Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from the Judiciary Committee and on the Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security Subcommittee for his leadership, and I thank the sponsors for their leadership. I thank our chairman and ranking member for the bipartisanship of this legislation. Again, Mr. Speaker, let me remind my colleagues how important this change is. It doesn't speak to mistakes or innocent mistakes, but what it does is it makes sure that a computer that is offline is subject to the laws of hacking that may occur when a computer is online or active. We know how creative those who want to undermine and distract from a fair, just election are. They may not just have an inclination to hack an active computer. So under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, this is to include computers, even if they are offline, that are part of a voting system used in a Federal election. Again, we understand how many people are engaged in making sure we have a secure and just election, and we know that this legislation focuses on the bad actors, and that is what we want to do. The integrity, Mr. Speaker, of the upcoming elections is essential to the foundation of our democracy. The right to vote is the most fundamental right of citizenship in our democracy, and this issue touches every voter in every community across America. We know that people are now voting as we stand here on the floor of the House. We know that mail balloting will continue or start in many jurisdictions. Some have already started. We know many States are engaged in early voting, where millions of people will be voting. This is an important initiative that needs to be signed immediately into law. We need to do all that we can to address current threats and to ensure public confidence in our elections. This legislation will help advance that goal. That is why I ask all of my colleagues to join me in supporting passage of S. 1321 today. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 1380) to amend the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure to remind prosecutors of their obligations under Supreme Court case law.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I thank my friend and colleague from North Dakota for his leadership. I thank, again, the chairman and ranking member of the full committee and our subcommittee chairpersons and ranking members. Mr. Speaker, let me just say that, as I indicated, it is with an enormous sense of pride and recognition and a breath of fresh air when we talk about the Constitution in this hallowed place, because this House and the other body are grounded in our appreciation and adherence to the Constitution. That is what this bill is: due process protections and dealing with the Bill of Rights, and the right to due process that we find in the 14th Amendment and the Fifth Amendment. So I am delighted that the Due Process Protections Act is now recognized, and it is a commonsense, bipartisan measure. How much better we will be when all of the judicial districts require exculpatory evidence to be presented, because then you know that you have given all parties their fair chance, and someone who might lose their liberty, you give them a fair chance by putting forward all of the evidence that may be exculpatory. So it is narrowly tailored to ensure that Federal prosecutors simply follow the law, as they already should, in every case. I strongly urge my colleagues to support this breath of fresh air in the recounting of the Constitution, a document that continues to live in 2020 so that it will become law and order. Again, I ask my colleagues to support this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5602) to authorize dedicated domestic terrorism offices within the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation to analyze and monitor domestic terrorist activity and require the Federal Government to take steps to prevent domestic terrorism, as amended.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, just one point that I want to make as I yield to the author and leader on this bill is that we are continuously fighting a known, recognized domestic terrorism. This vital bill will provide the reporting for a roadmap to do the right thing. That is what the Federal Government is challenged and charged to do. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Schneider). Congressman Schneider is a member of the Judiciary Committee and is the author of this legislation.

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

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, would you share the time remaining, please.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let me thank my good friend from Ohio for bringing to our attention something that I think is very important. Then, it allows me to say that I don't know one single person in this body who condones violent protests. I have not run into anyone in the Judiciary Committee, and I have not seen anyone on the floor on either side of the aisle. That is why this legislation is so crucial because it generated bipartisan support on the work that the Congress should do. What is it that the Congress should do? Find a way for our agencies to work together. In the Judiciary Committee, we had a hearing with the Attorney General on the question of domestic terrorism. In the Homeland Security Committee, we had a hearing on the question of domestic terrorism. I think we found some, if you will, collegiality in recognizing that white supremacy and white nationalism were the greatest threat to domestic security. I remember in this legislation the generosity of Mr. Schneider and my commitment when the committee added Mr. Steube's--a Republican's-- amendment at markup that included findings that addressed antigovernment actors and violence against police. We passed that in a bipartisan way. I want to remind my colleagues that the legislation itself was passed in a bipartisan manner. We have seen what happens when we undermine coordination. We see what happens when the pandemic office was dismissed out of the White House that was coordinating with agencies on COVID-19 or other pandemics. We see the confusion that we have. This legislation is simply trying to make sure that our very fine public servants who are fighting domestic terrorism are fighting it with the best informational tools they can get. How do they do that? With this very fine legislation that allows us to be able to get the right kind of data. I want to just indicate a lot of things have been happening. I have watched peaceful protesters be subjected to violence. My heart goes out. Those are someone's children; they are young people; and they have a right to be protesting. They have a right, as our dear beloved colleague has always said, to speak up. John Robert Lewis always said to speak up and get into good trouble to make this Nation better. I have not heard any Member of this body not condemn, in the strongest terms, the shooting of Los Angeles deputies and are pleased to hear that they are recovering. I would just indicate that we need to adhere to what is right. This legislation is laying us on a pathway of getting facts and information so that we can do what is right to secure the American people. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I thank the gentleman for his commentary, but I am going to rise and ask my colleagues to support this legislation in a bipartisan manner. As indicated--I would correct my friend's interpretation--Mr. Steube's amendment was added in the markup and the findings at that time addressed antigovernment actors and violence against police. We made it very clear, and it was bipartisan, that we condemn violence of any kind. But what I would say as well is that the simple addition as it relates to Kenosha was in sharp contrast to the visual, the video, of a direct skin contact shooting of an individual whose back was turned, and then the call across the Nation for white supremacists and white nationalists to come and defend. Defend what? There was law enforcement there. I think the governor had even asked for the Wisconsin National Guard to safeguard everyone. But here was someone that came--a teenager. I am grateful that he remained alive; grateful. But he walked with guns, and is alleged to have killed, harmed, three people at least, never was confronted by officers, of course, to our knowledge, and got home to sleep in his bed. On the other hand, Jacob Blake, whose father I met, wound up in ICU, wound up paralyzed, a victim in the Kenosha shootings. And so it is crucial that we get the facts of what this legislation wants to do, and that we don't get a young man from Illinois versus another young man from Ohio, who was 12 years old--Tamir Rice--who didn't get to go home. We want to make sure that we have fairness. Mr. Speaker, as I said, I am very concerned about the shootings of these individuals, the Los Angeles deputies. We don't know the motives of the assailants. It remains unknown. But we continue to seek justice for them, and we want to make sure that the threat of white supremacists and domestic terrorism is known. Mr. Speaker, this bill directs that directly and I think it will provide for a very important tool for our law enforcement--unbiased-- without any effort to try and stigmatize anyone. Mr. Speaker, in closing, domestic terrorism is a serious threat to our country. We must take real action to address the rise of hate crimes and white supremacy. This legislation would address the rising tide of white supremacy without impinging on constitutional rights. It reflects a careful balance between empowering the investigatory agencies of the Federal Government to curb hateful and dangerous incidents of domestic terrorism and protecting the rights of free speech and assembly. Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Brad Schneider for his leadership and his diligent work on this important legislation during this Congress. We will be better for the passage of this legislation. The Nation will be better. It is critical that we adopt this bill. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation, passed out of the Committee on the Judiciary in a bipartisan vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 6100) to amend title 18, United States Code, to clarify the criminalization of female genital mutilation, and for other purposes, as amended.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I emphasize that the practice of FGM violates girls' and women's rights to sexual and reproductive health, security, and physical integrity, their right to be free from torture and cruel or inhumane or degrading treatment, and their right to life when the procedure results in death. Let me be very clear: This is international, but it is happening in the United States, and I think it is important for this Nation to stand up to this dastardly act. According to the World Health Organization, it is estimated that more than 200 million girls and women alive today have undergone female genital mutilation. Further, there are an estimated 3 million girls at risk of undergoing female genital mutilation every year. And because of the manner in which female genital mutilation is being practiced in the United States, it affects interstate and foreign commerce, the regulation which the Constitution entrusts in the Constitution in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3. Mr. Speaker, I am very grateful to the Committee on the Judiciary's staff for working together with me and my office, making this legislation a real fix. Therefore, Congress has the authority under the Commerce Clause, as well as the necessary and proper clause contained in Article I, Section 8, to fix this, and that is what we have done. Again, let me thank the chairman and ranking member of the full committee and of the subcommittees, and all of the Members, for supporting this legislation. The STOP FGM Act is a critical measure to protect the health and safety of girls in our communities and to ensure that those who would engage in this horrific practice do not go unpunished. This is bipartisan legislation, and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation and voting to stop these dastardly acts. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5309) to prohibit discrimination based on an individual's texture or style of hair, as amended.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5309, the Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair Act of 2020, or CROWN Act of 2020. This important bill explicitly prohibits discrimination on the basis of hair texture and hairstyles commonly associated with a particular race or national origin in employment, housing, federally funded programs, public accommodations, and the making and enforcement of contracts. I rise to thank the sponsor of this bill, Congressman Cedric Richmond of Louisiana, for his leadership and his vision and, really, gathering all of the proponents with all of their efforts to be able to get this bill to move as quickly as it has done. To be clear, it is my view that existing civil rights statutes that prohibit discrimination on the basis of race or natural origin may already make such kinds of hair-based discrimination unlawful, but it is crucial that we are absolutely sure. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission agrees, having issued guidance interpreting title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to prohibit discrimination based on hairstyle or texture as a form of race discrimination in certain instances. Unfortunately, several Federal courts have erroneously rejected this interpretation, which is why we must pass H.R. 5309. Personally, coming from the State of Texas, I am aware of a heinous, devastating impact on a young man who had dreadlocks. Apparently, the school district could not find title VII, did not understand the law, and he did not experience the benefit of the law, being suspended and not being able to graduate. That was a dastardly action, and we are all sufferers for that happening to that young man who didn't deserve it. This legislation will leave no ambiguity that, in key areas where Federal law prohibits race and national origin discrimination, discrimination based on an individual's hair texture or hairstyle, if they are commonly associated with a particular race or national origin, is unlawful. The history of discrimination based on race and national origin in this country is, sadly, older than the country itself, and we are still living with the consequences today. Congress took a pivotal step in the fight against racism and discrimination when it passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race and national origin, as well as other characteristics in key areas of life. This law did not eliminate discrimination entirely. One cannot legislate away hate. But it provided critical recourse for those who face discrimination, and it made clear that the government has a compelling interest in fighting discrimination. Even Dr. Martin Luther King said that he might not be able to change hearts, but he could change laws. This is what we are doing today. We cannot fool ourselves into thinking that discrimination is no longer alive and well; however, the recent protests over police brutality, systemic racism, and institutional racism have forced many who would rather look the other way to confront the continuing and pervasive legacy of racism in our country. While racism and discrimination still take many blatantly obvious forms, they also manifest themselves in more subtle ways. One form is discrimination based on natural hairstyles and hair textures associated with people of African descent. I think you can take a national survey, go across the country in all 50 States and find someone who is of African descent, and they will tell you about the response to either their beards and hairstyles, as relates to men, and to women and their hairstyles. According to a 2019 study of Black and non-Black women conducted by the JOY Collective, Black people are disproportionately burdened by policies and practices in public places, including the workplace, that target, profile, or single them out for natural hairstyles and other hairstyles traditionally associated with their race, like braids, locs, and twists. Often, those hairstyles are protective hairstyles--hairstyles that tuck the ends of one's hair away and minimize manipulation and exposure to the weather--and