Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. This is a very conspicuous and daily occurrence that happens where our veterans are able to go to a supportive team that understands their service, appreciates their plight, and works to help them so that they do not go into the cycle of homelessness. I think it is particularly important when we think about veterans and their families. They are many times single parents, many times disabled or with family concerns, mental health needs, and these services that are provided include healthcare, daily living, legal services, fiduciary and payee services, personal financial planning, childcare, transportation, and housing counseling. Veterans like the Air Force veteran who, hoping to utilize the skills he learned in the service, instead bounced from job to job after being discharged, found himself sleeping at night on the cold cement under a bridge in Chicago. But, of course, he was able to get the support from our veterans support services. This is, again, a valuable statement made by this legislation, and I ask my colleagues to continue to support the services given by this particular program. Again, I hope that we will see the end of homelessness among our veterans and the increase in support services to help them in their pathway to success. Mr. Chair, I ask my colleagues to support my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, let me close by acknowledging and thanking the chairman and ranking member again for their leadership on this bill and to remind my colleagues that there are a series of stories of veterans who really needed these services. Katie, an SSVF caseworker at the Salvation Army Bismarck, received a call from a veteran named Cherie. Cherie was referred by the family assistance adviser at the military service center in Bismarck. According to Cherie, she didn't know the Salvation Army had the veterans program until she inquired for help. Cherie approached them. She had suffered a head injury resulting in a 3-inch blood clot, skull fracture, severe concussion. In short, she suffered traumatic brain injury. While on unpaid medical leave via physician's orders, she was terminated from her employer. This is the kind of devastating news that will be heard from veterans who will seek and receive this kind of help. Mr. Chairman, I include in the Record articles explaining the plight of a veteran in Bismarck: How the Salvation Army Helped a Mother and Her Children Keep Their Home On December 20, 2011, Katie, an SSVF Caseworker at the Salvation Army Bismarck Corps, received a call from a Veteran named Cherie. Cherie was referred by the Family Assistance Advisor at the Military Service Center in Bismarck, ND. According to Cherie, she ``didn't know the Salvation Army had the Veterans program until [she] required help.'' Cherie approached the SSVF program because on November 19th, she suffered a head injury resulting in a 3-inch blood clot, skull fracture and a severe concussion; in short, she suffered a traumatic brain injury (TBI). While on unpaid medical leave via physician's orders, she was terminated from her employer. A single mother of two, her biggest concern was maintaining her current residency. On December 21st, when Cherie met with Katie, she was very emotional and had difficulty processing her thoughts. She was extremely overwhelmed with how to pay for her rent and utilities and provide for her children while unemployed. Katie provided emotional support as well as resources for a food box, an application for food stamps through the county, contact information for a Veterans employment team representative and lastly, information about a support group for women Veterans in the Bismarck community. In Cherie's own words, ``The SSVF assistance provided peace of mind and helped keep me on my feet, especially with having kids. Katie has been such a calming influence, good about following up and very supportive.'' Since Cherie has been involved with the Salvation Army, she has been able to focus on recovering from her TBI, has found temporary full-time employment for which permanent placement is promising, and is able to provide for her children and keep a roof over their heads. She's also spreading the word to fellow Veterans throughout the state about the SSVF program.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. I ask my colleagues to support the program overall and my amendment. Mr. Chair, thank you for this opportunity to briefly explain Jackson Lee Amendment No. 34. Before I begin, let me express my appreciation and thanks to good friends, Chairman Calvert and Ranking Member Wasserman Schultz, for their hard and constructive work in shepherding this legislation to the floor. Chairman Calvert and I have worked together constructively for many years and he has always distinguished himself as one of the more bipartisan members of the House. And Ranking Member Wasserman Schultz has for years been one of the ablest Members of this body; I thank them both for their commitment to the important work of ensuring that our veterans receive the care and support they have earned from a grateful nation. Jackson Lee Amendment No. 34 makes a modest but important improvement to the bill by increasing the amount of funding for the ``Supportive Services for Veterans' Families'' account by $2 million, offset by a reduction of $2.5 million to the $4 billion allocated to the VA's ``Information Technology Systems'' account. Today, in our country, there are approximately 107,000 veterans (male and female) who are homeless on any given night. Any perhaps twice as many (200,000) experience homelessness at some point during the course of a year. The VA's ``Supportive Services for Veterans' Families'' Program helps veterans, and their families, who may have fallen on hard times or hit a rough patch in life and need a little help from the country they selflessly risked their life to defend. Homeless veterans or veterans facing homelessness who have minor age children are in need of special programs that allow housing that welcomes children. Jackson Lee Amendment No. 34 will enable this vital program to serve more veterans' families in need of help by provide a bit more funding for grants to private non-profit organizations and consumer cooperatives that provide supportive services to very low-income veteran families living in or transitioning to permanent housing. The SSVF Program ensures that eligible veteran families receive the outreach, case management, and assistance in obtaining VA and other benefits. These services may include health care, daily living, legal services, fiduciary and payee services, personal financial planning, child care, transportation, housing counseling. The SSVF Program enables VA staff and local homeless service providers to work together to effectively address the unique challenges that make it difficult for some veterans and their families to remain stably housed. Many homeless veterans, including in my own state of Texas, lack housing because they lost their job or could no longer afford rent; many suffer from an untreated mental illness that keeps them from working. Every day the SSVF program makes a real difference in the lives of real people. Veterans like the Air Force veteran who, hoping to utilize the skills he learned in the service, instead bounced from job to job after being discharged and found himself sleeping at night on the cold cement under a bridge in Chicago. Through the Thresholds Veterans Project, funded through the SSVF, this hero received steady community service support and eventually was placed in his own studio apartment. He now says, in his own words: I have a home. I enjoy bein' inside.'' Veterans like the one in Texas who because he lost his job at a manufacturing plant and was unable to pay the bills, was forced to seek shelter for himself and his family at a homeless shelter. Fortunately, the homeless shelter was a SSVF grantee and was able to assist the veteran obtain employment and his family in securing affordable low-cost housing. There are thousands of similar success stories made possible by the SSVF Program that I could share but all of them share a common theme: they involve veterans who served their country proudly, fell down on their luck, picked themselves back up, and found affordable and sustainable housing for their families because of the assistance and support made possible by the SSVF program. Ensuring that veterans have a place of their own to call home is the very least we can do. I urge my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee Amendment and commit ourselves to the hard but necessary work of ending veteran homelessness in America. I urge my colleagues to support Jackson Lee Amendment No. 34. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I have had the opportunity to serve on the Judiciary Committee for a number of years. It is a committee that has almost two-thirds of the jurisdiction of the United States Congress. What I love about it: It is a protector of the rights of the American people through the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. The pardon is an act of mercy, and this past week I applauded the act of mercy that was generated for a woman in Alabama who had a sentence of 100 years for a small, nonviolent drug offense. That woman became a minister and worked on degrees while she was incarcerated. I think we can expand on this concept of mercy and pass sentencing reduction, which goes to the reflection on sentencing that has been done under mandatory minimums for nonviolent offenses where individuals are incarcerated across the Nation for 25, 30, 40, 50 years, and even life. If we do that through the legislative process, we will have a structure that will look at these individuals to make sure that they can contribute to society. We need the National Sheriffs' Association, the National Association of Law Enforcement, the evangelicals, people of all faiths; we need lawyers; we need social workers; we need physicians to look at how this impacts families. We can do this with the House and the Senate. I commit to this Congress the interest in sentencing reduction.