Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, just recently I read an article that indicated that one in six Texans had been infected with COVID-19. As the study indicates in our local newspaper, that may be the case for States around the Nation. So I think it is extremely important that the General Services Administration and the administrator of that department follow their administrative duties to allow the President- elect and Vice President-elect to be engaged in COVID-19 briefings to save lives. In addition, I think it is crucial that we move forward on the Heroes Act that will provide for PPEs, will provide for payroll protection, and, of course, testing. Early on, testing was supposed to be 5 million a day. We have only tested 1.6 million a day minimally in the United States at least. We have to do more to save lives. Testing, social distancing, washing your hands, and wearing a mask will save lives. It will save lives here, and it will save lives across America. Finally, we must pass this legislation to help with the mental health stress people are facing and the economic stress they are facing. The General Services Administration needs to do their job and do it now so that the American people's lives can be saved.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank very much the distinguished manager, the honorable Barbara Lee. I am most grateful for her yielding to me. Also, let me acknowledge the very important work that she has done over the years in disparities and racial equity. I thank her for being my partner in H.R. 40, and me her partner in H. Res. 100, that really also speaks to the pain and the issues of disparities. We look forward to reconciliation and we look forward to repair with those two initiatives. Let me also acknowledge the chair of the Congressional Black Caucus for gathering us all together, and my colleagues that are here, and my colleague that has just joined us, Congresswoman Adams. Let me try to address where we are nationwide and how disparities weaves its way into this phenomenon of the transfer of power--the peaceful transfer of power--and how the President's status of the President-elect and Vice President-elect is interwoven in how to best respond to one of the disparities in healthcare, and that is COVID-19. Mr. Speaker, first to take note of the fact that the stability of the United States electoral system is remarkable, it first involved the election of 1800, which marked the first time in United States history that power was transferred. The second was the 1876 election, which the President was chosen, who won neither the absolute majority popular vote nor the necessary electoral votes, but it was resolved by the infamous Hayes-Tilden Compromise. The third instance involved the 2000 election, which sought the Supreme Court effectively deciding the Presidency. But in each of those moments there was an end. In each of those moments there was a transfer of power. We find ourselves now in a quandary. Believe it or not, there are people who are on ventilators. There are people in El Paso and Dallas who are in hospitals, who are being negatively impacted by the idea of the lack of peaceful engagement, specifically because the President- elect and Vice President-elect definitively need to be able to secure information to have their COVID-19 task force speak with the White House task force to understand prospectively how vaccines will be transferred or implemented throughout the Nation. So as people are languishing on hospital beds, as loved ones are saying goodbye over telephones, we have this inability to transfer power. Our history has shown the transfer of power in the Nation. It was designed as a benefit. It can be harmed when the transition is not smooth and transparent, which can be invariably attributed to one or more of the following reasons. The outgoing President is still engaged in the building of his or her legacy in the final months of the administration; two, there are sharp differences in philosophy or style between the outgoing and incoming administration; or the current or future President actively makes trouble for his or her successor. In this timeframe, I hope my colleagues, Republicans and Democrats, will find a way, as we come back to Washington, to be able to look to the transition of Dwight D. Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy, for example, and speak to the idea of how this should go; or maybe even from Lyndon Baines Johnson and Richard Nixon, opposite parties, but yet they found a way to come together in the wake of the importance of the Constitution and democracy. Why would I start a health disparities discussion on the transfer of power? As I indicated, it is very important for the work that is going to be part of containing COVID-19 to really start now, to really start now with a new attitude about wearing masks, socially distance, washing your hands, and yes, testing, testing, testing. That is what I have found as a chair of the bipartisan Congressional COVID Task Force where we have been working on doing the work of implementing and talking about the diagnostic testing and all its gradations over the past couple of months. Our first testing site in Houston was opened on March 19. We have opened 41 test sites. The most recent was this past Saturday. We open the 42nd on this coming Saturday. The question in disparities is very, very real. The pandemics dealing with racial disparities indicates that there are 74 Black or African-American persons out of 100,000 impacted by COVID; Alaska Native and American Indian, 40; Hispanic or Latino, 40; Asian, 31; White, 30; Native Hawaiian, 29; others, 29. We can see that there are large numbers of African Americans, Hispanic, and American Indian. We just heard that the Navajo community will be shutting down for a period of time. That is how devastating COVID-19 is. That is how much the disparities in healthcare are evident. Let me share with you this question of disparities and underlying conditions. Those are numbers of the number of deaths. So the number of deaths is much higher among African Americans and Hispanics. Why? Thirty percent more likely to die of CVD--that is cardiovascular disease--that is Black Americans. Latin Americans, 40 percent more likely to die from stroke. And then it goes on. Two times as likely to die as an infant, two times more likely to die of asthma, three times more likely to develop ESRD, two times more likely to die from prostate cancer, two times on cervical cancer, three times in pregnancy. There is still a high level of maternal mortality among African Americans. As it relates to Latin Americans and Hispanics, two times more likely to die of liver cancer, two times more likely to die of asthma, 1.7 more times to have diabetes, and two times more likely to die of HIV- AIDS. Which is why we see this increasing number of those on that ethnic backgrounds, African Americans, Hispanics and, of course, Native Americans and Alaskans, because of the underlying conditions and the lack of access to healthcare. We are on this floor today because, as members of the Tri-Caucus, we have made it our constructive business, starting from the Affordable Care Act, to deal with the question of health disparities. As a Member of Congress many years back, I authored legislation to create an Office of Health Disparities in the Health and Human Services Department, knowing that there was a lack of recognition of different clinicals that African Americans were not participating in, men and women. Hispanic men and women were not participating in those as well. In the course of the work that we are doing right now, we are seeing a high number of deaths. Texas hit 1 million cases on November 6. We were the first State to hit 1 million cases. Now, in Dallas and El Paso, my sister cities, my colleagues who are there working very hard, our hospitals are being oversaturated. The same thing that happened to Houston, Texas, in July of 2020. And so it is crucial to do three things: One, we must pass the Heroes Act. We are desperate for that money in testing, desperate for PPPs, desperate for PPEs. We are now running out of PPEs in some of these saturated towns. We are desperate, as I said, for testing. We are desperate for economic dollars that are needed. Every testing site that I have had--most of them, let me clarify that, we have had full distribution by our Houston Food Bank, because people need food. And as evidenced with lines in my sister State, just a day or two ago in Los Angeles, we saw cars and cars and cars of individuals recognizing that testing was crucial. I believe that we cannot ignore anymore. There must be cooperation with our Republican friends, I will call them, to deal with providing this financial relief to our cities and to all of our constituents who are desperately in need. We must acknowledge the health disparities. It is important both in the White House task force, we know that it is happening in the COVID task force under the President-elect and Vice President-elect, that health disparities can kill. And we can see that the lack of a transition of power right at this time, the continued denial of who has been the victor, so that the General Services Administration can stop violating the administrative procedure code in not allowing the resources necessary for the team that is now in place looking to transition to power with the existing Presidency being stopped, not by law, not by any determination that you did not meet the standard of victory in terms of the Electoral College, but by an individual administrator who indicates that they refuse to certify and to allow that transfer of funds for them to work on. So I thank the gentlewoman for allowing me to present today, to speak both on the disparities and the needs for response, but also on the devastating impact of COVID-19 impacting now several States. Mr. Speaker, I want to close on this. I want to say it to America. We are coming on our holidays, and many different faiths celebrate their holidays during this time, from Thanksgiving to, in the Christian faith, Christmas, but many different faiths. I am not here to judge how and which faith will be celebrating this very special time of the year. We beg of you, on the basis of science, to realize that because someone is your family member does not mean that they are immune or that they cannot transfer COVID to you, or they are not asymptomatic. My message is that we must test, test, test. Today, I had a press conference in Houston, and I want to read these words as I close. I would encourage all cities and States to follow what was utilized in Los Angeles. It was effective. And that is a public safety alert. A public safety alert that is simple, that goes out to the text of all citizens. COVID-19 cases are increasing. Please wear a mask and social distance. Get tested if you have symptoms or might have been exposed. I would add to that, get tested because you may be asymptomatic. That simple note to the text of people in that State allowed thousands of individuals to see the importance of getting tested, and they went to the testing sites. That is going to help contain and stop the community spread. So my message is, as you get into Thanksgiving, please do your events outside. If you are inside, doing them 10 or less. Please ask all of your relatives and loved ones to get tested, tested, tested, so that we can contain this preceding the vaccine, which we know is coming, but is not coming as soon as we would like. We also know that we will be addressing the question of implementation and distribution as it relates to people of color and those who suffer disparities, along with the elderly and those underlying conditions. You will not get a vaccine tomorrow. While we are waiting for that process, we need to do what is right. And that is to continue to social distance, wearing the mask and getting tested. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for her kindness and her leadership. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to join my colleagues during this Special Order to shed light on the impact of COVID-19 on communities of color. I want to recognize and thank Congresswoman Karen Bass and the Congressional Black Caucus for hosting this hour, so that we may not only speak about the disproportionate impact of the coronavirus on communities of color but also call upon the federal government to address these devastating inequities. Mr. Speaker, before addressing the devastating impact of the COVID-19 crisis on communities of color, I wish to speak briefly on the important subject of presidential transitions and the peaceful transfer of power for which the United States is justly celebrated around the world. The stability of the United States electoral system is remarkable, but this does not mean it has never been tested; it has--three times-- and weathered each crisis. The first involved the election of 1800, which marked the first time in United States history that power had transferred peacefully between political parties. The second involved the 1876 election, in which a president was chosen who won neither the absolute majority popular vote nor the necessary number of electoral votes and was resolved by the infamous `Hayes-Tilden Compromise,' which effectively ended Reconstruction. The third instance involved the 2000 election which saw the Supreme Court effectively decide the presidency by ordering the cessation of ballot counting in the state of Florida. Mr. Speaker, what enabled the country to weather these crises is that all parties, including the victor and the vanquished, understood and accepted the primacy of the rule of law and the bedrock democratic value that power is only legitimately conveyed by the people through their votes and is held in trust and to be used exclusively to protect and advance the national interest. A peaceful transfer of power implies also a smooth and seamless transition from outgoing administration to the incoming one, which has usually but not always been the case. Our history has shown how the transfer of power, and the nation it was designed to benefit, can be harmed when the transition is not smooth and transparent, which can invariably be attributed to one or more of the following reasons: (1) the outgoing president is still engaged in the business of building his or her legacy in the final months of the administration; (2) there are sharp differences in philosophy or style between the outgoing and incoming administrations; or (3) the current or future president actively makes trouble for his successor or predecessor. The transition between President Dwight D. Eisenhower and the newly elected John F. Kennedy is an example of the dangers of presidential legacy building post-election because Eisenhower authorized covert programs for regime change in what is today the Democratic Republic of the Congo, in the Dominican Republic, and, most famously, against Fidel Castro's Cuba but none of these programs were completed by the time Kennedy took the oath of office. The second form of trouble can come from the soon-to-be-powerful people on the receiving end of a transition, as when incoming President George W. Bush failed to pay due heed to the warnings received from then President Bill Clinton about the dangers of Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. But far the most serious harm to be avoided stems from the failure of the outgoing administration to prioritize and expedite the sharing of vital information and resources with the incoming administration. This is the danger we currently face in the aftermath of President- elect Biden's resounding victory in the Electoral College and the popular vote. Mr. Speaker, the federal government is perhaps the most complex organization in the world because it involves a $5 trillion-plus budget, four million person workforce, including the military and reservists, who are stationed all over the globe, and two million career civil servants in hundreds of operating units of the Executive Branch, not to mention the 4,000 political appointments made by the President. So, a presidential transition of this enterprise is a massive operation that requires a lot of work, time, and cooperation in three important areas. The first is access to the agencies themselves--there are over 100 operating in the government--and the incoming team needs to understand what's happening inside them because each and every one of them have different urgent issues that they are addressing and deciding, including for example, the approval and distribution of any vaccine for COVID-19 and dealing with the economic damage caused by the pandemic. The second area is the processing of personnel, 1,200 of whom require Senate confirmation and who will need security clearances and financial agreements with the Office of Government Ethics to make sure there are no conflicts. Third, the incoming President must have access to the President's Daily Brief, to ensure it has awareness and understanding of the most current threats and challenges facing our nation. The final area is providing funding needed to pay the salaries and expenses of the incoming administration's transition personnel. I call upon the current President to honor his oath of office to defend, protect, and preserve the Constitution and America's sacred tradition of peaceful transfers of power and begin the full and seamless transition to the Biden Administration. Turning to the immediate subject at hand, we must recognize the impact of COVID-19 