can play an important role in helping to keep one's hair healthy. They can be utilitarian, and we are denied that right to have a hairstyle that is utilitarian. That may be dreadlocks and braids and various other styles that are neatly placed on one's head, the crown. These findings are bolstered by numerous reports of incidents in recent years showing that this form of discrimination is common. For example, in 2017, a Banana Republic employee was told by a manager that she had violated the company's dress code because her box braids were too urban and unkempt. A year later, a New Jersey high school student was forced by a White referee to either have his dreadlocks cut or forfeit a wrestling match, ultimately leading to a league official humiliatingly cutting the student's hair in public immediately before the match. Let me just pause for a moment. Any of us who raised children, a son or a daughter, has that image in our heart, in our DNA. That picture has gone viral. It is still there. That young man can be 30 or 40 or 50, and you will see his commitment to wrestling on behalf of his school and his team. And in the public eye, he is having one of the most sacred parts of anyone's experience--your hair--being cut publicly for the world to view. I just feel a pain right now seeing that young man do that. His parents were not there, or had no ability to respond, but he had the courage to get it done so that he could compete with his teammates. In that same year, an 11-year-old Black girl was asked to leave class at a school near New Orleans because her braided hair extensions violated the school's policy. Unfortunately, research shows that such discrimination is pervasive. The JOY Collective study found that Black women are more likely than non-Black women to have received formal grooming policies in the workplace and that Black women's hairstyles were consistently rated to be lower or ``less ready'' for job performance than non-Black hairstyles by substantial margins. In view of these disturbing facts, seven States--California, New York, New Jersey, Virginia, Colorado, Washington, and Maryland--have enacted State versions of the CROWN Act, in every case with bipartisan support, sometimes even with unanimous support of both parties. I know my State is finally going to attempt to do so in the next legislative session in the State house. While I applaud these States for taking this necessary step, this is a matter of basic justice that deals with Federal law, civil rights, title VII, that demands a national solution by this Congress. I am glad that we are where we are today. Additionally, the United States military has recognized the racially disparate impact of seemingly neutral grooming policies on persons of African ancestry, particularly Black women. For this reason, in 2017, the Army repealed a grooming regulation prohibiting women servicemembers from wearing their hair in dreadlocks, and, in 2015, the Marine Corps issued regulations to permit loc and twist hairstyles. None of that impacts your service to this Nation. I thank the gentleman from Louisiana again, Representative Cedric Richmond, for introducing and championing this important bill and for his leadership on this issue. I urge my colleagues to pass H.R. 5309, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let me indicate that I want to thank the previous speaker for raising his concerns. I think what I would like to offer to him is that people have been suffering these indignities for decades. Natural hair is coming back. We called it Afros. And anyone who wore an Afro in a certain era knows how they were confronted and looked at. There were vast numbers of people wearing Afros, whether males or females, individuals of African descent. I am a living witness, and we are living witnesses to that. So I do want to make the point that it is not redundant. I will make this point again. But in 2016, the Eleventh Circuit rejected the EEOC's argument that existing law prohibits hair discrimination as a proxy for race discrimination. What I did say, as we worked together, Mr. Armstrong--I appreciate his commentary and his leadership--is that we are here to fix things, and here we have that the Eleventh Circuit would not accept that. So I thank the gentleman for raising the concern, and I think Chairman Nadler looked at this carefully and subcommittee chairpersons looked at this carefully and knew that we had to proceed. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee), who is a distinguished senior member on the Appropriations Committee but, more importantly, has, I think, had her own life experience and has fought throughout her life for civil rights, civil justice, and ensuring that the most vulnerable will have a voice.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).

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

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments of my good friend from North Dakota, and even my good friend from Ohio. But as I close, let me, first of all, indicate this couldn't be a more important bill. I heard on the floor someone talk about this being redundant. Whenever we can have civil rights, equal rights, and equality as being redundant, then America is doing the right thing. Whenever we can clarify the 11th Circuit that rejected the EEOC's argument that existing law prohibits hair discrimination as a proxy for race discrimination, whenever we can clarify that--whenever we can save the dignity, the hurt, and sometimes the ruination of people who simply because of the color of their skin and the kind of hair that they have, ruins their life or disallows them from graduating or have a public shedding of their hair for the world to see so that they can support their team. Whenever we are able to fix that on the floor of the House, I think we should do it. And I take issue with my good friend from Ohio, we have the legislative Record. We have condemned any violence against law enforcement officers, and we mourn and ensure that the world knows that we are praying for and have indicated our condemnation of the shooting of the two officers in California and wish for their speedy recovery. And, as well, I want to make sure that all those who are shown to have done this are quickly brought to justice. That is in the legislative history. We also recognize that the issues dealing with Kenosha are unique and, therefore, we are sorry that Tamir Rice did not get the opportunity as a young boy, just as this 17-year-old, who was clearly engaged with white supremacy and white nationalism, came to this place to do harm, which he did. Tamir Rice was just a 12-year-old boy in a park. So I don't think you can equate the two, and I don't think you can suggest that we are not supposed to respond to domestic terrorism. So let me indicate, Mr. Speaker, that I do want to thank Mr. Richmond, Ms. Fudge, Ms. Pressley, and as my colleague mentioned, the late John Robert Lewis, who was always looking for good trouble and to do what is right as a cosponsor of this legislation. H.R. 5309 is an important piece of legislation that will help further ensure that hairstyles and hair extremes commonly associated with a particular race or national origin cannot be used as proxies for race or national origin discrimination. Such discrimination should already be prohibited by Federal civil rights statutes, but unfortunately some Federal courts have interpreted these statutes so narrowly as to effectively permit using hair discrimination as a proxy for race or national origin discrimination. H.R. 5309 corrects this erroneous interpretation and further extends justice and equality for all. Mr. Speaker, I just want to put into the Record the plight of two students in the Barbers Hill Independent School District in my State where these two outstanding students, athletes, good academic students, were humiliated because their tradition was to wear dreadlocks, and they were suspended. And one or maybe two of them were not able to walk with their class. Humiliation. Discrimination that never got corrected. So today, for them we correct it. DeAndre Arnold, we correct it. We acknowledge that you deserve your civil rights. Mr. Speaker, I urge the House to pass H.R. 5309, and I yield back the balance of my time. General Leave

