Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. As I traveled through the airport, I could sense the degree of excitement of many of the students who were traveling on spring break. As I entered the Capitol, it was a joy to see so many classes and families enjoying the wonderment of democracy in this great place, the citadel of democracy. Nonetheless, I rise today to talk about America's schoolchildren and particularly to talk about those who are impacted by disparate policies such as the policies in Barbers Hill. I want to acknowledge the Congressional Black Caucus and the advocates who have supported and surrounded Mr. George. Mr. George is a young man who is isolated in a classroom, who has been going to school with no academic teaching, no ability to fraternize with his fellow students, no ability to eat in the lunchroom, and no expectation of any kind of spring break. Madam Speaker, you ask: Well, he has obviously misbehaved. No. He has over a 3.0 grade point average. He is an excellent student, but he is being there because of his hairstyle. I need the Secretary of Education to help this young man and go to his classroom.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the graciousness of Ms. Kaptur for this time. I honor, in this month, Women's History Month, and salute the many women who have invested in the lives of so many. I honor the teachers who have taught young people. I honor Ivalita Jackson and Valerie Bennett, who came from Florida, my aunt and my mother, as two young women and made their way and provided opportunities for me. I salute the first person who was nominated as a Presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton. I salute Rosa Parks, who opened the doors for opportunity and integration and who refused to back down. I honor those in my own community, like Maxine Seales. I honor those who are yet to be recognized, the young girls who question whether or not they can be the very best. My commitment to them and my message to them is that there is no limit to the opportunities that you can have. As this month honors women who have created history, you have a pathway for history as well. I will continue, as a Member of the United States Congress, to invest in opportunities for girls so they can see there is no limit and to make sure that, as we move forward, our young men will understand there are no limits for them equally. This is Women's History Month, and I stand here today and salute these women. Might I finish by saying I honor those women who have stood up against human trafficking and fought against the scourge of mistreatment of women around the world and who have looked for the equality of girls around the world. Since I just met with her just a few weeks ago, I honor Malala, a strong fighter for education in Pakistan, a young woman who should be honored during Women's History Month.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak on H.R. 7521, the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act. This bill would prohibit the distribution, maintenance, or provision of internet hosting services for any foreign adversary controlled application unless they execute a qualified divestiture as determined by the President. More specifically, under this bill, ByteDance would be required to divest themself from Tiktok in order for the application to remain in operation. As one of the most dominant social media platforms in recent history, it currently has over 150 million active users in the United States alone. Much of this success could be attributed to the application's algorithms being used to generate specifically curated content for each user on their respective ``For You'' pages in a short-form, infinite scroll format. Upon the rapid success of this content format, other social media platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, and Youtube have all followed suit. This has only further entrenched the massive success of the company among its users. This success is not without caveat, however. Recent studies conducted by researchers at Rutgers University found a disturbing underrepresentation of certain topics on the platform. Though pop culture and political terms were represented roughly proportional to other platforms, topics involving Uyghurs, Tibet, Tiananmen Square, and the Hong Kong protests were severely underrepresented. In addition, many valid concerns have been raised regarding the issue of national security and foreign government interference. Many stakeholders argue that the vast amount of data harvested from American users poses a threat to our data security and democracy. With the vast amount of American users on the platform, particularly individuals under the age of 24, I recognize the need to ensure security in our national democracy. I hope, moving forward, that we can join together in taking action to protect our youth from harmful actors while also safeguarding their freedom of thought. More investigation must happen to decide the next steps for TikTok. I will pursue the next steps before finalizing a complete ban. What company will be the purchaser? All must be answered before the best decision can be made.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, with a great deal of consternation I rise in opposition to the opposition. H. Res. 1065, here we go again. Rather than solutions, the Republicans are denouncing the Biden administration's immigration policy. What do they have to offer? This is an outrage. I thought it was extremely important to make sure that I put my statement in the Record about a President who is putting forward solutions by putting forward a supplemental almost 1 year ago that would have provided more resources to our southern border where I live, more resources in terms of dealing with asylum, more Border Patrol, more Customs and Border Protection, more courts, and more lawyers to be able to address what the American people want to be addressed. Nonetheless, what do we spend our time doing on the floor of the House? Condemning, not solving, and not finding a solution for our DACA young people who are doctors, lawyers, teachers, and others, EMS supporters, if you will, or workers. All we are doing led by the Republican majority, is condemn, condemn, and condemn. I want solutions. As the second in seniority member of the Homeland Security Committee, we are going to continue to work on the positive solutions of Joe Biden, President of the United States. He has solutions to be able to bring us all together to have comprehensive immigration reform. Let's work with the President of the United States. Stop denouncing. Do your job.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, in the bitter cold, one might wonder what the conditions of the soldiers in Ukraine are, young soldiers who are fighting for democracy. You would also wonder why this body of Members has not been able to resolve the crisis at the border in a way that is humane and is dealing with the southern border with the right kind of personnel and the right kind of funding. All of this was offered. There are hostages still being held, but what is most of a crisis are the children in Gaza who are dying and the fact that we are leaving this week without providing the funding that is necessary, the humanitarian funding, helping Doctors Without Borders, trying to make sure that ships are delivering the amount of resources that are necessary. People are dying, but most of all, our babies are dying. It is urgent that the Speaker of the House provides funding legislation, some of which was already presented by the President of the United States, to move forward on saving lives, helping the soldiers fighting for democracy, children trying to live, and families trying to live. Enough is enough. We must show our humanity.