Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I support H.R. 3359, the ``Homicide Victims' Families' Rights Act of 2021,'' and urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation, which establishes a procedure for families of murder victims, in cases investigated at the federal level, to continue to pursue justice for their murdered family member when the trail has gone cold. This legislation gives a designated family member the right to request a review of their murdered loved one's case file after three years. Unfortunately, four out of ten murder victims' families in this country never receive any closure in the loss of their family member. FBI data shows the percentage of homicides cleared by an arrest or other means has declined significantly from 1965 to today while the number of unsolved homicides grows by the thousands nationwide every year. In 2019, four Texas cities, including Houston, cleared 40 percent or less of reported homicides, according to FBI statistics. Low clearance rates lead to low confidence in law enforcement and reduced citizen cooperation, which lead to even lower clearance rates. The backlog of cases and low clearance rates disproportionately affect murder victims who are poor, undereducated, unemployed, and black. Poor, black, and brown victims and their families tend to receive less attention to their cases from law enforcement than those of other socioeconomic backgrounds and racial groups and their cases go unsolved. This disparate treatment is unacceptable. We can and we must provide justice for all victims and their families. I hope this legislation will set a new tone--eliminating disparate treatment--impacting vulnerable communities of poor black and brown families who oftentimes never receive closure, while serving as a model for state, local, and tribal governments where the vast majority of unsolved murders lie. H.R. 3359 will require federal law enforcement agencies, using ``fresh eyes,'' to complete a case file review and determine if a full reinvestigation could lead to new probative investigative leads. This legislation will encourage equitable treatment of victims and their families by requiring that federal law enforcement: (1) include the victim's family in the case file review and reinvestigation process; (2) provide written certification to a designated family member if final review is not necessary; (3) update that family member throughout the case file review and full reinvestigation; and (4) meet with and discuss the evidence with that family member if a full reinvestigation is not pursued. It has been shown that cold case investigations can be very effective. By using agents and investigators who have never worked the cases before and by deploying up-to-date investigative techniques, cold case investigations help take violent criminals off the street and bring closure to families. In 2010, the FBI and a cold case detective began a joint reexamination of the death of Ellen Beason in 1985, whose remains were found south of Houston in an area called the ``Killing Fields.'' Almost thirty years later, the cold case detective requested x-rays of the body, which showed that the woman's skull had been cracked on both sides from a forceful blow. Her body had never been X-rayed. The main suspect in the murder was finally convicted of involuntary manslaughter in 2014, sentenced to 20 years in prison, and named as the leading suspect in the murder of other women found in the Killing Fields, though he was never charged. H.R. 3359 mandates that a law enforcement agency must conduct a full reinvestigation like the one that brought justice to Ellen Beason's family, if probative investigative leads would result from a full reinvestigation. This bipartisan legislation represents an important step in fostering renewed hope for families and is supported by a broad array of advocates, including the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, the National Organization of Parents of Murdered Children, the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, and the Association of Prosecuting Attorneys. I thank Chairman Eric Swalwell for his astute effort on this bipartisan bill that will help families of victims seek justice for their loved ones. The backlog of cold case murders continues to grow nationally. This means that thousands of murderers evade prosecution and continue to walk the streets, able to commit more crimes, and possibly more murders, while thousands of mothers, fathers, husbands, wives, sons, and daughters have yet to find closure in the loss of their loved ones. That is why this bill is so important. This legislation would result in more closed cases, justice for victims, closure for their families, and greater faith in law enforcement. I ask that my colleagues join me in supporting this bill today.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on H.R. 1621.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to support H.R. 1621, the Prohibiting Punishment of Acquitted Conduct Act, which offers a solution to a long- identified problem within our criminal justice system. This bill provides necessary reform to current Federal sentencing practice that allows judges to sentence defendants based on conduct for which a jury has found them not guilty. The Sixth Amendment to the Constitution provides that anyone accused of a crime shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public jury trial, while the Fifth Amendment provides that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. These provisions mean that the government is bound to move each and every element of an offense for which a defendant is charged beyond a reasonable doubt during a jury trial, or that defendant must admit each element of an offense to support a plea of guilty. Absent that, those offenses are not found guilty, if you will, to the individual. Notwithstanding this constitutional obligation, Federal judges routinely nullify not guilty verdicts rendered by juries and sentence defendants to significantly higher penalties based on acquitted conduct. In its current form, 18 U.S.C. 3661 prohibits any limitation of the conduct a judge may consider when sentencing a defendant, even when a jury has determined that there was insufficient evidence to prove the defendant committed the charged offense; it seems clearly a constitutional violation. Additionally, under the concept of ``relevant conduct,'' the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines allow judges to consider a range of conduct, including dismissed charges, uncharged conduct, and acquitted conduct when imposing sentences. Again, might I say, seemingly a very unfair direction given without limitations, and certainly without adherence to the constitutional amendments. The fact-finding made by judges at sentencing is based on a lower evidentiary standard than at trial--that is, by a preponderance of evidence--which many scholars defined as a 50 percent chance that a claim is true. The reform proposed in this bill ensures that judges punish defendants on facts proven beyond a reasonable doubt, criminal standard, the higher evidentiary standard of proof required during a jury trial, which some scholars attach a value of 90 to 95 percent surety. Justice Ginsberg, a moderate liberal who became more liberal in later years, joined Justice Thomas and Justice Scalia, a staunch conservative, in his dissent in Jones v. United States, lamenting the failure of the Court to determine if the Sixth Amendment is violated when judges impose sentences based solely on judge-found facts. While the Sentencing Guidelines suggested prison sentences from 27 to 71 months for the three defendants in the case, the trial judge imposed--if you can believe it--overwhelming sentences of 180, 194, and 225 months, based on the conduct the prosecution failed to prove. Justice Scalia's often-quoted dissent was issued more than 7 years ago. Yet nothing has been done about this unjust, undemocratic practice and, really, unconstitutional, which diminishes the sanctity of the jury trial, the standard of reasonable doubt, which any layman can tell you. When you ask them what the standard is for proving guilt or innocence in a criminal trial, everybody knows the words, ``with reasonable doubt.'' Can you imagine? That is not the case. The public check on the government's power and the overall integrity of the criminal justice system must be maintained. H.R. 1621 would restore fairness to jury trials by amending Section 3661 to ban consideration of acquitted conduct at sentencing unless the conduct is considered for mitigation purposes. Though I wish we were doing more to advance substantive criminal justice reform, I am happy to support this bipartisan bill that addresses an acute need while restoring the basic propositions of due process and the right to a trial by jury. I want to express enthusiastic support and appreciation to Representative Steve Cohen, chair of the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, for his commitment to justice and for taking the lead on this significant, bipartisan bill, along with Representative Kelly Armstrong. A broad coalition of advocates support this measure, including--R Street Institute, the ACLU, The Innocence Project, Brennan Center for Justice, the American Bar Association, Families Against Mandatory Minimums, The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, and the Federal Public and Community Defenders. It is for that reason I hope that the Senate will take up this bill and pass the House version as soon as possible. I ask my colleagues to support this bill and to continue working on additional measures to make our justice system more equitable and more transparent. I look forward to coming to the floor with those initiatives. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen), the author of this legislation; the chairman of the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties of the Committee on the Judiciary; and a strong advocate for justice.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. I thank the gentleman from Oregon for supporting this legislation. He cited a number of judges and courts who added their support to this important legislation. Mr. Cohen's eloquence was in the efforts he has made to help those who have suffered injustice. We thank Congressman Armstrong for his work as well. The fact that they are speaking in tandem speaks loudly on this floor. As I close, I include in the Record the dissenting opinion of Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Ginsburg, with simple comments from their opinion: ``On petitioners' appeal, the D.C. Circuit held that even if their sentences would have been substantively unreasonable but for judge- found facts, their Sixth Amendment rights were not violated.'' That was found by the D.C. Circuit. ``We should grant certiorari to put an end to the unbroken string of cases disregarding the Sixth Amendment.'' So, you are more than affirmed that the Sixth Amendment in these cases is patently disregarded. I include in the Record the Supreme Court dissent on the Jones v. United States case.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 3294, a bill to place in the Capitol or on the Capitol Grounds a statue to honor Associate Justice of the Supreme Court Sandra Day O'Connor and a statue to honor Associate Justice of the Supreme Court Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was the first woman nominated to the United States Supreme Court by President Ronald Regan and was the 102nd appointee to the position. Justice O'Connor served from September 25, 1981, until her retirement on January 31, 2006. During her tenure on the court, Justice O'Connor was often the crucial swing vote in 5-4 decisions that included many of the most controversial issues of our time. Justice O'Connor has had a long and distinguished career as a public servant, including three terms as an Arizona State Senator, and serving as a judge on the Superior Court of Maricopa County, and the Arizona Court of Appeals. Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was the second woman appointed, and the first Jewish woman, to preside on United States Supreme Court. Justice Ginsburg was appointed to the court by President Bill Clinton on August 10, 1993 and served on the court until her death on September 18, 2020. Justice Ginsburg was an advocate for woman's rights long before she was appointed to the court. She co-founded the Women's Rights Project at the ACLU. In the words of the late Justice Ginsburg, ``women's rights are an essential part of the overall human rights agenda, trained on the equal dignity and ability to live in freedom all people should enjoy.'' These women broke down barriers that once stood in the way of equality. Their determination and persistence allowed for women across the nation to fight for their rights and achieve their dreams. Their sacrifices paved the way for many firsts en the Federal bench. Justice Sonia Sotomayor was the first Hispanic woman to be appointed to the position, and just last month, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson was the first African American woman to be nominated to the court. Although these are monumental steps for women and gender equality, there is still much work that needs to be done. It is our duty as Members of Congress to acknowledge and commemorate these inspiring Supreme Court Justices. The two statues in our nation's Capital will honor the lives and legacies of these two pioneering women. Moreover, by celebrating Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Justice Sandra Day O'Connor we celebrate the impact of women nationwide and showcase these two leaders as remodels for future generations. I urge all my colleagues to support S. 3294.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, some many years ago, with a bush as big as a bush on my head, an Afro, of which I was enormously proud, young, fragile ego, probably not that strong in my frame, some would say, skinny legs and high heels, an early teen, trying to express the pain that I felt, living in a segregated world, trying to assert the prominence of my community, my race of people, trying to associate belatedly with the foot soldiers and the battering and the insults that they received, trying to come to grips with the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Bobby Kennedy, Malcolm X, I wore this bush, which I had to do extreme things; for the original style, as was done to young girls, is processed. It burned beyond recognition. And I went out with my grandmother, a woman of tradition and, fearful for me, she asked me to go back because she couldn't walk with me with an Afro. The reason, of course, was her fear what an Afro signified, what it would do, how I would be harmed. Those were the conflicts and strife that Black people went through trying to come to grips with their identity. Madam Speaker, I say to my good friend, Mr. Jordan, we never encounter each other because we have mutual respect, as I do for him, and he does for Sheila Jackson Lee. We don't really get into it because we know we are the kind of folk that stand down from each other. But I enjoy engaging with the gentleman. I enjoy his leadership. And his constituents have every right to be concerned about gas prices. My constituents are concerned about eating, being able to pay their rent. And I believe we can walk and chew gum at the same time. Let's get together about gas prices, and paying rent, and people eating, and having jobs, and ending discrimination. Why can't we do that together? Because the gentleman has not walked in my skin. He has got to understand what it means when we are talking about a report that has been given. In 2019, the Joy Collective, the CROWN Act coalition: Black people are disproportionately burdened by policies, and practices in public places, including the workplace, that target, profile, or single them out for their natural hairstyle.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. The CROWN Study found that Black women's hair is more policed in the workplace, thereby contributing to the climate of group control. Black women are more likely to receive formal grooming policies; and 80 percent of Black women believe that they had to change their hair to be in the workplace. Just imagine, just imagine the beauty of these hairstyles, Mr. Jordan, the beauty of these hairstyles. This is what we are talking about; people who are severely discriminated against, young boys, young girls. A little girl in a Catholic school could not wear her hair, had to go home. Or the fabulous Serena, who gives joy to all of us and, yet, these are the locs that she is wearing.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. And this young boy, who, like me, felt diminished because someone thought it was wrong for me, an Afro, for him, his braided hair. Mr. Jordan, we have engaged in a lot, but I will not stand down on the CROWN Act. We must pass the CROWN Act to give dignity and reaffirm the rights of all people. Wear your hair as you desire. Madam Speaker, I rise to speak in support of H.R. 2116, the Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair Act of 2021. This legislation prohibits discrimination based on hair texture or hairstyles if that style or texture is commonly associated with particular race or national origin. The bill also prohibits this type of discrimination against those participating in federally assisted programs, housing programs, and employment. I have long believed that discrimination based on hair texture and hairstyle is an impermissible form of race discrimination. According to a 2019 report, known as the CROWN Study, which was conducted by the JOY Collective (CROWN Act Coalition, Dove/Unilever, National Urban League, Color of Change), Black people are ``disproportionately burdened by policies and practices in public places, including the workplace, that target, profile, or single them out for their natural hair styles--referring to the texture of hair that is not permed, dyed, relaxed, or chemically altered.'' The CROWN Study found that Black women's hair is ``more policed in the workplace, thereby contributing to a climate of group control in the company culture and perceived professional barriers'' compared to non-Black women. The study also found that ``Black women are more likely to have received formal grooming policies in the workplace, and to believe that there is a dissonance from her hair and other race's hair'' and that ``Black women's hairstyles were consistently rated lower or `less ready' for job performance.'' Among the study's other findings are that 80 percent of Black women believed that they had to change their hair from its natural state to ``fit in at the office,'' and that they were 83 percent more likely to be judged harshly because of their looks. The study indicated that Black women were one and a half times more likely to be sent home from the workplace because of their hair, and that they were over three times more likely to be perceived as unprofessional compared to non-African American women. Eight years ago, the United States Army removed a grooming regulation preventing women servicemembers from wearing their hair in dreadlocks, a regulation that had a disproportionately adverse impact on Black women. The decision was a result of the 2014 order by the Secretary of Defense at the time, Chuck Hagel, who was reviewing the military's policies regarding hairstyles popular to African American women. This decision to review these policies came after complaints from members of Congress, including myself, saying that these polices unfairly targeted black women. Hair discrimination is common, and the CROWN Study demonstrates that, but I would also like to take the time to share numerous stories from many Americans across the country in order to put faces and names to these statistics. In 2017, a Banana Republic employee was told by a manager that she was violating the company's dress code because her box braids were too ``urban'' and ``unkempt.'' A year later, in 2018, Andrew Johnson, a New Jersey high school student, was forced by a white referee to either have his dreadlocks cut or forfeit a wrestling match, leading him to have his hair cut in public by an athletic trainer immediately before the match. Again in 2018, an 11-year-old Black girl in Louisiana was asked to leave class at a private Roman Catholic school near New Orleans because her braided hair extensions violated the school's policies. In 2019, two African American men in Texas alleged being denied employment by Six Flags because of their hairstyles--one had long braids and the other had dreadlocks. In the following year of 2020 there were news reports of a Texas student who would not be allowed to walk at graduation because his dreadlocks were too long. Finally, I'd like to share the story of a young man from my district, who was suspended from school just last year for his natural dreadlocks. DeAndre Arnold was a senior at Barbers Hill High School in Houston, Texas. Arnold had his dreadlocks for years and this hairstyle had become a part of his identity and allowed him to embrace his culture. Arnold's family is from Trinidad and the men in his family often grow their locks near or below their waist. Arnold had complied with the dress code throughout high school by keeping his hair up. His high school routinely inspected his hair for violating a hair length school policy; upon inspection they ultimately decided to suspend him for violating the policy. Arnold was not allowed to return to school, attend his senior prom, or his graduation ceremony unless he cut his hair. Thankfully Arnold was able to take this decision to court, where the judge ruled that he could return to school without fear of recrimination. However, Arnold's high school failed him, as students in our society should not have to undergo litigation just to peacefully obtain an education. Students like DeAndre Arnold should not be faced with the impossible choice of either suppressing their cultural heritage and Black identity by cutting their natural hair, or forfeiting their right to equal educational and extracurricular opportunities. People of color, especially Black people, have long felt pressure to alter their natural hair to conform to what society has deemed ``acceptable.'' The CROWN Act prohibits discrimination in federally funded programs and activities based on an individual's hair texture or hairstyle if it is commonly associated with a particular race or national origin, including ``a hairstyle in which hair is tightly coiled or tightly curled, dreadlocks, cornrows, twists, braids, Bantu knots, and Afros.'' The legislation also provides that the prohibition will be enforced as part of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin in federally funded programs, and that violations of Section 3(a) will be treated as if they were violations of Section 601 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The CROWN Act would end the demeaning practice of forcing conformity onto people of color. It would make it illegal for employers and educators to deny an individual employment or educational opportunities due to the length, texture or style of their hair. To be frank, it is a tragedy that we need federal legislation to end these discriminatory practices and give people of color the dignity that is their inherent right. The CROWN Act says to Americans facing discrimination that the Congress of the United States hears them, sees them, and affirms their beauty and dignity and pride in their culture. I rise in strong support of this bill so that men and women of color no longer feel that they cannot or should not enter certain spaces because they wish to wear the hair that they are born with. I strongly urge all Members to join me in voting for the passage of H.R. 2116, the CROWN Act. I include in the Record a May 20, 2021 article entitled: ``Opinion: Stop policing people of color's hair and pass the CROWN Act.'' [From Chron.com, May 20, 2021] Opinion: Stop Policing People of Color's Hair and Pass the CROWN Act Texas seems to be hell bent on policing Black peoples' hair--and it needs to stop. Immediately. In Troy, an 11-year-old Native and African-American student spent more than a week in in-school suspension after administrators said his braided hairstyle violated the dress code, per 25 News KXXV's Jarell Baker. Barbers Hill Independent School District voted unanimously in July of 2020 to uphold a school policy that allowed the district to suspend DeAndre Arnold and his cousin Kaden Bradford for refusing to cut their dreadlocks, even barring Arnold from his senior prom and high school graduation. Such incidents are far from isolated in the Lone Star state, which begs the question: Why are Texas schools so determined to uphold dated rules that seemingly exist only to police the appearance of Black and brown students? People of color, especially Black people, have long felt pressure to alter their natural hair to conform to what society has deemed ``acceptable.'' It's demeaning, and--quite frankly--sad. And it's time we proudly rocked all of our kinks and curls without being punished for it. That's why the CROWN Act is important. ``Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair,'' or CROWN, is an act that would prohibit race-based hair discrimination in Texas schools and workplaces. The CROWN Act would make it illegal for employers and educators to deny an individual employment or educational opportunities due to the length, texture or style of their hair. It's sad that there even has to be a law in place, considering no other race has to deal with their hair being a Civil Rights issue. But here we are. The law hasn't passed in Texas (yet), but with April 27 being Texas' CROWN Act Day, Texas Legislative Black Caucus members are working around the clock to see that it happens. As a Black woman, I am tired of feeling like I can't or shouldn't enter certain spaces because my hair ``isn't done'' or straightened. I am tired of being asked if my hair is real or if someone can touch it. It's the hair I was born with, not a science experiment. This is also the reason people of color get so upset about outside races wearing braids or other protective hairstyles. The issue is not the style itself, but the fact that you have an entire group of people who are seen as ``less professional'' in the workplace and even denied jobs for rocking styles they created while others are allowed to copy it and receive compliments? It's disgusting. The CROWN Act is necessary for the culture, and the fact that Texas isn't moving quicker to pass it is quite telling. Whether anyone wants to admit it, hair discrimination is race discrimination. And we've had enough.