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I support this legislation because we have to stand to cure, to fix COVID-19, not to stigmatize and destroy the opportunity of saving America and doing the right thing by science. Madam Speaker, as a senior member of the Judiciary and Homeland Security Committees, and the Budget Committee, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 908, which condemns anti-Asian sentiment in all its forms and manifestations, from whatever quarter, and from whomever, from the ordinary citizen up to and including the President of the United States. Since January 2020, there has been a dramatic increase in reports of hate crimes and incidents against those of Asian descent and the danger accelerates as the number of deaths attributable to COVID-19, which currently stands at 197,000, continues to increase and is expected to exceed 250,000 by Election Day on November 3, 2020. The use of anti- Asian terminology and rhetoric related to COVID-19, such as the ``Chinese Virus'', ``Wuhan Virus'', and ``Kung-flu'' have perpetuated anti-Asian stigma and is reminiscent of dark and shameful chapters in America's past where Asian-Americans were escaped as the ``yellow peril'' and interned in relocation camps. Madam Speaker, more than 23,000,000 Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders account for 7 percent of the Nation's population in the United States and over 2,000,000 Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders are working on the frontlines of this COVID-19 pandemic in health care, law enforcement, first responders, transportation, supermarkets, and other service industries. Madam Speaker, there are approximately 2 million Asian American owned businesses that generate over $700 billion in annual revenue and employ nearly 4.5 million workers. According to a recent study, there were over 400 cases related to COVID-19 anti-Asian discrimination just between February 9, 2020, and March 7, 2020 with Asian Americans being harassed, assaulted, and scapegoated for the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, in March 2020, anti-Asian woman wearing a mask was kicked and punched at a New York City subway station; two children and two adults were stabbed at a wholesale grocery in Midland, Texas; a couple was assaulted and robbed by a group of attackers in Philadelphia; and a 16-year-old boy was sent to the hospital after being attacked by bullies in Los Angeles, California. According to a report in the Houston Chronicle, during this pandemic a different curve has emerged in the Harris County metroplex, one of outward racism toward Asian Americans, where the increased use of anti- Asian rhetoric has also resulted in Asian-American businesses being targeted for vandalism. Madam Speaker, the Secretary General of the United Nations called for international solidarity and an end to any ill-founded discrimination of the outbreak's victims. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) counsels against that naming COVID-19 by its geographic location or linking it to a specific ethnicity because such linkage perpetuates stigma. For this reason, in 2015, the WHO issued guidance calling on media outlets, scientists, and national authorities to avoid naming infectious diseases for locations. On February 27, 2020, the Secretary of Health and Human Services stated ``ethnicity is not what causes the novel coronavirus'' and that it is inappropriate and inaccurate to call COVID-19 the ``Chinese virus.'' On February 28, 2020, Dr. Mitch Wolfe, the Chief Medical Officer of the CDC said, ``Stigma is the enemy of public health'' and on March 10, 2020, Dr. Robert Redfield, the Director of the CDC, testified that use of the term ``Chinese coronavirus'' is wrong and inappropriate. So, I am proud to be an original cosponsor and to strongly support H. Res. 908 introduced by my friend, the gentlelady from New York, Congresswoman Meng. The resolution calls on all public officials to condemn and denounce any and all anti-Asian sentiment in any form and recognizes that the health and safety of all Americans, no matter their background, must be of utmost priority. The resolution condemns all manifestations of expressions of racism, xenophobia, discrimination, anti-Asian sentiment, scapegoating, and ethnic or religious intolerance and calls on Federal law enforcement officials, working with State and local officials to expeditiously investigate and document all credible reports of hate crimes and incidents and threats against the Asian- American community in the United States. The resolution also calls upon federal, state, and local authorities to so, collect data to document the rise of incidences of hate crimes due to COVID-19; and to take action whenever appropriate to hold the perpetrators of those crimes, incidents, or threats accountable and bring such perpetrators to justice. Finally, and importantly, H. Res. 908 recommits United States leadership in building more inclusive, diverse, and tolerant communities and combatting misinformation and discrimination that put Asian Americans at risk. I urge all Members to join me in voting for H. Res. 908 and I thank Congresswoman Meng for introducing this important resolution.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I thank our distinguished chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, and I thank and applaud the gentlewoman from New York for her outstanding leadership and championing the rights of all Americans. Madam Speaker, from the unwarranted, unwanted allegations of hysterectomies in immigrant women around the Nation in detention centers, to the President of the United States taking to the bully pit to be able to call COVID-19 and the coronavirus the ``China virus,'' we are finding ourselves in the midst of confusion that is hurting the American people--hurting them in two ways: One, over 6 million COVID-19 infections in the United States, and now, predictions of upwards of 250,000 dead. Every one of them we, as Members of the United States Congress, should mourn because families, sadly, are having to bury family members having not seen them in their last days. What good is it to use that word--the ``Wuhan'' virus? That is not the scientific term. And out of that, we have created a hostile situation for our Asian-American friends, for Asian Americans who have been at the front lines fighting on behalf of this Nation. The use of anti-Asian terminology and rhetoric related to COVID-19, such as the Chinese virus, Wuhan virus, kung flu have perpetrated anti- Asian stigma and is reminiscent of dark and shameful chapters in America's past where Asian Americans were labeled as the ``yellow peril'' and interned in relocation camps. Madam Speaker, more than 23 million Asian American and Pacific Islanders account for 7 percent of the Nation's population in the United States, but over 2 million Asian American and Pacific Islanders are working on the front lines of this COVID-19 pandemic in healthcare, law enforcement, first responders, transportation, supermarkets, and other service industries. They feel threatened. For example, in March 2020, an Asian woman wearing a mask was kicked and punched at a New York City subway station by individuals; two children and two adults were stabbed at a wholesale grocery store. This was anti-Asian rhetoric. Finally, let me say, my own constituent, Coco Ma, in Houston, was afraid to go into a grocery store. Madam Speaker, include an article describing her concern. [From houstonchronical.com, Apr. 17, 2020] In Houston's New Normal, a Different Curve Emerges: Outward Racism Toward Asian Americans (By Olivia P. Tallet) Coco Ma knows it's risky to leave her house amid the coronavirus pandemic, as the number of Houston area confirmed cases increases and the peak is yet to come. The Rice University MBA student, however, doesn't even do the occasional run to the supermarket because, for her, the risk comes not only with battling against the virus but also against the vitriol aimed at Asian Americans like her, stereotyped as culprits of the pandemic. ``I have that fear . . . I ask my husband, who is white, to pick up the food we order. I'm afraid to go inside myself,'' said Ma, aware of the scapegoating impacting