are this Nation's most valuable asset and this legislation ensures that we will invest all the necessary resources to provide them the protection they deserve. This legislation is imperative to ensuring the protecting our Nation's children by providing funding to those agencies with our children's best interest at heart. As the Chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus, a Representative of the people of the United States, and a mother of two, I am proud to support this legislation and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3845, introduced by my distinguished colleague from my home state of Texas, Representative Al Green. Through this important resolution, the House of Representatives will explicitly go on record against a form a racial hatred that has plagued this country for far too long. As a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, I have been an outspoken advocate for civil rights and the vigorous prosecution of those who violate our Nation's laws that protect the most vulnerable amongst us. Though we cannot stop acts of racism, ignorance and intolerance, we must speak with a clear and loud voice and say the time has come for our Nation to no longer turn a blind eye to acts of hatred and intolerance. This legislation comes at a time when the hanging of nooses is making a resurgence around the country. We all know about the case in Jena, LA, where a noose was hung in a school yard and resulted in the division of a town along racial lines, and where six black teenagers were arrested for beating a fellow white student after a series of racial disturbances. One of those students, Mychal Bell, just yesterday pled guilty to lesser charges after one of the largest civil rights protests in years and the largest march in the South since the 1960s. This October, the Judiciary Committee held hearings on the matter, to address those responsible for administering the laws governing hate crimes. Unfortunately, as we have seen since the events of Jena, nooses are being hung in the halls of some our country's most distinguished institutions and businesses. At Columbia University's Teachers College, a noose was left on the doorknob of an African American female professor. In Chicago, a noose was found at a Home Depot construction site. In Queens, New York, a woman was arrested after hanging a noose in her yard and threatening to hang her African American neighbor's child from it. In my own home state of Texas, two students in Pearland hung a noose in their school parking lot. It is unfortunate that this Congress is taking up this issue only after companies such as Home Depot and Verizon, as well as colleges and universities across the country and numerous other institutions, have already spoken against these acts with a loud and clear voice. The time has come for the United States Congress to speak just as loudly and say we will not tolerate these heinous acts. The symbol of the noose is powerful and offensive. Thousands of African Americans have been lynched in this country simply for being the ``wrong'' color. The incident of noose hangings of Black America was not aberrational or occasional. At any moment in time, an African American could lose their life at the hands of an angry white mob, and the symbolism of the noose still hangs over this country like a black cloud. The noose has come to symbolize white supremacy and the subjugation of an entire race of people. It has been used as a weapon against those who dared to challenge their condition. It has been used as a weapon to silence the voice of those who dared to speak out. The ritualistic, brutal, and public murders that took place with a noose were done specifically to terrorize the African American community. The threat of lynching was used to prevent people from voting, marching, protesting, getting an education, and even starting a business. The noose as sign of intimidation dates back to 1896 as a means of voter suppression. Today, we see the noose used to intimidate educational and business institutions, teachers, workers, community leaders and now our children. With the passage of this resolution, our country and this Chamber will say, in no unclear terms, that we will not be intimidated and we will not allow our children to be intimidated. I applaud this important resolution for the message it sends to the country and the world, that we do not tolerate hatred and bigotry against anyone. Let me remind those who regard the hanging of a noose from a tree in Jena, Louisiana or anywhere else in this country as a harmless act: it is not harmless and it is not just a juvenile prank. It is a frightening and symbolic play for power, as was captured so poignantly by Billie Holiday in her unforgettable rendition of Southern Fruit: Southern trees bear strange fruit, Blood on the leaves and blood at the root, Black bodies swinging in the southern breeze, Strange fruit hanging from the poplar trees. While the use of this racist tool continues, we must not forget that over 4,700 people were lynched between 1882 and 1959 in a campaign of terror led by the Ku Klux Klan. Nor should we forget that more people died at the hands of lynch mobs than died in the attack on Pearl Harbor (2,333) and died during Hurricane Katrina (1,836) combined. Mr. Speaker, we must act now to stop the use of this racist and evil symbol of America's bitter waters. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important legislation.