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, as President Zelenskyy said, we are the leaders of peace. The President is the leader of world peace. Thank you, President Biden, for recognizing the crisis and the murder and pillage and slaughter of babies in Ukraine. Let us continue to stand together, but I am fighting as much to be able to solve the Ukraine crisis as I am for peace. Let me also acknowledge this past week the remembering of those who were killed in Atlanta, which exhibited the worst kind of Asian hate. Let us stand together against such hate and stand together for what is right. Let me also mention the fighters at the Pleasant Village senior citizen housing. They have been fighting against eviction, against disrespect, and against a complete altering of their living quarters. They determined that they should have quality-of-life housing. I am asking the new owner to stand down and to allow this housing project or this housing facility to be for seniors in their later lives so they can have a better quality of life. I will continue to fight to ensure that they have a place to live that is safe and best for them.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I thank my friends and colleagues, Chairman Johnson and Chairman Nadler, for this long overdue legislation that we voted on last year; and, as well, to acknowledge the forced arbitration legislation that was signed by the White House dealing with sexual assault. Now we have come full circle, so let me try to reinforce, because our friends on the other side of the aisle--and I call them friends--not only have it wrong, they have it upside down. It is completely misconstrued as to what this legislation does. And if you go out on the street corner and talk to any American they will say, of course I want the FAIR Act, because forced arbitration says to them that, in essence, you are obligated, you are indentured to the contract that you signed to get a job, to buy a phone, to get that big TV, and that you are not able to pursue your due process rights. Now, this is a constitutional issue. The Fifth Amendment completely indicates that you cannot be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, however you choose your due process of law. We go on to the 14th Amendment; of course, part of the historic 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments, and it indicates that no State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States under this Constitution, which includes the right to a trial by jury, nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process again; and that you would guarantee equal process and justice under the law. So let me factually say, though the signing of any contract or document is voluntary, often large corporations make it impossible to use their product or be employed without agreeing to a contract with a forced arbitration, making signing of the contract or document anything but voluntary; and clearly, it has constitutional implications. Something that should alarm all American consumers is that according to a study commissioned by University of California Davis Law Review, 81 companies in the Fortune 100, including subsidiaries or relating affiliates, have used arbitration agreements in connection with consumer transaction. Now let me be very clear. When you have a dispute, we are perfectly happy for you, as the individual, part of the contract, to say to the corporation, I don't care about my rights. I am going to throw myself on the mercy of arbitration. And in doing so, you may subject yourself to a limited decision, as Brian Flores was finding out. Madam Speaker, let me tell you that American economic supremacy does not stem from the contributions of modern-day oligarchs, billionaires, CEOs, or the wealthy. It comes from the middle class. It comes from those 60 million workers and countless others who put in an honest 8- hour day, five times a week, in the simple pursuit of trying to feed their families and take care of their communities.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his generosity. I oppose the upcoming amendment that talks about not excluding unions. Unions have agreements between individuals. Unions have the power, through their persons they represent, to vote yea or nay for that contract. So if they vote yea or nay on that contract, their eyes open on the arbitration, it is the union that will be protecting that individual. They will not be in that process alone. In the instance of an individual and the contracts that are signed, they will be alone. But they will not be alone if the FAIR Act is passed and the Constitution is upheld. That is why I support enthusiastically the FAIR Act and oppose the amendment to be forthcoming. Pass the FAIR Act because justice and the Constitution requires it. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 963, ``The FAIR Act'' which prohibits a predispute arbitration agreement from being valid or enforceable in an employment, consumer, antitrust, or civil rights dispute. Action on this legislation is long overdue considering the long history of the problems caused by forced arbitration. The FAIR Act was passed by the House in the 116th Congress, so I hope we can pass it again now and that the Senate will do the same this time so we can finally resolve this problem. Forced arbitration is typically due to a clause in a contract that takes away employees' and consumers' rights to pursue litigation in the case their legal rights are violated. 60 million American employees and myriad consumers are unfairly, and usually unknowingly, subjected to its limitation of their legal rights. Though the signing of any contract or document is voluntary, often large corporations make it impossible to use their product or be employed without agreeing to a contract with a forced arbitration clause, making signing of the contract or document anything but voluntary. Something that should alarm all American consumers is that, according to a study commissioned by the University of California Davis Law Review, 81 companies in the Fortune 100, including subsidiaries or related affiliates, have used arbitration agreements in connection with consumer transactions. The study also found that possibly two-thirds of American households are covered by consumer based forced arbitration agreements. This means nearly 86 million American households have their Constitutional right of access to the judicial system restricted. For American employees, the numbers are also staggering. Similarly, 60 million American employees are subject to forced arbitration agreements of which they are often unaware until a dispute arises for which they seek judicial redress. The extensive reach of arbitration clauses is only increasing, with the Economic Policy Institute estimating 80 percent of private sector nonunion workers being subject to forced arbitration clauses by 2024. Madam Speaker, American economic supremacy does not stem from the contributions of modern-day oligarchs, billionaires, CEOs, or the wealthy; it comes from the middle class. It comes from those 60 million workers and countless others who put in an honest 8-hour day 5 times a week in the simple pursuit of trying to feed their families and take care of their communities. The fact that so many of these hard-working Americans are having their legal rights taken away without them knowing it is morally reprehensible and must be put to an end. The FAIR Act remedies that 1 problem. In addition to being sound policy, the FAIR Act promotes racial equity in our rapidly diversifying country and workforce. Another study from the EPI found 59.1 percent of African American workers (7.5 million workers) are subject to mandatory arbitration, as are female workers (at 57.6 percent). Unfortunately, this is not surprising considering African Americans and women are two of the most historically discriminated against groups in the United States. Forced arbitration continues the struggles of African Americans in the workplace, from slavery, sharecropping, and redlining to ongoing segregation, discrimination, racism, and voter suppression. As these statistics show, our struggle for equity in the workplace continues. We are exhausted, yet we remain in the fight. We must continue to set right historical wrongs, and the FAIR Act provides us an avenue to do so. Fairness in the workplace for women is also further remediated by this legislation. In this country, we have a disgraceful wage gap between men and women of 82 cents to the dollar, according to the latest Bureau of Labor Statistics figures. As a Member of the Women's Caucus, I have been fighting for pay equity for American women since before I arrived here as a Representative in 1995, and I believe that equal pay for equal work is a simple matter of justice. Wage disparities are not simply a result of women's education levels or life choices. In fact, the pay gap between college educated men and women starts as soon as they enter the workplace and expands shortly thereafter. Women can have the same background, work in the same field, and perform the same functional position, yet still be grossly underpaid. Disproportionately subjecting women to forced arbitration is yet another stain on this country's historical attitude towards women in the workforce. I have consistently been a proud sponsor and cosponsor of legislation that expands legal rights, creates a more level playing field, and erodes long standing social disparities. The FAIR Act achieves these goals, and I therefore urge my colleagues to support the FAIR Act.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts for his leadership. How honored I am to be on the floor with Richard Neal, who had a major and forceful engagement in bringing about the recognition of those who were murdered in 1972. I thank my friend and colleague on the other side of the aisle for joining in this bipartisan effort, and I reenforce Chairman Neal's comments about the bipartisan celebration of this great day and the great people of Ireland. I am happy to be on the floor on St. Patrick's Day, and I wish all of my constituents, and friends across the nation of the great green, a happy St. Patrick's Day. But I come to make sure this day, Bloody Sunday, is certainly not forgotten. I am so glad Chairman Neal indicated its inspiration came from the toil and the soldiers on the battlefield, Madam Speaker, our beloved friend John Lewis, in the civil rights movement, and those who are willing to sacrifice for their belief and justice. I am so glad that we ultimately found the truth to recognize John ``Jackie'' Duddy, Patrick ``Paddy'' Doherty, Bernard ``Barney'' McGuigan, Hugh Gilmour, Kevin McElhinney, Michael Kelly, John Young, William Nash, Michael McDaid, James ``Jim'' Wray, Gerald Donaghy, Gerald McKinney, William ``Willie'' McKinney, and John Johnston, who tragically lost their lives. As this resolution indicates, British soldiers came and shot them down. They did not understand their seeking of dignity and the rights that they had. So Bloody Sunday almost tracked some of the terrible issues that we had, but these people died and were injured, and many families for decades were denied truth. I think it is very important that we stand on the floor today in a bipartisan way to honor that and to applaud Prime Minister David Cameron, who went to the House of Commons and apologized and said that the events that took place on Bloody Sunday were unjustified, unjustifiable, and wrong.