Chinese Americans and Asians in general who are mistaken as people from China, where the COVID-19 pandemic was first detected. Almost 1,500 hate incidents against Asian American and Pacific Islanders in the U.S. have been reported to the STOP AAPI HATE initiative since it began tracking incidents March 19. ``We know that (that) number is only a drop in the bucket. We know that this is really ubiquitous now,'' said lawyer Manjusha Kulkarni, executive director of the Asian Pacific Policy and Planning Council and founder of the tracking hate initiative, headquartered in California. Although the tracking isn't well known around the country, it has already received reports of incidents in 46 states, including Texas, said Kulkarni. The majority of the attacks are verbal, but some are also physical. To report incidents Hate and racist incidents against Asian Americans related to the COVID-19 pandemic can be reported to: Hate is Contagious: racismiscontagious.com; Stop AAPI Hate: asianpacificpolicyandplanningcouncil.org/stop-aapi-hate. In West Texas, a man stabbed and cut members of a family from Burma, at a supermarket in Midland on March 14. The father and one of his two small children were severely wounded before a store employee subdued the attacker. The man allegedly said he did it because he thought the family was from China and infecting people with the virus. Local media outlets reported that the FBI is investigating the case as a hate crime. In Houston, a city known for its diversity and tolerance, a woman verbally attacked the owner of the Vietnamese restaurant Vietopia earlier this month in a parking lot in front of the business, screaming expletives and, ``You, get out of our country.'' ``I felt unwanted here. We were very offended,'' said Sammi Tran, co-owner and wife of the victim, who videotaped the incident. ``My husband was born here in America. We don't harm anybody, but this is happening now. I've never felt like this before.'' ``We go to the supermarket and they look at us as if we were ugly people,'' Tran said. `Racism Is Contagious' At over half a million people, Asians make up 8 percent of the population in the Houston metro area. Residents with Chinese heritage represent the third largest subgroup after Indian and Vietnamese. Roughly 70 percent of Asians in the city are U.S. born or naturalized citizens, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Statewide, about 1.5 million residents identify as Asians, or 5.2 percent of the population. In Houston's Chinatown, the novel coronavirus hit businesses hard in January, well before residents were ordered to stay at home. Rumors spread on social media falsely claiming that an Asian supermarket in the area was shut down by the government due to coronavirus infections. Although there wasn't a single COVID-19 case in the state at the time, the rumors quickly propelled a fear of contagion and customers avoided the area, driving losses that reached 70 percent overnight for many Asian American businesses. Not long afterward, President Donald Trump called the agent of the pandemic ``the Chinese virus,'' stirring outrage and concern among Asian Americans. ``The community feels under siege. There is a genuine, palpable sense of fear in the Asian American community, they feel that they're being targeted,'' said Texas Representative Gene Wu, a Democrat from Houston. ``And this is not a Democratic or Republican issue. I've heard this from Democratic and Republican'' Asians. Trump recently said he was not going to use ``Chinese virus'' anymore, but some of his supporters do. ``China poisoned our people. President Trump has the courage to call it as it is: The Chinese Virus,'' the narrator's voice says over a sinister music clip in a campaign ad currently running on local television stations for Kathaleen Wall, who is in the GOP runoff for the 22nd District of Texas, representing the Sugar Land area. Asked if she didn't consider that her ad could negatively impact Asian Americans, she answered in an email: ``Leave it to Texas Democrats like Sri Preston Kulkarni to defend the Chinese Communist Party while ten thousand Americans have died because of the Coronavirus.'' Kulkarni is the Democratic candidate running in the November general election for District 22. Wea H. Lee, chairman of the Asian Southern News Group and the business organization International Trade Center in Houston, said attempts to diminish Asian people and their cultures overlook their success and integration in the country, such as having higher levels of income and education than the U.S. population overall. ``These politicians, the people making this kind of statement, it's so stupid, they are so nave that they don't see really what our community looks like,' said Lee. The Anti Defamation League warns that online forums and posts, some from white supremacist groups, are ridiculing Chinese people in relation to COVID-19 and portraying them as a dirty culture. A national campaign called ``Racism Is Contagious'' is using data to raise awareness about the issue and collect reports of abuses. It shows photos of Asians wearing a mask with the message ``I am not a Virus,'' which has become a viral hashtag. Invisible stories For many Chinese Americans, the real story buried under the vitriolic noise is that their network of connections with China, Asian doctors and business people is precisely what has helped them help others during the coronavirus crisis. The North Houston Chinese American community, for example, acquired part of its donation of masks and medical supplies to local healthcare providers via their connections in China, said Yanbo Wang, one of the organizers. They raised over $14,000 in donations from 98 families and have helped seven nonprofit health providers and organizations. ``We paid for shipments to bring masks that people in China donated to us,'' said Wang. The shipment arrived right when those supplies were difficult to find. Similarly, The Pearland Chinese Association collected and donated masks and other products from many Asian Americans who bought them earlier in the year. Hearing from their families in China about the epidemic gave them an edge to prepare and acquire products before the pandemic was well known in America. Jie Wu, a board member of the association, said many Asian Americans who work in the Texas Medical Center also let them know early about concerns with medical supplies. She said they mobilized and raised thousands of dollars plus masks, gloves and protective gowns, in what the organization calls ``The Love for the Community Initiative.'' Masks were collected among school parents, many of whom worry that the stigma can hurt Asian American children born in the U.S. Some reports nationwide have already pointed to hateful incidents against minors. Coco Ma, the co-founder of #SnacksForMedStaff initiative, is also concerned about the stereotyping. ``But I also want people to understand that I wanted to start the campaign not to prove who I am (and that) people should not get mad at me'' as an Asian person, said Ma. ``We Asians are doing this because we care.'' The idea of sending food to medical teams working in hospitals with COVID-19 cases came to Ma while talking on the phone with her mother, who is an administrator at a hospital in China dealing with the pandemic. Initially, she sent snacks to a few healthcare providers, but the initiative grew with people sending her money for a GoFundMe campaign. Ma, a Houston resident, and her classmate and program partner Kathleen Harcourt, who is Asian American, have now created a website to make all the #SnacksForMedStaff activities transparent to donors. They have raised around $12,000 of a $20,000 goal and have sent food packages to hospital teams in Texas and other four states among the hardest hit by the pandemic. ``We are getting very good feedback from doctors,'' Ma said. ``They feel appreciated.'' As the coronavirus is soon expected to peak locally, adding pressure to medical teams, Ma said her initiative will raise the funding goal and provide more packages. ``People are so polarized,'' said Ma. ``Forget about politics, especially during this pandemic. Forget about race. Focus on what is the problem and coming up with a solution. This is about humanity first.''