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 7102 the ``Native American Entrepreneurial Opportunity Act.'' H.R. 7102 creates an Office of Native American Affairs (ONAA) within the Small Business Administration. I am a long-time member of the Congressional Native American Caucus as well as the Congressional Small Business Caucus. I understand the need for Native Americans to have an advocate within the Small Business Administration. The Native American business community as well as families would be positively impacted by the passage of H.R. 7102. This bill would draw attention to the resources that are available to tribal business owners through the (SBA) and oversee economic and entrepreneurial relationships with the Small Business Administration. The goal is to produce economic development within tribal communities by educating Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian Organizations about programs administered by other Federal agencies. The passing of H.R. 7102 would allow the Office of Native American Affairs to: Work with Indian tribes, Alaska Native corporations, Native Hawaiian Organizations, and small businesses owned by individuals who are members of those entities on entrepreneurial development, contracting and capital access programs to establish or expand their small business concerns and promote economic development in Indian Country. Formulating and promoting policies, and enhancing existing programs, so they better address the entrepreneurial, capital access, business development and contracting needs of tribes and Native businesses, including by collaborating with high-level officials of SBA and other federal agencies. In addition, the (ONAA) will be able to provide financial and other assistance directly to deploy training, counseling and other educational outreach, workshops, supplier events. Additional important assistance would include access to the SBA's entrepreneur and contracting programs to facilitate Native contractors' participation in SBA's various small business contracting programs, facilitating and improving access to SBA's various loan programs, loan guarantees, disaster assistance, and other capital access programs. Finally, ensuring tribal consultations are conducted to solicit input and facilitate discussion of potential modifications to SBA programs and procedures. It is imperative that H.R. 7102 is passed because Native Americans will have an advocate and the economic and entrepreneurial tools it needs to meet the needs of the communities they serve.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in celebration of 30 years of Brady Background Checks. The landmark Brady Bill, championed by Jim and Sarah Brady, was enacted 30 years ago on February 28, 1994. This historic legislation established our nation's background check system for guns sold at licensed firearms dealers. The Brady Bill is named after Reagan White House Press Secretary Jim Brady. After Jim Brady survived a bullet to the head during the 1981 assassination attempt of President Reagan, he and his wife, Sarah Brady, knew our country urgently needed common-sense solutions to prevent guns from falling into the hands of those who intend to cause harm. Since its enactment, the Brady Bill has blocked almost 4.9 million prohibited gun transactions. Thirty years later, the Brady Bill continues to save countless lives each day because background checks work. As we celebrate enduring milestones that have transformed our country, I cannot help but remember the lives that have been selfishly lost to inaction and negligence. So, in addition to celebrating the success of the Brady Bill, I would like to take a moment to urge the passage of an additional, necessary piece of gun violence prevention legislation--H.R. 52, The Kimberly Vaughan Firearm Safe Storage Act. This bill was named after Kimberly Vaughan, a 14-year-old girl, who was among the ten lives we lost during the devastating Santa Fe High School shooting on May 18, 2018. H.R. 52 will establish best practices for firearm storage to protect children from improperly stored or misused firearms and establish a grant program for local government and nonprofits to distribute safe storage devices. In particular, the Attorney General is directed to establish voluntary best practices relating to safe firearm storage and publish them on a website and in print. Secondly, it will require most weapons to have a clear written notice on the packaging that says, ``Safe Storage Saves Lives' and how to obtain the best practices established by the Attorney General. Additionally, the bill will provide grants to states and local governments with a ten-year, $10 million grant program to distribute safe storage devices. As Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Crime and Federal Government Surveillance, member of the Gun Violence Prevention Task Force, and co- founding member of the Children's Caucus, gun violence prevention and the protecting of children is deeply important to me. And so, in highlighting the importance of passing bills, such as H.R. 52, we must also reflect and remember the lives of those lost to senseless gun violence. Kimberly Vaughan loved cats, Harry Potter, and regularly took trips to the library. She was drawing geometric shapes in her first period art class when she was tragically killed by a 17-year-old student who was on a shooting rampage. That student ultimately massacred 8 students, 2 teachers, and wounded 13 others at Santa Fe High School in Texas. It was the worst school shooting since 17 people were killed at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida just two months prior. The shotgun and the .38 caliber pistol the shooter took to school belonged to his father and were available to him at his home. Firearm injury is the leading cause of death for children and young adults in the United States. Although American children are ``twice as likely to be shot and killed as they are to die drowning,'' there are more safety regulations for pools than gun storage according to a report by Everytown for Gun Safety. Every year, almost 20,000 children are shot and killed or wounded by a firearm, and 3 million are exposed to gun violence. One in three U.S. households with children have firearms and firearms accounted for nearly 19 percent of childhood deaths in 2021, a 50 percent increase since 2019. On average, 9 minors are killed by improperly stored or misused guns every day. In my home state of Texas, more than 4,000 Texans are shot and killed each year. Safe storage practices are critically important to keep firearms away from dangerous individuals and to keep children and families safe from senseless gun violence. In the last decade, nearly 2 million firearms have been reported stolen. Between 2010 and 2016, police recovered more than 23,000 stolen firearms that were used to commit kidnapping, armed robberies, sexual assaults, murders, and other violent crimes. An estimated 4.6 million minors live in homes with at least one unlocked, loaded firearm; on average, 9 children are killed by improperly stored or misused guns every day. The passage of the Brady Bill reminds us that bold action to prevent gun violence is possible. Americans should be safe from gun violence in their homes and neighborhoods. Americans should not be shot at Super Bowl parades. Americans should not be shot in their schools. Americans should not be shot at their places of worship. It is simply unconscionable that guns are now the leading cause of death of children and teens in America. Just two years ago, I joined Congress in passing the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, the first major gun violence prevention law since the Brady Bill. Already, this legislation is saving lives, but we need bolder action. It is long past the time to do something about the epidemic of gun violence in our nation? The nation that prides itself on protecting our children and the future generations. If we want to protect Americans, we must start by learning how to effectively store guns in the homes that choose to have them. Americans want more than thoughts and prayers. They want action. Gun safety is a nonpartisan issue that requires a bipartisan solution. Over 90 percent of Americans--including Republicans, Democrats, and Independents alike--want to expand the Brady Bill and pass universal background checks so that we can end the scourge of gun violence. A majority of Americans want an assault weapons ban, extreme risk laws, and support for community violence intervention. Data for Progress finds 49 percent of voters support changing Senate rules so Democrats can pass gun control legislation. This includes 76 percent of Democrats, 43 percent of Independents, and 24 percent of Republicans. Put simply, Americans deserve sensible action to end this epidemic. The Brady's legacy lives on today in the gun violence prevention organization named after them. We must remain persistent in the fight for a safer America that is free of gun violence. I will continue to work with colleagues to end this epidemic.