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, how sad and maybe even criminal it was to ignore this for so many years. How grateful we would be when those who died for their rights, for justice, for equality, the very same tenets we all adhere to here in the United States. Let me draw in now and conclude my remarks by joining in the resolution that urges the European Union, including the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom, to act in good faith with regard to negotiations around Brexit and the implementation of the Northern Ireland Protocol. But more importantly, let me emphasize the importance of the relationship between the United Kingdom, the United States, and Ireland. Let me track the fact that we believe in justice, we believe in civil rights, and we believe in the idea of the speech of empowerment and the speech of democracy. Let us not resort to bloodiness and the killing of those who simply seek to speak for justice for them and their families. Today, in commemoration of Bloody Sunday, never again. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 888, which expresses the hope for justice for the victims of Bloody Sunday, one of the most tragic of days during the Troubles, on its 50th anniversary, as well as acknowledging the progress made in fostering peace in Northern Ireland and on the island of Ireland in recent decades. On January 30, 1972, 26 unarmed civilians were shot by British soldiers during a protest that began peacefully in Derry, resulting in the death of 14 individuals in a massacre now known as Bloody Sunday, or the Bogside Massacre. Bloody Sunday is one of the most significant and deadly injustices to take place during the Troubles--also known as the Northern Ireland conflict--and describes the struggle between Irish Roman Catholics and British who sided with Irish Protestants that lasted from the 1960s until 1998. None of the 26 unarmed people shot by British Army soldiers posed a threat of causing death or serious injury, or were doing anything that could justify their shooting. The families of these victims were denied for decades an honest and comprehensive assessment of the events that took place on Bloody Sunday. In 1998, after campaigns from the families of those injured and killed on Bloody Sunday, a second inquiry was established by the British Government, and it found without doubt that the shootings were the result of wrongful actions taken by British soldiers. The lack of accountability and justice provided to those who perished and their families from this heinous use of force was unacceptable. They deserved justice. Accountability and justice for the victims of Bloody Sunday would represent a step toward addressing Northern Ireland's legacy of violence and promoting reconciliation. This conflict was rooted in suppression, silencing the voices of those who differ from you by taking away their freedoms and their liberties. As an African American woman in the United States, I know too well the struggles of oppression. The march led by our Beloved John Lewis from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama that resulted in the brutal beating of marchers by police is known as Bloody Sunday is a turning point in the civil rights struggle. I stand with the victims of Bloody Sunday, because whenever oppression happens anywhere around the world, and people risk losing their freedoms and their liberty, I will always stand with them.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I thank Chairman Neal and Congressmen Doggett and Blumenauer for this important statement. Slaughter is not a sufficient definition of what Putin and Putin's war is doing to the innocent Ukrainian people. I rise in strong support of totally removing from them normal trade relations, as just a few weeks ago I was on the border of Lithuania and Belarus, where the 30 to 40,000 Russian troops were poised, poised, ready to move and to slaughter. How outrageous, when babies are killed, when hospitals with pregnant women, when a mother who lost her life because her pelvis was crushed, her baby and herself died because of Putin. They continue to slaughter. They continue to destroy historic places. They continue to destroy hospitals and government buildings, and they are not ceasing. So glory to Ukraine. We must stand with them and realize that their fight is our fight. As we in the civil rights movement experienced the idea of lack of justice, we know that this does not even equate to the violence that Russia is putting forth. I support this legislation.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 7108, The Suspending Normal Trade Relations with Russia and Belarus Act. The Act takes decisive action to respond to Russia's continued unprovoked attacks on the people of Ukraine and holds Belarus accountable for its support for Russia's aggression. This legislation counters Russia's unconscionable actions and Belarus' complicity by suspending normal trade relations with Russia and Belarus. This legislation includes additional provisions to expand the United States' trade tools to stop Russia's unacceptable and unjust war on Ukraine and to hold Belarus accountable for its involvement. Specifically, the bill: Provides the President with time-limited authority to increase tariffs on products of Russia and Belarus, until January 1, 2024; Requires the U.S. Trade Representative to use the voice and influence of the United States to seek suspension of Russia's participation in the World Trade Organization (WTO) and to halt Belarus' WTO accession and accession-related work; and Provides the President with the authority to restore normal trade relations with Russia and Belarus if these countries have ceased their acts of aggression against Ukraine and other certain conditions are met. Congress has the authority to overrule such decision through a congressional disapproval process. Since Vladimir Putin began this war, the United States has had a relentless and devastating economic response in the form of sanctions. Even prior to this legislation, the United States has already carried out the following actions: The connection to the U.S. financial system for Russia's largest financial institution, Sberbank, including 25 subsidiaries, has been severed by imposing correspondent and payable-through account sanctions. This action restricts Sberbank's access to transactions made in the dollar. Sberbank is the largest bank in Russia, holds nearly one-third of the overall Russian banking sector's assets, is heavily connected to the global financial system, and is systemically critical to the Russian financial system. Russia's second largest financial institution, VTB Bank (VTB), including 20 subsidiaries, have been appropriately subject to full blocking sanctions. This action freezes all of VTB's assets touching the U.S financial system and prohibits U.S. persons from dealing with them. VTB holds nearly one-fifth of the overall Russian banking sector's assets, is heavily exposed to the U.S. and western financial systems and is systemically critical to the Russian financial system. Full blocking sanctions also extend to the three other major Russian financial institutions: Bank Otkritie, Sovcombank OJSC, and Novikombank- and 34 subsidiaries. These sanctions freeze any of these institutions' assets touching the U.S financial system and prohibit U.S. persons from dealing with them. These financial institutions play a significant role in the Russian economy. New debt and equity restrictions have been imposed on thirteen of the most critical major Russian enterprises and entities. This includes restrictions on all transactions in, provision of financing for, and other dealings in new debt of greater than 14 days maturity and new equity issued by thirteen Russian state-owned enterprises and entities: Sberbank, AlfaBank, Credit Bank of Moscow, Gazprombank, Russian Agricultural Bank, Gazprom, Gazprom Neft, Transneft, Rostelecom, RusHydro, Alrosa, Sovcomflot, and Russian Railways. These entities, including companies critical to the Russian economy with estimated assets of nearly $1.4 trillion, are no longer able to raise money through the U.S. market--a key source of capital and revenue generation, which limits the Kremlin's ability to raise money for its activity. There are additional full blocking sanctions on Russian elites and their family members: Sergei Ivanov (and his son, Sergei), Nikolai Patrushev (and his son Andrey), Igor Sechin (and his son Ivan), Andrey Puchkov, Yuriy Solviev (and two real estate companies he owns), Galina Ulyutina, and Alexander Vedyakhin. This action includes individuals who have enriched themselves at the expense of the Russian state, and have elevated their family members into some of the highest position of powers in the country. It also includes oligarchs who sit atop Russia's largest financial institutions and are responsible for providing the resources necessary to support Putin's invasion of Ukraine. This action follows up on yesterday's action targeting Russian elites and their family members and cuts them off from the U.S. financial system, freezes any assets they hold in the United States and blocks their travel to the United States. Costs on Belarus for supporting a further invasion of Ukraine by sanctioning 24 Belarusian individuals and entities, including targeting Belarus' military and financial capabilities by sanctioning two significant Belarusian state-owned banks, nine defense firms, and seven regime-connected official and elites have been enacted. Sweeping restrictions have been implemented on Russia's military to strike a blow to Putin's military and strategic ambitions. This includes measures against military end users, including the Russian Ministry of Defense. Exports of nearly all U.S. items and items produced in foreign countries using certain U.S.-origin software, technology, or equipment will be restricted to targeted military end users. These comprehensive restrictions apply to the Russian Ministry of Defense, including the Armed Forces of Russia, wherever located. Russia-wide restrictions to choke off Russia's import of technological goods critical to a diversified economy and Putin's ability to project power are also present. This includes Russia-wide denial of exports of sensitive technology, primarily targeting the Russian defense, aviation, and maritime sectors to cut off Russia's access to cutting-edge technology. In addition to sweeping restrictions on the Russian-defense sector, the United States government will impose Russia-wide restrictions on sensitive U.S. technologies produced in foreign countries using U.S.-origin software, technology, or equipment. This includes Russia-wide restrictions on semiconductors, telecommunication, encryption security, lasers, sensors, navigation, avionics and maritime technologies. These severe and sustained controls will cut off Russia's access to cutting edge technology. Historical multilateral cooperation serves as a force multiplier in restricting more than $50 billion in key inputs to Russia--impacting far more than that in Russia's production. As a result of this multilateral coordination, the United States has provided an exemption for other countries that adopt equally stringent measures. Countries that adopt substantially similar export restrictions are exempted from new U.S. licensing requirements for items produced in their countries. The European Union, Australia, Japan, Canada, New Zealand and the United Kingdom, have already communicated their plans for parallel actions. This unprecedented coordination significantly expands the scope of restrictions on Russia. Further engagement with Allies and partners will continue to maximize the impact on Russia's military capabilities. Madam Speaker, taking further action against both Russia and Belarus on the international stage is of the utmost necessity in showing our European allies that we are steadfast in our opposition to this bloody war. The Suspending Normal Trade Relations with Russia and Belarus Act does exactly that symbolically and literally, and I am confident it will play a role in ending this war. It is for that reason, Madam Speaker, that I rise in strong support of the Suspending Normal Trade Relations with Russia and Belarus Act and urge my colleagues support for the Act.