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I thank Mr. Simpson and Ms. Kaptur for working to try to put forward a bill and to recognize the unfortunate addition of riders, which we would hope that we could pass these kinds of bills in the appropriate manner. But I thank them for their work, and I thank the Rules Committee for making this amendment in order. This is an important part of the Energy and Water legislation in Appropriations, and that is the Department of Energy's departmental work that it does with environmental justice. My amendment would ask for an additional $1 million to be placed in that program under the administrative office's responsibilities, and to do so because it is an essential tool in the effort to improve the lives of low-income and minority communities as well as the environment at large. Many of my Members here have worked on this issue, in particular, Jim Clyburn and the Congressional Black Caucus, over the years. I add to their work by making sure that this is a focus of the Department of Energy. Maintaining funds for environmental justice that go to Historically Black Colleges and Universities, minority-serving institutions, Tribal colleges, and other organizations is imperative to protecting sustainability and growth of the community and environment. In particular, those individuals who study this issue in those particular institutions of higher learning go out to communities and are a source of research and aid to communities that suffer from the lack of environmental justice, for example, in Flint, Michigan. It is clear that that is a place where there was an infusion of experts on how to deal with unclean water. I worked with Dr. Hotez, one of the renown infectious disease physicians in Houston, Texas, when the Zika virus began to take over in the summer in, particularly, minority communities. DOE's Environmental Justice Program provides dollars to be awarded to an important cause of increasing youth involvement in STEM and promoting clean energy, weatherization, cleanup, and asset revitalization. Weatherization is extremely important. The housing stock in my congressional district, as in rural communities, is extremely old and sometimes weak and subjected to the whims of bad winter weather and the whims of very hot summers. These dollars can assist in these kinds of programs. The Community Leadership Institute is another vital component of the Environmental Justice Program, and it promotes environmental sustainability. It brings important factors, including public health and economic development. It is an important program that helps Native Americans and Alaskan Natives. So I hope that my colleagues can support the Jackson Lee amendment because it deals with an expanse and an emphasis on the importance of a quality of life that can deal with a good environment. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, with that in mind, what we are glad to say is that we emphasize and ask for that amount of dollars within the administrative account to be increased on the Environmental Justice Program. We are grateful for the statement of the chairman, and with that in mind, we want to remind our colleagues that STEM programs, the program that helps in leadership, in particular, that will help young people learn more about environmental justice, the issues that we see in communities with clean water, clean air, the Zika virus, and other elements that impact on minority communities, the Environmental Justice Program can be very helpful and very useful. I would ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk; No. 25. Mr. Chair, I want to thank Chairman Simpson and Ranking Member Kaptur for shepherding this legislation to the floor and for their commitment to preserving America's great natural environment and resources so that they can serve and be enjoyed by generations to come. My amendment increases funding for DOE departmental administration by $1,000,000 which should be used to enhance the Department's Environmental Justice program activities. Mr. Chair, the Environmental Justice Program is an essential tool in the effort to improve the lives of low income and minority communities as well as the environment at large. Twenty-four years ago, on February 11, 1994, President Clinton issued Executive Order 12898, directing federal agencies to identify and address the disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their actions on minority and low-income populations. A healthy environment sustains a productive and healthy community which fosters personal and economic growth. Maintaining funds for environmental justice that go to Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Minority Serving Institutions, Tribal Colleges, and other organizations is imperative to protecting sustainability and growth of the community and environment. The funding of these programs is vital to ensuring that minority groups are not placed at a disadvantage when it comes to the environment and the continued preservation of their homes. The crisis in Flint, Michigan teaches us how important it is that minority groups and low-income communities are not placed at a disadvantage when it comes to environment threats and hazards like lead in drinking water or nesting areas for mosquitos carrying the Zika virus. Through education about the importance of environmental sustainability, we can promote a broader understanding of science and how citizens can improve their surroundings. Funds that would be awarded to this important cause would increase youth involvement in STEM fields and also promote clean energy, weatherization, clean-up, and asset revitalization. These improvements would provide protection to our most vulnerable groups. This program provides better access to technology for underserved communities. Together, the Department of Energy and Department of Agriculture have distributed over 5,000 computers to low income populations. The Community Leaders Institute is another vital component of the Environmental Justice Program. It ensures that those in leadership positions understand what is happening in their communities and can therefore make informed decisions in reards to their communities. In addition to promoting environmental sustainability, CLI also brings important factors including public health and economic development into the discussion for community leaders. The CLI program has been expanded to better serve Native Americans and Alaska Natives, which is a prime example of how various other minority groups can be assisted as well. Through community education efforts, teachers and students have also benefitted by learning about radiation, radioactive waste management, and other related subjects. The Department of Energy places interns and volunteers from minority institutions into energy efficiency and renewable energy programs. The DOE also works to increase low income and minority access to STEM fields and help students attain graduate degrees as well as find employment. Since 2002, the Tribal Energy Program has also funded 175 energy projects amounting to over $41.8 million in order to help tribes invest in renewable sources of energy. With the continuation of this kind of funding, we can provide clean energy options to our most underserved communities and help improve their environments, which will yield better health outcomes and greater public awareness. We must help our low income and minority communities and ensure equality for those who are most vulnerable in our country. I ask my colleagues to join me and support the Jackson Lee Amendment for the Environmental Justice Program. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, all over the Nation, we face a series of disasters that come in many different forms: fires, volcanoes, and heavy rain. My amendment deals with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the important aspect of its investigatory work by redirecting $3 million for increased funding for postdisaster watershed assessment studies that are typical across the Gulf region and even up the East Coast, where we know Hurricane Sandy was devastating just a few years ago. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers plays a critical role in the building, maintaining, and expanding of the most critical of the Nation's infrastructure. My amendment would address the question of pre-preparedness. As we were facing the disaster of Hurricane Harvey, so many wondered how much more we should have pre-prepared. Many were aware of the fact that we flooded in 500-year and 1,000- year flood areas. We are aware of the devastation in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The Army Corps of Engineers can be very instrumental in assessing ahead of time the potential impact of flood and storm damage and, through the investigations, can reduce this and create savings. I am optimistic, as we go forward, and hopeful that we will receive in the Gulf region a regional watershed assessment flood risk management feasibility study. But I think it is important to note that we are probably not out from under the weather of future disasters. On April 15, 2016, 240 billion gallons of water fell in the Houston area over a 12-hour period and, as well, 2016, another major flood causing major damage. And, finally, this is not atypical, it seems, as we watched the hurricane season of last year all over the Gulf region and we found Hurricane Harvey dropped 21 trillion gallons and 300,000 homes were lost. So the investigatory part of the Army Corps of Engineers is an important tool for the whole Nation when it comes to dealing with pre- preparedness and assessing how we can do better in natural disasters. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk; it is number 35 on the roster. Mr. Chair, I want to thank Chairman Simpson and Ranking Member Kaptur for shepherding this legislation to floor and for their commitment to preserving America's great natural environment and resources so that they can serve and be enjoyed by generations to come. My amendment speaks to the need for robust funding for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ``Investigations'' account by redirecting $3 million for increased funding for post-disaster watershed assessment studies, like the one that is being contemplated for the Houston/Harris County metropolitan area. As the federal agency that collects and studies basic information pertaining to river and harbor, flood and storm damage reduction, shore protection, aquatic ecosystem restoration, and conducts detailed studies, plans, and specifications for river and harbor, and flood and storm damage reduction, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers plays a critical role in the building, maintaining, and expanding the most critical of the nation's infrastructure. We understand this very well in my home state of Texas and the Eighteenth Congressional District that I represent. The Army Corps of Engineers has been working with the Harris County Flood Control District since 1937 to reduce the risk of flooding within Harris County. Current projects include 6 federal flood risk management projects: 1. Sims Bayou 2. Greens Bayou 3. Brays Bayou 4. White Oak Bayou 5. Hunting Bayou, and 6. Clear Creek In addition to these ongoing projects, the Army Corps of Engineers operates and maintains the Addicks and Barker (A&B) Detention Dams in northwest Harris County. Mr. Chair, I am pleased that the bill provides that the Secretary of the Army may initiate up to six new study starts during fiscal year 2018, and that five of those studies are to consist studies where the majority of the benefits are derived from flood and storm damage reduction or from navigation transportation savings. I am optimistic that one of those new study starts will be the Houston Regional Watershed Assessment Flood Risk Management Feasibility study. Such a study is certainly needed given the frequency and severity of historic-level flood events in recent years in and around the Houston metropolitan area. On April 15, 2016, an estimated 240 billion gallons of water fell in the Houston area over a 12 hour period, which resulted in several areas exceeding the 100 to 500 year flood event record. Some of the areas that experienced these historic rain falls were west of I-45, north of I-10, and Greens Bayou. Additionally, an estimated 140 billion gallons of water fell over the Cypress Creek, Spring Creek, and Addicks watershed in just 14 hours. The purpose of the Houston Regional Watershed Assessment is to identify risk reduction measures and optimize performance from a multi- objective systems performance perspective of the regional network of nested and intermingled watersheds, reservoir dams, flood flow conveyance channels, storm water detention basins, and related Flood Risk Management (FRM) infrastructure. Special emphasis of the study, which covers 22 primary watersheds within Harris County's 1,735 square miles, will be placed on extreme flood events that exceed the system capacity resulting in impacts to asset conditions/functions and loss of life. Mr. Chair, during the May 2015 Houston flood, 3,015 homes were flooded and 8 persons died; during the April 2016 Houston flood, 5,400 homes were flooded and 8 deaths recorded. The economic damage caused by the 2015 Houston flood is estimated at $3 billion; the 2016 estimate is being compiled and is estimated to be well above $2 billion. Mr. Chair, minimizing the risk of flood damage to the Houston and Harris County metropolitan area, the nation's 4th largest, is a matter of national significance because the region is one of the nation's major technology, energy, finance, export and medical centers: 1. The Port of Houston is the largest bulk port in the world; 2. Texas Medical Center is a world renowned teaching, research and treatment center; 3. Houston is home to the largest conglomeration of foreign bank representation and second only to New York City as home to the most Fortune 500 companies; and 4. The Houston Watershed Assessment study area sits within major Hurricane Evacuation arteries for the larger Galveston Gulf Coast region. The Jackson Lee Amendment No. 35 is particularly important in light of the devastation of Hurricane Harvey and its aftermath. At its peak on September 1, 2017, one-third of Houston was underwater due to Hurricane Harvey flooding. There was over 41,500 square miles of land mass impacted by Hurricane Harvey and the subsequent flooding that covered an area larger than the States of Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont combined. Hurricane Harvey dropped 21 trillion gallons of rainfall on Texas and Louisiana, most of it on the Houston Metroplex. In September 2017, NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory reported that Hurricane Harvey's rainfall created 275 trillion pounds of water, which caused the crust in and around Houston to deform and sink nearly 1 inch because of the weight. Over 300,000 structures flooded in southeastern Texas, where extreme rainfall hit many areas that are densely populated. Hurricane Harvey is the largest housing disaster to strike the U.S. in our nation's history. Hurricane Harvey damaged 203,000 homes, of which 12,700 were destroyed. Texas flood control districts are still struggling to recover from this record breaking flood event. Nineteen trillion gallons of flood waters poured into the Houston Ship Channel from area rivers and bayous on the way to the Gulf of Mexico. As a consequence, tens of millions of tons of sediment and debris flowed through the biggest waterway in the nation. Today, the Port of Houston is operating with draft restrictions that may last a year or longer. Draft restrictions are adding costs to oil and gas and Petrochemical operations, which are passed on to wholesalers, who pass these costs to consumers at the pump. The Port of Houston produces 27 percent of the nation's gasoline and about 60 percent of the U.S. aviation fuel. Investments in all aspects of our nation's water infrastructure pays dividends in the form of economic activity. The Houston Ship Channel generates $617 billion in the U.S. with $265 billion of that in Texas representing 16 percent of the state of Texas's GDP. The Port of Houston sustains 2.7 million jobs nationally with 1.2 million of them within the state of Texas. I ask my colleagues to join me and support Jackson Lee Amendment No. 35. I thank Chairman Simpson and Ranking Member Kaptur for their work in shepherding this bill to the floor. I am asking my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. First of all, let me thank the chairman of the committee for what has been ongoing support of our efforts. And I hope he sees that these are efforts for across the Nation as well. To be clear, I am glad that we do not alter the account but we redirect and focus moneys on this important investigatory area. I thank him for his support. I would be happy to yield to the ranking member, who, likewise, has helped me over the years to address this question of flooding. But I want to make the point that what we saw in the last hurricane season is that it reaches across the Gulf region, including the U.S. Virgin Islands and, of course, Puerto Rico. I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), the distinguished ranking member.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Let me take this moment again to acknowledge the funds that have been put into this bill that focuses on what we experienced in the last year. And I would indicate that the investigatory account, which will see this focus, is important. The dollars that we have received from this Congress I do appreciate. And the final word I would say in closing is that we work and hope to work with the administration for those funds to get to the local jurisdictions. We are right in the middle of trying to get those dollars down from Washington into our local jurisdictions. With that, I thank the manager and the chairman and the manager who is ranking member again and ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, this is an educational amendment, if you will. It is to emphasize the importance of the Department of Energy's program that deals with the emphasizing of educating minority students across America with STEM. Now we have moved and advanced to STEAM. That includes arts. But the Office of Minority Impact that is in the DOE has as its major focus--and we are still behind in the numbers--to ramp up the numbers of men and women and minorities in the STEM effort. Women and minorities make up 70 percent of college students but only 45 percent of undergraduate STEM degree holders. If we are to be a 21st century and 22nd century country--and as I was sitting in some meetings today--competing with countries on the question of cybersecurity--I know that we are in the Energy and Water approps, but if we are to reach beyond the boundaries of research that help in energy and water, I think it is important that we continue to try and do outreach to increase the numbers of women and minorities to go into the STEM fields. The energy and science education programs funded in part by this bill will help ensure that members of underrepresented communities are not placed at a disadvantage when it comes to the environmental sustainability, preservation, and health. The larger point is that we need more STEM educators and more minorities to qualify for those positions. Mr. Chairman, there are still a great many scientific riddles left to be solved, and perhaps one of these days a minority engineer or biologist will add to the others and will come up with some of the major solutions in our time. I would offer to say that education efforts with teachers and students under this program are extremely important because the students of today, teachers who are teaching the students of today, are the scientists and problem-solvers of tomorrow. So I again want to emphasize to my fellow Texan, Secretary Perry, who is Secretary of the Department of Energy, to focus and to grow the department that deals with educating young people in the science, technology, engineering, and math. We are waiting for them. We need them, and the Nation needs them. I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment, and I conclude by saying: Let's provide more opportunity for these students. I want to emphasize the Energy Institute High School in Houston and, as well, to cite high schools across the Nation that are working to provide these students with this kind of training. And I hope these dollars will help them do so. I ask for the support of my amendment. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk, No. 36. I want to thank Chairman Simpson and Ranking Member Kaptur for shepherding this legislation to the floor and for it commitment to preserving America's great natural environment and resources so that they can serve and be enjoyed by generations to come. Jackson Lee Amendment No. 36 simply provides that: ``None of the funds made available by this Act for `Department of Energy--Energy Programs--Science' may be used in contravention of the Department of Energy Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.).'' This amendment was approved and adopted in identical form on April 29, 2015, during the 114th Congress as an amendment to H.R. 2028, the Energy and Water Resources Appropriations Act of 2016 and on July 7, 2017, during this Congress as an amendment to H.R. 3219, the Energy and Water Resources Appropriations Act of 2018. Mr. Chair, twenty years ago, on February 11, 1994, President Clinton issued Executive Order 12898, directing federal agencies to identify and address the disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their actions on minority and low-income populations. The Department of Energy seeks to provide equal access in these opportunities for underrepresented groups in STEM, including minorities, Native Americans, and women. Mr. Chair, women and minorities make up 70 percent of college students, but only 45 percent of undergraduate STEM degree holders. This large pool of untapped talent is a great potential source of STEM professionals. As the nation's demographics are shifting and now most children under the age of one are minorities, it is critical that we close the gap in the number of minorities who seek STEM opportunities. I encourage Energy Secretary Perry to surpass the commitment of his predecessors' toward increasing the nation's economic competitiveness and enabling more of our people to realize their full potential. Mr. Chair, there are still a great many scientific riddles left to be solved--and perhaps one of these days a minority engineer or biologist will come-up with some of the solutions. The larger point is that we need more STEM educators and more minorities to qualify for them. The energy and science education programs funded in part by this bill will help ensure that members of underrepresented communities are not placed at a disadvantage when it comes to the environmental sustainability, preservation, and health. Through education about the importance of environmental sustainability, we can promote a broader understanding of science and how citizens can improve their surroundings. Through community education efforts, teachers and students have also benefitted by learning about radiation, radioactive waste management, and other related subjects. The Department of Energy places interns and volunteers from minority institutions into energy efficiency and renewable energy programs. The DOE also works to increase low income and minority access to STEM fields and help students attain graduate degrees as well as find employment. With the continuation of this kind of funding, we can increase diversity, provide clean energy options to our most underserved communities, and help improve their environments, which will yield better health outcomes and greater public awareness. But most importantly businesses will have more consumers to whom they may engage in related commercial activities. My amendment will help ensure that underrepresented communities are able to participate and contribute equitably in the energy and scientific future. I ask my colleagues to join me and support Jackson Lee Amendment No. 36. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to Frazier Vonne Thomas Scurry, a great American woman and one of the outstanding community leaders in the City of Houston. Her upcoming 100th birthday marks a century of living for this remarkable woman. Mrs. Scurry, lovingly and rightfully known as the matriarch of the Scurry Family, was born Frazier Vonne Thomas on October 10, 1918. She is the beloved second child of Napoleon Thomas and Martha Waters Thomas of Washington County, Texas. She enjoyed an active childhood with her sister, Willa Winters-Miller and brothers, Donald and Napoleon Jr. Thomas. She married her late husband of 66 years, Robert Daniel Scurry and relocated to Houston, Texas. This loving union produced five remarkable children: Arthur Daniel (Barbara), Annette Vonne Collett (Billy), Frazier Marie Scurry-Scott (Arthur), Donald Roy (Lesley) and Maggie Vernece Scurry-Frost (Felton). As a young mother, Mrs. Scurry was an attentive and devoted stay-at- home mom. She made sure that her children received the best upbringing possible and that they were raised in a loving, respectful household. She remained at home until her youngest child reached school age. She then continued her long-deferred education and attended Memorial Hermann Hospital Practical Nursing School. She worked diligently to become a Licensed Practical Nurse and began her career at Memorial Hermann Hospital. She later worked as a private duty nurse where she was able to devote special care and attention to her patients whom she was known for developing special relationships with. She devoted the remainder of her career to the Texas Women's Clinic with Dr. Harold Dailey, as a nurse for the private practice, until her well-deserved retirement. Mrs. Scurry is one of the oldest members of her church, Good Hope Missionary Baptist Church, where she has continued her membership for over 77 years. She was recently appointed to the newly formed Mothers' Board at Good Hope. She was a Sunday School teacher for the Beginners Class, for over 30 years; teaching the love and grace of God and Jesus Christ. Her faith in God has not wavered in her almost 100 years. Mrs. Scurry assisted with the Baptist Training Union, mentoring young people on the importance of honoring themselves, as well as others. Mother Scurry was president of the Women Ruth Circle, President of the Deacons and Trustees Wives, and a representative and delegate at the National Baptist Convention and Conference. In her community, Mrs. Scurry served as president of the Heights Y Club. Mrs. Scurry kept busy at work, giving her patients the best care imaginable and served her community and church with her whole heart. After her retirement, Mrs. Scurry began organizing trips for women's groups; many times driving them cross-country to various states. She loved taking cruises, particularly to warm and sunny destinations and has visited the Caribbean Islands, Alaska, Hawaii, Jamaica and the Virgin Islands. Mrs. Scurry is a loving grandmother of 14, great-grandmother of 24, great-great-grandmother of 6 and mother/grandmother to a large extended family. She truly believes that it takes a village to raise a child and has exemplified that belief throughout her life. On July 20, 2018, Mrs. Scurry's family and friends will celebrate her centennial birth year and honor her great life. In her entire century of life, she has seen both world wars, the Suffragette Movement, the invention of the television, the enforcement and abolition of prohibition, the Great Depression, the first man on the moon, the Civil-Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the rise of Martin Luther King, Jr., and the creation and development of the internet. These barely even skim the surface of the events Mrs. Scurry has experienced throughout her 100 years. Mrs. Scurry's life in the 20th century and now into the 21st has ensured that she has witnessed more landmark events in American history than one can imagine. Martin Luther King, Jr. once said, ``Life's most persistent and urgent question is, `What are you doing for others?' '' Whether she was serving her five children, her hospital patients, or her church community, Mrs. Scurry consistently and passionately dedicated her life to serving others and spreading joy. Sophocles said ``One must wait until the evening to see how splendid the day has been.'' Mr. Speaker, now that we are in the evening of the life of Frazier Vonne Thomas Scurry, it is clear that she has lived a full and consequential life, as a friend, colleague, advocate, community leader, and most notably, the beloved matriarch of the Scurry family.