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, let me be very clear: We cannot shut this government down. Mr. Speaker, 4 pages, 5 pages, or 20 pages of a stopgap measure, the government cannot shut down. The rules of this House and Senate require the Congress to do its work. As the President said, we have the purse strings to be able to ensure that the government remains open; that law enforcement is paid; that Medicare and Medicaid are provided for our families and our seniors; that we are able to ensure that the young families of young soldiers, men and women of the United States military who put on the uniform unselfishly and are on the front lines, are paid. As we have seen, a number of tragic incidents have caused the loss of lives of the men and women in uniform, including many of our tragic flight incidents. We have lost many lives over this last year, including those who are in combat. Mr. Speaker, are you telling me that we are not going to put pen to paper and work together, work with the Budget Committee that I sit on, to ensure that there are Members who will advocate for your Members to join in, without poison pills, of the funding of the CR? This paper allows us today to work through an extension until March 8 and an extension until March 22. It includes a response to our student loan crisis, which is extremely important. It ensures that the doors of the government remain open. What I hope that we will be able to do is to fight against the dastardly position of underfunding or not funding the women, infants, and children program. My community needs to be able to provide funding for women, infants, and children, a major component of the Federal Government's budgeting. What else do I want to make sure that we do? As I walked through my district over these last couple of days, in particular, I heard about the crisis of seniors and housing. Mr. Speaker, we know that young families need housing, but do you realize that in the later years of a senior's life, sometimes they are priced out of their own home? Because of building around their home, their home values increase. They cannot afford the taxes or the upkeep. Where do they go? This government should be committed, with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, to developing a serious housing program for seniors. This program would, in essence, ensure that we could provide housing for seniors all over America. Mr. Speaker, I agree with Senator Tester, who, in speaking about the House, said that we can't fool around. If that is what it takes to get this done, we need to stop kicking the can down the road. We need to stop it. We need to get a real budget. Mr. Speaker, I am standing with him. We can't be far right. We can't be far this. We can't be far that. We have to be for the American people. We can't be against the rights of women, where we are denying them the ability to get medication dealing with abortion. We cannot help our veterans who are in need of mental health care and not allowing them to go under the NICS check so that if they are in danger by getting guns that we can protect them. Again, as I said, we cannot stop the nutrition programs for low-income women. Homeland Security, the border, providing relief for the people in Gaza, humanitarian relief for our children and pausing for peace, we have to work to fund all of those elements and resources at the southern border. I thank the President for being at the southern border. We already know his insight. We know the work that he can do with Ranking Member Thompson of the Homeland Security Committee and those of us who are Democrats who want to see the border solved. We have to do it with a budget, and we have to also do it with passing the supplemental that he has put before us that takes care of the people of Ukraine and the soldiers on the front line and, as well, those elements in Taiwan and around the world. Let me say this: I am here to work. I started out by saying we cannot shut the government down. There is too much work to be done. I am here to work. I am here to work and get the job done. Pass the budget.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of this bill, the Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2024. This bill would temporarily extend specific Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) programs and activities through May 10, 2024. I have always been a firm believer in the importance of comprehensive transportation and infrastructure funding. As the proud representative of Texas' 18th District, I understand deeply the immense benefit that having a well-funded airport and airway system can bring to a city's economy. The George Bush Intercontinental Airport, one of the largest and busiest airports in the world, resides in my district in the greater Houston area. This airport alone has brought in over $14.1 billion in revenue to the State of Texas, representing over 20 percent of Texas' total international trade. At the national scale, a study conducted by Airports Council International found that America's airports account for more than 7 percent of America's GDP. In addition, this revenue is only expected to grow, with a predicted compound annual growth rate of 8.76 percent from 2022 to 2028. Reauthorizing funding will allow for the continued maintenance and effective functioning of airports just like IAH across the country. The American people cannot afford a delay to this funding. This bill will also allow for resources to be directed properly, ensuring that airports are not forced to redirect resources away from safety due to a lack of funding. While we wait for our colleagues in the Senate to act on H.R. 3935, the ``Securing Growth and Robust Leadership in American Aviation Act,'' this bill is a necessary extension of existing funding toward the aviation industry. The bill currently sitting in the Senate would provide a more comprehensive, long-term FAA reauthorization that updates outdated policies regarding aviation safety and efficiency. In the meantime, however, we must act now to ensure that FAA is getting the funding it needs to continue operations effectively. I urge my colleagues to vote in support of this bill.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairwoman Granger and Ranking Member DeLauro for their leadership. Mr. Speaker, 331 million Americans are depending on us to save their lives. If we do not vote today, we will cause the loss of life. We did not vote for the supplemental that the President sent over almost a year ago to deal with the southern border, and lives have been lost. As a Texan, I will not accept your challenge that I want people to die, or that this constitutional right of the power of the purse is one that I have used recklessly. They have used it responsibly, and the budget numbers, whether it is Nancy Pelosi or the negotiators, are responsible for helping the 331 million Americans. In my State, your State, you will not pay 172,000 Active-Duty soldiers when we don't pass this today. The Small Business Administration will stop handling $2 billion in loans. There will be no reentry programs for those who are trying to get their life straight. We will eliminate the funding for our public schools at the Department of Education in programs like early education and child nutrition. We will stop 176,000 people from flying and airport travel because you will not be able to fund aspects of Homeland Security. Mr. Speaker, 786,000 people would lose their access to the women and infant program, which I understand is one of those that are being attacked. You are causing the loss of life, and I will not stand here and accept that challenge. You are my friends and we work together, but your arguments are false. The responsibility of the power of the purse is to be responsible. Mr. Speaker, 168,000 Federal workers who do vital work will be lost if we do not proceed.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. It is important that the food and drug is able to be funded, that housing is able to be funded, and that the Department of Agriculture is able to be funded.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Let me say, Mr. Speaker, as I close, we must be responsible-- The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman is no longer recognized. Members are reminded to direct their remarks to the Chair.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, we have done the right thing. We have kept the government open, but there is much more to do. It is the wide- ranging responsibilities of the United States Congress. One of those responsibilities is to tell the truth of our history. This is a unique day, February 29, a leap year. There are a lot of unique aspects of America's history, and certainly, one of them is the history of slavery. I am very proud to have been given the responsibility of carrying forward H.R. 40, the Commission to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African Americans Act. This is a law that was introduced 38 years ago by the late John Conyers, not for any form of retribution or retaliation, but to know the truth, to address the historical injustices, cruelty, brutality, and inhumanity of slavery in the United States. By the way, slavery still exists around the world. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in signing on to H.R. 40. In this month of African-American History Month, let us know the truth, and let us know the truth together.