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, earlier today during the debate dealing with removing the normal trade relations from Russia and Belarus, I indicated that ``slaughter'' is too nice a word to describe the actions of Vladimir Putin against the innocent people of Ukraine. I insist on that definition. One Member rose and said it was genocide. Certainly, it is near that devastating and deadly system that we have seen used elsewhere. As Russian soldiers come home in body bags and as Russian mothers begin to mourn, I make this plea to the Russian people: This is an illegal war. Putin is a war criminal. We can only now count on you. The Western world has done every single thing that they can do to stop the pillage, the violence, the killing of pregnant women, the slaughtering of babies in the street. It is time now for the Russian people to unleash the shackles around your mind and your hands, to be able to stand up and say to Putin--who is now leading your country into an end that you will never, never, never forget or be forgiven for. Why don't you stand up and speak eloquently to stop this violence and this war, to ask for peace, to get to the peace table, and make a difference in Russia saving lives, and for the people of Ukraine.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3197, which provides a land conveyance to the city of Eunice, Louisiana. The Save the Liberty Theatre Act of 2021 will allow the city of Eunice to restore its historic Liberty Theatre. This historic theatre has hosted silent films, live bands, and other entertainment over its beautiful history. The Liberty Theatre has been a staple of Louisiana's Cajun community for nearly 100 years. With passage of this bill, the City of Eunice can proceed with its efforts to restore the theatre as an important center of culture and tourism. The bill will also direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey all rights, title, and interest of the federal government in specified areas of the ``Jean Lafitte National Historical Park and Preserve'' to the city of Eunice, Louisiana. That area includes an annex owned by the National Park Service (NPS) that is attached to the Liberty Theatre, which is owned by the city. The area the NPS owns is a section of the Liberty Theatre that provides a handicap accessible entrance, but this ownership interest in the property is hindering efforts to restore the theatre. The Save the Liberty Theatre Act of 2021 would grant Eunice full ownership of the theatre property so the city can begin restoration efforts. The theatre's stage has been dark since October 2019, and to local Cajun musicians like Joel Savoy, there is a fear that the centerpiece of the Cajun community will be nothing more than a memory. Savoy's family is very connected to the theatre, as his parents were the driving force behind a restoration project in the 1980s to reopen the ornate building. The theatre's return is vital to regional tourism. Savoy, along with a handful of other Eunice residents, formed the Association for the Liberty Theatre earlier this year. Their association is looking into ongoing revenue potential through private events, such as wedding receptions, so the theatre doesn't shutter again in a few decades. Their goal is to renovate and reopen the theatre by 2024 to commemorate the 100th anniversary, and according to Savoy an anonymous donor has committed to donating a ``substantial amount'' of the projected $2 million needed to return the theatre to its former glory. A handful of other Eunice residents plan on launching fundraising campaigns and other public planning projects if the legislation passes. The people of this community are willing to go the extra mile in hard work and funding to preserve this landmark that is dear to them. I encourage all my colleagues to join me and vote for H.R. 3197. Since the people of this community are willing to come together to revitalize this landmark, we should support them.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6434, the Japanese American WWII History Network Act to direct the Secretary of the Interior to establish, within the National Park Service, the Japanese American World War II History Network. We must never forget the maltreatment that these Americans endured. The establishment of this network would educate generations to come on past racial injustices in our country, in an effort to avoid future prejudice. The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, marked the United States' official entrance into World War II. Two months later, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066, which ordered 120,000 people of Japanese descent to be forcibly removed from their homes and placed in internment camps, based on the widespread suspicion that they were acting as foreign agents. The belief was baseless, but that didn't stop the War Relocation Authority from rounding up more than 120,000 people--two-thirds of whom were U.S. citizens. Japanese Americans were interned and essentially treated as prisoners. After decades of pressure from the Japanese American League (JACL) and the Japanese American community, President Jimmy Carter opened an investigation to determine if the imprisonment of these people was justified by the government. The investigation found virtually no evidence of Japanese disloyalty and concluded that the mass incarceration of Japanese Americans was a product of abject racism. In 1988, over 40 years after the internment camps closed, President Ronald Reagan signed the Civil Liberties Act, which offered a formal apology for the government's policy toward Japanese Americans and paid $20,000 in compensation to each of the 80,000 living survivors. The reparations granted to the survivors and the official apology were necessary for our country to move past this grave racial injustice. It must be noted that, just as our government recognized that reparations to the Japanese American community was necessary to acknowledge and move beyond that injustice, America's original racist tragedy must be similarly addressed. On July 30, 2008 the U.S. House of Representatives passed H. Res. 194 apologizing for American slavery and subsequent discriminatory laws. The Senate has never passed a resolution, and no reparations have been granted. Millions of Africans and their descendants were enslaved in the United States from 1619 through 1865. Slavery in America resembled no other form of involuntary servitude known in history, as Africans were captured and sold at auction like inanimate objects or animals. Africans forced into slavery were brutalized, humiliated, dehumanized, and subjected to the indignity of being stripped of their names and heritage. In 2022, he passage of H.R. 40 is essential to solving the deep racial, economic, social, and cultural divides in America. Now more than ever, the facts and circumstances facing our nation demonstrate the importance of H.R. 40 and the necessity of placing our nation on the path to reparative justice. By passing H.R. 40, Congress can start a movement toward the national reckoning that we need in order to bridge racial divides. Reparations are ultimately about respect and reconciliation and the hope that someday, all Americans can walk together toward a more just future. We owe it to the millions of Americans who were born into bondage, knew a life of servitude, and died anonymous deaths, as prisoners of this system. We owe it to the millions of descendants of these slaves, for they are the heirs to a society of inequities and indignities that naturally filled the vacuum after slavery was formally abolished 154 years ago. Madam Speaker, the establishment of the Japanese American WWII History Network would represent much more than just a resource that will educate on inequality and brutality in America. It represents Americans moving past injustices and honoring those who were once victims of racial discrimination in our country. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 6434, the Japanese American WII History Network.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I rise today to indicate that finally we have passed and signed into law the Violence Against Women Act. After years of introducing it and passing it in the United States House of Representatives, we came together, and today at the White House, relief has been given to the millions of victims of domestic violence, rape, and sexual assault. We provided the opportunity for enhanced police efforts for trying to stop the most dangerous calls of police officers: domestic violence; dealing with cultural groups that respond to this in a different way; and once and for all, stopping the dastardly act of raping Indian women and escaping prosecution. Now we allow the courts on Indian reservations to be able to bring people to justice. We have provided a place for abused persons to live. We have given more money to area shelters, like the Houston Area Women's Shelter, and we responded to the advocates across America. I am glad to have written and authored H.R. 1620. I thank all of those who ultimately brought that bill to law. Now, the President has done what he has always wanted to do, to have the Violence Against Women Act reauthorized.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, let me thank the gentlewoman from Florida for, first of all, all of her leadership in leading the Women's Caucus for a very sizable period of time; and to give us the opportunity to speak about women today; and to remind us that we really started out with a very important woman, and that is, of course, our mothers. So why don't I, as well, acknowledge, Ivalita Jackson, who served her community; but, more importantly, her profession, and she was proud of that, in nursing. And at the time, she was a vocational nurse, and she wore the uniform with pride. She was a mother with pride. She was a wife with pride. She was really our rock, and she did things that showed her sacrifice. She loved her profession. She loved nursing. She was our at-home doctor, probably the doctor for the neighborhood. But in order to ensure that she was home during the day, she made sure she took the night shift. And the night shift in a hospital is a challenging shift. We can see all of the great and wonderful things that nursing has generated, the heroes of today, the sheroes of today, as we went through 2 years of the pandemic. But my mother was a shero many, many decades ago. And I came to love the uniform, came to love those white sparking shoes that she wore so proudly, came to love and honor her sacrifice; and how much she gave to her family, her job, her profession, her church. Ivalita Jackson is one to be honored; along with her mother, my grandmother, Vannie Bennett; my other grandmother, Olive Jackson; and then my aunt, Valerie Bennett, Vickie and Audrey, all wonderful women, and Sybil. So today, I come to join my colleagues to be able to talk about women and to celebrate, as the President did in Women's History Month, just 24 hours ago; but then to celebrate again, as I mentioned, now, in law, now the law, and that is the Violence Against Women Act, that almost a decade, it seems--even though we went back as far as 2013, that would have been 8 years--it seems that I have been doing this for a decade. But I remember standing next to Vice President Joe Biden on the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, which was in 1996. I call the image, me in short stature and Joe Biden, tall stature, but yet, one of great compassion. And I loved hearing him speak today, how culturally out of step men were, or the community was, or the Nation was, in trying to understand why he would be engaged in fighting against domestic violence. I remember him today saying, they asked me whether or not he had come from a family of domestic violence, or he had abused his wife or he had known someone in his family who had experienced that. And he looked at them incredulously and said no. It is something to care about. Domestic violence kills. Sexual assault can kill. Rape kills, and it destroys lives. From very little girls and very little children, boys or girls, to adulthood. We loved him for saying that. And out of that passion came the first Violence Against Women Act centered around domestic violence. Then it grew to focus on the wide breadth of sexual assault in this Nation. In speaking to the head of the major chiefs at the White House, she reaffirmed the fact, as a chief of police of a major city, that domestic