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the Homeland Security Committee, I am opposing all of the bills under this rule, including the underlying bill, but in particular H.R. 3, which is a danger to childcare development, Pell grants, and election security, meaning, Mr. Speaker, they are cutting those dollars. But the main element of my opposition is the crisis on the border. I want this House to recognize that you have individuals who have crossed for humanitarian reasons who are being treated and violated like in a third-world country that would be inhumane. You have Guatemalans, some of whom now are facing the tragedy of the volcano, coming who speak an indigenous language, and they are lumped together 50, 100 at a time. Their children are snatched away from them. This is a policy that is going to be further funded by the rescissions in this bill. It is imperative that anyone who has a humane bone in their body stand up against ripping children away from individuals. As a member of the Committee on Homeland Security and the Committee on the Judiciary, that was not the policy. The policy was for children who came unaccompanied, not children with their parents. In addition, you have children who have not seen their mothers--who are 4 years old, who are infants--for weeks at a time and cannot speak English. Again, you have Guatemalans who are not speaking Spanish, English, or a language that is interpreted in the courts. It is an indigenous language. They do not know that you are ruling against them, as it relates to their plea for asylum. This bill and the rescissions will give more funding for those kinds of inhumane deportation and more dollars to separate children from their parents. For God's sake, this is not America. We must stop it now. Oppose the bill.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as the founder and chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus and as a mother, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 3, the ``Spending Cuts to Expired and Unnecessary Programs Act.'' I oppose this legislation because it would eliminate $7 billion for children's health insurance without allowing for Congress to reinvest the funds into healthcare services for families and children. I also oppose this bill because it undermines the Bipartisan Budget Agreement we only just passed last year. Instead of wasting time on their partisan agenda, House Republicans should be bringing to the floor legislation that addresses the real challenges facing the American people such as: (1) tax reform; (2) DACA and immigration; (3) restoring the Voting Rights Act; (4) healthcare; (5) and education. Yet here we are rushing through another piece of legislation that will do harm to millions of Americans, mostly children and working families, without proper discussion or deliberation. It is very clear that H.R. 3 has been pushed to the floor today without debate in the Appropriations Committee because of all the harm it will inflict on the American people. H.R. 3 undermines our nation's ability to improve and promote health, safety and environmental standards and provide much-needed protections for the American people. But perhaps most deceitful of all are the cuts in funding for the Children's Health Insurance Program, a program which plays such a critical role in our nation's health care system. Together, CHIP and Medicaid cover 39 percent of children in the United States. This is over 9 billion children, whose lives the opposition has decided to quit investing in. When CHIP was first passed in Congress over two decades ago, this was a bipartisan movement that not only strengthened the ties between the parties, but also ensured coverage for so many lower income families who do not qualify for Medicaid. Without such a vital program, the number of children covered, and the number of treatments they would be covered for, would vastly decrease, in a most harmful and debilitating way. Not only this, but if the funds were to be rescinded, Congress could be prevented from reallocating those funds into early childhood education, health-related research, and other initiatives that only improve the quality of life for our constituents. Given that we have experienced multiple health and safety disasters in communities across the country in recent years, it is the wrong time to thwart the progress of programs that are beneficial to so many Americans. It is no wonder that leading children's organizations such as First Focus, along with 500 national, state, and local organizations across the country, are urging Congress to reject any cuts to the Children's Health Insurance Program. The value of the contingent funding is in its ability to protect children's health coverage in the event of unforeseen circumstances or unexpected disasters, such as Hawaii's overwhelming volcano eruption or Hurricane Harvey, which devastated the state of Texas just last year. The Administration and CBO cannot guarantee that there will not be an economic recession or health epidemic for which contingency funding would be necessary and yet they are still willing to gamble with our children's lives. It is time for the Trump Administration and House Republicans to abandon their crusade to balance the budget on the backs of the poor and vulnerable. We should be investing in our children's futures, not risking their chances of having one at all. I urge my colleagues to vote NO on this reckless, irresponsible, and cruel measure.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, again, I offer my appreciation both to the Rules Committee and to the chairman and ranking member. This is to emphasize the need for funding in the Army Corps of Engineers. It is an amendment that increases and decreases by $100 million, with the focus on the construction account. I hold up examples of construction projects that are necessary, not only in the Gulf region, but projects that are necessary across the Nation. That is, of course, dams, reservoirs, reservoir pools, and other areas that can be devastated by disaster. And so this amendment is to emphasize the Army Corps of Engineers construction account, particularly dealing with the need for repair to river and harbor, flood and storm damage, shore protection, aquatic ecosystem restoration and, as well, to include the need to deal with our ports. So my amendment is, again, to reflect on the devastation of the storm that occurred over the last year. With the prediction of 14 storms coming in 2018, approximately five or so to be of monumental impact and hitting the Gulf Region, it is imperative that the Army Corps of Engineers move on their construction account and move on their construction projects to avoid some of the disaster that we have already experienced. I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment. In concluding, let me emphasize the Port of Houston, which truly needs the Army Corps of Engineers' efforts, particularly in dredging. We are a manmade port. That is a very important aspect of our work, and that is construction work. The Port of Houston today is operating with draft restrictions that may last a year or longer. Draft restrictions are adding costs to oil and gas and petrochemical operations, which are passed on to wholesalers, who pass these costs to consumers at the pump. It is also well known that the work that the Army Corps of Engineers does in respect to repair helps the environment. So again, I ask my colleagues to support the amendment, what is a focus on the Army Corps of Engineers' construction account, but I would like to make the additional point that we, in the region, need an expedited utilization of those dollars to fix the repairs, prepare us for oncoming potential disasters not only in my particular State, but across the region. I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I might consume. Mr. Speaker, the chairman is correct: the protection of our neighborhoods, the protection of our young people, the securing of our schools, the stopping of gun violence, the safeguarding of this Nation, are important responsibilities of this Congress, and certainly of the Nation itself. So I join with that commitment of safeguarding our neighbors and friends and families and our children. So I would certainly like to say of the Senate amendment dealing with the Safe Neighborhoods Grant Program Reauthorization Act of 2018, it does provide additional resources to help local jurisdictions prevent and fight crime in their communities. It would authorize the Attorney General to establish and implement a program to be known as the Project Safe Neighborhoods Block Grant Program within the Office of Justice Programs at the Department of Justice, thereby providing a formal authorization for the Project Safe Neighborhoods program, which is currently implemented by DOJ. That is an absolutely positive step to protect our neighborhoods. Thirty percent of the funding awards under this program would be, however, allocated to fighting gang-related crime. While I support authorizing this program, I would like to highlight two major concerns with this Senate amendment. First, a substantial portion of the funding under this bill would be dedicated to anti-gang task forces. I support preventing and fighting crime no matter who the perpetrator may be, but I must caution against targeting groups of young people who are not engaged in crime, or who are standing around, or who may be, in essence, said to be engaged in crime, or may be from particular neighborhoods or ethnicities or backgrounds. I think all of our children deserve a chance to grow and become contributing citizens. I would want to make sure that we get the gangs and that we get those who are the deadly ones that are killing and maiming, and those names, we know, have been cited, but I also want to make sure that we give our children a chance. However, under the current framework, focus is placed on identified subsets of individuals or organizations responsible for increasing violence. This creates a danger where innocent young people will likely become targets, whether by virtue of clothes color or mere acquaintance of someone in light of the various talk, if you will, about gangs like MS-13, which I will acknowledge are in all of our communities from east to west and north to south. Let's get the bad guys. Let's make sure we help our children not be destined to be the bad guys. We must not use law enforcement as a means to target individuals based solely on their ethnicity or national origin. Far too often, the rhetoric that we are fighting gangs may be laced with bias toward difference. That is why I wanted to offer an amendment at the Rules Committee to the Senate amendment, which would reflect the original provision offered by Representative Comstock related to targeting groups. That was one that we were