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 7176--the ``Unlocking our Domestic LNG Potential Act of 2024.'' This bill, H.R. 7176, would substantially weaken the federal review and authorization process for natural gas exports. Specifically, it removes the requirement under section 3(a) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) that the Department of Energy first determine liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports be in the public interest before approving export applications to non-free trade agreement countries. These determinations currently involve a review of the economic impacts, including potential changes to domestic natural gas and electricity prices on consumers and manufacturers. They also consider the environmental impacts of the exports. Finally, they consider potential effects on the security of the U.S. natural gas supply. Instead of maintaining this time-tested and reliable process, this bill assumes that all LNG exports are automatically in the public interest. This is reckless and irresponsible. By removing a crucial safeguard for American consumers, this bill allows our adversaries, like China, to purchase even more of our energy to use against us. Multiple analyses have found that increased LNG exports directly lead to higher natural gas prices here at home. According to the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, LNG exports cost American consumers over $100 billion over a 16-month period. Over the last five years, doubling our LNG exports has led to natural gas prices more than tripling in 2022. Expert testimony supports this conclusion as well. On February 7, 2023, the Subcommittees on Energy, Climate, and Grid Security and Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials held a joint legislative hearing entitled ``Unleashing American Energy, Lowering Energy Costs, and Strengthening Supply Chains.'' At this hearing, the Subcommittees heard testimony from Mr. Tyson Slocum. In his written testimony, Mr. Slocum detailed how increased LNG exports have raised costs for American consumers, and that loosening the approval process for LNG exports would likely further increase the high prices Americans pay for heating and electricity. Mr. Slocum also testified that increased LNG exports would further tie American natural gas prices to international natural gas prices, decreasing our economic independence and exposing Americans to increased gas price volatility. Supporting documents entered into the hearing record further underscored the point that a sudden decrease in U.S. LNG export capacity has historically resulted in a plunge in natural gas prices. That is not the only problem with this negligent and short-sighted bill. H.R. 1130 also eradicates existing protections that ensure American LNG is not being exported to rival nations against the public interest. According to the Energy Information Administration,13 percent of U.S. LNG exports went to China in 2021--that is over 450 billion cubic feet. As it stands, this bill is far too overinclusive to be in the best interest of the people. During both the Subcommittee and Full Committee markups, Democrats introduced reasonable amendments designed to address their concerns. However, the majority has voted down all such efforts. Democrats have tried and tried again to meet Republicans in the middle on this. Instead of working with us, however, our colleagues across the aisle have remained entrenched. Instead of focusing on the welfare of our American people, they are attempting to pass out a giant handout to Big Oil and Gas that will simultaneously enrich many of our economic adversaries. Many of these companies already enjoy billions in taxpayer-funded subsidies and are taking in recordbreaking profits since Putin's invasion of Ukraine. Republicans may point out that last month, President Biden announced a temporary pause in the Department of Energy's (DOE) approval of LNG exports while DOE completes a public interest analysis. Importantly, however, this pause only applies to new export applications. It does not impact currently-operating export capacity or impact capacity that is under construction, and it does not impact capacity that is permitted but has not yet started construction. DOE's updated public interest determination is an opportunity to take long-overdue action to make sure additional exports are benefitting Americans. This extreme bill would kill all efforts to ensure that our LNG exports are in Americans' best interests. I will always stand behind the hardworking middleclass individuals that are the backbone of our society. As such, I urge my colleagues to do the same and vote no on this reckless and overbroad bill.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 7176--the ``Unlocking our Domestic LNG Potential Act.'' This bill, H.R. 7176, would substantially weaken the federal review and authorization process for natural gas exports. Specifically, it removes the requirement under section 3(a) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) that the Department of Energy first determine liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports be in the public interest before approving export applications to non-free trade agreement countries. These determinations currently involve a review of the economic impacts, including potential changes to domestic natural gas and electricity prices on consumers and manufacturers. They also consider the environmental impacts of the exports. Finally, they consider potential effects on the security of the U.S. natural gas supply. Instead of maintaining this time-tested and reliable process, this bill assumes that all LNG exports are automatically in the public interest. This is reckless and irresponsible. By removing a crucial safeguard for American consumers, this bill allows our adversaries, like China, to purchase even more of our energy to use against us. Multiple analyses have found that increased LNG exports directly lead to higher natural gas prices here at home. According to the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, LNG exports cost American consumers over $100 billion over a 16-month period. Over the last five years, doubling our LNG exports has led to natural gas prices more than tripling in 2022. Expert testimony supports this conclusion as well. On February 7, 2023, the Subcommittees on Energy, Climate, and Grid Security and Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials held a joint legislative hearing entitled ``Unleashing American Energy, Lowering Energy Costs, and Strengthening Supply Chains.'' At this hearing, the Subcommittees heard testimony from Mr. Tyson Slocum. In his written testimony, Mr. Slocum detailed how increased LNG exports have raised costs for American consumers, and that loosening the approval process for LNG exports would likely further increase the already-high prices Americans pay for heating and electricity. Mr. Slocum also testified that increased LNG exports would further tie American natural gas prices to international natural gas prices, decreasing our economic independence and exposing Americans to increased gas price volatility. Supporting documents entered into the record further underscored the point that a sudden decrease in U.S. LNG export capacity has historically resulted in a plunge in natural gas prices. That is not the only problem with this negligent and short-sighted bill. H.R. 1130 also eradicates existing protections that ensure American LNG is not being exported to rival nations against the public interest. According to the Energy Information Administration, 13 percent of U.S. LNG exports went to China in 2021--that is over 450 billion cubic feet. As it stands, this bill is far too overinclusive to be in the best interest of the people. During both the Subcommittee and Full Committee markups, Democrats introduced reasonable amendments designed to address their concerns. Democrats have tried and tried again to meet Republicans in the middle on this. Instead of working with us, however, our colleagues across the aisle have remained entrenched. Instead of focusing on the welfare of our American people, they are attempting to pass out a giant handout to Big Oil and Gas that will simultaneously enrich many of our economic adversaries. Many of these companies already enjoy billions in taxpayer-funded subsidies and are taking in recordbreaking profits since Putin's invasion of Ukraine. Republicans may point out that last month, President Biden announced a temporary pause in the Department of Energy's (DOE) approval of LNG exports while DOE completes a public interest analysis. Importantly, however, this pause only applies to new export applications. It does not impact currently-operating export capacity or impact capacity that is under construction, and it does not impact capacity that is permitted but has not yet started construction. DOE's updated public interest determination is an opportunity to take long-overdue action to make sure additional exports are benefiting Americans. This extreme bill would kill all efforts to ensure that our LNG exports are in Americans' best interests. I will always stand behind the hardworking middle-class individuals that are the backbone of our society. As such, I urge my colleagues to do the same and vote no on this reckless and overbroad bill.