violence calls are the most deadly for law enforcement officers, and don't end well, in many instances, for our families. It is appropriate in this month of women's history, that we also have a curative response by putting into law, after so many years of trying, introducing over and over again this legislation, and finally, H.R. 1620 became law as the Senate passed that bill with an enhancement of what we had included, which was the work dealing with Native Americans, the work dealing with providing for housing, the amount of money, $1 billion, to cover the many new issues dealing with women, dealing with cultural organizations, different women from different ethnicities, language; we were responding to the needs that they have, religious groups. We have cultural training for young men and boys. We wanted to make sure that we did not, in any way, undermine what the President had dreamed about when he first introduced this legislation, I believe, in 1994. So I wanted this to be part of Women's History Month because it was a long journey. And let me thank all of the advocates who, year after year, month after month, day after day, second after second, minute after minute, hour after hour, met with all of us to try to work to enhance and to be assured of the best kind of legislation that we could secure. Today was a celebratory day. But I really focus on it for saving lives. And I just imagine, somewhere in America today is a woman being abused, a woman suffering. And we now have a law that her State and Federal Government law enforcement can maybe intervene, and her days of being abused will be ended. I do want to also acknowledge, as I move toward the historic women, the kind of work women do. I want to make sure that we talk about daycare owners. This is The Gingerbread School, and I thank the owner for taking the children of mothers who work day-in and day-out, hourly wages, night shifts. I remember my mom, as I said, working night shifts. She is there for them. These are the kind of women in Women's History Month that deserve honor and respect, and I thank her for it. Madam Speaker, then I acknowledge the fact that women are in the medical profession. We used to take them for granted. There are a rising number of women becoming doctors. We did not take them for granted in the horrors of the pandemic of COVID-19 because we were desperate for those who were testing when the vaccines came or vaccinating. But most importantly, it was those nurses at our bedside, for those on ventilators, those in hallways, those who were suffering. COVID-19 was devastating and deadly, and it was the nurses and the medical professionals, the many women who provided the kind of support that maybe got us through. I thank those late-night shifts. I thank those tears, those collapsing on sidewalks outside of hospitals saying, ``How much more can I take?'' They took more, and they kept going on and on and on. I pay tribute to the millions of medical professionals who are women. I support all of them, but I particularly support those who are women. Madam Speaker, today, we had a hearing in the Budget Committee on the question of how the pandemic impacted women, and I want to make one point about that. It was unanimity. Certainly, it was recognized by one of our witnesses that the idea of childcare being only 7 percent of your income under the Build Back Better Act would be transformative; that childcare keeps women out of the workforce, but most importantly, it takes 25 or 50 percent, even, of their income. Remember, they still are the lowest paid. We realize, in this Women's History Month, there are many things that we need to do to improve the lives of women. With that in mind, I now cite some of the women who should be honored who have done great things. First, I do acknowledge the paycheck fairness bill that we did this year; the child tax credit, driven by women, joined by great men, but driven by women and really saving the lives of families all over America. Madam Speaker, I acknowledge Vice President Kamala Harris-- historically, the first woman of color to serve in the highest offices of the land as Vice President of the United States, a woman of Indian descent and African descent. It is important to take note of the fact that an estimated 10 million people in this country, as I spoke earlier, experienced domestic violence, and that is why, again, we celebrate this month with the passing of that bill. But I just want to give a roll call of the many pioneering women who should be recognized today: Shirley Chisholm; Barbara Jordan; and as well those early pioneers, Harriet Tubman, who led the Underground Railroad and slaves to freedom; Sojourner Truth, an abolitionist as well a suffragette who said the words, ``Ain't I a Woman''; Rosa Parks, who refused to get up so that she could sit so that others might walk and others might run toward justice. Astronaut Mae C. Jemison, my dear friend, a Houston resident, the first African-American woman to go into space. Mathematicians like Katherine G. Johnson, Dorothy Vaughan, and Mary Jackson, those mathematicians who helped NASA in the early days by pencil and hand, calculating major calculations needed for space exploration. Authors Maya Angelou, Toni Morrison, and Gwendolyn Brooks, all enormous authors with enormous missions and all fighters for justice. All of these persons, in their own way, provided a pathway for women. I am very pleased to have brought the first African-American statue into the United States Congress--designed and sculpted by a woman, and as well raised the dollars to bring her here. She now sits in Emancipation Hall, and her next journey is going to be in the rotunda or Statuary Hall, where she belongs with the other suffragettes. We know that Shirley Chisholm was the first Black woman to ever serve in the United States House of Representatives and the first woman to ever run for President of the United States. Madam Speaker, I want to take note of my hometown heroes, such as Nellye Joyce Punch, Ramona Toliver, Beulah Shepard, Christia Adair. These are women who have since gone on, but they were pioneers in their time, fighting for what was right. I remember Beulah Shepard saying, ``It just takes one vote.'' Nellye Joyce Punch led on hunger and trying to stamp out hunger, as she was a great teacher. Ramona Toliver was an activist in Frenchtown in the Fifth Ward and always fought to ensure that the people of that community were responded to and not ignored. Madam Speaker, I think it is important to realize that as we honor women, we must recognize they find themselves in many different careers. Coming from Houston, I want to acknowledge Sally Christian Ride, the first woman sent into space; Eileen Marie Collin, the first space shuttle pilot; and, of course, numbers of other unsung heroes in the space program. I mentioned Vice President Kamala D. Harris, and I want to emphasize, as I close my remarks, that we have yet another journey to take. That is the final confirmation after hearings of the next person to ascend to the Supreme Court, and that is a Justice Brown Jackson, who by all accounts is an outstanding--without question--legal scholar and jurist. I hope for her, in this time of newness and difference, that she will be greeted by those who will look to her credentials, her firstness, and, of course, the constant excellence that she has shown. Women have always been challenged as to whether or not they could do the job. I leave you with the names of Golda Meir of Israel, Indira Gandhi of India, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf of Liberia, Margaret Thatcher of Great Britain, Angela Merkel of Germany, and Portia Simpson-Miller of Jamaica, among many others. I know that there are millions of women who we have left out, but today, we come to celebrate under the leadership of Lois Frankel, as well as the Democratic Women's Caucus, to be able to once and for all put a mark in this Congressional Record to say that we paused to say thank you to women, that we paused to say thank you to the new and many Members of the United States House of Representatives who have grown and grown, Members who happen to be women. The few women who were here when I came in 1995, we have exponentially grown in excellence, and we have brought a new face, a new perspective. I remember those days, sitting lonely on the Committee on the Judiciary with Pat Schroeder as, day after day, our friends on the other side of the aisle brought up partial-birth abortion. Over and over again, Pat and I tried to explain that these are decisions that are health decisions that should be left to the mother, her faith leader, and her doctor. It is sad that the State of Texas has failed to remember such and continues to abuse women in that State as it relates to choice and the ability to seek a lawful abortion as they may desire with their church, their doctor, and themselves. Madam Speaker, the last point that I want to make, that mothers have to deal with, are the horrible actions of Governor Abbott dealing with transgender children. I want to say on this floor today that this is part of women's history because it was the parents but the mothers leading to protect their children from the abuse of this governmental agency, suggesting that you could not have trans medical care, trans- affirming medical care; that you, as a mother, could not protect your child. Thank you to the mothers who have stood up. Thank you to the court that indicated that you, Governor Abbott, are wrong yesterday, wrong today, and wrong tomorrow. These are our precious children. These are precious lives. These are precious families. These are precious mothers. My tribute to women today includes my tribute to the fighters that have always stood up for what is right, what is conscience, and what is just, either in fighting for democracy; fighting against the terror of January 6; fighting for women's rights in the Violence Against Women Act; fighting against abuse; fighting to stamp out hunger; fighting to stamp out anger; and fighting in Ukraine to be able to stand against a despot called Putin, who is violent and is a war criminal killing children. The mothers in my State who are standing for their trans children, I offer them my greatest respect and dignity as we salute Women's History Month.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, allow me to again express my appreciation to the growth and bounty of the Women's Democratic Caucus. It is amazing, the coming together of now generational women, freshmen classes, sophomore classes, and some of us who have had the privilege of serving for a period of time. What an amazing power base that you and we have created. Madam Speaker, I thank Lois Frankel for her leadership. I thank Brenda Lawrence and Jackie Speier for the way they have guarded and guided this privilege with this power. I do think it is important to put in the Record her singular work. She will not say singular work, but we were all glad to join her. Obviously, this particular young soldier came out of the breadth and depth of Houston and out of Texas--but to be able to honor the life of a young woman that simply wanted all her life to join the United States Army. Jackie Speier had been working on the issue of sexual assault in the military, along with our good friend, Senator Gillibrand, and the lack of justice that we were seeing all the time. This had been going on for a very long time. It is important in this Women's History Month to say that we together made history with your legislation that responded to the heinous crime of the killing of Officer Guillen, a precious young women, who, growing up as a little girl wanted to be in the United States military. I think this is the point that should be made. Only in this recent time can young girls want to grow up to be generals, astronauts, presidents, scientists, and others. As Ms. Frankel and Ms. Speier indicated, the abuse that was laid upon women for even thinking about equality or justice or voting. And then, of course, I must say that African American women found themselves at the lowest wrung of the ladder and suffered the continuing lingering history of slavery, the rape that was put upon them, the tending to whatever child was born, and then, of course, tending to the fields. Here we are today with a little bright light--and I am going to say little bright light because Ms. Frankel laid out all the things we need to do: the ERA, and we hope to get this new Justice. I wanted to take a moment just to respond and build upon this vile war criminal who seems to have Ukraine--God bless the soldiers, the men, the