on people of color and its devastating consequences on the communities we represent. As a Founding Member of the Bipartisan Congressional Coronavirus Task Force, I call upon my fellow Members of Congress to not only recognize the disproportionate impact of this virus on communities of color but also to come together to redress this reality. I first saw news reports on the rapid spread of the coronavirus in early January. As the numbers of infected increased, I knew this was not something to be taken lightly, so I began to monitor the situation more closely. On February 10, 2020, I held the first press conference on the issue of the novel coronavirus at Houston Intercontinental Airport, where I was joined by public health officials, local unions, and advocates to raise awareness regarding the virus, the implications it might have for travel to the United States from China, and the need to combat early signs of discrimination targeting Asian businesses in the United States. From the onset of this pandemic, I have actively worked to address the negative and unequal affects of this disease on people of color. I have facilitated the opening of 41 COVID-19 testing sites, which have collectively provided over 200,000 tests to residents in Harris County, one of the most diverse counties in the state of Texas. Across the United States, Black individuals comprise thirteen percent of the population. Yet, we experience a higher rate of incarceration and health disparities, are more vulnerable to economic slowdowns, and are even more likely to get COVID-19 and face significantly worse health outcomes from the disease. Disparities tell the story of living while Black in America, and there are disparities in every aspect of African American life and death. Right now, Black people are dying at 2.2 times the rate and Latinx people at two times the rate of white people. Whereas American Indian and Alaska Native people are 5.3 times more likely than white people to be hospitalized due to COVID-19. My district of Harris County has reported over 175,000 total cases of coronavirus, of which over 17,300 identify as Black and over 37,700 identify as Hispanic or Latinx. From a high prevalence of preexisting conditions to limited employment opportunities to additional structural inequities that are the result of implicit bias and racial discrimination, there are several factors at play for why communities of color are disproportionately affected by the coronavirus, For example, the African American community is known to be highly affected by preexisting conditions, such as diabetes, heart disease, hypertension, lung disease, and obesity. With these underlying health conditions, many African Americans suffer from an impaired immune system, thereby dramatically increasing the risk of being infected with and the fatality of the coronavirus. Limited employment opportunities also play a role in understanding why people of color are most affected by this disease. According to the Center for Economic and Policy Research, Black workers make up about one in nine workers overall, but they represent about one in six front-line-industry workers, further increasing the disproportionate likelihood of being exposed to and contracting the virus. These disparities cannot be separated from the history of enslavement of Black people and subsequent periods of segregation, racialized violence, pervasive racial discrimination and their ongoing impacts. With that in mind, I urge my colleagues to support my bill, H.R. 40, the Commission to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African- Americans Act, as it is the most comprehensive legislative solution to begin repairing the legacy of systemic racism and accounting for the harms of past and present. Mr. Speaker, it is abundantly clear that people across the United States are struggling in the face of this epidemic. As Members of Congress, we have a duty to our constituents to address this vicious cycle of socioeconomic disparities that further the inequities facing communities of color, especially during the COVID-19 crisis. We must come together to ensure that COVID-19 relief extends to all members of our communities.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to all the men and women who have served in the Armed Forces of the United States and risked their lives to defend our freedoms and way of life and took and lived the oath to ``support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic'' and bore true faith and allegiance to the same, an obligation they took freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion. Veterans are truly heroes walking among us. I want to thank all of our armed serviceman and women for their selfless dedication to our protection every day. Veterans Day is a reminder to all of us who live in freedom that, as President Kennedy said, `The price of freedom is high, but Americans have always paid it.'' This Veterans Day is a welcome opportunity to remember that the fallen who gave the last full measure of devotion to their country on battlefields around the world--in places whose names may be unforgettable--or locations that have slipped into the pages of history. We will never forget: Revolutionary War--Valley Forge, YorkTown; Civil War--The Battle of Antietam, The Battle of Gettysburg; World War I--The Battle of Argonne, Flanders Field, Verdun; World War II--Pearl Harbor, Battle of Bataan, The Battle of Midway, D-Day, Battle of the Bulge, Battle of Anzio, Battle of Corregidor; Korean War--Inchon, Heart Break Ridge, Pork Chop Hill; Vietnam--Tet Offensive, Battle of Hue; Desert Storm--September 11, 2001, Pentagon Attack (125 killed); Operation Enduring Freedom--Battle of Kandahar; Operation Iraqi Freedom--Second Battle of Fallujah. The memory of the fallen are never forgotten. Each Veterans Day, Americans come together to remember those who have served our country around the world in the name of freedom and democracy. The debt that we owe to them is immeasurable. Their sacrifices, and those of their families, are freedom's foundation. Without the brave efforts of all the soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines and Coast Guardsmen and women and their families, our country would not live so freely. I offer my deepest gratitude to our nation's troops and reservists, their families, and the 21.6 million veterans, including 29,126 here in the 18th Congressional District. 21.6 million brave men and women are veterans of our nation's military service. This includes more than 2 million women, 2.7 million African-American men and women, 1.5 million Hispanic men and women, 342,000 Asian- American Pacific Islanders, and 178,000 American Indians. Nine in ten military families believe the public does not understand or appreciate their sacrifices. We use Veterans Day to show our veterans and military families how important they are to us and how grateful we are for them each and everyday. November is National Caregivers Month to show our caregivers how grateful we are for them. It is only fitting that we thank those caregivers who serve our military today. 5.5 million spouses, parents, children, and other loved ones care for our wounded warriors and 15 percent of caregivers spend 40+ hours a week providing care for our military families. As a senior member of the House Committees on Judiciary and Homeland Security, I care deeply about our veterans. In Congress, I have sponsored many legislative proposals and cosponsored more than 50 pieces of legislation that will positively benefit our veterans and their families.'' This year, I introduced H.R. 2898, the Buddy Check Week, which has been endorsed by the American Legion. The American Legion send email urging all congressional offices to support veterans by cosponsoring H.R. 2898, a bill to direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to designate a week as ``Buddy Check Week'' for the purpose of outreach and education concerning peer wellness checks for veterans, and for other purposes. The American Legion was chartered and incorporated by Congress in 1919, and today it is the nation's largest wartime veterans service organization. As we continue to fight the COVID-19 pandemic on all fronts, we cannot forget about our duty to care for our veterans who have already sacrificed so much for this country. Throughout this epidemic, the feeling of isolation among veterans has only been amplified, causing an increased risk of suicide within the community. CBS News has reported a 20 percent increase in military suicides when compared to the same period in 2019. A report conducted by the Meadows Mental Health Policy Institute found that for every 5 percent increase in the unemployment rate, we could lose an additional 550 veterans to suicide annually and up to 20,000 more veterans may be susceptible to substance abuse as a result of the crisis. Now more than ever, we need the Buddy Check Week Act. This bill would provide vital support and training to organize outreach events and educate veterans on how to conduct peer wellness checks and recognize signs of problems in fellow veterans that indicate suicide risks. This legislation is modeled after the American Legion's ``Buddy Check National Week of Calling,'' held March 11 to 16, 2019, and will augment the organization's efforts to conduct outreach to veterans across the nation. The Buddy Check Week Act directs the Secretary of Veterans Affairs in consultation with veterans, non-profits that serve veterans, mental health experts, and members of the Armed Forces, to develop and implement collaborative education opportunities for veterans to learn how to conduct wellness checks. The VA will provide online or in-person training to individuals, as well as provide opportunities for Veterans Service Organizations (VS0s) to learn how to: train individuals to conduct peer wellness checks, transfer phone calls to the Veterans Crisis Line, and be resilient when handling a veteran in crisis. The Buddy Check Week Act is a fitting way to honor our veterans and I look forward to working with my colleagues to see that it becomes law. On the battlefield, the military pledges to leave no soldier behind. As a nation, let it be our pledge that when they return home, we leave no veteran behind. This day and every day let us honor their service with actions that fulfill our commitment to our troops, their families, and our veterans--and that are worthy of our grateful nation.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, as senior member of the House Committee on the Judiciary, as citizen of the United States, as a mother, and as a African American woman I rise in my strong opposition to the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to replace the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court of the United States. I oppose this nomination because Judge Barrett's extreme record on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, along with her ideologically driven writings and speeches, demonstrate that she is incapable of rendering equal justice under law. Judge Barrett is hostile to Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), and to Supreme Court cases upholding the Affordable Care Act (``ACA'') and is being nominated to be the decisive vote on the Court to reverse these landmark rulings, so that millions of people can be deprived of access to essential health care services and abortion access. One highly respected legal commentator who has studied her record in depth called Judge Barrett's record on the bench ``fundamentally cruel'' and said that she ``has either written or joined a remarkable number of opinions that harm unpopular and powerless individuals who rely on the judiciary to safeguard their rights.'' The rush to confirm Judge Barrett is a key part of this impeached and dissembling president's corrupt scheme effort to avoid a peaceful transfer of power and remain in office at any cost. Indeed, the President recently admitted that he wanted a ninth justice in place because he believes the Supreme Court will end up deciding the election winner, and he wants another loyalist on the Court to tip the scale in his favor. No justice confirmed under these circumstances would have legitimacy in a case bearing on the outcome of the presidential election, so it is troubling that Judge Barrett has not stated publicly that she will recuse herself from participating in any such case. By nearly a two-to-one margin, Americans believe that the winner of the upcoming presidential election should fill the current Supreme Court vacancy. In this they are in lockstep agreement with the principle enunciated by Senate Majority Leader McConnell on February 13, 2016, when he refused to even confirmation hearings, much less a floor vote, for President Obama nomination of Judge Merrick Garland to succeed Justice Scalia: The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president. This principle was echoed by the current Judiciary Chairman Graham who stated in 2016: I want you to use my words against me. If there's a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say Lindsey Graham said let's let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination. Before she became the beneficiary of this 180 degree reversal in principle, even Judge Barrett herself enthusiastically agreed with Majority Leader McConnell and Judiciary Committee Chairman Graham that the Senate could and should refuse to advise and consent to a Supreme Court nomination made in an election year, especially where the nomination would alter the ideological balance of the Court. The legitimacy of the federal judiciary stems from the public's faith that its decision-making is fair and impartial but the rush to confirm Judge Barrett will deeply tarnish the integrity and reputation of the Supreme Court. As a group of former federal judges counseled in their letter to Senate leaders: Our nation is on the precipice of a national election and is in the grip of a global pandemic. Our citizenry is sharply polarized--a foreboding sign for the health of any democracy. The judicial confirmation process has increasingly become dangerously politicized. Injecting a Supreme Court confirmation fight into this noxious mix will unalterably change and diminish the public's faith in this vital institution. Let me now turn to the specific harm to the American people that will result if this nominee were to be confirmed as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. Judge Barrett is expected to be the deciding vote to strike down the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act, or ``ObamaCare,'' depriving millions of people with access to health care amidst the worst public health crisis this nation has witnessed in over a hundred years. The ACA provides critical health care protections to millions of people, including an estimated 130 million Americans with pre-existing conditions such as the seven million Americans who have tested positive for COVID-19. If this crucial health care access is stripped away, it would have a particularly devastating impact on communities of color and people with disabilities; the rate of Black people who are uninsured would dramatically increase 20 percent, and an estimated 5.4 million Latinos, 2 million Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders, and 300,000 Native Americans could lose coverage, and Americans with disabilities would be particularly impacted, with the uninsured rate for people with disabilities rising by up to 42 percent. Invalidation of the ACA would not only remove critical health care protections for people with pre-existing conditions and people with disabilities, it would disproportionately harm people of color and potentially jeopardize access to a COVID-19 vaccine, the Medicaid expansion that has brought health care to tens of millions of people, critical nondiscrimination provisions, coverage for those under 26 who are currently on their parents' health care insurance plan, insurance coverage for substance abuse treatment including opioid addition, and the removal of caps that insurance companies previously placed on expensive medical treatment. The Supreme Court is set to decide the fate of the ACA and its protections for people with pre-existing conditions this term and will hear oral arguments in California v. Texas. __ U.S. __, No. 19-840 (2020)--the legal challenge to this vital law--on November 10, just one week after Election Day, and that is why the President and his Senate acolytes are rushing forward with this nomination to try to install Judge Barrett on the Court in time to kill the ACA, a feat they have tried but failed to accomplish 70 times through the legislative process. In Doe v. Purdue University, 928 F.3d 652 (7th Cir. 2019), Judge Barrett wrote an opinion that allowed a male student--who was credibly accused of committing multiple sexual assaults and suspended from the university--to advance a Title IX lawsuit against the university alleging he was discriminated against because he was a man. Judge Barrett's ruling turned a sex discrimination statute on its head, using a law meant to prevent and address sexual assault to promote impunity for that very same behavior and will discourage universities from disciplining male perpetrators of sexual violence since doing so may result in their being sued for sex discrimination. Judge Barrett's opinion in this case intimated erroneously and intentionally that the U.S. Department of Education's Obama-era 2011 Title IX guidance calling on schools to