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I urge the complete passage of this legislation, and I thank my colleagues for their convictions and their messages on the floor today. Might I add for my colleagues' information, there are about 17,500 individuals trafficked in the United States, and we believe 50 percent of those may be children. In this legislation, we have language to combat the trafficking of our children. Along with the other tragic stories we have heard today, we must be able to support our children and prevent the trafficking of our children. I thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Zoe Lofgren) for her efforts in this area, and I include an article from the San Jose Mercury News for the Record. [The Mercury News, Dec. 4, 2007] Reaching Across Party Lines To End Modern-Day Slavery (By Zoe Lofgren and Dan Lungren) They are age-old stories. Women brought to the Bay Area from China with false promises of life in a far-off land, only to be trapped in prostitution. Latino men laboring in debt bondage on ranches and farms in inland valleys. These stories may be redolent of the Gold Rush and frontier days, but in fact are situations that have been uncovered in present-day California. Some call it human trafficking, perhaps to make the crime less disturbing to confront. We call it modern slavery. It must be stopped. Especially in the past decade, federal criminal civil rights prosecutions have uncovered cases of enslavement across the country. The litany of cases goes on and on, each one equally tragic: Mexican women forced to serve up to 50 men each day in dingy brothels in New York; African teenagers held in servitude as nannies in Washington, D.C.; American women and girls lured onto the streets with promises of love and glamour only to be held in prostitution through coercive force; African-American men laboring in orange groves of Florida trapped by drug addiction and ``company-store'' debts; Asian workers trapped in sweatshop garment factories in American Samoa and Saipan; Honduran women forced to drink and dance with clients in dance halls in Texas; and mentally ill white Americans forced to work on a Kansas farm. From the beginning, the promise of freedom enshrined in the 13th Amendment has protected everyone in the United States, whether African-Americans, Latinos, Asians or Europeans. Slavery might seem like a closed chapter in our nation's history, but it is worth remembering that the civil rights movement was only possible after the NAACP and the FBI worked together during the Roosevelt administration to dismantle the system of sharecropping and peonage in the American south. Even today, farmworker advocates routinely have to fight against enslavement in the fields before they can address other concerns that the migrant community faces. Asian- American community activists and legal service providers have built their efforts upon the successful liberation of workers from the notorious El Monte sweatshop more than a decade ago. The Constitution's promise of freedom is written in the suffering of all of those who have been held in bondage. As a country we owe it to them to never stop fighting against servitude and slavery. This week, the House of Representatives will consider a bill that we are co-sponsoring to update our anti-slavery statutes, the William Wilberforce Act. Named in honor of the famous English legislator who fought the transatlantic slave trade in the 19th century, the proposed law will provide new tools to protect against modern slavery. The law will protect people in the United States, both in the immigrant community and among American citizens, and will provide foreign aid and diplomatic tools to combat slavery and trafficking overseas as well. The Wilberforce Act protects workers, ensures compassionate immigration treatment for children, and allows for the reunification of victims and their families. The bill delivers on the promise of freedom by creating tough new enforcement tools to punish exploitation, whether by unscrupulous labor recruiters, diplomats who abuse their servants or brutal pimps. The bill provides resources so that non-governmental organizations, federal and local law enforcement and the faith community can work together to liberate victims and bring their traffickers to justice. In our congressional districts--in the South Bay and Sacramento--such interdisciplinary task forces have begun the important work of implementing state and federal anti-trafficking statutes. The Wilberforce Act will allow them to intensify their efforts. There are some who feel that there is no room for bipartisanship in Washington. Some say that the political parties are so far apart as to preclude any cooperation at all, especially on legislation that combines compassionate and pragmatic immigration solutions with tough law enforcement standards. The Wilberforce Act disproves that notion. We will continue to work together to ensure that no one is held in bondage in California or elsewhere. Coretta Scott King once said ``Freedom is never really won--you earn it and win it in every generation.'' We are proud that the California congressional delegation can come together across party lines to lead the fight to guarantee the constitutional promise of liberty for all.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3887) to authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2008 through 2011 for the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, to enhance measures to combat forced labor, and for other purposes, as amended.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney), the co-chair of the Human Trafficking Caucus. (Mrs. MALONEY of New York asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Mr. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran), a member of the Appropriations Committee and a committed and dedicated fighter against human trafficking.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentlemen from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) control 10 minutes of the time allocated for H.R. 3887, the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2007.