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I could not help, with my good friend and colleague eloquently speaking about the children and the pain, to rise to the floor today, having just stood on the grounds of the United States Capitol, wondering why we have not been able to pass the $95 billion that would aid in the crises in Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan, the southern border that they left out, and Gaza. I rise today to associate and agree that we must have humanitarian aid for the Palestinians, for the children, for Gaza, and we must have it now. This is no room to leave out these precious souls and to continue to leave them without homes, without food, without clothing, without refuge. It is clear that I stand today for aid to the Palestinians and humanitarian relief for the children. I finish, Mr. Speaker, by saying it is important that the President gave TPS to those Palestinians who cannot return home. Let us bring humanitarian relief to human beings and to these children, and I know we can do this together as a Congress. Let's do it now.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, this is Black History Month. This is a moment to recount the journey of African Americans in America. I rise today to speak about H.R. 40, the Commission to Study Slavery and Develop Reparation Proposals introduced by John Conyers almost 40 years ago. I was honored and privileged on his retirement for him giving me the honor of carrying this legislation. For many in this body, one would wonder why we need to retrace that history of slavery. It is an amazing and powerful history. It is an amazing history of unselfishness, but at the same time the dividing of families, the blocking of learning to read, and the violence of the whole condition of slavery. Again, it is a time in America's history that we must review and understand. As a Member of the United States Congress, I have introduced this legislation and look forward to its passage by executive order. At the same time, I want my colleagues to come join me, to walk the Emancipation Trail, which I have introduced and it has passed in this House. That is the trail that slaves took in 1865 after General Granger came and indicated that slaves west of the Mississippi were free. That trail has not yet been finalized, but, Mr. Speaker, this will be a major part of America's history. Join me in supporting the Emancipation Trail.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, let me pay tribute to the Congressional Black Caucus and the managers tonight for honoring Black History Month. I look forward to participating this month of February to honor the great history and excellence of African Americans. At this time, I call upon Speaker Johnson to do his work. There is a $60 billion bill that will help us fund the desperate people of Ukraine, Gaza, Israel, and Taiwan and be able to help the Palestinian families. It has already been voted on in the early hours of this morning from the Senate. Let the House do its job, do its will. Let us vote. Mr. Speaker, 300 of us will vote to push that legislation forward, yet tonight, we did a foolish thing, and that is to pass an impeachment of a very qualified and effective Secretary of Homeland Security. Do your job, Mr. Secretary. Do not be impacted, Secretary Mayorkas, by this false attempt to diminish you. Help us as we work toward making the border safe, and that is the way we do it, by doing our job, and also passing also the funding bill that has been put forward. I ask my colleagues: Let's do our job.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I thank the distinguished gentleman for yielding. We want to rise and help all of the families, particularly those families who every day are dealing with children and family members with disabilities. This is an instance where I say can we all get together and can we try to find a resolution toward making sure that we have good healthcare for these families and for these persons? What I would offer is that presently this legislation undermines the Affordable Care Act by stripping dollars from the Prevention and Public Health Fund and undermining its critical investments in health and well-being. It makes it very difficult to help those who need help. It would stop funding from the Prevention and Public Health Fund, which supports critical investments to help prevent disease. At the same time, this legislation opens the possibility of limiting the use of any value metrics when determining a drug price. Furthermore, the Congressional Budget Office determined that this bill would raise drug costs for Medicare, Medicaid, and the Department of Defense. The CBO also estimates that this legislation would increase costs for Veterans Affairs health programs, raising Federal spending on prescription drugs by $1.115 billion over 10 years and billions more in the following decades. Americans are looking for answers, and they are looking for answers for all persons who need healthcare. To pay for these increased costs, there are plans to cut from the Prevention and Public Health Fund and cutting programs to improve public health and to prevent chronic diseases such as childhood lead poisoning and improving immunization rates. Democrats in Congress, along with the Biden-Harris administration, are working to ensure all Americans have access to affordable care and effective healthcare treatments. This bill claims to protect people from discrimination. It would, in fact, result in harm to patients if enacted into law. I believe that people with disabilities deserve equality, inclusion, and access to all aspects of American life. Instead of prioritizing legislation that could lower prices for them, access value, and improve health, Republicans are attempting to pass legislation that undermines the work that we have done over a 10-year period to really include the disabled community. If this bill is enacted, then the language referring to similar measures in the current version of the bill would introduce ambiguity across the health sector. It could invite lengthy lawsuits from an industry eager to stop any efforts to constrain its ability to set prices as high as it wants. I simply want to say, as I started, can we all work together? All aspects of our community need access to good healthcare-- certainly, our disabled community--and this does more to undermine their access than to expand their access. Mr. Chair, I ask my colleagues to send this back to the committee so that we can find common ground and really serve the disabled community and many others and not allow those who seek profit to overcome those who seek good healthcare, including our seniors, our veterans, and many aspects of our community that have chronic diseases. Mr. Chair, I rise today to discuss the issue concerning H.R. 485, the Protecting Health Care for All Patients Act. The Protecting Health Care for All Patients Act of 2023 does not protect health care for patients, but rather undermines our progress in lowering prescription drug costs for American families. This bill claims to prevent the federal government from using a measure called the Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY). This is a red herring, as the Inflation Reduction Act already explicitly prohibits the use of QALYs. The legislation goes further by banning the use of the QALY ``or such a similar measure,'' across all federal health care programs, without defining what such a similar measure could include. A long-standing criticism of QALY has been that it would: Discriminate against people in poor health. Extending the lives of individuals with underlying health conditions gains fewer QALYs than extending the lives of `healthier' individuals. This blanket prohibition on the use of ``similar measures'' applied across the federal government. This legislation opens the possibility of limiting the use of any value metrics when determining a drug's price. Furthermore, the Congressional Budget Office determined that this bill would raise drug costs in Medicare, Medicaid, the Department of Defense (DoD). CBO also estimates that this legislation would increase costs for Veterans Affairs health programs, raising federal spending on prescription drugs by $1.115 billion over 10 years and billions more in the proceeding decades. Americans are looking for Congress to lower drug prices further, not increase them. To pay for these increased costs, there are plans to cut from the Prevention and Public Health Fund and cutting programs to improve public health and prevent chronic diseases, such as childhood lead poisoning, and improving immunization rates. Democrats in Congress along with the Biden Harris Administration are working to ensure all Americans have access to affordable and effective health care treatments. This bill claims to protect people from discrimination but would in fact result in harm to patients if enacted into law. I believe that people with disabilities deserve equality, inclusion, and access in all aspects of American life. Instead of prioritizing legislation that could lower prices, assess value, and improve health Republicans are attempting to pass legislation that undermines the work of Congress and the Biden Administration. If this bill is enacted the language referring to ``similar measures'' in the current version of the bill would introduce ambiguity across the health sector. It could invite lengthy lawsuits from an industry eager to stop any efforts to constrain its ability to set prices as high as it wants for any drug--regardless of the drug's value. In closing, it is imperative that health care be made affordable for those with disabilities. Disabled patients in this country deserve a reliable health care system. We need to consider real legislation that will address prescription drug pricing at its core.