take sexual harassment seriously resulted in discrimination against men--even though this guidance prohibited the unfair procedures the male student alleged he experienced. It is unconscionable that we are even considering replacing Justice Ginsburg's legacy with a judge who is willing to allow sex discrimination laws to be used as a sword for men rather than a shield to protect women. In the field of criminal justice and procedure, Judge Barrett's judicial record raises serious questions about whether she would be fair to victims of law enforcement misconduct; she has regularly ruled for law enforcement and against defendants in criminal cases and people in prison, often in dissent, reflecting her extreme views. For example, Judge Barrett dissented in United States v. Uriarte, No. 19-2092, 2020 WL 5525119 (7th Cir. Sept. 15, 2020), where the Seventh Circuit, sitting en banc, applied the reduced mandatory minimum sentencing requirements of the First Step Act, an important, bipartisan criminal justice reform measure passed by Congress and signed into law in 2018. In a 9-3 opinion, the Seventh Circuit held that at the time of the enactment of the First Step Act, Hector Uriarte, a federal defendant, was convicted but not yet sentenced, and therefore eligible for the First Step Act's reduced sentencing procedure. Mr. Uriarte was resentenced under the First Step Act to a term of 20 years, and the Trump administration challenged that new sentence, and predictably Judge Barrett authored the dissent, siding with the Trump administration that the First Step Act did not apply to the defendant. In another case, McCottrell v. White, 933 F.3d 651 (7th Cir. 2019), the majority reversed the district judge's finding that the guards had fired ``reasonable'' warning shots and remanded the case but Judge Barrett dissented, siding with prison guards who fired buckshot from their shotguns, significantly injuring two inmates, and opining that the inmates should be denied the opportunity to prove at trial that excessive force was used against them in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Judge Barrett's reasoning was so unreasonable that the majority was moved to note that ``the dissent suggests that firing two shotguns loaded with buckshot into the ceiling of a crowded dining hall cannot be deemed to be malicious and sadistic or even characterized as an intentional application of force without a showing that a guard `intended to hit or harm someone with his application of force.' That standard is met here.'' The scourge of gun violence kills nearly 40,000 Americans every year but Judge Barrett's record indicates she would likely be a pivotal vote on the Court to support the gun lobby and strike down common-sense gun safety laws. In Kanter v. Barr, 919 F.3d 437 (7th Cir. 2019), a Seventh Circuit panel majority consisting of Reagan held that a law barring felons from possessing a firearm did not violate the Second Amendment but unsurprisingly Judge Barrett dissented, accusing the majority of treating the Second Amendment as a ``second-class right'' and stating that she believed the ban on gun possession should only apply to violent felons. And outrageously, Judge Barrett also concluded that it was appropriate to deny nonviolent felons the right to vote but not the right to bear arm, writing ``history does show that felons could be disqualified from exercising certain rights--like the rights to vote and serve on juries--because these rights belonged only to virtuous citizens.'' We do not need a Supreme Court Justice whose world view is that the right to own an AR-15 is more precious and valued than the fundamental right to vote. Upon Judge Barrett's nomination to the Supreme Court, the Giffords Law Center stated: Judge Barrett holds Second Amendment views that are far more extreme than conservatives like Justice Antonin Scalia. Her willingness to disregard established precedent and strike down gun safety laws is too radical for this country and even past Republican administrations. Moreover, it is clear that based on her statements and judicial record, Judge Barrett is incapable of serving as a fair and neutral arbiter in reproductive rights cases, including those involving abortion, contraception, and perhaps even fertility care. In 2006, Judge Barrett signed her name to a two-page advertisement in a South Bend, Indiana newspaper calling for the end of the legal right to abortion--which, under her extremist views, includes some forms of birth control and in vitro fertilization but she failed to disclose this document in her Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaire. In 2012, Judge Barrett signed a letter entitled ``Unacceptable'' that protested the Obama administration's good faith effort to create a compromise in carrying out the ACA's requirement ensuring comprehensive birth control coverage, an accommodation permitted eligible employers and schools to opt out of covering birth control but still ensure that the workers and students had access to seamless coverage of essential care. As a signatory to this letter, Judge Barrett demonstrated that she is willing to eschew science in favor of her own personal biases and thinks employers can deny their workers birth control coverage. And unsurprisingly, Judge Barrett's judicial record reflects her deep hostility to reproductive freedom. In Planned Planned Parenthood of Ind. & Ky., Inc. v. Adams, 937 F.3d 973, 981 (7th Cir. 2019), Judge Barrett voted to rehear a case involving an Indiana abortion restriction that judges already deemed likely unconstitutional. The Indiana law put minors in dangerous situations by requiring them to notify their parents even if a judge already found the minor to be mature enough to make this decision without involving a parent, which the district court noted that ``the requirement of providing parental notification before obtaining an abortion carries with it the threat of domestic abuse, intimidation, coercion, and actual physical obstruction.'' The Indiana law was in clear violation of longstanding Supreme Court precedent, and the three-judge Seventh Circuit panel that blocked the Indiana law found that it would likely impose ``an undue burden for the unemancipated minors who seek to obtain an abortion without parental involvement via the judicial bypass.'' Yet Judge Barrett joined a dissent that questioned whether the plaintiffs could even challenge the law before it went into effect, arguing erroneously that the status of pre-enforcement challenges in the abortion context'' was ``unsettled'' and deserved full court review. In another case, Planned Parenthood of Indiana & Kentucky v. Commissioner of Indiana State Department of Health, 917 F.3d 532 (7th Cir. 2018), Judge Barrett voted in dissent to rehear a case already deemed unconstitutional and joined a dissent that argued that a state should be able to restrict abortion when the reason for that choice is the fetus's gender, race, sex, or fetal diagnosis (often known as ``reason bans''), even though that provision was not being considered in the decision before the court. President Trump has bragged repeatedly that he would only nominate justices who would ``automatically'' overturn Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973); it is clear that Judge Barrett has passed his litmus test. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a fearless champion of justice and the conscience of the Court so it is doubly outrageous that the Senate majority is attempting to rush through Judge Barrett's nomination rather than addressing the many urgent challenges that are gripping our nation at this moment--from the devastating impact of the worst public health crisis in a hundred years, to the racial reckoning over police brutality and violence, to the need to safeguard our democracy by helping fund the election and U.S. Postal Service. At a time when more than 215,000 Americans have lost their lives to COVID-19 and the need for health care access is more acute than ever, this President and this temporary Republican Senate majority has chosen to subordinate passing legislation to aid an ailing nation to stealing and filling a Supreme Court vacancy with a nominee hostile to health care access, hostile to women's rights, and indifferent to the plea for equal justice being voiced across the country by Americans of every race, creed, color, religion, and region. Madam Speaker, I end where I began: Judge Barrett's extreme record on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, along with her ideologically driven writings and speeches, demonstrate that she is incapable of rendering equal justice under law. I urge this nomination be defeated and that this vacancy not be filled until after the election of the next President of the United States.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, today I rise to join my colleagues during this Special Order to honor Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died on Friday, September 18, 2020 at the age of 87 years old. As a direct beneficiary of her advancement of women's rights and a long-time admirer of her vigorous defense of the constitution, I am honored but heartbroken to pay tribute to Justice Ginsburg, an American hero, feminist icon, and role model to millions. Today, tomorrow, and forever, the American people mourn the loss of a true titan, an American legend, and an inspiration. Our thoughts and prayers are with Ruth's family, friends, and loved ones. Ruth Bader Ginsburg dedicated her life to defending the Constitution and protecting the sanctity of America's democratic ideals, and we will forever be indebted to her service to this country. Joan Ruth Bader, fondly nicknamed Kiki, was born on March 15, 1933 to an immigrant family and grew up in Brooklyn's Flatbush neighborhood. Ruth Bader Ginsburg often spoke of her mother's large ambitions for her, and how the devastating loss of her mother's death at an early age instilled in her the determination to live a life that her mother would have been proud of. And so, she did. Ruth Bader attended Cornell University where she met Martin D. Ginsburg, her future husband and love of her life to whom she was married for 54 years. At the age of 21, Ruth Bader graduated Phi Beta Kappa from Cornell with a Bachelor of Arts degree in Government on June 23, 1954 and was the highest-ranking female student in her graduating class. A month after graduating from Cornell, Ruth and Martin were married and moved to Fort Sill, Oklahoma, where Martin was stationed as a Reserve Officers' Training Corps officer in the U.S. Army Reserve after his call-up to active duty. To help support the family, Ruth Bader Ginsburg worked for the Social Security Administration office in Oklahoma, where she was demoted after becoming pregnant with her first child, Jane, who was born in 1955. In the fall of 1956, Ruth Bader Ginsburg enrolled at Harvard Law School, where she was one of only 9 women in a class of about 500 men. Harvard Law Dean Erwin Griswold reportedly invited all the female law students to dinner at his family home and asked the female law students, including Ginsburg, ``Why are you at Harvard Law School, taking the place of a man?'' When her husband took a job in New York City, Ruth Bader Ginsburg transferred to Columbia Law School and became the first woman to be on two major law reviews: Harvard Law Review and Columbia Law Review. In 1959, she earned her law degree at Columbia and tied for first in her class but despite these enviable credentials and distinguished record of excellence, no law firm in New York City would hire her as a lawyer because she was a woman. Ruth Bader Ginsburg became a crusader for women's rights and an unstoppable force who transformed the law and defied social convention. Her now infamous quote, ``I ask no favor for my sex; all I ask of our brethren is that they take their feet off our necks'', was a personal mantra for the Justice as it characterized her fight for and pursuit of equal rights throughout her lifetime. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, later affectionately known as the `Notorious RBG,' was as instrumental and historically significant to the cause of women's rights as was Thurgood Marshall to the cause of civil rights for African Americans. As a young lawyer and Director of the Women's Rights Project of the American Civil Liberties Union, Ruth Bader Ginsburg litigated six landmark cases before the Supreme Court, winning five out of the six cases. Like Justice Marshall, Ruth Bader Ginsburg's uncanny strategic instincts and careful selection of cases were vital in her persuasion of the all-male Supreme Court to start dismantling the legal institution of sex discrimination one case at a time. In 1975, Ruth Bader Ginsburg litigated and won Weinberger v. Wiesenfeld, which would become a landmark case in antidiscrimination jurisprudence. In this case, the widower had been denied survivor benefits, which would allow him to stay at home and raise his son, based on a Social Security provision that assumed only women were secondary providers with unimportant incomes. While some questioned Ginsburg's choice to challenge instances of sex discrimination by representing a male plaintiff, Ruth Bader Ginsburg saw it as an opportunity to show the court that childcare was not a sex-determined role to be performed only by women. As with many of her cases, her goal was to free both sexes, men as well as women, from the roles that society had assigned them and to harness the Constitution to break down the structures by which the state maintained and enforced those separate spheres. As Ruth Bader Ginsburg continued to challenge the stereotypical assumptions of what was considered to be women's work and men's work, she was able to persuade the Court and the nation that discriminating on the basis of sex was not only wrong but also a violation of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, which guarantees equal protection to all citizens under the law. As the courts began to recognize the changing roles of men and women, Ruth Bader Ginsburg was able to advance gender equality with the understanding that women are capable of being heads of households or sole providers for their family. In 1993, President Bill Clinton appointed Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the Supreme Court, making her the second woman to fill this position. This historic appointment further symbolized the principle that women were equal to men in every respect, that they could have successful careers and also could, if they chose, be devoted wives or mothers, thereby breaking barriers for generations of women to follow in her footsteps. In fact, many of Ginsburg's opinions helped solidify the constitutional protections she had fought so hard to establish decades earlier. While we commemorate Justice Ginsburg's work for advancing the women's movement both as a Justice and as a lawyer, all are in her debt who cherish the progress made in the areas of LGBTQ+ equality, immigration reform, environmental justice, voting rights, protections for people with disabilities, and so much more. Throughout her life, Ruth Bader Ginsburg worked to make the law work so that America would be more just, equitable, fairer, and better for all. Whether it be in her legendary dissenting opinions or as leader when in the majority, Justice Ginsburg continued to advocate for the marginalized and most vulnerable. In recent years, she may not have been able to control the outcome of the rulings, but she grew bolder in her dissents, often stating what should have been the outcome. Throughout her tenure on the bench, Ruth Bader Ginsburg displayed her rigorous and incisive legal mind and employed her formidable skills as a consensus builder, but she could be tough and forceful when the moment demanded. Nothing illustrates this better than her famous dissent in Shelby County v. Holder, in which the 5-to-4 majority negated the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by invalidating section 4 of the law, which neutralized section 5, the provision of the act that required jurisdictions with a history of racial and ethnic discrimination in voting to obtain preclearance from the federal government before any changes in voting procedures, from polling stations to voter photo IDs could go into effect. It was in her scathing dissent Justice Ginsburg stated, ``Hubris is a fit word for today's demolition of the VRA'' and that the majority's logic was akin to ``throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet.'' Unlike the others, Justice Ginsburg was able to see the ramifications of the ruling and its allowances for reinvigorated efforts of voter suppression. Today, I join millions of individuals who are mourning the loss of this legal giant, feminist, and trailblazer. Justice Ginsburg loved this country, so much so that she served the nation while enduring illnesses and undergoing treatments that would have incapacitated lesser mortals. She inspired generations of women then and now to shatter glass ceilings, and her legacy will inspire new generations of women in the years to come. As the news of her passing continues to reverberate across the country and around the world, it is important that we remember and honor what she stood for and continue fighting to realize the goal of equal justice under law. I am honored to be able to pay tribute to the memory of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the `Notorious RBG,' one of the greatest jurists in our nation's history, a tireless and unyielding champion for equal justice, and a fierce defender of the Constitution.