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3887, the William Wilburforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2007. I would like to thank the Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Mr. Lantos, for introducing this important, bipartisan legislation that will authorize appropriations for FY 2008- 2011 for the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, enhancing measures to combat forced labor, as well as for your ongoing leadership on this and other crucial human rights issues. I am proud to join over 40 of my colleagues in co-sponsoring this bill. Mr. Speaker, the issue of the trafficking of persons is one of the utmost significance, one which no nation is exempt from. Within the United States, we pride ourselves on overcoming the historic stain of slavery, and we are comforted by the thought that while others may persist in this repulsive practice, we do not. This however, is simply not the case. According to the GAO, ``as many as 17,500 people are believed to be trafficked into the United States each year.'' The trafficking of persons is our problem; they are forced through our borders and used by our people. This extreme injustice can no longer go unnoticed. The flow of human trafficking is no surprise; traffic flows from the less industrialized countries to the more industrialized countries. This fact makes the issue of human trafficking a problem for all nations alike on a political, social, and moral level. The U.S. Department of State estimates that 800,000 people are trafficked across national borders every year, in addition to the reported millions of people trafficked within their own countries. The trafficking industry generates billions of dollars annually, and, together with drugs and weapons, is now a leading source of profits for organized crime. According to most analysts, the largest number of victims trafficked internationally come from Asia, though significant numbers of women and girls trafficked to work in the commercial sex industry come from the former Soviet Union and southeastern Europe. One subset of trafficking, and one of particular interest to the United States, is trafficking for forced labor, which the International Labor Organization defines as ``any situation in which work is carried out involuntarily under the menace of a penalty.'' The ILO estimates that some 12.3 million people have been the victims of forced labor, with agriculture, construction, domestic service, restaurants, and manufacturing sectors being the most prominent industries into which forced labor is trafficked. In March of this year, the Committee on Homeland Security, on which I am a senior Member and I serve as Chairwoman of a subcommittee, held a hearing on the crossing of borders and victims of trafficking which produced a meaningful discourse on horrific implications of the trafficking of persons and sought to address said issues. However, 7 months later, the issue is not resolved. The current policy of the United States, under the Trafficking Victims Prevention Act of 2000, allows the government to support many types of anti-trafficking domestically and overseas. However, much more must be done. The GAO currently reports that, while the government allocated funds to combat trafficking, there was an overemphasis by the government on sex slavery, which came at a price for the majority of others who are a victim of human trafficking. Reliable information and independent evaluations of the success of the United States in combating this human atrocity have been hard to come by. While the State Department points to progress by citing the increase of countries with anti-trafficking initiatives and an increase in the number of arrests and convictions for human traffickers, the GAO report cites a less optimistic reality. The U.S. Government has yet to develop a coordinated, interagency response to combat trafficking overseas or a systematic way to evaluate the effectiveness of its anti- trafficking policies. In addition, a July 2007 GAO report entitled ``Monitoring and Evaluation of International Projects Are Limited, But Experts Suggest Improvements,'' found that monitoring mechanisms are lacking in U.S.-funded international projects, and that the U.S. and international organizations have encountered difficulties collaborating with host governments that often lack the resources, capacity, and/or political will to address trafficking. Given the very real and persistent nature of the crime of human trafficking, it is our responsibility as Members of the Congress of the most powerful nation in the world to address and resolve this atrocity once and for all. Nearly 150 years after our great country abolished slavery at home, it is our job to once again be a beacon of progress and hope and no longer allow one man to profit from the suffering of another. I believe that this legislation makes important strides towards addressing this serious problem. After hearing the profoundly disturbing testimony presented before the Committee on Foreign Affairs in a hearing on this issue earlier this year, I am particularly pleased that this legislation includes provisions aimed at ensuring that individuals are trafficked into the United States to work in diplomatic missions and embassies. I an extremely concerned about this issue, and I look forward to working further with my colleagues to establish a mechanism capable of preventing such abuses in the future. Mr. Speaker, this important reauthorization speaks directly to a serious but often hidden problem that we face, on both a national and an international level. I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.