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, this is African-American History Month, Black History Month, and we find that much of the history of Texas is intertwined with African-American history. A slave woman was called the Yellow Rose of Texas, and we realize that it was President Lincoln who insisted on sending General Granger to Texas to show the Western States that slavery was over after they rebuffed and refused to free the slaves west of the Mississippi. General Granger came on June 19, 1865, to declare that the slaves be made free and that States like Texas stop defying Federal law. It is interesting that out of that, we have been able to establish the first Federal holiday in 38 years, and that is Juneteenth, which equals freedom. Now, across the Nation, there will be States, 50 of them, celebrating Juneteenth on June 19. We have outstanding pastors that I honor today: Reverend William A. Lawson, Reverend F.N. Williams, Reverend Samuel Smith, and Reverend S.J. Gilbert. Of course, we honor our community colleges that are enormously diverse and educate mountains and many African American students. Texas and African-American history is better because African-American history is part of the history of Texas.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, smoke and mirrors have never been the foundation of the Constitution. That is all we have today to misrepresent to the American people that we are doing serious work. It comes to mind as to whether or not Secretary Mayorkas is being charged with Articles of Impeachment because he is a Cuban immigrant who came to the United States with his family as political refugees, that they spent time fleeing the Nazis, and that he came here to do his very best for the American people. Yet we attempt to charge him with willful violation of the law. Operational control of the border means zero persons coming across. This has not been the case as relates to any Secretary no matter what administration. Yet we have failed in this process of false smoke and mirrors to allow us to be able to articulate any charge that might constitute high crimes and misdemeanors. We failed to provide evidence to support the charges such as they are.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. We have failed to name the proper target for impeachment in a policy dispute. We have failed to process anything against Secretary Mayorkas, and we could not, in any way, bring anything to suggest that he violated the law or that he benefited from any aspect of his work. This Secretary has been denied due process. This is smoke and mirrors. The Constitution, which is the foundation of this land, is true. There have been no high crimes and misdemeanors or bribery. This is an impeachment that should be immediately dismissed. Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the Articles of Impeachment. Madam Speaker, it is a sad day that the House has been convened to consider an impeachment bill against the current Secretary of Homeland Security--a measure that is without merit or consideration of the consequences to the agency or how this action may undermine the current challenges the nation is facing. While this impeachment resolution bears no meaningful or serious merits, I offered an amendment for consideration by the Rules Committee that would strike Article 1 of H. Res 863--Impeaching Alejandro Nicholas Mayorkas, Secretary of Homeland Security, because he is not accused of committing any high crimes or misdemeanors. Article I of the bill accuses him of ``Willful and Systematic Refusal to Comply with the Law. Secretary Mayorkas has not committed ``Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors''--the United States Constitution's standard, for an impeachment. Secretary Mayorkas is carrying out his duties faithfully. House Republicans may not approve of the Biden administration's policies, but policy differences are not grounds for impeachment under the Constitution. House Republicans are trying to distract from their inability to govern and score political points with their extreme political base by impeaching the Secretary. Rather than abusing their power as the majority in the House of Representatives with an unjustified impeachment process, they should focus on keeping the government open and join with Democrats to provide border personnel the funding they need to do their job. I regret that of the two hearings held that they did not include any majority witnesses that were Constitutional Scholars nor a minority hearing to allow opposing views to be aired, nor the target of the impeachment Secretary Mayorkas being allowed to come before the committee in his defense. This is the standard set by prior impeachment proceedings but ignored by the majority-controlled Homeland Security Committee. In 1776 the Framers declared the self-evident and later the universal truth that all persons are created equal and endowed by their Creator with the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. As important, the Framers declared that ``to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just power from the consent of the governed.'' This genius of self-government is the Framers' gift to us and America's gift to the world, and for nearly 250 years the world has looked upon the United States with wonder, awe, and envy not just for its awesome powers and achievements, but for being the exemplar to which most freedom-loving nations aspire. But as President Lincoln reminded us at Gettysburg, the proposition that a people can govern themselves is not to be taken for granted; it is a proposition that will be tested time and again and it is for us, the living, to highly resolve to commit ourselves to the great task always before us, that government of the people, by the people, and for the people not perish from the earth. As Thomas Paine said in his time, the past fourteen years were times that tried one's soul. The nation was tested, severely so, by what can only be described as the modern-day Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse: a deadly pandemic, economic devastation unseen since the Great Depression, social justice unrest, and the very real threat of authoritarianism. While the threat posed by these challenges are still with us to varying extent, we can all rejoice that the nation withstood the challenge, e pluribus unum, by standing together as ``We The People.'' President Lincoln reminded us that in times of testing and challenge that ``the fiery trial through which we pass will mark us down in honor or dishonor until the latest generation'' but that so long as the people ``retain their virtue and vigilance, no administration, by any extreme of wickedness or folly, can very seriously injure the government' in the short space of four years.'' And Lincoln was right, for on Election Day 2020, Americans by a substantial majority, voted to withhold consent to govern from an incumbent administration and confer it upon another. That act of self-government and sovereign expression was solemnized on January 20, 2021, at noon when Joseph R. Biden and Kamala D. Harris took the oath of office as the 46th President and 59th Vice-President of the United States. The Philadelphia Miracle of 1789 endures but only because we Americans resolve that it does and work to make it so. The President takes the oath of office pledging to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution. As does every one of my congressional colleagues, I have sacredly pledged true faith and allegiance in defending the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and to execute the duties of the office well and faithfully I hold. I do this ever mindful that the purpose of our form of government is ``to form a more perfect union, to establish justice, to ensure domestic tranquility, to provide for the common defense, to promote the general welfare, and to secure the blessings of liberty for posterity.'' But we all have a responsibility to preserve and strengthen this constitutional republic and pass it on to the next generation by engaging in robust, lawful, and peaceful civic activity to hold our government to account and to peaceably assemble when necessary to petition for a redress of grievances as shown by the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. at the March on