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, we awoke this morning to daunting news in this Nation, and I know that the Nation prays. I want to thank the gentlewoman from Washington for her distinguished service, and our fellow coleaders and cosponsors, Congresswomen Kuster, Garcia, and Frankel, and, really, all of those who rose in the immediacy of our visit to be able to sign on to H. Res. 1153. In the spirit of our late friend and colleague, America is better than this. America is better than this. First, to my Republican friends, I hope that they will rise today and vote for this legislation. If they read it, they will understand there is no condemnation of ICE. There is accountability that each and every one of us who serves the people of the United States is obligated to do. We are obligated to be accountable. We are obligated to treat every human being with decency. Though this is a circumstance that pained my heart, am I reminded of the man that killed nine at Mother Emanuel Church and was taken to get a burger before he was taken to jail because he said he was hungry. No one seems to condemn that. It certainly hurt my heart. Nine people of faith praying were killed, murdered in their church, and left lying in blood. But he was taken to get a burger. Why should these women be treated any less? This resolution, why is it so intimidating? All we say is, condemning the performance of ``unwanted, unnecessary medical procedures on individuals without their full, informed consent,'' recognizing that ``everyone deserves to control their own reproductive choices and make informed choices about their bodies.'' We have been saying that all along. My friends on the other side of the aisle, I hope they join in that. They want a singular path. We say people with their God, women with their God, their family, and their medical professional. Acknowledges that ``further accountability, oversight, and transparency is necessary to protect people in the custody'' of DHS and ICE, to make sure these women are not deported as we are in the midst of an inspector general's report. Thankful to the Judiciary Committee, the chairman, and the colleagues who led this letter of over 180-plus Members. That IG's investigation is proceeding, but they need to have those witnesses, and this resolution is crucial because it lays out intimate facts that we heard personally from women. I don't know whenever--I know that I was here for debates on partial- birth abortion. That is obviously not what it was. It was a medical procedure to save the mother's life. But when have we ever discussed the private examinations of women, how private we are in order to get America to understand how this was? Women should rise up, not respecting their party. They should rise up when they know that procedures were done without consent--physically touched, could not speak English. All women seemed to get the same diagnosis: remove the Fallopian tube. Pauline--I will not call her last name--I sat with her for an hour and a half, and she described what happened: sedated, did not know, told after she came out of the sedation, broke down in tears. I pay tribute to her. And almost about to be on the verge of deportation, a witness. The whistleblower, a mother of five children, single mother of five children, she needed her job. Demoted because she had the courage to talk about examinations, surgeries. Only women would understand examinations without lubricant, young women in the prime of fertility, crying. Beds--this is a private center contracted by the government. Beds that looked like they had been there since the 1800s. These were metal beds. I have never seen a bunk bed this thin. This is a place waiting for COVID-19 because they are so close. The beds themselves are 2 feet to 4 feet away. You know what their COVID-19 practice is for protection? It is to have one head this way and one head that way. There are no masks. The air is going.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. You have no way to protect these women in this crowded scenario. There is a men's site. By the way, this is a for-profit center, so they take U.S. Marshals individuals. They take county individuals. It is just a potpourri of persons. They have women who have been there for 3-plus years. I don't blame the workers or even the agencies, the subagency. It is the policies of this administration dealing with immigrants who are human beings and have due process rights accordingly, as being in the United States. I leave you with this: Please pass H. Res. 1153 because this is drawn by this woman who says liberty because we are daughters, we are mothers, we are human beings. The Nation is better than this. Vote for H. Res. 1153 to stop these procedures and stop these prisons from taking advantage of us. Mr. Speaker, as a leader of this resolution and a senior member of the House Judiciary and Homeland Committees, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 1153, ``Condemning Unwanted, Unnecessary Medical Procedures on Individuals Without Their Full, Informed Consent''. First and foremost, I would like to thank my fellow co-leads of this resolution, Representatives Jayapal, Kuster, Garcia, and Frankel as well as all 224 members who have supported this resolution. H. Res. 1153 addresses the recent allegations of improper medical care of detained women in the Irwin County Detention Center in Ocilla, Georgia by: condemning the performance of unwanted, unnecessary medical procedures on individuals without their full, informed consent; recognizing that everyone deserves to control their own reproductive choices and make informed choices about their bodies; and acknowledges that further accountability, oversight, and transparency is necessary to protect people in the custody of U.S. Immigration and Customs. The resolution also calls on the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to pause the removal of any individual who has received any medical procedure at the Irwin County Detention Center as well as allow individuals who may have experienced an unnecessary or nonconsensual procedure to have immediate access to adequate, safe, and consensual medical treatment. By passing this resolution today, DHS must also comply with all investigations and records request related to investigations about the Irwin County Detention Center, ensure affected individuals are able to freely participate in any investigations, and hold all individuals involved in perpetrating these instances of medical impropriety accountable. On September 14, 2020, Project South filed an explosive complaint to the Department of Homeland Security's Office of Inspector General. The complaint alleged unsafe, unsanitary conditions, as well as cited significant numbers of full and partial hysterectomies performed on detainees at the Irwin County Detention Center without the full and informed consent of the patients. On September 16, 2020, I was alerted to the DHS' decision to fast- track the deportation of a young woman, Pauline Binam, who was a victim of improper medical care at the Irwin County Detention Center. Pauline is a strong, kind, and lovely young woman who has lived in the United States since she was two years old. Since 2017, Pauline had been held in DHS custody and was scheduled to be deported to Cameroon. That is three years of not being able to hold her child, embrace her family, or celebrate milestones and holidays with loved ones. In August 2019, while being detained at the Irwin County Detention Center, Pauline underwent a procedure commonly known as a D&C, which she had been told that it was for the purpose of getting rid of the cysts on her ovaries. According to the Mayo Clinic, a D&C procedure is used for the following medical reasons: Clearing out tissues that remain in the uterus after a miscarriage or abortion to prevent infection or heavy bleeding; Removing a tumor that forms instead of a normal pregnancy; Treating excessive bleeding after delivery by clearing out any placenta that remains in the uterus; or Removing cervical or uterine polyps, which are usually benign. However, when Pauline woke up from the anesthesia, she was informed that the doctor had removed her fallopian tube during the surgery. This medical procedure, which substantially impacts Pauline's potential to have more children, was performed without her consent and has forever altered Pauline's life. And Pauline is not the only victim. Numerous allegations of medical abuse at the Irwin County Detention Center have come to light over the past few days and weeks. These shocking claims of medical malpractice reflect widespread medical neglect in the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention system. It is imperative that we, as Members of Congress, fulfill our duty to the American people and get to the bottom of what happened to the women being held at the Irwin County Detention Center. We cannot wait. The women in this facility cannot wait. We must seek out justice for these women immediately, and that starts by voting to pass this resolution. Furthermore, Pauline and the other women who have shared their stories of these violating and nonconsensual medical procedures must have the ability to contribute to this investigation. Had I not intervened and stopped Pauline's deportation when I did, we would have lost a key witness to the investigation; someone who is vital to shining a light on these cruel, and immoral medical procedures performed without full and informed consent. We cannot be known as a country that violates our own laws. Just because someone is an immigrant, is undocumented, or being detained for deportation, it does not mean that they can be denied their due process rights under the laws of this land and under the constitution of the United States of America. Last weekend, I, along with several other Members of Congress, had the opportunity to visit the Irwin County Detention Center. During that trip, I was able to speak with multiple detainees and hear about the living circumstances and quality of care surrounding their detention at the facility. It is no secret that the United States has had a long history of women being denied reproductive rights and being violated medically, especially women of color. When you perform procedures that disallow a woman from making her own choices or deny her from making a choice, you are violating her very humanity, and I will not stand idly by and allow it to continue. As a woman and a mother, I am appalled and horrified by what has been happening to these women at the Irwin County Detention Center, and I believe that we owe it to them to investigate their claims fully. I urge my colleagues to vote with their conscience and pass H. Res. 1153 today.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, thank you to the gentlewoman who is managing this resolution, and thank you very much to Mr. Malinowski for bringing us together. I think I started out earlier this morning by saying the Nation is better than this. It is not because people do not have the right to espouse views that I may disagree with. But not when those views become detrimental to innocent Americans; when those views take the very hostile and historically violent form of anti-Semitism; when they begin to attack and marginalize groups; when they evidence themselves as we saw--although not claiming to be part of QAnon--that scene in Charlottesville, with tiki torches, saying that part of the Nation did not belong here, in essence threatening people of color, Jewish people. I believe this resolution is crucial. It is crucial because it is dangerous to remain silent. As we have looked at QAnon, it is attempting to speak of fringe beliefs that can be enormously dangerous. It can actually motivate domestic extremists, which may result in harm to innocent persons. The FBI has made an assessment, with high confidence, that the fringe political conspiracy theories, including QAnon, are motivating domestic extremists, and where QAnon adherents have been implicated in one particular case of a man arrested in 2018 for plotting to plant a bomb in the Illinois Capitol rotunda to make Americans aware of pizzagate. I think we are also aware of, during the last Presidential election, someone driving and rushing to a restaurant in Washington, D.C., and going in the basement, suggesting that pedophiles and the then- Presidential candidate were involved in it. These are dangerous positions. They are not just that I disagree because a philosophy is different from Sheila Jackson Lee. It is that we must not be silent, for there have been atrocities perpetrated around the world historically because people remained silent. The atrocities in Germany come to mind; we remained silent. Or the genocide in Sudan; we remained silent. So this resolution is crucial. It is as crucial as the work we will do in addressing the sin, the original sin, of this Nation, and that was slavery. But I rise today to support H. Res. 1154 that condemns QAnon and rejects conspiracy theories. I ask my colleagues to support this. And I thank the author of this legislation for his courage and leadership.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the Committees on the Judiciary and on Homeland Security, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 1154, a resolution condemning QAnon and rejecting the conspiracy theories it promotes. QAnon is a movement promoting a collection of unfounded conspiracy theories that have spread widely on the internet since 2017. Whereas, throughout history, conspiracy theories that falsely blame secret cabals or marginalized groups for society's ills have fueled prejudice, genocide, and acts of terrorism. QAnon first gained notoriety with its unfounded, outrageous, and bizarre conspiracy theory alleging that prominent Americans are engaged in a secret plot to control the world, while using their power to exploit children. Qanon has gone on to embrace virtually every popular conspiracy theory of the last several decades, from questioning the truth about the September 11th terrorist attacks, to believing in alien landings, to denying the safety of vaccines. Many QAnon followers express anti-Semitic views, and the Anti- Defamation League has said that the movement's central conspiracy theory includes anti-Semitic elements; Mr. Speaker, history records that conspiracy theories have been a central driver of anti-Semitism for centuries, and QAnon conspiracy theories are fanning the flames as anti-Semitism is on the rise in the United States and around the world. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has assessed with high confidence that ``fringe political conspiracy theories'', including QAnon, ``very likely motivate some domestic extremists, wholly or in part, to engage in criminal or violent activity'', and that these conspiracy theories ``very likely encourage the targeting of specific people, places and organizations, thereby increasing the likelihood of violence against these targets.'' This assessment is supported by an alarming number of ``events in which individuals committed crimes, plotted attacks, or successfully carried out deadly violence, and who--either before or after their arrests--attributed their actions to their conspiratorial beliefs.'' For example, QAnon adherents have been implicated in crimes that they claim their QAnon beliefs inspired, including-- 1. A man arrested in 2018 for plotting to plant a bomb in the Illinois Capitol rotunda to make Americans aware of the ``Pizzagate'' conspiracy theory; 2. A man arrested in 2018 for using an armored car to block traffic on the Hoover Dam Bypass Bridge; 3. A man in Arizona arrested in 2019 for vandalizing a Catholic church; and 4. A woman arrested in New York with a car full of knives after posting a video accusing Joe Biden of participating in child sex trafficking and threatening to kill him. According to the Combating Terrorism Center at the United States Military Academy at West Point, ``QAnon is arguably no longer simply a fringe conspiracy theory but an ideology that has demonstrated its capacity to radicalize to violence individuals at an alarming speed.'' The conspiracy theories promoted by QAnon undermine trust in America's democratic institutions, encourage rejection of objective reality, and further deepen our Nation's political polarization. It is therefore timely and appropriate that the People's House support this resolution, which puts it on record clearly condemning QAnon and rejecting the false conspiracy theories it promotes and spread. In the highly charged political climate we find ourselves in it is also appropriate that this body condemns any and all other groups and ideologies, from the far left to the far right, that contribute to the spread of unfounded conspiracy theories or that encourage Americans to destroy public and private property and attack lawful authority. Mr. Speaker, in addition to condemning QAnon and its false and dangerous conspiracy theories, I support the resolution because it calls upon the Federal Bureau of Investigation, as well as all Federal law enforcement and homeland security agencies, to continue strengthening their focus on preventing violence, threats, harassment, and other criminal activity by extremists motivated by fringe political conspiracy theories and urges all Americans, regardless of our beliefs or partisan affiliation, to seek information from authoritative sources and to engage in political debate from a common factual foundation.