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, as a senior member of the Judiciary, Homeland Security, and Budget Committees, the Democratic Working Women Task Force, and as cosponsor, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2694, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), which would ensure that pregnant workers can continue to do their jobs and support their families by requiring employers to make workplace adjustments for those workers who need them due to pregnancy, childbirth, and related medical conditions, like breastfeeding. The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act would establish that private sector employers with more than 15 employees and public sector employers must make reasonable accommodations for pregnant employees, job applicants, and individuals with known limitations related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions. Similar to the Americans with Disabilities Act, employers are not required to make an accommodation if it imposes an undue hardship on an employer's business. Pregnant workers and individuals with known limitations related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions cannot be denied employment opportunities, retaliated against for requesting a reasonable accommodation, or forced take paid or unpaid leave if another reasonable accommodation is available. Workers denied a reasonable accommodation under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act will have the same rights and remedies as those established under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, including recovery of lost pay, compensatory damages, and reasonable attorneys' fees. While the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) provide some protections for pregnant workers, there is currently no federal law that explicitly and affirmatively guarantees all pregnant workers the right to a reasonable accommodation so they can continue working without jeopardizing their pregnancy. The Supreme Court's landmark decision in Young v. United Parcel Service, 575 U.S. __, No. 12-1226, 135 S.Ct. 1338 (2015) allowed pregnant workers to bring reasonable accommodation discrimination claims under the PDA. But pregnant workers are still being denied accommodations because the Young decision set an unreasonably high standard for proving discrimination, requiring workers to prove that their employers accommodated non-pregnant workers with similar limitations. As a result, in two-thirds of cases after Young, courts ruled against pregnant workers who were seeking accommodations under the PDA. Providing accommodations ensures that women can work safely while pregnant instead of getting pushed out of work at a time when they may need their income the most. The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act is especially important considering that many pregnant workers hold physically demanding or hazardous jobs, and thus may be especially likely to need reasonable accommodations at some point during their pregnancy. Madam Speaker, research shows that pregnant workers are likely to hold jobs that involve standing and making continuous movements, which can raise specific challenges during pregnancy. Such physically demanding work--including jobs that require prolonged standing, long work hours, irregular work schedules, heavy lifting, or high physical activity--carries an increased risk of pre-term delivery and low birth weight. Twenty-one (20.9) percent of pregnant workers are employed in low- wage jobs, which are particularly likely to be physically demanding. Pregnant black and Latina women are disproportionately represented in low-wage jobs, which means as a result, these workers are especially likely to stand, walk or run continuously during work, and therefore may be more likely to need an accommodation at some point during pregnancy to continue to work safely. Three in ten pregnant workers are employed in four of the occupations that make up the backbone of our communities: elementary school teachers, nurses and home health aides. Employers can accommodate pregnant workers because pregnant women make up a small share of the workforce, even in the occupations where they are most likely to work, which means that only a very small share of an employer's workforce is likely to require pregnancy accommodations in any given year since less than two percent of all workers in the U.S. are pregnant each year. Not all pregnant workers require any form of accommodation at work, so only a fraction of that small fraction will need accommodations. For example, pregnant women are most likely to work as elementary and middle school teachers but only three percent (3.2 percent) of all elementary and middle school teachers are pregnant women. But workers employed in four of the ten most common occupations for pregnant workers--retail salesperson; waiter or waitress; nursing, psychiatric and home health aide; and cashier--who report continuously standing on the job would particularly benefit from this legislation. Madam Speaker, prolonged standing at work has been shown to more than triple the odds of pregnant women taking leave during pregnancy or becoming unemployed. Another four of the ten most common occupations for pregnant workers--waiter or waitress; nursing, psychiatric and home health aide; cashier; and secretaries and administrative assistants--involve making repetitive motions continuously on the job which have been shown to increase the likelihood of pregnant women taking sick leave. Pregnant workers in low-wage jobs are particularly in need of this legislation granting them the clear legal right to receive accommodations because, in addition to the physically demanding nature of their jobs, they often face inflexible workplace cultures that make it difficult to informally address pregnancy-related needs. For instance, workplace flexibility--such as the ability to alter start and end times or take time off for a doctor's appointment--is extremely limited for workers in low-wage jobs. Over 40 percent of full-time workers in low-wage jobs report that their employers do not permit them to decide when to take breaks; between two-thirds and three-quarters of full-time workers in low-wage jobs report that they are unable to choose their start and quit times; and roughly half report having very little or no control over the scheduling of hours more generally. The second most common occupation for pregnant Latinas--maids and housekeeping cleaners--is especially physically demanding because, according to the data, 80 percent of maids and housekeeping cleaners stood continuously, 38 percent were exposed to disease daily, and 70 percent walked or ran continuously on the job. Occupations that have seen the most growth among pregnant women in the past decade expose many workers to disease or infection daily; depending on the disease, this can pose particular challenges to some pregnant workers at some points during pregnancy. When pregnant workers are exposed to some diseases, they face particular risks; pregnant women with rubella are at risk for miscarriage or stillbirth and their developing fetuses are at risk for severe birth defects. Madam Speaker, no one should have to choose between a paycheck and a healthy pregnancy, which is why they should have clear rights to reasonable accommodations on the job to ensure they are not forced off the job at the moment they can least afford it. I urge all Members to join me in voting for H.R. 2694, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I really thank the gentlewoman for her leadership on these issues. Thank you so very much for allowing me this time. As well, to the chairman of the committee, ranking member, and to Ms. Finkenauer and the gentleman from Kentucky, let me thank them for their leadership, and I thank the gentlewoman for the time. Madam Speaker, let me indicate how important this legislation is. Twelve Utah childcare students were infected with COVID-19. They infected another 12; one of them was a parent who had to go to a hospital. The Ensuring Children and