able to work with here in the House. That specific provision in H.R. 3249 was a much better provision. If accepted, my amendment would have ensured that funding be allocated justly based on sincere need and not on abuse that may occur to demonstrate a significant or increased presence of criminal organizations; and, number two, prevent funding being used towards a wide range of people that might need help, but labeled as criminal groups, rather than the smaller number of people in communities responsible, as you will hear law enforcement say, for the majority of violent crimes, like concentrated transnational organized crime groups as defined by the statute. This eliminates the sweeping effect this bill will have in application, where groups of people not defined by statute as transnational organized crime groups will become targets based on possible biases or rhetoric launched at particular classes of people. We cannot ignore that unfortunately, in the reality of our times, things may go awry. Therefore, in addition to introducing legislation, we must be vigilant in conducting oversight of the use of program funds and in protecting against such possible abuse. Second, I have concerns about the provision of the bill that focuses on data-driven intervention. I advocate instead for a robust focus on prevention-driven initiatives that will save us an enormous amount of money when done effectively. That is why I wanted to offer a second amendment which would amend the Crime Control Safe Streets Act of 1968 to allow for strong emphasis on gang prevention programs, which is key to curtailing much of these problems. It is imperative to provide front-end mechanisms that would prevent the problems that are often costly, resulting in both human costs and tax dollars for our prisons. This amendment was practical and inexpensive. Now, let me clarify something. Data is very important because it helps us move toward best practices. But in addition to data, we need to be able to use our good sense to talk about intervention, prevention, and working with youngsters again, who may be categorized as being violent but, instead, may be the right kind of targets for intervention and prevention programs. This Senate amendment authorizes $50 million for each of the fiscal years 2019 to 2021, $150 million. The Senate amendment does not comply with House Republican CutGo requirements so that $50 million may be authorized for the program for this time. I certainly believe where we are trying to help children, we should also take that into consideration, particularly with prevention and intervention or gang violence and antibullying initiatives. They are equally worthy goals. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to look further into how we continue to work together and to work to monitor this legislation to ensure that there is not an adverse impact on individuals clearly because of neighborhoods and backgrounds, because that is what America is all about: an equal opportunity for particularly our young people, to get out of where they are and to be able to surge to be a good and contributing citizen. Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak on the Senate amendment to H.R. 3249, the ``Project Safe Neighborhoods Grant Program Act of 2017''. This Senate amendment would provide additional resources to help local jurisdictions prevent and fight crime in their communities. It would authorize the Attorney General to establish and' implement a program, to be known as the ``Project Safe Neighborhoods Block Grant Program'' (Program), within the Office of Justice Programs (OJP) at the Department of Justice (DOJ), thereby providing a formal authorization for the Project Safe Neighborhoods Program, which is currently implemented by DOJ. Thirty percent of the funding awards under this Program would be allocated to fighting gang-related crime. While I support authorizing this Program, I would like to highlight two major concerns of this Senate amendment. First, a substantial portion of the funding under this bill would be dedicated to anti-gang task forces. I support preventing and fighting crime no matter who the perpetrator may be, but I must caution against targeting groups of young people who are not engaged in crime. However, under the current framework, focus is placed on ``identified subsets of individuals or organizations'' responsible for increasing violence. This creates a danger, where innocent young people will likely become targets, whether by virtue of clothes color or mere acquaintance of someone, in light of the administrations' rhetoric around MS-13s. We must not use law enforcement as a means to target individuals based solely on their ethnicity or national origin. Far too often, the rhetoric of fighting gangs has been laced with racial bias. This is why I offered an amendment at Rules to this Senate amendment, which would reflect the original provision offered by Rep. Comstock relating to targeted groups. That specific provision in H.R. 3249 was a much better provision. If accepted, my amendment would have: 1) ensured that funding be allocated justly based on sincere need and not on abuse that may occur to demonstrate a ``significant or increased presence'' of criminal organizations; and 2) prevented funding being used towards a wide range of people that need help but labeled as criminal gangs, rather than the small number of people in communities responsible for majority of violent crimes, like concentrated ``transnational organized crime groups'', as defined by statute. This eliminates the sweeping effect this bill will have in application, where groups of people not defined by statute as ``transnational organized crime groups'' will become targets based on biases and/or rhetoric launched at a particular class of people. We cannot ignore that unfortunate reality of current times. Therefore, in addition to introducing legislation, we must be vigilant in conducting oversight of the use of Program funds and in protecting against such possible abuse. Second, I have concerns about the provisions of the bill that focus on data-driven intervention and I advocate instead, for a robust focus on prevention-driven initiatives that will save us enormous amount of money when done effectively. This is why I offered a 2nd amendment, which would amend the Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, to allow for strong emphasis on gang prevention programs, which is key to curtailing much of these problems. It is imperative to provide front-end mechanisms that would prevent the problems that are often costly, resulting in both human cost and tax dollars for our prisons. This amendment was practical and inexpensive. This Senate amendment authorizes $50,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2019 through 2021, totaling $150,000,000. This Senate amendment does not comply with House Republican ``cut- go'' requirements so that $50 million may be authorized for the Program for this time period. I believe prevention and intervention of gang violence and anti-bullying are equally worthy goals. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to pursue avenues that will not adversely impact individuals based solely on their ethnic backgrounds. Mr. Speaker, I do not argue against the merit of this Program. It would be but one facet of DOJ's efforts to address gun and gang violence at the local, state, and tribal levels. We should view it from that holistic perspective, and as an effort to supplement but not supplant alternatives that may employ different, yet, still-effective approaches. During the Committee's consideration of the H.R. 3249, we expressed these funding concerns, and urged that these funding prohibitions be eliminated. Today, we also address the concerns in the Senate amendment to H.R. 3249, which states as a purpose: Developing and executing comprehensive strategic plans to reduce violent crimes ``including the enforcement of gun laws, and prioritizing efforts focused on `identified subsets of individuals or organizations' responsible for increasing violence in a particular geographic area.'' For these reasons, I respectfully request serious consideration of these concerns and caution against possible abuse that may occur, which will prove counterproductive. 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, the gentlewoman from Virginia is absolutely right on our commitment to working to protect the children that we don't want to be the victims. Certainly, gangs like MS-13 are in many places, and that is what my focus is. Those bad guys, those who would do harm, clearly, we stand united on. At the same time, I want to make sure that those who stumble in have alternatives, particularly in this country, to get out of that web. As we protect against them and give law enforcement their tools, I want to make sure that we give to others to find other ways to move away from this so that the bad intent, the murderous intent of those gangs can be separated and handled by law enforcement, while other young people have other opportunities. I might also say that I would hope that the Department of Justice will fund this program and, when I say that, Congress will work with us to fund other programs of intervention. So I might, if I could, engage the chairman in a colloquy. I would be eager to hear the gentleman's thoughts on this thought. I am concerned that all of the talk of fighting gang violence may be, beyond this august Hall, laced with bias, racial bias, ethnicity, et cetera. The Senate amendment includes a reference to focusing on identified subsets of individuals and organizations responsible for increasing violence in a particular geographic area. I might indicate that that may be some bad behavior kids. Will the gentleman assure me that the intent of this provision referring to subsets of individuals is not to encourage or condone the targeting of anyone because of their race or national origin and that they happen to be in groups?