Washington, following the example of Mahatma Gandhi; by John Lewis and the Civil Rights foot soldiers at the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama; by Elizabeth Cady Staton and Lucretia Mott at Seneca Falls; by Cesar Chavez leading the fight for human dignity of farmworkers, and by Black Lives Matter demonstrators protesting inequalities in the criminal justice system. For the work of democracy is never complete, our union is always in the process of being made more perfect. The ingredients for good policy are competence, capability, and willingness to put aside partisanship and place national interest first. At this moment in our nation's history Republicans are attempting to impeach Secretary Mayorkas not for any malfeasance or wrongdoing--but because they disagree with his actions carrying out the Biden administration's border and immigration policies. Using policy differences as grounds for impeachment is an abusive political action that the Founders rejected as antithetical to the U.S. Constitution. Republicans have not alleged that the Secretary has committed an impeacbable offense, so their ``reports'' attempting to legitimize their unfounded case for impeachment effort contain blatant misinformation and politically motivated rhetoric, such as criticizing the termination of harmful but barely utilized Trump-era immigration and border policies, which were not laws--a fact they either do not understand or willfully ignore. Such a political theater has no basis in the history of American constitutional law, as Article II of the U.S. Constitution sets the standard for impeachment of ``civil officers'' as ``Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.'' The Biden administration's departure from the failed, cruel, and sometimes unlawful border and immigration policies of the previous administration is certainly not an impeachable offense. Impeachment under these circumstances is not a constitutional remedy for political and policy differences. Impeachment is an extraordinary remedy reserved for the most egregious political offenses, not policy differences. Indeed, Madison objected to the term ``maladministration'' being added to the list of impeachable offenses during the Constitutional Convention because it would upset the separation of powers. The first and only impeachment of a Cabinet official occurred in 1876 following extensive evidence of corruption. Republican Congressman Tom McClintock, the Chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary's Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement, described Rep. Greene's attempt to impeach Secretary Mayorkas over policy disagreements as a ``perilous path'' for future governance. Chairman McClintock went on to argue that the redefinition of impeachment found in H. Res. 863 ``would utterly destroy the separation of powers at the heart of our Constitution. While these are the basis for this Committee not moving forward in the process, there are compelling reasons why the Committee should be actively engaged in Immigration Reform. Impeachment is not a punishment, sought to be inflicted when one branch of government merely disagrees with or dislikes what a coordinate branch has done. It is a serious remedy designed to prevent abuses of power and is designed to ensure that ours remains a government of, by, and for the people. This is about the duty of the President of the United States--you do not impeach people because you disagree with their approach to their service to the country or to the provisions on their policy. We do not impeach people on that basis. No, this resolution does not provide any meaningful or sincere effort to protect the American people. Rather, this resolution sets forth nothing more than a partisan fishing expedition and should be rebuked as such. Impeachment is serious, yet here we are engaged in a baseless political stunt to impeach our current President. The U.S. Constitution governs the order of our Nation, and it dictates the work of the Congress. Article I detail the powers of the House and the exercising of these powers as they relate to the coordinate, coequa1 branches of government, codified in Article II, and Article III: three equal branches of government coexisting and cohesively working to provide oversight to the respective actions of the Congress, the Executive and Judiciary. Specifically, Article I, Section 2, Clause 5 indicates that the ``House of Representatives . . . shall have the sole power of impeachment.'' Article II states that the ``The President . . . shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors''; Article II also requires that the ``President take care that the laws are faithfully executed.'' That language is stark and clear--and throughout our history it has been used in varying periods where the assessment was that the law has been breached. Sometimes Congresses are concerned that the weight and view of the American people should be considered. Sometimes they are moved by the urgency of the matter. This has worked, with challenges of course, since 1789, yet the outright abuse of our constitution to use impeachment as a political tool is an abomination of our congressional duties. As constitutional scholars have long laid out the historical guardrails and mandates upon which must heed, I would like to point to a few salient remarks from the September 28, 2023, Committee on Oversight and Accountability hearing entitled ``The Basis for the Impeachment Inquiry of President Joseph R. Biden'' as reminders for us all here today. In the testimony of Michael J. Gerhardt, Burton Craige Distinguished Professor of Jurisprudence, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, he highlighted the clear warning from Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist Papers, and what he foresaw in the dangers of trivializing impeachment through petty partisanship. As quoted in Alexander Hamilton, No. 65, the Federalist Papers (1961), he states that impeachment may ``agitate the passions of the whole community, and to divide it into parties more or less friendly or inimical to the accused. In many cases it will connect itself with preexisting factions, and will enlist all their animosities, partialities, influence, and interest on one side or on the other; and in such cases there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the relative strength of the parties, than by the demonstrations of innocence or guilt.'' As Professor Gerhardt noted, ``in other words, an impeachment proceeding, including the initiation of an impeachment inquiry, must rise above petty partisanship in order to ensure its legitimacy.'' And as aptly stated in the testimony of Johnathon Turley, Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University School of Law, in highlighting the carefully crafted powers vested in the House of Representatives pursuant to Art. I, Sec. 2, Cl. 5 is that: ``The Framers debated and crafted this standard and process to avoid an ``anything goes'' mentality. That was the reason our Framers opposed the ``maladministration'' standards as too malleable and indeterminate. While we continue to have passionate and good-faith debates over the meaning of the high crimes and misdemeanors standard, it is not intended to give the House carte blanche for any impulsive impeachment theory.'' Nearly fifty years ago, my predecessor, Barbara Jordan, of Texas' 18th Congressional District, declared, in the first presidential impeachment inquiry in more than a century, that: My faith in the Constitution is whole; it is complete, it is total. I am not going to sit here and be an idle spectator to the diminution, the subversion, the destruction of the Constitution.'' She noted ``those are impeachable `who behave amiss or betray their public trust'' (quoting from the North Carolina ratification convention). In this vein, we should not be here today in efforts to betray and diminish our Constitution and rule of law. The unsubstantiated accusations, that the President of the United States has abused his powers and that his conduct is in dereliction of his duties as President is flatly outrageous. When the Framers of our Constitution designed our government, they bifurcated power between the federal and state governments, and divided among the branches. They vested in Congress the capacity to make the laws, and in the Executive the power to faithfully execute those laws. Because the House enjoyed a natural superiority, as most representatives of the passions of the populace, the Framers vested in the House of Representatives the sole power of impeachment and made the Senate the judges. Yet, entirely unlike the incredulous and now confirmed illegality of President Trump's behavior while in office, President Biden has certainly not earned the same stain of impeachment from the House of Representatives and his conduct absolutely does not merit conviction and removal from office by the Senate. When the Founders inserted the Impeachment