Child Care Workers Are Safe Act of 2020 is vital and long overdue. This bill requires the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to provide educational materials and technical assistance to States related to the safe provision of childcare services during COVID-19. With this bill, childcare facilities not only receive information on COVID-19 prevention, but also professional development for providers on health and safety, as well as guidance on the acquisition and use of personal protective equipment. We heard this a lot in my district: No PPE. It also instructs HHS to recommend additional steps to Congress about ensuring the safe provision and adequate supply of childcare during COVID-19, including whether and how to expand the supply of childcare to meet demand. There is a demand. It is crucial. In addition, according to The Washington Post, before the coronavirus pandemic, approximately one-third of all children under age 5 attended a paid care facility, daycare center, preschool, or prekindergarten. In 2019, there were 15 million-plus children living with a single mother and approximately 3 million children living with a single father. This is crucial because, as things open up, children and schools are all going to be intermingling, and these childcare workers are vital to what we do and how we provide for these hardworking parents and to protect these children. And now we know. It has been disabused that at any point children are not infectious. That is no longer a fact. It is not a fact. It is not true. They are infectious and they can transmit COVID-19. Let me take a moment to speak quickly to H.R. 2574, the Equity and Inclusion Enforcement Act of 2019. That bill passed, but it restores the power of students and parents to challenge discriminatory policies and practices in schools and other federally funded programs. We know what happened to this young man who wanted to wrestle. What a humiliating situation when, on the wrestling floor, in the competition, a coach had to cut his hair off. I ask my colleagues to support H.R. 7909. I also rise to support H.R. 3659, Danny's Law, that deals with bullying, and, as well, H.R. 8162, 21st Century Community Learning Centers Coronavirus Relief Act. Madam Speaker, I thank my colleagues and ask my colleagues to support the legislation. Madam Speaker, as a cosponsor and Founding Chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus, I rise in strong support of H.R. 7909, the ``Ensuring Child and Child Care Workers Are Safe Act of 2020,'' which requires the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to provide educational materials and technical assistance to states related to the safe provision of child care services during COVID-19. Despite their vital role during the pandemic, child care providers have received insufficient actionable guidance on how to prevent the spread of COVID-19 while providing high-quality care. With this bill, child care facilities not only receive information on COVID-19 prevention but also professional development for providers on health and safety as well as guidance on the acquisition and use of personal protective equipment. It also instructs HHS to recommend additional steps to Congress about ensuring the safe provision and adequate supply of childcare during COVID-19, including whether and how to expand the supply of child care to meet demand. As an increasing number of states open up and more individuals return to work, parents are relying on child care facilities once again, making the need for proper guidance to prevent the spread of COVID-19 at child care services more essential than ever. As of this morning, the United States has over 6,606,859 cases of coronavirus and over 195,961 related deaths. Adequate and updated information is key to getting control over this disease, and we must ensure that this guidance is easily and readily accessible to all. It is no secret that the child care sector provides an immense public value to our society and our economy. According to the Washington Post, before the coronavirus pandemic, approximately one-third of all children under age 5 attended a paid care facility, day-care center, preschool or prekindergarten. Child care plays a crucial role in the lives of working parents, especially in single parent households. In 2019, there were about 15.76 million children living with a single mother and approximately 3.23 million children living with a single father in the United States. We must never forget that child care is often a lifeline to single, working parents that allows them to balance both their parenting and professional responsibilities. I am proud to be a leader on this critical piece of legislation, and I urge my colleagues from both parties to join me in voting to pass H.R. 7909.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for her kindness. In the last year alone, an estimated 160,000 students across the country skipped school because they feared being bullied. I started out by saying, and let me specifically note, in 2018, 7.1 percent of LGBTQ students were verbally bullied because of their sexual orientation. Twenty-eight or 30 percent of those students were physically bullied. Let me just say this. This is an excellent bill. It brings us all together. It announces our attempt to respond to Danny's mother, to attack an epidemic of bullying in our schools. We don't know where it starts. We don't know where these children come from. But we have to help them because bullying destroys the lives of the bully and of the one bullied. Madam Speaker, as a cosponsor and senior member of the Judiciary and Homeland Committees, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3659, ``Danny's Law,'' which requires the President to establish an Anti-Bullying Roundtable to study bullying in elementary and secondary schools in the United States. The 13-member roundtable will consist of relevant stakeholders, including but not limited to teachers, parents of schoolchildren, and guidance counselors, who will submit a report to Congress on best practices concerning bullying upon 270 days of convening. This report will provide recommendations for combating bullying, educating school officials on how to recognize bullying, as well as helping parents to address the early warning signs of bullying with their children, so that we can take a well-informed step forward in the fight against childhood bullying. This bill is named after Daniel Fitzpatrick, a 13-year-old boy who died by suicide on August 11, 2016. Danny was a loving and generous kid who embodied kindness and empathy to all. He was also the victim of relentless physical, mental, verbal, and emotional bullying at school. Throughout my tenure in Congress, I have been an active advocate for anti-bullying initiatives. In January 2019, I was able to achieve broad bipartisan support for my bill, H.R. 494, the Tiffany Joslyn Juvenile Accountability Block Grant Reauthorization and Bullying Prevention and Intervention Act, which was later passed in the House. Although some people may dismiss bullying as a normal part of growing up, bullying can be detrimental to a child's education and have lifelong consequences. It is an epidemic that plagues our country and too often claims the lives of our youth. In Houston, Texas, a child is bullied every seven seconds and approximately 11 percent of students do not go to school at least one day during the school year because they feel unsafe. On a national level, 90 percent of students between the fourth and eighth grades report being victims of some type of bullying. In the last year alone, an estimated 160,000 students across the country skipped school because they fear being bullied by their peers, and many more attended school in a state of anxiety and depression, affecting their ability to effectively learn. Students who are chronically absent between grades 8 and 12 are over seven times more likely to drop out before graduation and long-term consequences include poverty as well as diminished mental and physical health. Furthermore, students who identify or are