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. I just wanted to make a concluding comment. We worked together on this. Would the gentleman also say that intervention and prevention programs are a positive contribution to helping our young people stay away from violence?

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, today, June 6, marks the 74th anniversary of D-Day, the Allied Forces' audacious amphibious landing at Normandy, France, on June 6, 1944. This joint undertaking to liberate the continent of Europe from the clutches of an evil and aggressor enemy was the first and most emphatic demonstration of the invincible strength of democratic nations when acting collectively. For nearly seventy years, from April 4, 1949 to January 20, 2017, peace in Europe has been secured and no adversary, not the old Soviet Union or the contemporary Russian Federation, has dared to risk war by attacking a European ally of the United States because every American president has made clear that the United States is committed to Article V of the North Atlantic Treaty which holds that an attack on any NATO member is regarded as an attack on all of them. Mr. Speaker, ``Operation Overlord,'' as D-Day was formally known, was the largest single amphibious assault in the history of warfare. The success of D-Day, which was far from certain at the outset, led to the liberation of Western Europe, signaled the death knell of the German Wehrmacht, and paved the way to unconditional victory by the Allied Forces over the evils of Nazism, fascism, and Japanese imperialism. It is no exaggeration to say that D-Day changed the course of human history. The aim of the meticulously planned D-Day operation was to open a second front in the European war theater from which the Allied Forces could attack the German army and push east to capture Berlin. With the Russian Army advancing from the east, coupled with the southern front opened by the Allied invasion of Italy from North Africa in 1942, the opening of a western front would set in motion the pincer movement that would catch the German Army in a trap from which there would be no escape. The formidable German Army expected that the Allied Forces would try to launch an invasion from the western beaches of France. They just did not know when or where. So in anticipation of an Allied invasion, the Nazis constructed the infamous Atlantic Wall, an extensive system of coastal fortifications built along the western coast of Europe and Scandinavia. Under the direction of Field Marshal Rommel, the Atlantic Wall was reinforced by the addition of concrete pillboxes built along the beaches to house machine guns, antitank guns and light artillery. Mines and antitank obstacles were planted on the beaches themselves and underwater obstacles and mines were placed in waters just off shore. By the time of the D-Day landing, the Nazis had laid almost six million mines in northern France. And awaiting Allied soldiers who made their way onto and away from the beaches were gun emplacements and minefields extended inland. ``War is hell,'' said General William Tecumseh Sherman during the Civil War. And that is an apt description of what awaited the brave Allied warriors who set sail from England to the beaches of Normandy in the early morning of June 6, 1944, at the beginning of what has rightly been called ``The Longest Day.'' But they were buoyed in their resolve by the millions of prayers from Americans and others back home, of all races, religions, and creeds, invoking the Lord's blessing, mercy, and grace. With the outcome in doubt, President Franklin Roosevelt asked the nation to join him in this solemn prayer: ``Almighty God: Our sons, pride of our nation, this day have set upon a mighty endeavor, a struggle to preserve our Republic, our religion, and our civilization, and to set free a suffering humanity. ``Lead them straight and true; give strength to their arms, stoutness to their hearts, steadfastness in their faith. ``They will need Thy blessings. ``For these men are lately drawn from the ways of peace. ``They fight not for the lust of conquest. ``They fight to end conquest. ``They fight to liberate. ``They fight to let justice arise, and tolerance and goodwill among all Thy people. ``They yearn but for the end of battle, for their return to the haven of home.'' The prayers were needed because the cost of D-Day was high; U.S. casualties on D-Day totaled more than 2,499 dead, 3,184 wounded, 1,928 missing, and 26 captured. Our British and Canadian allies suffered terrible losses on D-Day as well: approximately 2,700 for the British and 946 for the Canadians. German casualties are estimated at 4,000 to 9,000. In total, the number of combatants killed, wounded or missing in the Battle of Normandy for both sides exceeded 425,000, not including the estimated 15,000 to 20,000 French civilians killed. But the operation was a success. More than 156,000 troops or paratroopers came ashore on D-Day, 73,000 from the U.S., 83,000 from Great Britain and Canada. By the end of June 11, D-Day+5, 326,547 troops, 54,186 vehicles and 104,428 tons of supplies had come ashore. And with them came the seeds for the victory in Europe that would come less than a year later, on May 8, 1945, with the fall of Berlin and the unconditional surrender of the Nazis. On the eve of the Normandy invasion, General Dwight D. Eisenhower, the Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces, addressed the soldiers, sailors, and airmen of the Allied Expeditionary Forces and said to them that they were about to embark upon a ``Great Crusade,'' and that the ``eyes of the world'' were upon them. He told them that their task would not be easy because the ``enemy is well trained, well equipped and battle-hardened. He will fight savagely.'' But, General Eisenhower said, ``this is the year 1944. The tide has turned. The free men of the world are marching together to victory.'' And march to victory they did, fully justifying General Eisenhower's ``confidence in their courage, devotion to duty, and skill in battle.'' Because of the heroism of these men who willingly risked their lives to be the tip of the spear of liberty, the war was won and a world was saved for freedom. Mr. Speaker, D-Day was, and remains, a day like no other in the history of man's sojourn on earth. We remember Gettysburg. There, President Lincoln paid tribute to those ``who gave their lives so that the nation might live.'' It is equally fitting and proper that we never forget D-Day and that we continue to honor those who risked all and gave all so that the light of freedom would never be extinguished in the world.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to commemorate LGBTQ Pride Month and the remarkable progress that has been made in making our country more diverse and tolerant and embracing of differences in the 18 years since the cruel murder of Matthew Shepherd, a college student from Laramie, Wyoming. As a country, America has made and continues to make great progress in the area of social equality, as evidenced most dramatically by the seismic shift in public support for marriage equality over the past decade. Today, supporters of marriage equality dramatically outnumber opponents by 61-35 percent; a near total reversal from 2004, when opponents outnumbered supporters 58-39 percent. Our country made progress in bringing our LGBTQ brothers and sisters, mother and fathers out of the shadows with the repeal of ``Don't Ask, Don't Tell,'' which I was proud to support. Our nation is now stronger and our people are safer thanks to the sacrifices made by these brave Americans, who no longer need to choose between service and silence. There have been other changes for the better. In April 2015, President Obama issued a landmark Executive Order prohibiting discrimination against LGBTQ persons in the workplace. This civil rights victory ensures the tax dollars used to pay government contractors support contractors that are committed to equal employment opportunity for all persons regardless of sexual orientation. This legislation marks a major shift from a time when the U.S. Civil Service Commission prohibited the hiring of LGBTQ persons to a time when the Secretary of Defense has selected an openly gay man as his chief of staff. And we are making progress in realizing the goal of making H.R. 2282, the ``Equality Act of 2017,'' the law of the land so LGBTQ people