men that stayed behind to fight, but the toll has been so brutal on the women of Ukraine. Even in the last 24 hours, women are leaving safe places in Poland and Romania and they are coming back to Ukraine demanding that they fight, that they stand with the people of Ukraine for the democracy that they love. The death toll is brutal. The way they are dying is brutal. To be running with your child thinking you are protecting them. And to have the greatest moment of your life, the birth of a new baby, and you die and the baby dies, and your whole innards are crushed. Besides the women that are left behind in pools of blood--then the women who are escaping with their children who have nothing. This has been found around the world in Sudan when we were fighting against genocide. The victims were women who were trying to hold on to families in Rwanda. Places in South and Central America; the missing Mexican women that we have been working on for years. My previous Member from California had led us in this fight, and we are still fighting. In the United States missing girls and human trafficking is a scourge today, and the dominant population of human trafficking are girls and girls who were tending to their daily duties of going to high school and, all of a sudden, they walked away, and they are in human trafficking, or they are being trafficked. So we have a lot to fight. We have a lot to put on the Record today and this month. We have got a lot of grandmothers to thank, a lot of moms to thank, and a lot of firsts to thank. We have got a lot of poets who have described our lives and a lot of writers who have described our lives. We have got a lot of children who simply say thank you. I guess I don't want to leave the podium. I must thank the teachers because if ever people were elevated to know how much you appreciate women, this 2-year, 3-year period of the pandemic really laid it out. You were either sacrificing as a mother because you were wearing 25 hats, Madam Speaker, and a lot of them dealing with homeschooling and trying to make do. You were a nurse; you were a teacher. You were simply in the fight. Madam Speaker, you were a doctor, you were a hospital administrator, you were an EMS, you were a fire person, a police person, and you were in here dealing with just the pit of COVID-19 and what it was doing to our families. You could have been in the funeral home business as a woman, and you were dealing with these circumstances. So let me just give a big thank you in this month, and I hope that if I have not called your name, I am giving a big, overall thank you to all of you women. We recognize all of our gentlemen. But today, all of you have stood in the gap during a time in America's history that no one ever expected. So I say thank you to Congresswoman Frankel, to Congresswoman Speier, and to all the women. We count them as being on the floor today to be able to honor Women's History Month and then, of course, International Women's History Month to be able to say thank you to all of them. I must say thank you to the Pakistani women. I was at the Pakistani Embassy last night. I don't want to leave the floor without saying I met a lot of Pakistani Americans who were there celebrating Women's History Month and to honor Pakistani-American women. First, I would like to thank the Democratic Women's Caucus for hosting this Special Order to celebrate Women's History Month. During Women's History Month, we celebrate the generations of trailblazing women who, in the face of daily hardship and systemic discrimination, have paved a path toward gender justice. It also serves as a global call to action, calling on us to advance the rights and dignities of women at home, at work and in all aspects of life. Women have always led the effort to create a more fair, more resilient, more prosperous, and more equal America. It brings me great pride that in 2022, women are not only working tirelessly to meet the needs of this unique moment, women are taking the lead. With Vice President Kamala Harris making history for our nation, with more women than ever before serving in Congress and taking on leadership roles in the President's cabinet, with the first Black woman nominated to the Supreme Court, with women leading some of America's largest and most innovative businesses, and with women continuing to break ground as scientists and researchers, America is stronger because of women. I am proud that House Democrats are leading efforts to expand on opportunities for women and to combat gender discrimination. In addition to our work to close the gender wage gap by passing the Paycheck Fairness Act, a major part of that effort includes addressing the challenges posed to American women by the COVID-19 pandemic. It is important to recognize that the burden of caring for children, the elderly, and the sick still falls to women unevenly in our society, and the pandemic forced many women to sacrifice their careers to care for loved ones. Last year, Democrats and President Biden enacted the American Rescue Plan, which extended the expanded Child Tax Credit to help families make ends meet and help women stay in the workforce and return to their jobs. It is now year 3 of the Coronavirus pandemic, which means that women have been leading the COVID-19 response, combatting the virus in America and around the world. During Women's History Month, we honor the female frontline health care workers. From health care to home care, restaurants to grocery stores, women workers, low-paid workers, and women of color are on the front lines of the COVID-19 pandemic. According to a U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics survey, nearly 80% of healthcare workers and 83% of workers who provide social assistance, including child care and emergency services, are women. Additionally, women-dominated occupations, such as nurses, flight attendants, and personal care aides, are among the most vulnerable to getting sick and spreading it to others. Women are also in the position to suffer the most in an economic recession. Women are the most economically vulnerable, comprising nearly 60% of workers in low-wage occupations. Low-paid women workers have very little in the way of savings, which means it is much harder for them to weather economic shocks, especially when they are likely to be supporting a number of dependents. Just this week, my bill, VAWA, was reauthorized as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022, which President Joe Biden signed into law. We must continue to do more to ensure that law enforcement has all the tools it needs to protect Americans from domestic violence, stalking, and sexual assault and that survivors have the resources to heal. VAWA is life-saving legislation. This legislation was enacted in response to the prevalence of domestic and sexual violence, and the significant impact of such violence on the lives of women. Statistics have revealed that these forms of violence impact us all. In the United States, an estimated 10 million people experience domestic violence every year, and more than 15 million children are exposed to this violence annually. According to the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, about 20 people per minute are physically abused by an intimate partner. About 1 in 4 women and 1 in 9 men experience severe intimate partner physical violence, sexual violence, and/or partner stalking with injury. Today, in Texas, 35.10 percent of women and 34.5 percent of men are subjected to domestic violence. As we celebrate Women's History Month, let us reflect on the women who shaped our history and on those today who are leading our nation forward. We must work toward a future with equal access to economic opportunities, health care, and safety for all Americans. It brings me great pride to say that more than 120 women House Members proudly follow in her footsteps--including a record number of committee and subcommittee chairs, myself included. Driven by these women's devoted service and guided by their leadership, the Democratic House continues to lead the way in building a more just future--whether strengthening the rights of women in the workplace through the Paycheck Fairness Act and Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, defending reproductive health freedoms with the Women's Health Protection Act or advancing the Build Back Better Act's historic investments in maternal care, paid family and medical leave, childcare and more. Last month we celebrated the contributions of African Americans to the history of our great nation, and paid tribute to trailblazers, pioneers, heroes, and leaders like U.S. Congresswoman Barbara Jordan; U.S. Congressman Mickey Leland; Mae C. Jemison; activists, intellectuals, authors, and artists like Harriet Tubman, Rosa Parks, Maya Angelou, Toni Morrison, and Gwendolyn Brooks, to name just a few of the countless number of well-known and unsung heroes whose contributions have helped our nation become a more perfect union. The history of the United States has been marked by the great contributions of African American activists, leaders, writers, and artists. As a Member of Congress, I know that I stand on the shoulders of giants whose struggles and triumphs made it possible for me to stand here today and continue the fight for equality, justice, and progress for all, regardless of race, religion, gender or sexual orientation. Women's History Month is also a time to remember many pioneering women like U.S. Congresswoman Shirley Chisholm; activists Harriet Tubman and Rosa Parks; astronaut Mae C. Jemison; mathematicians like Katherine G. Johnson, Dorothy Vaughan and Mary Jackson; authors Maya Angelou, Toni Morrison, and Gwendolyn Brooks; all of whom have each in their own way, whether through courageous activism, cultural or intellectual contributions, or artistic creativity, forged social and political change, and forever changed our great Nation for the better. Shirley Chisholm became the first African American woman elected to Congress, when she was elected to represent the New York's Twelfth Congressional District in 1968 running on the slogan, ``Fighting Shirley Chisholm: Unbought and Unbossed.'' She reflected that spirit well during her 14 years in Congress. Before Shirley Chisolm, no black woman had ever served in the U.S. House of Representatives or the U.S. Senate but following in her footsteps are 51 black women Members of Congress, two black women U.S. Senators, including the president of that body and Vice-President of the United States; 23 Hispanic members; and 15 Asian-Pacific members, along with the first woman Speaker of the House, and mayors of several of the largest cities in the nation, including the District of Columbia, Chicago, San Francisco, Atlanta, New Orleans, Baltimore, Hartford, Minneapolis, San Antonio, and St. Louis. Shirley Chisolm had an understanding that during those turbulent times the nation required a determined leader to represent the voice of so many Americans who felt dismay at their treatment. She took an extremely active role in changing the way women were to be judged from that point on. She remarked that, ``Women in this country must become revolutionaries. We must refuse to accept the old, the traditional roles and stereotypes.'' This is a sentiment that I myself take to heart, women in this nation are now told they have a right to determine the kind of life they want to lead; Shirley Chisholm was at the core of this movement. This past August 26, 2021, we commemorated the 101st anniversary of the ratification of the 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which granted women the right to vote. This momentous achievement did not come easy or without struggle, for as the great abolitionist and orator, Fredrick Douglas stated: ``If there is no struggle, there is no progress . . . . Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will.'' The fight for women's suffrage was waged over a 72-year period, beginning in Seneca Falls, New York at the Seneca Falls Convention in 1848, and exemplifies the prophetic and timeless saying of Margaret Mead that one should: ``Never doubt the ability of handful of committed persons to change the world. It is the only thing that ever has.'' The Seneca Falls Conference was organized by Lucretia Mott, with others including Mary McClintock and Sojourner Truth, who went on to establish herself not only as a great advocate for women's suffrage but also as a great abolitionist. Among the courageous suffragists who spearheaded the movement were Alice Paul, who fearlessly executed the National Women's Party picketing protests, and conceived the hunger-strike in prison; Carrie Chapman Catt, who devised the ``winning plan'' at the Atlantic City Convention; and Ida B. Wells-Barnett, whose political activism and criticism of the suffrage leadership for excluding black women led to a more inclusive and effective movement. In 1916, four years before the ratification of the 19th Amendment, Jeannette Rankin was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives from Montana, the first woman elected to federal office in American history. A little over a century later, a record number of women serve in the House of Representatives, comprising 23.4% of the chamber's voting members, and presided over by Nancy Pelosi, the first and only woman elected Speaker of the House. In the 117th Congress, about 37% of women are women of color, and since 1964, more than 70 women of color have been elected to Congress. Although there remains much work to do to ensure that women enjoy full blessings of liberty and equality, that should not detract from the achievements and contributions to the greatness of our country made by American women, including Sally Kristen Ride, the first woman sent into space; Eileen Marie Collins, the first woman space shuttle pilot; Grace Murray Hopper, an American computer scientist and United States Navy rear admiral; and Katherine Johnson, one of the unsung heroes of the NASA Space Program, whose mathematical calculations helped the United States win the Space Race. Nor should we forget that the current Vice-President of the United States is Kamala D. Harris, Vice President Harris is the first woman, the first Black American, and the first South Asian American to be elected as Vice President. Similarly, we should remember that just five short years ago, Hillary Clinton shattered one glass ceiling when she became the first woman nominated as the presidential candidate of a major political party and came within 80,000 votes of winning the presidency and thus shattering the ultimate glass ceiling. American women will break this ceiling in the not distant future, drawing inspiration from trailblazers in other nations such as Golda Meir of Israel, Indira Ghandi of India, Ellen Sirleaf of Liberia, Margaret Thatcher of Great Britain, Angela Merkel of Germany, and Portia Simpson-Miller of Jamaica, among many others. In my home city of Houston, there are numerous men and women who are great because they have heeded the counsel of Dr. King who said: ``Everybody can be great because anybody can serve. You only need a heart full of grace. A soul generated by love.'' One barrier left to fall, however, is one of the most important, and that is membership on the Supreme Court of the United States. For most of our national history, presidents and senators have turned a deaf ear to Abigail Adams' plea to her husband ``to remember the ladies and be more generous and favorable to them than your ancestors.'' Since Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's 1981 appointment, only a small handful of women have been nominated to the High Court during this time, despite the fact that women constitute a majority of the general population, 37% of all attorneys in America, a number that will soon exceed the majority since a substantial majority (54%) of all law students in America are women. With Associate Justice Stephen Breyer's retirement announcement, President Biden and the U.S. Senate, now have been presented and should move quickly to capitalize on this opportunity to begin to rectify the High Court's gender and racial imbalance and to diversify its composition by confirming a member of the most underrepresented, disadvantaged, marginalized, longest suffering, and most patient demographic in America: black women. Longer than any other racial or ethnic group, black women have been subjected to the coercive powers of the law while being excluded from the opportunities to make the laws citizens are to live under. President Biden has made a nomination for the ages in selecting U.S. Circuit Court Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to serve as U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice. Not only does Judge Jackson possess one of the finest legal minds of her generation, her commitment to equal justice, the rule of law, and Constitution is unsurpassed. Judge Jackson will be a great Justice and a role model to women and girls everywhere, especially little black girls, that in America all things are possible with hard work and determination. With this nomination, we are taking a massive step towards having a government whose institutions, including and especially the Supreme Court, are comprised of persons that look like the American people. I applaud President Biden for making this historic nomination and urge the Senate to conduct a fair, impartial, and expeditious confirmation proceeding and confirm Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson--who has already been confirmed on a bipartisan basis three times. As we celebrated Black History Month and now Women's History Month, let us pay tribute to those who have come before us, and pay forward to future generations by addressing what is the number one issue for African American families, and all American families today: preserving the American promise of equal opportunity for all. And it is crucial that as we reflect on how far women have come, we also not lose sight of how far we have to go and what must be done to achieve true gender and racial equality so every girl everywhere can pursue her dreams and realize her potential. As we progress through Women's History Month, let us summon the extraordinary courage and resilience of the many women who came before us. Democrats will never relent as we carry on the fight for full equality--not only for our nation's daughters, but for women and girls all over the world. As the legendary Congresswoman Shirley Chisholm said, ``If they don't give you a seat at the table, bring a folding chair.''

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, as a senior member of the Committees on the Judiciary, on Homeland Security, and on the Budget, and the Congressional Women's Caucus, I am pleased to join this Women's Caucus Special Order with my colleagues, to discuss the bravery of Ukrainian women and girls in the face of Russia's war against Ukraine. I thank the Co-Chairs of the CWC, Representatives Dean and Gonzalez- Colon, for their leadership of the Bipartisan Congressional Women's Caucus. Firstly, I would like to commend all Ukrainians for their outstanding bravery. It is truly inspirational for Americans, and for people around the world. America stands with you. Russia's launch of a premeditated war against Ukraine is an attack on democracy and a grave violation of international law, global peace, and security. The fighting has sparked massive displacement and has forced over two million Ukrainians to flee their homes to neighboring states and has put women and girls at heightened risk of violence. Although many people have fled, millions have stayed behind to help fight the Russian invaders and defend Ukrainian sovereignty. Thousands of Ukrainian women have taken up arms and are playing a vital role in Ukraine's national defense. Today they make up 22.8% of the Ukrainian army, not including the thousands who have volunteered as civilian soldiers. Life in the military is not easy for women. While women have been serving in the Ukrainian military since the annexation of Crimea in 2014, they did not win the right to officially fight alongside their male counterparts until 2017. When Russian-backed forces seized part of the Donbas region and conflict ensued in 2014, thousands of women volunteered to help the Ukrainian military. They served as assault troops, medics, and snipers. But the sacrifices made by these women went largely unrecognized. Official documents issued by the Ukrainian military, listed these soldiers as seamstresses, cooks, and janitors. The women who volunteered ``often found themselves outside legal protection,'' according to the Invisible Battalion, an advocacy group for Ukrainian servicewomen, that studied women's roles in the war against Russia. Although these women have not always been adequately supported by their government because of soviet era laws forbidding them from enlisting, they have persisted. In 2017 a group of women veterans got together and lobbied for their rights, which brought about a much-needed change in the culture in the Ukrainian military. Just last year the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense determined that female soldiers marching in a military parade celebrating independence from the Soviet Union would wear high heels, not boots. Regardless of the numerous hurdles and mockeries Ukrainian women have faced and continue to face today, there are thousands who are putting their lives at risk to protect and defend their homeland. Among them have been a 79-year-old woman who recently learned how to fire a gun, a former beauty queen Anastasia Lenna, who represented Ukraine at the 2015 Miss Grand International pageant--and Kristina, a former wedding singer. Kristina was living in Italy last summer when tensions between Ukraine and Russia rose. While knowing the security risks, Kristina returned to her country to become a soldier. She told a VICE news reporter that ``The risk of saying goodbye to life is always there, [and she is] not afraid of death; [she] is afraid to [become a slave].'' Words that will forever stick with me. Women's History Month is a celebration of women's contributions to history, culture and society, and there is no better example of this than those women fighting in Ukraine today. So, on this day, March 9, 2022, I would like to publicly commend the women fighting in Ukraine for their boundless courage and bravery. The world stands with you and will continue to fight alongside you to put an end to Putin's cruel parade.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3113, the ``Modernizing Access to Our Public Land Act,'' or the MAPLand Act, which will make it easier for every American to access data for outdoor recreation possibilities. It directs the Department of the Interior, the Forest Service, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to jointly develop and adopt standards to ensure compatibility among federal databases for the collection and dissemination of outdoor recreation data related to federal lands. The Department of the Interior, the Forest Service, and the Corps of Engineers must digitize and publish geographic information system mapping data that includes: federal interests, including easements and rights-of-way, in private land; status information as to whether roads and trails are open or closed; the dates on which roads and trails are seasonally opened and closed; the types of vehicles that are allowed on each segment of roads and trails; the boundaries of areas where hunting or recreational shooting is regulated or closed; and the boundaries of any portion of a body of water that is closed to entry, is closed to watercraft, or has horsepower limitations for watercraft. The MAPLand Act's stipulations will provide essential information to all Americans who wish to spend time on our beautiful public lands. Because of the provisions in this bill, Americans will have the most up to date information about the trail they wish to hike, stream or lake they wish to fish on, or regulations of grounds on which they wish to hunt. This ensures that all Americans will be safe while exploring our great outdoors, making this legislation's passage of the utmost necessity. This bill would also allow our agencies to manage and plan more effectively while also reducing the potential for access-related conflicts between recreators and private landowners. Simply put, this legislation promises to help more people get outdoors. Currently, more than 9.52 million acres of land in the West lack permanent and legal access points for public use, and information on these lands is still kept on paper files. Approximately 5,000 of the Forest Service's 37,000 recorded easements have been digitized and uploaded to an electronic database. The MAPLand Act would help give federal land management agencies the resources they need to digitize these files for public use, as well as require these agencies to provide information on seasonal vehicle restrictions on public roads and trails, hunting boundaries, and watercraft restrictions. Madam Speaker, it is for these reasons that I strongly support H.R. 3113, the MAPLand Act and therefore urge my colleagues to support this legislation as well.