perceived as LGBTQ are often at an increased risk of being bullied. In 2018, 70.1 percent of LGBTQ students were verbally bullied because of their sexual orientation while 28.9 percent of LGBTQ students were physically bullied. Youth with disabilities and those who are socially isolated are also considered as vulnerable populations when it comes to being targets for bullying. Cyber bullying adds an additional layer of complexity when trying to build a safe environment for all youth. In today's world, our children are exposed to technology at a much younger age, which raises the likelihood of them being subjected to cyberbullying. Over 80 percent of teens use a cell phone regularly, making it the most popular form of technology and a common medium for cyber bullying. According to the i-SAFE foundation, over 50 percent of adolescents and teens have been bullied online. Yet, well over half of young people do not tell their parents when they are being bullied online. By passing Danny's Law today, we are taking a tremendous, nonpartisan step towards eliminating childhood bullying and promoting more inclusive and tolerant environments for the next generation. I am proud to be a leader on this important legislation that will undoubtably improve the educational experiences of the next generation, and I ask all members from both parties to join me in voting to pass H.R. 3659.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I rise to speak in support of H.R. 8162, the ``21st Century Community Learning Centers Coronavirus Relief Act''. H.R. 8162, expands the allowable uses for subgrants provided under the 21st Century Community Learning Centers Program for the 2020-2021 school year. Specifically, the bill allows eligible entities that are awarded program subgrants for community learning centers to use these subgrants to: (1) carry out activities that advance student academic achievement and support student success, regardless of whether such activities are conducted in person, virtually, during school hours, or when school is in session; and (2) provide in-person care during the regular school day and when full-time in-person instruction is not available to students. (Currently, the program only supports academic enrichment opportunities for children during non-school hours or periods when school is not in session.) Because of the ongoing COVID-19 threat to health, the spring of 2020, saw the forced closure of all K-12 and post-secondary education institutions in the Nation. There is an urgent need to meet the education crisis the Nation is facing with an adequate response. Data from the National Center for Education Statistics shows that one out of every four households in Texas does not have access to broadband internet, and some 8 million homes do not have a computer or a smartphone. Because of this bill, Community Learning Centers will provide academic enrichment opportunities during school and non-school hours for children, particularly students who attend high-poverty and low- performing schools. The program helps students meet state and local student standards in core academic subjects, such as reading and math; offers students a broad array of enrichment activities that can complement their regular academic programs; and offers literacy and other educational services to the families of participating children. Technological difficulty is just one of the reasons students could become disengaged from the virtual learning environment. Learning Centers are needed because despite being one of the most developed countries in the world, the United States has one of the highest rates of childhood poverty globally. Preliminary data on the Huston Independent School District (HISD) from the Texas Education Agency shows 23.4 percent of students lost contact or stopped engaging with learning during the Spring. This is more than twice statewide average, the total statewide for unengaged students is nearly 500,000. One key factor is poverty, children born or raised in poverty face a number of disadvantages, most evidently in education. Poverty reduces a child's readiness for school because it leads to poor physical health and motor skills, diminishes a child's ability to concentrate and remember information, and reduces attentiveness, curiosity and motivation. Children in poverty are also finding the challenge of keeping up with school work more difficult due to COVID-19. One of the most severe effects of poverty in the United States is that poor children enter school with this readiness gap, and it grows as they get older. Children feel alienated from society; suffer insecurities because of their socioeconomic status; fear the consequences of their poverty; endure feelings of powerlessness; and are angry at society's inability to aid in their struggles. Children from lower-income families are more likely than students from wealthier backgrounds to have lower test scores, and they are at higher risk of dropping out of school. Students with low income backgrounds who complete high school are less likely to attend college than students from higher-income families. For some children, the effects of poverty on education present unique challenges in breaking the cycle of generational poverty and reduce their chances of leading rewarding, productive lives. In addition to these challenges' children living in poverty often do not have access to necessary computer technology, broadband internet connection to participate in remote learning, or the nutritional support that provides adequate food, which is essential to learning. We know that this crisis created by COVID-19 was difficult for the Nation's approximately 56.6 million students, 3.5 million full- and part-time public school teachers, and parents. This bill is necessary as the beginning of the fall school year continues to pose challenges to educating the nation's children. To meet the challenges created by COVID-19, the HISD school board passed a budget amendment earlier this month to spend $31 million on devices for students. By the end of the year, the district says it plans to have distributed nearly 125,000 devices and hotspots to students. The statute being amended only allows learning centers and related grants to be funded when schools are in session. At a time when learning centers are more important to education because COVID-19 is impacting schools' functioning as the primary source of full time learning we need to act to support this education resource. Children are depending on Congress to make education possible during COVID-19. There are: 50.8 million students in public schools, and 5.8 million students in private schools. Among the 50.8 million students enrolled in elementary and secondary public schools: 1.4 million were in prekindergarten; 3.7 million were in kindergarten; 35.5 million attended elementary through middle school (K and 8th grade); and 15.3 million attended high school (9 through 12th grade). Through 2028, enrollment is projected to increase to 51.4 million. In 2018, 3.3 million students graduated from high school, marking nearly a 1 percent increase from 2017; 3.7 million were expected to graduate in 2020; 3.3 million from public high schools; and 0.4 million from private schools. The average per-student expenditure in public schools is $13,440. In 2019, there are approximately 16,800 school districts in the United States. 13 percent of all public school students were served by the Individuals with Disabilities Act for the 2015-2016 school year. Between 2000 and 2016, total public school enrollment increased for 32 states. The following saw increases of 15 percent or more: Florida, Delaware, North Carolina, Idaho, Georgia, Colorado, Arizona, Texas, Utah, and Nevada. The following states saw decreases of 10 percent or more: Michigan, Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont. In 2018, 7 million or 13.7 percent of public school students received special education services. In 2017, 9.6 percent of public school students were learning English as a second language. I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 8162.