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I take this time to not only speak to the American people about voting, but also just take a brief moment to pay a beginning tribute to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. She deserves a much longer period of acknowledgment, and I am going to do so as we return back to Washington in the coming days and weeks. In fact, I believe that we should dedicate weeks and days of honoring Justice Ginsburg, even in the midst of this potential nomination to replace her. I want to speak to the American people as we begin our journey toward November 3 and let them know of the precious right to vote, that citizenship gives them that very precious right to make their own decision. I have no right to tell them that, but as a Member of the United States Congress, I have an obligation to ensure that their vote is protected, however they vote. I must ensure that there is a truthful understanding of mail ballots. Some States have been voting with mail ballots for decades. I must ensure that the mail ballots are protected, the early vote is protected, and, as well, it is protected on November 3. I just want to indicate, Justice Ginsburg said in the Shelby case that the majority's logic was akin to ``throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet.'' Justice Ginsburg believed in voting and voting protection. Let's pay tribute to her and vote. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died on Friday, September 18, 2020 at the age of 87 years old. As a direct beneficiary of her advancement of women's rights and a long-time admirer of her vigorous defense of the Constitution, I am honored but heartbroken to pay tribute to Justice Ginsburg, an American hero, feminist icon, and role model to millions. Today, tomorrow, and forever, the American people mourn the loss of a true titan, an American legend, and an inspiration. Our thoughts and prayers are with Ruth's family, friends, and loved ones. Ruth Bader Ginsburg dedicated her life to defending the Constitution and protecting the sanctity of America's democratic ideals, and we will forever be indebted to her service to this country. Joan Ruth Bader, fondly nicknamed Kiki, was born on March 15, 1933 to an immigrant family and grew up in Brooklyn's Flatbush neighborhood. Ruth Bader Ginsburg often spoke of her mother's large ambitions for her, and how the devastating loss of her mother's death at an early age instilled in her the determination to live a life that her mother would have been proud of. And so, she did. Ruth Bader attended Cornell University where she met Martin D. Ginsburg, her future husband and love of her life to whom she was married for 54 years. At the age of 21, Ruth Bader graduated Phi Beta Kappa from Cornell with a Bachelor of Arts degree in Government on June 23, 1954, and was the highest-ranking female student in her graduating class. A month after graduating from Cornell, Ruth and Martin were married and moved to Fort Sill, Oklahoma, where Martin was stationed as a Reserve Officers' Training Corps officer in the U.S. Army Reserve after his call-up to active duty. To help support the family, Ruth Bader Ginsburg worked for the Social Security Administration office in Oklahoma, where she was demoted after becoming pregnant with her first child, Jane, who was born in 1955. In the fall of 1956, Ruth Bader Ginsburg enrolled at Harvard Law School, where she was one of only 9 women in a class of about 500 men. Harvard Law Dean Erwin Griswold reportedly invited all the female law students to dinner at his family home and asked the female law students, including Ginsburg, ``Why are you at Harvard Law School, taking the place of a man?'' When her husband took a job in New York City, Ruth Bader Ginsburg transferred to Columbia Law School and became the first woman to be on two major law reviews: Harvard Law Review and Columbia Law Review. In 1959, she earned her law degree at Columbia and tied for first in her class but despite these enviable credentials and distinguished record of excellence, no law firm in New York City would hire her as a lawyer because she was a woman. Ruth Bader Ginsburg became a crusader for women's rights and an unstoppable force who transformed the law and defied social convention. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, later affectionately known as the `Notorious RBG,' was as instrumental and historically significant to the cause of women's rights as was Thurgood Marshall to the cause of civil rights for African Americans. As a young lawyer and Director of the Women's Rights Project of the American Civil Liberties Union, Ruth Bader Ginsburg litigated six landmark cases before the Supreme Court, winning five out of the six cases. Like Justice Marshall, Ruth Bader Ginsburg's uncanny strategic instincts and careful selection of cases were vital in her persuasion of the all-male Supreme Court to start dismantling the legal institution of sex discrimination one case at a time. In 1975, Ruth Bader Ginsburg litigated and won Weinberger v. Wiesenfeld, which would become a landmark case in antidiscrimination jurisprudence. In this case, the widower had been denied survivor benefits, which would allow him to stay at home and raise his son, based on a Social Security provision that assumed only women were secondary providers with unimportant incomes. While some questioned Ginsburg's choice to challenge instances of sex discrimination by representing a male plaintiff, Ruth Bader Ginsburg saw it as an opportunity to show the court that childcare was not a sex-determined role to be performed only by women. As with many of her cases, her goal was to free both sexes, men as well as women, from the roles that society had assigned them and to harness the Constitution to break down the structures by which the state maintained and enforced those separate spheres. As Ruth Bader Ginsburg continued to challenge the stereotypical assumptions of what was considered to be women's work and men's work, she was able to persuade the Court and the nation that discriminating on the basis of sex was not only wrong but also a violation of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, which guarantees equal protection to all citizens under the law. As the courts began to recognize the changing roles of men and women, Ruth Bader Ginsburg was able to advance gender equality with the understanding that women are capable of being heads of households or sole providers for their family. In 1993, President Bill Clinton appointed Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the Supreme Court, making her the second woman to fill this position. This historic appointment further symbolized the principle that women were equal to men in every respect, that they could have successful careers and also could, if they chose, be devoted wives or mothers, thereby breaking barriers for generations of women to follow in her footsteps. In fact, many of Ginsburg's opinions helped solidify the constitutional protections she had fought so hard to establish decades earlier. While we commemorate Justice Ginsburg's work for advancing the women's movement both as a Justice and as a lawyer, all are in her debt who cherish the progress made in the areas of LGBTQ+ equality, immigration reform, environmental justice, voting rights, protections for people with disabilities, and so much more. Throughout her life, Ruth Bader Ginsburg worked to make the law work so that America would be more just, equitable, fairer, and better for all. Whether it be in her legendary dissenting opinions or as leader when in the majority, Justice Ginsburg continued to advocate for the marginalized and most vulnerable. In recent years, she may not have been able to control the outcome of the rulings, but she grew bolder in her dissents, often stating what should have been the outcome. Throughout her tenure on the bench, Ruth Bader Ginsburg displayed her rigorous and incisive legal mind and employed her formidable skills as a consensus builder, but she could be tough and forceful when the moment demanded. Nothing illustrates this better than her famous dissent in Shelby County v. Holder, in which the 5-to-4 majority negated the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by invalidating section 4 of the law, which neutralized section 5, the provision of the act that required jurisdictions with a history of racial and ethnic discrimination in voting to obtain preclearance from the federal government before any changes in voting procedures, from polling stations to voter photo IDs could go into effect. It was in her scathing dissent Justice Ginsburg stated, ``Hubris is a fit word for today's demolition of the VRA'' and that the majority's logic was akin to ``throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet.'' Unlike the others, Justice Ginsburg was able to see the ramifications of the ruling and its allowances for reinvigorated efforts of voter suppression. Today, I join millions of individuals who are mourning the loss of this legal giant, feminist, and trailblazer. Justice Ginsburg loved this country, so much so that she served the nation while enduring illnesses and undergoing treatments that would have incapacitated lesser mortals. She inspired generations of women then and now to shatter glass ceilings, and her legacy will inspire new generations of women in the years to come. As the news of her passing continues to reverberate across the country and around the world, it is important that we remember and honor what she stood for and continue fighting to realize the goal of equal justice under law. I am honored to be able to pay tribute to the memory of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the `Notorious RBG,' one of the greatest jurists in our nation's history, a tireless and unyielding champion for equal justice, and a fierce defender of the Constitution.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the Committee on the Judiciary, I rise in strong support of H.R. 8225, the ``Fight Notario Fraud Act,'' introduced by the gentlelady from Florida, Congresswoman Murcasel-Powell. I support this legislation because it protects persons who are the most vulnerable in society against unconscionable predatory conduct from fraudulent ``notarios publicos'' who use the ``notary public'' title to hold themselves out as authorized to provide immigration legal advice and services. Specifically, H.R. 8225 would criminalize the provision of fraudulent legal services, certain misrepresentations by individuals who claim to be authorized to practice immigration law, and threats and retaliation associated with the provision of fraudulent legal services. Additionally, the bill would require the Attorney General to create no fewer than 15 Special United States Attorney positions to prosecute notario fraud crimes. Mr. Speaker, the roots of modern ``notario fraud'' in the United States stem from a practice in parts of Latin America where ``notarios publicos,'' (which could be literally translated to ``notaries public'') are lawyers and, as such, are authorized to provide legal services. Unlike in the United States, because ``notario pblicos'' in Latin America have a law license and can represent others in court, many Spanish-speaking immigrants in the United States turn to notaries thinking they are attorneys able to represent them in legal proceedings, especially cases involving immigration claims. On account of linguistic and cultural differences in meaning, notario fraud disproportionately targets immigrants from Latin America who are not fluent English speakers or familiar with the difference between the Latin American and American legal systems. Notarios often gain the trust of the immigrant families they defraud, making extravagant promises and preying on the desperation of families. The effect of the breach of trust can often be dire and multifaceted. Notarios often make mistakes in these filings and proceedings, which can result in irreversibly negative immigration consequences for their clients. A notario's legal errors can lead to an unfavorable review in immigration courts and may prejudice the immigrant-appellant on appeal. Fly-by-night notarios may skip town with important documentation immigrants need to file for immigration relief or they may apply for relief without the immigrant-applicant's knowledge. A notario's advice to a parent may impact the separate and independent relief a child applicant may have. Currently, equitable relief for this malfeasance is not available in the immigration proceedings and, even worse, defrauded immigrants can be charged with filing false claims. Immigrants have been defrauded of hundreds or even thousands of dollars by unscrupulous notarios only to find out they will not receive the services they were promised and, in some cases, these individuals find themselves in worse conditions than when they originally sought help with their immigration matters. After they discover that they have been bilked, many immigrants are afraid to report notaries; by some estimates, only one in every hundred cases are reported. In one civil action initiated by the Federal Trade Commission in 2011, investigators recovered evidence of 2,785 defrauded immigrants, but only 99 consumer complaints associated with the notario grifter--a reporting rate of 3.55 percent. Because many of the victims of notarios also do not have legal immigration status, they fear negative immigration outcomes if they attempt to bring a complaint. Courts across the country have recognized the widespread prevalence of notario fraud. The proposed explicit criminalization of notario fraud is necessary to focus criminal fraud prosecution on widespread scams that target some of the least sophisticated and most vulnerable individuals in our society. I strongly support this legislation and urge all Members to join me in voting for its passage.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as a cosponsor and a senior member of the Committees on the Judiciary and Homeland Security, I rise in strong support of H.R. 6270, the ``Uyghur Forced Labor Disclosure Act of 2020'', which directs the Securities and Exchange Commission to issue rules requiring U.S. publicly traded companies to disclose imports of manufactured goods and materials that originate in or are sourced in part from the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR) on an annual basis. With this bill, companies would also be required to disclose that the goods and materials did not originate from forced labor as well as describe the nature and extent of commercial activity related to the products. Furthermore, companies must also provide the gross revenue and net profits attributable to the good. The legislation also stipulates that companies must say whether they intend to continue importing from that entity. H.R. 6270 ensures that both the SEC and GAO would be required to report to Congress on compliance, oversight, and effectiveness. For years, the Chinese government has engaged in a systematic campaign of repression targeting Uyghurs and other Muslim groups. Chinese authorities have used the pretext of terrorism to suspend the Uyghurs' civil and political rights and pursue the internment of Uyghurs in ``educational training centers'' where they are forbidden from practicing their religious and cultural beliefs. These same education centers are forced labor camps. According to the BBC, approximately one million Uyghurs have been detained without trial, forced into mass internment camps, and subjected to forced labor, torture, political indoctrination, forced renunciations of faith, and other severe human rights abuses. The U.S. Holocaust Museum's Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide recently determined that there is reasonable basis to believe crimes against humanity are being committed in the XUAR. Furthermore, satellite imagery, leaked official documents from the Chinese government, and the testimony of camp survivors have confirmed a widespread and pervasive forced labor system that exists inside the mass internment camps. This is a systematic, widespread, and shocking violation of basic human rights for which the Government of China must be held accountable. The United States cannot and should not sit idly by while these gross injustices are happening. According to numerous reports, forced labor by the Uyghur detainees in labor camps and factories feed into the supply chains of more than 80 well-known global brands. In its 2019 Annual Report, the Congressional-Executive Commission on China found that goods produced with forced labor included textiles, electronics, food products, shoes, tea, and handicrafts. Mr. Speaker, companies have a moral duty to ensure the goods they purchase are made using free workers who are paid a fair wage, and the transparency measures in this bill are key to ending the persistence of modern-day slavery in supply chains. Importing products made wholly or in part from forced or prison labor is not only against U.S. law but also international human rights standards. However, audits and due diligence efforts to ensure clean supply chains are nearly impossible due to government surveillance and the pervasiveness of forced labor in the regional economy. Time and time again, the United States has been the beacon of freedom in the world and a fierce defender of human rights. Today, we, as Members of Congress, have a duty to continue that legacy by condemning the heinous human rights violations against the Uyghur people in the XUAR. By passing H.R. 6270, our actions send a message to China that Congress not only stands in solidarity with the Uyghur people but also that we will always speak up for the vulnerable and the voiceless whether that is in the Xinjiang region of China or anywhere else in the world. Lastly, Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank Congresswoman Wexton for introducing this vital piece of legislation, and I am proud to do my part in leading this bill through the House. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in voting for H.R. 6270.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5822, the ``Homeland Security Acquisition Professional Career Program Act,'' which would authorize an acquisition professional career program (APCP) within DHS. This program, which DHS established in 2008, is a pipeline for a cadre of acquisition professionals to support the Department's multi- billion dollar investments in goods and services. Under APCP, DHS hires individuals, many of which are new to the Federal government or recent college graduates, at the GS-7 grade level to work in one of six acquisition positions. Upon successful completion of the three-year program, participants are placed into permanent full-time positions at the GS-12 grade level. The bill outlines the requirements for the program, which includes acquisition training, on-the-job experience, Department-wide rotations, mentorship, shadowing, and other career development opportunities for participants. The bill also requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to report annually to Congress through fiscal year 2026 on various aspects of the program, including the DHS components and offices that participated, attrition and retention rates, and the Department's recruiting efforts for the program. The Department of Homeland Security is the third largest Department of the U.S. government, with a workforce of 229,000 employees and 22 components including TSA, Customs and Border Protection, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, FEMA, the Coast Guard, Secret Service, Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers, the National Protection and Programs Directorate, and the Science and Technology Directorate. This year, the House Appropriations Committee approved $50.72 billion in FY 2021 discretionary funding, including $48.1 billion in nondefense discretionary funding, for the Department of Homeland Security. These taxpayer dollars must be used in a manner consistent with the mission and purpose of the Department of Homeland Security, while using the best methods for assuring adherence to good government principles. I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as the Founding Chair of the Coronavirus Task Force and a senior member of the Judiciary and Homeland Committees, I rise in strong support of H.R. 7496, the ``COVID PREPARE Act,'' which requires every federal agency to submit a report to Congress on the steps they are taking to respond to a potential resurgence of COVID-19, including measurable goals, anticipated challenges, and how they will consult with Congress. I would like to thank Representatives Brad Schneider and John Katko for introducing and leading this important piece of legislation. By passing this bipartisan bill today, Congress has taken it upon itself to ensure that all federal agencies are aware of the risks associated with any resurgence in coronavirus cases and are prepared to address them efficiently. This legislation stipulates that Congress will receive regular updates from these agencies until the President ends the emergency declaration related to the coronavirus pandemic. At the beginning of this pandemic, the federal government's response to COVID-19 was delayed, disorganized, and haphazard. It is because of these inefficiencies that the United States currently has over 7 million cases of the coronavirus and over 205,000 related deaths. In the state of Texas alone, there are currently 761,332 cases of the virus and approximately 15,820 deaths. We must not make the same mistakes again. As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to wreak havoc on American communities and take thousands of American lives, experts have warned that things might get even worse in the fall, especially as schools, businesses, and communities continue to reopen. Over the last six months, federal agencies have learned many hard lessons, and they have crafted new, effective strategies that will protect families and communities across the country fight against a possible resurgence of coronavirus cases this fall. We must put our faith in science and continue to invest in testing, contact tracing, as well as vaccine development. In my own district, I have facilitated the opening of 32 testing sites since the beginning of the pandemic in an effort to curb the spread of the virus. Mr. Speaker, Congress has a duty to assure the American people that the federal government is doing everything in its power to beat back the dual health and economic crises of this pandemic. H.R. 7496 honors that responsibility entrusted to us by the American people, and I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to come together and vote for this important legislation.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5823, the State and Local Cybersecurity Improvement Act, which authorizes a new DHS grant program to address cybersecurity vulnerabilities on State and local government networks. The new grant program would be authorized at $400 million with a graduating cost-share that incentivizes States to increase funding for cybersecurity in their budgets. Under the bill, State, tribal, and territorial governments would be required to develop comprehensive cybersecurity plans to guide the use of grant funds. This bill tasks the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), the Nation's cyber risk advisor, that works with partners to defend against today's threats and collaborating to build more secure and resilient infrastructure for the future to provide support to state and local governments. The bill also requires CISA to develop a strategy to improve the cybersecurity of State, local, tribal, and territorial governments, among other things, identify Federal resources that could be made available to State and local governments for cybersecurity purposes, and set baseline objectives for State and local cybersecurity efforts. CISA would also be required to assess the feasibility of implementing a short-term rotational program for the detail of approved State, local, Tribal, and territorial government employees in cyber workforce positions at CISA. Lastly, the bill establishes a State and Local Cybersecurity Resiliency Committee comprised of representatives from State, local, tribal, and territorial governments to advise and provide situational awareness to CISA regarding the cybersecurity needs of such governments. As a member of the House Committee on Homeland Security since its establishment, and current Ranking Member of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security. This bill is of importance to me. The threats we face--digital and physical, man-made, technological, and natural--are more complex, and the threat actors more diverse, than at any point in our history. CISA is at the heart of mobilizing a collective defense as we lead the Nation's efforts to understand and manage risk to our critical infrastructure. I am a cosponsor of H.R. 5823, and ask my colleagues to join me in supporting this important step to improving cybersecurity of state and local governments.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I am so glad that my colleague invoked God's name on the floor of the House. As I stand here, I can read the words ``In God We Trust.'' We are blessed by a Nation that has the right and the protections to express our faith, our love of the God we love. And so I thought this morning I was compelled to come to the floor because I believe in a God of love, and my Christian faith believes in the sacrifice He made so that we might live and, as well, to recognize that He protects us all. As we go through this road of trepidation with COVID-19, as I mourn for more than 200,000 Americans, many of whom lost their lives because of ill-fated policies by the administration, I thought it was imperative that I speak to the souls of America because, as my predecessor, the Honorable Barbara Jordan, I have faith in this Nation. She was a good mentor for me and many others. She was a patriot, and I have tried to be every day of my life. I honor the men and women who put on the uniform, young boys and girls almost, young men and women throughout the ages. I acknowledge the fact that, even with bondage in their DNA, slaves volunteered, ex- slaves, to fight in the Civil War, but they fought in wars before, including the Revolutionary War. The heritage of African Americans and Black Americans in this country is wrapped in the love of the Nation. The times that we have stepped out to be able to demand justice for our Nation and for everyone, it has not been against the flag; it has been to empower the flag to symbolize the right thing. How many people realize the number of African Americans who died during the civil rights movement? I didn't say the Civil War. We lost many in the civil rights movement. Yes, we know, tragically, brave men and women who were not Black who came to help lost their lives. The three Mississippi boys, Viola Liuzzo, and others lost their lives because they believed in a better America. Then I am reminded of the beginnings of the takeover of a beautiful country called Germany by Nazism. The words that I remember in a historical perspective is: It was the silence that killed us. Dr. King said that it is not the good people who fail, but it is those who stand by silently and say nothing--so, too, the head of this Nation. It might have been a lot of bickering on Tuesday night in your mind, Mr. Speaker, but I can say to you that it was a painful experience for so many when we could not hear the simple words of condemnation of white supremacy, even when, as the senior member of the Homeland Security Committee, I have heard over and over again, a member of the Judiciary Committee, Director Wray of the FBI that the most dangerous domestic terrorist threat in the United States--not my words, his words--is white supremacy, or those words coming, as well, from the head of the Homeland Security Department, the Secretary. I offered an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that was adopted that directs the Secretary of Defense to report to Congress the extent, if any, of the threat to national security posed by domestic terrorist groups and organizations motivated by a belief system of white supremacy such as boogaloo boys and proud boys extremists. I am proud of the House. Obviously, it was adopted in a bipartisan commitment. I am proud that Members joined in by their acquiescence and affirmation that this is not America. But over these last couple of days, social media is raging. When that question was posed to the existing and sitting President of the United States, we heard these words when they asked would you condemn the proud boys' violence, ``stand back and stand by.'' Mr. Speaker, as I close, let me say that white supremacy is going to strangle us and our values. I beg of this leadership and I beg of all of us to stand against it, to fight against it, and to save lives, because those lives are precious American lives, and we are not that way. We are better than this, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to efforts to legitimize violent White Nationalists groups. Over the last several months, I have raised concerns over the role that Boogaloo and Proud Boys have played in bringing an element of violence into the otherwise peaceful protests following the death of George Floyd. During the House Consideration of the NOAA, I offered an amendment that was adopted to directs the Secretary of Defense to report to Congress the extent, if any, of the threat to national security posed by domestic terrorist groups and organizations motivated by a belief system of white supremacy, such as the Boogaloo and Proud Boys extremists. During the first Presidential debate the President had the opportunity to condemn Proud Boys, which he could not or would not do. In the light of day, he claims ignorance of who or what Proud Boys is--which sounds like the same words he used about not knowing David Duke--a former Grand Wizard of the KKK who endorsed him during his first Presidential Election. The President in the interviews with Robert Woodward has proven himself to be anything but ignorant or uninformed. He has shown his willingness to use his knowledge for his benefit while keeping his knowledge hidden from others at their expense. What I know is that Congress has been briefed on the national security threat posed by Proud Boys and Boogaloo Boys, which means the President has also been briefed. On May 30, 2019, the FBI issued an Intelligence Bulletin on Anti- Government, Identity Based, and Fringe Political Conspiracy Theories Very Likely Motivate Some Domestic Extremists to Commit Criminal, Sometimes Violent Activity, which includes the activities associated with Proud Boys and Boogaloo Boys. Proud Boys is described by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a hate group. The ADL describes Proud Boys as: Ideology: Primarily alt lite: Misogynistic, Islamophobic, transphobic and anti-immigration. Some members espouse white supremacist and anti-Semitic ideologies and/or engage with white supremacist groups. In sum, the Proud Boys is a far-right neo-fascist organization that admits only men as members and promotes political violence. The group believes men--especially white men--and Western culture are under siege; their views have elements of white genocide conspiracy theory. While the group claims it does not support white supremacist views, its members often participate in racist rallies, events, and organizations. The organization glorifies violence, and members engage in violence at events they attend; the Southern Poverty Law Center has called it an ``altright fight club''. The President's message when asked about condemning the White Supremist Group--Proud Boys, was to say to them ``Stand Back and Stand By.'' It surprises absolutely no one that ``Stand Back and Stand By,'' means to be ready . Ready for what? The intelligence community has been sending warnings to the White House and Congress that groups like Proud Boys are a threat to our national security and have been waiting for someone like the President to incite others to join them in order to grow their numbers to spread violence. As I speak, the Internet is ablaze with activity from the Proud Boys in celebration and elation of their favorable recognition of the President. Proud Boys created a new image to signify the President's message to them, ``Stand Back and Stand By.'' We know from experience how people like members of Proud Boys react when they believe they have legitimacy from the President; they take it as a license to continue their violent activities as we said four years ago, culminating in Charlottesville, Virginia. Proud Boys may use the phrase ``Stand Back and Stand By'' to describe the overwhelming majority of white Americans who are not aware of or interested in the activities of the group or any white supremist group, but may intend to support this President in November despite his obvious flaws. The unfortunate truth for voters who think their vote this November is not at risk of sending an affirming nod to Proud Boys or groups like them--then they should think again. President's own acts makes this election no longer about Red or Blue States, Democrats and Republicans, but about whether you condone racism, misogyny, or political and election violence. White Nationalists will interpret every white voter's vote for Trump as a vindication of their hate, misogyny, and rage against non-whites and independent women. Let us not be fooled, these groups hate a lot of things--and the color of a person's skin is just one of those things--they also hate women who are educated, who are leaders, who dare to think for themselves; they hate white men who form families with persons of other races, and they hate white men who will hire, promote, and support persons of color and women in employment; they hate education, public order, peace and justice that adhere to equality for all. They do love one thing--violence. Our role as Members of Congress is to defend and protect the American people, no matter their race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, or country of origin. White Nationalists have been busy looking for fights and igniting violence at peaceful street protests. We saw them in Charlottesville, Virginia and have seen them trying to end state and local measures to slow the spread of COVID-19 and carrying out violence at George Floyd protests. Now the President is inviting Proud Boys to polling locations during ballot casting. COVID-19 is presenting a heightened barrier and challenge to voting in the November 3rd election. The validity of the American vote and the ability for Americans to exercise their vote is in jeopardy from a President who seems to be at war with the free and fair election process. Over the years, it has become increasingly hard for citizens to realize their voting rights--particularly for African Americans and other minorities, as well as for students, the elderly, and individuals with disabilities. Voter suppression measures across the country in the past included: new voter ID laws, reductions and cuts to polling places and early voting, and purging of voter rolls, but today there are challenges being made to mail-in voting during a time of COVID-19 when in-person voting would pose health risks to many voters. The doubts the President is seeking to create around mail-in voting are resulting in significant burdens for individuals seeking to exercise their most fundamental constitutional right. With varied systems of election administration and technology, polling place practices, and inexperienced poll workers, there is a real and dangerous threat that White Nationalists may take this opening provided by the President to compromise our nation's electoral process. During a time when the voting rights of minorities and all Americans are under the greatest attack since the passage of the Voting Rights Act, it is imperative that the federal government take all necessary steps to ensure that the right to vote and the entire electoral process is fully protected and upheld. It is important to know and understand that the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act never mention color, ethnicity, or race. Both of these laws are to preserve and protect basic human rights and dignity owed to each person. This may be the election year when the voting rights of a majority of Americans may need both of these laws. That is why I am asking the Department of Justice, pursuant to its statutory authority and consistent with its historic role as a guardian of civil rights and liberties, to take immediate action and investigate the full scope of vulnerabilities, security threats and breaches to our electoral and voting process posed by groups like Proud Boys. This President finds it too difficult to call out those among us who are the truly abhorrent and objectionable because they are at the heart of his political base. The violence seen during the recent national movement to end the deaths of unarmed black men while in police custody is not the start of the events that have led to the Boogaloo movement or Proud Boys activity. Groups like these have been around for over a century, most notable is the KKK, which is why they should not be invited to visit polling locations during a public election. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), in the immediate aftermath of Election Day, a wave of hate crimes and lesser hate incidents swept the country with 1,094 bias incidents recorded in the first 34 days following Trump's Election on November 8, 2016. Of these incidents, the SPLC reports that anti-immigrant incidents (315) remain the most reported, followed by antiblack (221), anti- Muslim (112), and anti-LGBT (109). Anti-Trump incidents numbered 26 (6 of which were also anti-white in nature, with 2 non-Trump related anti-white incidents reported). The threats from White Nationalist groups range from decentralized and leaderless accelerationist networks using social media platforms, such as the Boogaloo movement, to more structured, far-right militia extremist groups. The ideologies undergirding these movements or groups have some similarities to other anti-government and white supremacist beliefs but are often not tied to a single, monolithic ideology. In addition, in many cases, their adherents' decentralized, and coded use of digital tools poses unique challenges for law enforcement and government officials to identify and track their activity. These developments in domestic terrorism, as reported in the media and government intelligence reports--coupled with recent arrests and successful violent attacks carried out by ``Boogaloo boys'' and militia extremists--are troubling. My concern is that as the nation moves towards a historic national election, the activity of violence instigators like Boogaloo Boys or Proud Boys will increase and lead to attacks becoming more frequent. This view is heightened given the President's instructions to Proud Boys to ``Stand Back'' and ``Stand By.'' The domestic terrorism issues of greatest concern to me are: The number of incidents, although small in number, that have involved government employees, contractors or military personnel; The targeting of places of worship; Politically motivated attacks or attempted attacks; and Use of Social media for domestic and international hate groups to collaborate and stoke hate. Icreasingly everyday the President confirms his candidacy as candidate of white supremacy. A quote from Lincoln's address to Congress in December 1862 come to mind, when he said to this body: ``Fellow-citizens, we cannot escape history. We of this Congress and this administration, will be remembered in spite of ourselves. No personal significance, or insignificance, can spare one or another of us. The fiery trial through which we pass, will light us down, in honor or dishonor, to the latest generation. We say we are for the Union. The world will not forget that we say this. We know how to save the Union. The world knows we do know how to save it. We--even we here--hold the power and bear the responsibility.'' Due to the rise in online activity of these groups spurred by the President's comments many law enforcement jurisdictions around the nation must prepare for the violence that may come as these groups seek to act out in advance of the election. This will put additional strain on the budgets of local and state law enforcement agencies already burdened with COVID-19 emergency measures and tight budgets caused by the economic collapse due to this Administration's mismanagement of COVID-19. Congress must send a unified message that there is no place in the body politic for these groups or these views. I invite my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to do what the President did not do by joining me and Vice President Biden and millions of Americans in condemning the White Supremist Groups.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, let me thank the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania and thank my colleagues for this vigorous discussion and the unanimous consent. I want to give them comfort. Tomorrow, we will be able to vote on the Heroes bill that we ask each and every one of them to support to provide moneys not only for small businesses but nonprofits and faith institutions because we believe in the American people, and we are going to keep them working. I look forward to them joining this bipartisan effort, supporting the Heroes bill that we have offered under the leadership of Speaker Pelosi. I rise today to support both H. Res. 1153 and H. Res. 1154. I traveled to Irwin County this past weekend, but my exposure to this tragedy was not just that day; just last week, with butterflies in my stomach, if you will, and concern for a young woman, 29 years old, about to enter onto a plane that she obviously was directed to go to a place that she had never been, or had not been since she was 2 years old, a young woman from Cameroon who did have, who admits that her fallopian tube was removed without her consent. So people of color are not unused to having medical procedures without our consent. Women are not unused to and unfamiliar with having medical procedures without their consent. Think about these women, speaking mostly a different language, detained for civil matters, and that is, not being statused. Young women, women intimidated in the midst of COVID-19 in a facility where there is one physician who is supposed to be an OB/GYN, and you are carted off like cattle in a bus with one diagnosis: Oh, you need a fallopian tube removed. Let my friends on the other side of the aisle be reminded that they have been throwing the word ``uterus'' and other words around the floor of the House.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, this is not a condemnation of ICE. Read the language. It just says that they should engage in more vigorous oversight, and they are doing that with an inspector general's investigation. Look at this. This is from one of the women: Liberty, we are daughters and we are mothers, but you are stopping us from doing that. And H. Res. 1154 that I join in supporting, as well, condemning QAnon, talks about a better America, that we are not the way it is described in this resolution. I ask my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying bills because we are daughters and we are mothers, and what is going on there is an atrocious condition that should not exist. I ask my colleagues to join me, and I thank my good friend from Pennsylvania for yielding.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the Committee on the Judiciary and Co-Chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus, I rise in strong support of H.R. 7718, the ``Protecting the Health and Wellness of Babies and Pregnant Women in Custody Act,'' introduced by our colleague Congresswoman Bass of California. This legislation requires the Bureau of Justice Statistics to collect and report data relating to the demographics and physical and mental health needs of incarcerated women who are pregnant, in labor, or in post-partum recovery, at the Federal, State, tribal, and local levels. In addition, the bill will help ensure that appropriate medical services and programs related to pregnancy and childbirth are provided in the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) and made available to women in custody. The bill also prohibits the use of restraints or restrictive housing, while in BOP or U.S. Marshals Service custody, during the period of pregnancy, labor, and postpartum recovery, unless these measures are necessary. Over the past four decades, the total U.S. prison population has skyrocketed. There are almost 2.3 million people currently in our nation's prisons and jails, 36 which represents a more than 500 percent increase over the last 40 years. During the period from 1980 to the present, the federal prison population has grown from approximately 25,000 to 180,000--an increase of over 600 percent. A topic that is not as widely discussed is the fact that women are the fastest-growing segment of the incarcerated population. In the same time period, the number of women in the state prison population has grown by 834 percent, at more than double the pace of men. Today, the overall incarcerated population has begun to decrease slightly, although almost all of the reduction has been among men, and the proportion of incarcerated women remains on the rise. Since 2000, the jail incarceration rate for women has risen 26 percent while the rate for men has fallen by 5 percent. In addition, at the present time, there are more women in prison than at any point in U.S. history. Nationally, 64 out of every 100,000 women were in prison in 2016. Since 2013, the percentage of women prosecuted federally has consistently hovered around 13 percent. At the state level, the rate at which women are incarcerated varies greatly; the state with the highest rate of female imprisonment is Oklahoma and the states with the lowest incarceration rates for women are Rhode Island and Massachusetts. In 35 states, women's incarceration numbers have been higher than men's, and in a few states, the growth of women's prison populations have counteracted any reductions in men's incarceration numbers. Further, women in jail are the fastest growing correctional population in the country, increasing 14-fold between 1970 and 2014. This trend is even greater in small counties, where there has been a 31-fold increase between 1970 and 2014. Significantly, nearly half of all incarcerated women are held in jails. Mr. Speaker, somewhere between 3 percent and 6 percent of women entering the prison system are pregnant, with the highest rates of pregnancies being in local jails. Statistics from the Bureau of Prisons show that there were 171 pregnancies in federal prison in 2018. While the prison health care system is barely adequate for men, it fails to meet incarcerated women's basic needs. The situation is even more dire for pregnant women in prison who have additional and unique health needs. A significant portion of women come into the prison system with a history of poverty, substance abuse, and trauma and abuse. Women who enter prison are also less likely to have had access to regular health care before their incarceration, especially appropriate prenatal care. Moreover, women in prison are more likely to suffer from undiagnosed chronic illnesses, such as diabetes and high blood pressure, that can cause a high-risk pregnancy. Another salutary aspect of H.R. 7718 is that provides education and technical assistance by the National Institute of Corrections to state and local corrections facilities on appropriate medical care for pregnant women and to ensure training of BOP correctional officers at facilities housing women and of deputy U.S. Marshals, on the requirements of the bill. Finally, the legislation directs GAO to study and report to Congress the services and protections provided for pregnant incarcerated women in local and State correctional settings and in Federal pretrial detention facilities and authorizes the Attorney General to make grants to State, tribal, and local governments, to promote and support the health needs of incarcerated pregnant women. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 7718 complements and expands on the SIMARRA Act I introduced in the 114th and 115th Congress (i.e., H.R. 5130, H.R. 3410) and incorporated in the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act, legislation which directs the Bureau of Prisons to establish a pilot program to allow incarcerated women who give birth and children born during such incarceration to reside together in a separate prison housing unit. I strongly support this legislation and urge all Members to join me in voting to pass H.R. 7718, the ``Protecting the Health and Wellness of Babies and Pregnant Women in Custody Act.''

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Bass) for yielding me the time. I hope my time has not started running. We are trying to be COVID-19 safe. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the sponsor of this bill, Mr. Deutch, and his bipartisan cosponsors, and indicate my strong support for H.R. 6813, Promoting Alzheimer's Awareness to Prevent Elder Abuse, and to let him know that this is something that I think is enormously important and is seen throughout our districts. As I talk about this legislation, however, let me say what a pleasure it was for me to do a video to celebrate our virtual walk right in Houston, Texas, 2020 Walk to End Alzheimer's, where thousands will be walking in their front yards, they will be walking in backyards, they will be walking on trails, they will be walking in parks. They will be committed to ending Alzheimer's through the Houston Alzheimer's Association and the region. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank them for their great leadership. I have joined them every year at the University of Houston. These are committed and dedicated caretakers and others who want to make sure that they keep seniors safe. This bipartisan legislation strengthens the Elder Abuse Prevention and Prosecution Act passed by Congress in 2017 by providing for better collection and use of data on elder abuse and requiring the Department of Justice's Elder Justice coordinator to develop best practices and training materials for professionals treating, protecting, and caring for people living with Alzheimer's and related dementia. This is an important initiative with a companion bill. According to the National Council on Aging, seniors who have been abused have a 300 percent higher risk of death when compared to those who have not been mistreated. Combine that with COVID-19 and caretakers getting COVID-19 and sometimes strange persons coming in to take care of your loved one. This is an important initiative. During the current pandemic, the health and safety of people living with Alzheimer's and other forms of dementia are at an even greater risk. Approximately 7 out of 10 residents in long-term facilities have some form of cognitive impairment, with 29 percent having mild impairment, 23 percent moderate impairment, and 19 percent severe impairment. We know when the misguided recommendations came from the Federal Government that it was only elders that got COVID-19, we understood that, of course, that was not true, but we know COVID-19 was in nursing homes.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, so this is, of course, a very important initiative for helping to safeguard our elder population. But more importantly, I want to say that we need to end Alzheimer's, or dementia, as we know it, and I join my colleagues in supporting this very important legislation. I know Mr. Deutch's commitment to fighting Alzheimer's, ending it in our lifetime, providing a cure, and also to end elder abuse. Mr. Speaker, I ask everyone to support H.R. 6813. Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the Committee on the Judiciary and as a cosponsor, I rise in strong support of H.R. 6813, the ``Promoting Alzheimer's Awareness to Prevent Elder Abuse Act,'' introduced by Congressman Deutch of Florida. This bipartisan legislation strengthens the Elder Abuse Prevention and Prosecution Act passed by Congress in 2017, by providing for better collection and use of data on elder abuse and requiring the Department of Justice's Elder Justice Coordinator to develop best practices and training materials for professionals treating, protecting, and caring for people living with Alzheimer's and related dementias. Companion legislation (S. 3703) passed the Senate on August 6, 2020. Mr. Speaker, according to the National Council on Aging, seniors who have been abused have a 300 percent higher risk of death when compared to those who have not been mistreated. During the current pandemic, the health and safety of people living with Alzheimer's and other forms of dementia are at even greater risk. Approximately seven out of ten residents in long-term care facilities have some form of cognitive impairment, with 29 percent having mild impairment, 23 percent moderate impairment, and 19 percent severe impairment. According to one study, over 50 percent of nursing home staff admitted to mistreating (e.g. physical violence, mental abuse, neglect) older patients within the prior year. With current social isolation measures limiting contact with family members and other visitors, these individuals are at even greater risk of abuse and exploitation. Several federal agencies currently collect elder abuse data on an ongoing basis. Two distinct data sets include the National Adult Mistreatment Report System (NAMRS) (which collects state-level adult protective services data) and the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) (which collects data on suspected elder financial exploitation submitted by financial institutions). Although many cases may go unreported, the National Adult Mistreatment Report System (NAMRS) (which collects state-level adult protective services data) reflects data on elder abuse cases reported to state and local authorities. Based on the most currently reported data, neglect comprised the highest percentage across types of elder abuse, followed by financial exploitation. Financial exploitation causes large economic losses for elders, families, businesses, and government programs, and one of the key factors that makes the elderly more susceptible to financial exploitation is cognitive decline. According to data collected by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), financial exploitation lasts longer than average in cases where the targeted person has a diminished cognitive capacity. Such person are particularly vulnerable to scams as their condition makes it more difficult for them to communicate the crimes to law enforcement or to seek critical assistance from first responders or other social services personnel. People living with Alzheimer's or dementia often have difficulty understanding or explaining situations; and their behaviors may be misunderstood as uncooperative, disruptive or combative. The Elder Abuse Prevention and Prosecution Act required the Justice Department to create training materials to help criminal justice, health care, and social services personnel assess and respond to elder abuse cases. Under the Act, the Elder Justice Coordinator is responsible for evaluating training models to determine best practices and creating or compiling and making publicly available replication guides and training materials for law enforcement officers, first responders, social workers, prosecutors, judges, individuals working in victim services, adult protective services, medical personnel, mental health personnel, financial services personnel, and any other individuals that encounter and support people living with Alzheimer's and other types of dementia. The legislation before us builds upon existing requirements for training materials by requiring the Elder Justice Coordinator to engage in greater consultation with relevant entities and stakeholders. H.R. 6813 would also require further training materials relating to victims and witnesses who have Alzheimer's disease and related dementias. One study determined that a significant subset of individuals with dementia illnesses could reliably report on emotional events and were even able to report details of the event accurately and to recall the same event with the same accuracy after a short time delay. Crime victims with dementia should be evaluated for their ability to remember emotional events in order to determine whether they can provide testimony about the criminal events. This legislation would require the Elder Justice Coordinator to develop specific training materials for these types of cases. The bill also aligns with the latest recommendations from the National Plan to Address Alzheimer's Disease, which includes disseminating information on abuse of this vulnerable population and educating law enforcement about interacting with these individuals. Mr. Speaker, dementia-specific training materials will improve the quality of professionals' interactions with individuals living with Alzheimer's and other dementia, and will also help protect them from elder abuse and exploitation. Mr. Speaker, in this time when the nation is being ravaged by the coronavirus pandemic, greater dissemination of best practices and improved training materials will help first responders, law enforcement, medical professionals and other individuals effectively interact with people living with Alzheimer's and other dementia who are targeted by fraud and in need. I strongly support this legislation and urge all Members to join me in voting for its passage.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as a cosponsor and a senior member of the House of Representatives, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5068, the ``Women Who Worked on the Home Front World War II Memorial Act,'' which would authorize the establishment of a memorial on federal land in the District of Columbia, commemorating the efforts of the 18 million American women who kept the home front running during World War II. I would like to thank Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton for introducing this important piece of legislation. It is no secret that women are dramatically underrepresented when it comes to our memorials. Despite being instrumental in maintaining the stability of the country during World War II, the women of World War II have not received much recognition for their contributions. This bill would change that by authorizing the Women Who Worked on the Home Front Foundation to establish a memorial to honor these women. The memorial is designed to be interactive and to educate visitors on the crucial roles women played during World War II. For instance, millions of American women took jobs to support their families and the country at large during World War II, forever redefining what ``women's work'' looked like. In fact, more than 10,000 women served behind the scenes of World War II as codebreakers. Women were also trained to fly military aircraft so that male pilots could leave for combat duty overseas. More than 1,100 female civilian volunteers flew nearly every type of military aircraft as part of the Women Airforce Service Pilots (WASP) program. WASPs flew planes from factories to bases, transported cargo and participated in simulation strafing and target missions. Between 1940 and 1945, the percentage of women in the workforce increased from 27 percent to nearly 37 percent, and, by 1945, one in four married women worked outside of the home. The work done by women on the home front had a profound effect on the job market going forward. As the nation continues to mourn the loss of the `Notorious RBG', an unmatched constitutional scholar and Supreme Court Justice who irrevocably advanced the women's movement, I can think of no better way to honor her legacy than by voting for this bill to commemorate the women whose sacrifices and decisions to enter the workforce during World War II also helped to change perceptions about gender roles in society. We, as Members of Congress, have a duty to recognize and celebrate these revolutionary patriots for their service to this country. As a proud leader of this bill, I encourage my fellow colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 5068.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the House Judiciary Committee, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5139, the ``Stop Sexual Assault and Harassment in Transportation Act,'' which establishes formal sexual assault and harassment policies for the transportation industry. I would like to thank Congressman DeFazio for his leadership on this vital piece of legislation. While the United States prides itself for being an innovator and leader in transportation, we are severely lacking in our protections of personnel and travelers from sexual assault and harassment. There have been too many accounts of women and children being sexually assaulted on airplanes and groped on crowded trains, as well as flight attendants being sexually harassed daily in their workplaces. According to a survey of students at San Jose State University conducted by Metro Magazine, almost two-thirds (63 percent) of respondents had experienced some form of harassment while using transit. Verbal harassment was the most common form of harassment, with 41 percent experiencing ``obscene/harassing language'' and 26 percent being subjected to sexual comments. Among non-verbal types of harassment, 22 percent had been stalked and 18 percent had been victims of indecent exposure. With respect to physical harassment, 11 percent of students had experienced groping or inappropriate touching. These facts and figures are representative of a larger issue of sexual assault and harassment in the public transportation industry across the country. Things must change. H.R. 5139 seeks to help prevent sexual assaults and sexual harassment on airplanes, buses, passenger vessels, commuter and intercity passenger railroads, and ridesharing vehicles by establishing formal policies to which transportation providers must adhere. For example, passenger transportation providers are required to facilitate the reporting of sexual harassment and assault incidents, develop procedures that limit or prohibit future travel for individuals who perpetuate these incidents, as well as train personnel to recognize and respond to such incidents. The bill also establishes a maximum civil penalty of $35,000 for individuals who physically or sexually assault transportation personnel. Furthermore, H.R. 5139 not only establishes a data collection program within the Department of Transportation regarding the number of incidents of sexual assault or harassment reported by transportation personnel and passengers each year, but it also streamlines the reporting process for individuals involved in an incident. By doing so, individuals will be able to report allegations to law enforcement in a confidential and separate manner from the reporting processes offered by the transportation provider. It is simply not enough to condemn sexual harassment and assault. It is time for actionable solutions that stop these incidents from occurring altogether, and this bill is a great step in that direction. I encourage my fellow colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 5139.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, the American people cannot wait. Help is on the way, and the only thing I can ask from my Republican friends is to take a walk in neighborhoods in their districts around the Nation where mothers and fathers are waiting on a disbursement needed to put food on their table. This $2.2 trillion bill is going to help businesses, nonprofits, and faith institutions with the PPP. It is going to give us protective equipment. Yes, the engine of our communities, small independent restaurants, are getting close to $120 billion; more funds to bolster education and childcare; schools that cannot open because they do not have the resources; money for testing--I have opened 33 testing sites in our neighborhoods; contact tracing, of course; making sure the cities' and counties' essential workers and hazard pay is paid. Is anyone asking the American people if they are suffering and need this resource to help them? To fight COVID-19, we have to stop the evictions; stop the foreclosures; give healthcare, clothes, food, and security; make sure we take care of small businesses, education; and give our people a lifeline. The American people can't wait. Now is the time to help them. Vote on the Heroes Act for this money and this relief.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the Committees on the Judiciary and on Homeland Security, I rise in strong support of Senate amendments to H.R. 925--America's Conservation Enhancement Act (an update of The Heroes Act), a much needed installment of the necessary assistance and relief provided by Congress to address the adverse health and economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. To date, there are more than 7,213,419 confirmed cases, over 206,402 dead, including 748,967 cases and 15,711 deaths in my home state of Texas. I want to thank our frontline healthcare workers and essential workers for their sacrifice and commitment during this crisis. I have worked along side medical professionals and public health experts in my city of Houston to open 33 remote testing sites. This update of the HEROES Act provides an additional $2.2 trillion for protects lives, livelihoods and the life of our democracy. This update to the HEROES Act is needed in order to have the economic vitality to reopen that allows a science-based path to safely reopen our country and helping ensure that every American can access free coronavirus treatment. In support this legislation also because it provides strong support for our heroes fighting the pandemic on the front lines with nearly $1 trillion for state, local, territorial and tribal governments who desperately need funds to pay the health care workers, police, fire, transportation, and EMS personnel, along with teachers and other vital workers who keep us safe and are in danger of losing their jobs. The Heroes Act update provides for: small businesses, by improving the Paycheck Protection Program to serve the smallest businesses and struggling nonprofits, hard-hit businesses with second loans, and targeted assistance for the struggling restaurant industry and independent live venue operators. The bill also provides additional assistance for airline industry workers, extending the highly successful Payroll Support Program to keep airline industry workers paid. There are more funds to bolster education and childcare, with $225 billion for education--including $182 billion for K-12 schools and nearly $39 billion for postsecondary education--and $57 billion to support child care for families. Another reason to support this bill is that it puts money in the pockets of workers with a second round of direct payments to families of $1,200 for adults and $500 for each child, new payroll protection measures to keep 60 million workers connected with their jobs, and restores the weekly $600 federal unemployment payments through January 2021. On top of that, by taking the necessary measures to slow the pandemic and `flatten the curve' so as not to overwhelm the nation's health care system, economic activity in the United States has experienced a severe shock to the system. There have been more than 36 million initial unemployment claims in the past month alone. In addition, on March 23, 2020, the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) dipped to 18,321.62, which is even lower than it was on Election Night 2016, and far below the 19,827 mark where it stood on January 20, 2017. In other words, Mr. Speaker, all the gains that were made to the stock market and heralded by this Administration as evidence of its genius have been wiped out, depleting the retirement savings and 401(k) fund of millions of ordinary Americans. The situation is so dire that Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, appointed by the current President, stressed the importance of Congress providing further fiscal relief, stating this week: ``While the economic response has been both timely and appropriately large, it may not be the final chapter, given that the path ahead is both highly uncertain and subject to significant downside risks. Additional fiscal support could be costly, but worth it if it helps avoid long-term economic damage and leaves us with a stronger recovery.'' The U.S. economy lost over 20 million jobs in April with the unemployment rate spiking to 14.7 percent, the worst since the Great Depression, but actual job losses were near 20 percent according to some estimates. And in addition to the highly inequitable gender and racial impacts, this economic downturn reveals a strong class dimension to the unemployment wave, with 18.1 million of the 19.5 million jobs lost in the private sector last month classified as production and nonsupervisory workers as opposed to managers. So, we have simultaneously a public health emergency and an economic calamity, both of which are addressed in the legislation before us. But before we can get back on our feet economically and restore the booming economy inherited by the current Administration, Americans must be assured and confident that there is a plan and strategy to combat COVID-19; and the resources and commitment needed to implement the plan and execute the strategy. And that means testing, testing, and more testing, along with contact tracing. Mr. Speaker, the occasion demands that we rise, and I urge all Members to join me in voting to pass H.R. 925--America's Conservation Enhancement Act (an update of The Heroes Act).