Clause in Article I, Section 2, Clause 5, they did so to preserve our democracy, protect the American people, and to prevent the abuses and excesses of the Chief Executive. The Constitution has served our nation well for over two hundred years. Yes, in order to keep faith with the Framers and with our future, we must preserve, protect and defend that Constitution and its provisions. This impeachment resolution, however, is not one that is within the national interest but a disgrace to our government and its entrusted duties. The reason given for the Impeachment is the border crisis, one that this body has not taken any steps to address, but the Senate has sent over a border bill to address the border policy issues raised during the two Impeachment hearings. The response from the House is to stay the Senate Border bill is dead on arrival-sight unseen and no counteroffer made. As a result of lack of Congressional action, the Biden Administration is using the tools it has available to secure the border and build a safe, orderly, and humane immigration system. Secretary Mayorkas as head of DHS began a whole-of-government approach in Fall 2021 to prepare for the end of Title 42. In May 2022, Secretary Mayorkas issued the six-pillar plan that outlined preparations to prepare for surges in migration and the lifting of Title 42. The plan showed measurable success. The power of immigration reform to reduce unlawful entry is proven through the Biden Administration method of promoting the largest expansion of legal pathways for safe, orderly, and humane migration in decades, and put in new rules to encourage people to use those lawful pathways instead of making the dangerous journey to try to enter unlawfully. The success of the lifting of Title 42 was not sustainable without resources and changes being made to immigration laws. Instead, Republican governors have become the poster children for increased irregular migration because of their work to send people from the Southern Border to New York, Chicago, San Francisco, and Los Angeles, which sent a message that unlawful border crossings were welcomed. The final ingredient is legislative action by Congress to address increasing the capacity of immigration courts to prioritize the orderly and fair processing of asylum claims of certain recent arrivals, while ensuring those not seeking protection or who don't qualify are promptly returned to their country of origin. The Administration is continuing to aggressively increase legal pathways, enforce our immigration laws, target smugglers who prey and profit on vulnerable migrants and seek to traffic drugs into our country, and work collaboratively with cities and states that are impacted. Republicans who have used immigration as a wedge issue attempted to derail the President's efforts. It is time to focus on the places and communities receiving new residents and families to make sure the transition a win--win for new immigrants and communities. Providing Resources to Larger Urban Areas and Rural Areas. Democrats have proposed legislation, such as the Dream Act and the American Dream and Promise Act, that would provide a pathway to citizenship for young undocumented immigrants brought to the U.S. as children, also known as Dreamers. Democrats are focused on providing resources to communities receiving migrants, implementing policies to ensure an orderly, humane border, and keeping the government funded. Democrats also recognize that while there are near-term costs to receiving migrants, immigrants contribute significantly to the U.S. economy, fuel our growth, and provide a net benefit to our country's finances by paying billions in taxes annually. Democrats also support comprehensive immigration reform that would create a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants and improve border security measures while respecting the rights and dignity of all individuals. In July 2021, the House passed a bill that would create a pathway to citizenship for undocumented farmworkers and their families, called the Farm Workforce Modernization Act. This would protect workers from exploitation and abuse and would provide stability for the agricultural industry. Democrats have advocated for a comprehensive immigration reform package that would address the root causes of migration, improve border security, and create legal pathways for people to enter the U.S. lawfully. The Biden-Harris Administration, under the direction of Secretary Mayorkas, are showing Congress, the nation and the world what is indeed possible when immigration is not treated like an offense to the nation instead of the fuel that drives our economy and injects vitality into our communities. Because of joint Congressional and White House support since early 2021, DHS and CBP increased their border holding capacity by over a third through the construction of new facilities. CBP has increased the efficiency of migrant processing and reduced the time noncitizens spend in temporary holding by 30 percent. Over the years, I worked with my fellow Democrats and Republican Members of this Committee to make sure that these unaccompanied children stay safe and have a legal documentation in the United States, while the Republican Party sadly has steadfastly opposed all the legislations that benefits these children. I ask the Rules Committee to reject this Impeachment and begin plans to consider the bill sent from the Senate for a resolution to the Border crisis.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman for yielding. In the time that we have had to debate one of the most sacred and deliberative responsibilities of the United States Congress--that is, impeachment proceedings--there has not been one iota of truth and/or facts that would suggest that Secretary Mayorkas is, in fact, guilty of the Articles of Impeachment against him: One, the willful violation of the law, and the benefit to himself from anything that he might have done or that he did not do. What it has done is given to this Nation, a Nation of laws and a Nation of immigrants, the sense that you cannot flee Nazism, you cannot flee Cuba, and come to this country to serve your beloved adopted country for more than two decades, that you cannot be the Justice Department U.S. attorney, you cannot be a Deputy Secretary and now the Secretary of Homeland Security without those who find it strange to have you, with your diversity, to be able to lead in this way. This is a question of stunts over solutions, and the Constitution was created to create a more perfect order, and that is that, under that Constitution, precious rights fall under the Fifth Amendment and the 14th Amendment, due process. Let me say, Mr. Speaker, that this Secretary of Homeland Security was not allowed to bring his own witnesses. The majority did not allow the minority to have its day of witnesses. There were no constitutional scholars who pointed to the fact in large numbers, as they would have, that this is, in fact, a fraud, and it is fraught with misrepresentations. Operational control is zero people crossing the border. That means they are not crossing for entertainment, they are not crossing for business, they are just there. This is wrong. This is wrongheaded. This is a stunt, and this does not bequeath or equal to the Constitution, which is to create a more perfect Union. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote against these Articles of Impeachment.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, the American people might wonder just what happened here today. Well, first of all, the southern border deal never got anywhere, and all of the logistics and all of the cloak and dagger and what was going to be in it failed to even get the attention of the Speaker of this House or any of the Republican Members. Yet, all of a sudden, an unfounded legislative initiative that was allegedly to advocate for the needs of the people in the Mideast wound up on the floor of the House. You wonder what we did today. It wound up on the floor of the House with no conscience, no thought, no commitment, and that is why I was not able to vote for it. I was willing to join an amended initiative to ensure that all of the people that are in need in the Mideast would be taken care of; that we would have the funding for Israel; that we would have the funding for the Palestinians and the aid that is needed in Gaza and the ability to deal with the crisis of debt that they have been facing; that we would have the money for Taiwan; and, yes, that we would have the money for Ukraine. I have been to the border of Ukraine. I have seen the violence against the children. I have seen Russia steal children. I have seen parents die in the streets. It is necessary that we do this right, and that is funding for all of those that are in need, and do it now. The Speaker of the House needs to work in a professional way for the American people to show we care about the nations and we care about the Mideast.