will finally be guaranteed explicit, permanent protection under the nation's existing civil rights laws against discrimination in vital areas of life, like employment, access to public spaces, housing, credit, education, jury service, and federally-funded programs. Mr. Speaker, it is unacceptable that in 31 states LGBTQ people can get married on Sunday and remain at risk of being fired or evicted on Monday simply because of who they are. This year marks the 49th anniversary of the LGBTQ Civil Rights Movement, where activist such as Frank Kamney led the struggle for the voices of the LGBTQ community to be heard. Frank Kamney's courageous demonstrations inspired others to resist mistreatment and we witnessed in 1969 what happens when a community says enough is enough. Our country has made much progress since the Stonewall uprising of 1969 but more remains to be done to realize the full promise of America that all are equally treated and protected by the law. So there is much reason for joy and optimism when my home city of Houston hosts the Ruby Anniversary celebration of Pride Week later this month, June 14-24, 2018. According to the 2010 U.S. Census, the 16th largest LGBTQ community in the nation is located in the Houston metropolitan area, which I am privileged to represent. The Houston LGBTQ community is culturally diverse, economically dynamic, and artistically vibrant. Houston Pride Week has been an annual event for the last 39 years, since 1979, and promotes the individuality of Houston's ever-growing LGBTQ community. The Pride Festival and Parade are at the center of a celebration annually attended by more than 700,000 people from Houston and around the world. Mr. Speaker, as the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. reminded us, ``Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.'' All Americans should be deeply concerned over the increase in violence and acts of hate perpetrated against members of the LGBTQ community we have witnessed in recent months. Especially troubling is the rise in bigotry and violent crimes against transgender people, particularly transgender women of color. According to statistics compiled by the Human Rights Campaign, at least 22 trans gender people in the United States lost their lives due to fatal violence, the most ever recorded. Sadly, we are on pace to break this record in 2017, as 11 transgender persons have been killed in the first five months. Mr. Speaker, I invite all Americans to visit Houston during Houston Pride Week to observe how we live out our conviction that ``Love Will Conquer Hate.'' Progress is made through the efforts of courageous men and women who actively engage their communities and face adversity to ensure that the rights of all are clearly recognized and protected. People like the legendary Bayard Rustin, who organized the 1947 Journey of Reconciliation which inspired the Freedom Rides of the 1960s and helped Dr. King organize the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and who was the driving force behind the historic 1963 March on Washington. Texas natives such as Sheryl Swoopes, a 3-time WNBA Most Valuable Player and champion for the Houston Comets, and former Houston Mayor Annise Parker. These leaders have set an example of what can happen when we lift the limits of inequality and support our fellow Americans in their pursuits of their inalienable rights. Other members of the LGBTQ community whose contributions have enriched American culture and made our country better include the great poet Langston Hughes; Mandy Carter, 2008 national co-chair of Obama Pride and lifelong activist; Billy Strayhorn the musician and gifted composer whose 30-year collaboration with Duke Ellington gave the world some of the greatest jazz music ever; Tom Waddell, army medical doctor and Olympic athlete; and James Baldwin, one of the towering figures in the history of American literature. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to acknowledge the achievements of just a few of the countless number of Americans who overcame prejudice and discrimination to make America a more welcoming place for succeeding generations of LGBTQ community members.

Ms. JACKSON LEE

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to call upon the President and the Congress of the United States to act without delay regarding the ``zero-tolerance'' policy that separates families apprehended on the southern border by U.S. Border Patrol. As the Founder and Chair of the Children's Caucus and as a parent and grandparent, I cannot think of a situation more devastating than having the government forcibly separate a parent from her child to a place unknown, for a fate uncertain, absent any form of communication. Everyday, hundreds of persons, ranging from infants and toddlers to adolescents and adults, flee violence, oppression, and economic desperation from Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador, seeking safe harbor in the United States. They are not criminals or terrorists, they are refugees seeking asylum. While they hope to receive asylum, none of us expected that they would be treated as criminals or that their children would be forcibly separated from them. But shamefully that is exactly what is happening under this Administration. A recent audit of the Office of Refugee Resettlement of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services shows that more than 7,600 children have been forcibly separated from their parents after crossing the U.S. border. Unconscionably, this cruel and unnecessary practice has resulted in the shameful fact that DHS cannot account for the 1,475 immigrant children. The Trump Administration's practice of separating children from their parents inexplicably turns accompanied children into unaccompanied children, with all the attendant risks and dangers, which now must include human trafficking because over 1,000 children cannot be accounted for by this Administration. It is a documented fact that if young children are traumatically removed from their parents, their physical and mental health and well- being will suffer. The effects of these traumatic experiences--especially in children who have already faced serious adversity--are unlikely to be short lived and can last a lifetime. The Trump Administration's ``zero-tolerance'' policy does not make our nation safer or more secure, nor is it a solution to the problem of illegal immigration and refugees seeking asylum. It is, however, monstrously cruel, inhumane, and shameful and makes a mockery of America's reputation as the most welcoming and generous nation on earth. The last time this nation had policies that promoted the forcible separation of children from newly arrived persons was slavery. A dark chapter in this nation's history that we should not revisit. Today the parents of these thousands of children once removed from the U.S. will do nothing less than to find ways to reunite with their children, even under the threat of imprisonment. A second attempt to enter the U.S. will be threatened by a federal criminal offense punishable by prison. It would be unconscionable to prosecute parents under these circumstances. There must be strong and aggressive congressional oversight of this Administration's immigration enforcement. The federal government policy regarding legislation should not to create greater fear for families already traumatized by intolerable conditions in their countries. U.S. immigration policy should not deter refugees from seeking asylum within our borders. We should welcome mothers carrying their babies to a safe haven and assure safety of children. As we have seen with the recent volcanic activity and earthquakes in Guatemala, we should be seeking ways to help our neighbors in the Southern Hemisphere. The Trump Administration is utterly failing in its basic duty to treat all persons with dignity and compassion, and is making a mockery of our national values and reputation as a champion of human rights. This crisis is not just an immigration matter nor is it just a foreign policy matter. It is a humanitarian crisis, executed by an administration that purports to be the champion of `family values' but whose actions do not value families. We are a great country with a long and noble tradition of providing sanctuary to the persecuted and oppressed. And it is in that spirit that we should act. We can do it; after all, we are Americans.