Hakeem Jeffries

Mr. JEFFRIES

Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, I appeal the ruling of the Chair.

Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. JEFFRIES

Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 2(a)(1) of rule IX, I rise to give notice of my intent to raise a question of the privileges of the House. The form of the resolution is as follows: A resolution expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that President Donald Trump shall publicly disclose his tax return information, which would conform with an important tradition connected to occupancy of the White House, as well as uphold his promise to the American people that he would release his tax returns. Whereas, every President since Gerald Ford has disclosed his tax return information to the American people; Whereas, in May 2014 Donald Trump stated during a television interview: ``If I decide to run for office I'll produce my tax returns absolutely. I would love to do that''; Whereas, in February 2015 Donald Trump stated during a radio interview: ``I have no objection to certainly showing tax returns''; Whereas, in February 2016 Donald Trump stated during a televised Republican Presidential debate: ``I will absolutely give my returns, but I'm being audited now for two or three years, so I can't do it until the audit is finished, obviously''; Whereas, in May 2016 Donald Trump stated during a television interview: ``I will really gladly give them. When the audit ends, I'll present them. That should be before the election''; Whereas, the IRS has made clear that any taxpayer, including Donald Trump, may release his tax returns at any time while under audit; Whereas, the House of Representatives by constitutional design is the institution closest to the American people, and an overwhelming majority of the American people think Donald Trump should release his tax returns immediately; Whereas, 17 different intelligence agencies in the United States have concluded that Vladimir Putin and his Russian regime interfered with our Presidential election for the purpose of helping Donald Trump; Whereas, multiple high-level Trump associates were in regular contact with Russian operatives and intelligence agents during the same time that Russia was hacking into our democracy; Whereas, multiple high-level Trump associates have financial ties to the Russian regime; Whereas, Paul Manafort, Donald Trump's former campaign chairman, engineered a pro-Russia change in the Republican Party platform in July 2016 and has received millions of dollars from pro-Russian oligarchs to advance Putin's agenda; Whereas, Michael Flynn, Donald Trump's first National Security Adviser, resigned in disgrace for misleading to Vice President Mike Pence about potentially unlawful phone calls to the Russian Ambassador and failed to disclose financial compensation received from a Russian propaganda media outlet closely tied to Vladimir Putin; Whereas, Carter Page, a top foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign, has now acknowledged visiting the Kremlin in the midst of the 2016 Presidential election; Whereas, Jeff Sessions, Donald Trump's Attorney General, misled the Senate under oath by failing to disclose his meetings with the Russian Ambassador that took place in July 2016 at the Republican National Convention and again in September of 2016; Whereas, Michael Cohen, Donald Trump's personal attorney, now acknowledges being in contact with Russian operatives at the same time the attacks on our democracy were taking place; Whereas, Jared Kushner, a senior White House advisor and Donald Trump's son-in-law, now acknowledges previously undisclosed meetings with the Russian Ambassador; Whereas, Roger Stone, a self-described political trickster and Donald Trump's long-time consigliere, now acknowledges being in contact with the Russian-aligned hacker Guccifer II and predicted during the campaign that John Podesta's emails would soon be exposed; Whereas, Ian Fleming, the renowned British author has observed, ``Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action''; Whereas, Donald Trump has shown an unrestrained willingness to criticize and insult allies of the United States of America; Whereas, Donald Trump wrongly accused Great Britain, our closest ally, of wiretapping Trump Tower in New York City; Whereas, Donald Trump declined to shake German Chancellor Angela Merkel's hand while seated together during their recent joint appearance at the White House; Whereas, Donald Trump stated in a recent C-PAC speech that ``Paris is no longer Paris''; Whereas, Donald Trump threatened to cancel a refugee transfer agreement with our ally Australia and reportedly hung up on the Prime Minister; Whereas, Donald Trump told the President of Mexico that America would deploy military personnel to that sovereign nation if our southern neighbor does not deal with its ``bad hombres''; Whereas, Donald Trump has repeatedly criticized our strategic and military alliance with Western European allies and called NATO ``obsolete''; Whereas, Donald Trump refuses to say a negative word about Vladimir Putin or his corrupt Russian regime; Whereas, Bill O'Reilly interviewed Donald Trump on Super Bowl Sunday and asked about Putin's brutal and murderous regime; Whereas, Donald Trump responded, ``There are a lot of killers. You think our country's so innocent?'', suggesting a moral equivalence between the United States and Russia; Whereas, Yogi Berra, the great Yankee catcher and philosopher-King, once observed ``that's too coincidental to be a coincidence''; Whereas, Donald Trump tweeted on January 11: ``I have nothing to do with Russia--no deals, no loans, no nothing'' Whereas, Donald Trump Jr. once stated: ``Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets. We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia''; Whereas, disclosure of Donald Trump's tax returns will help the American people and their elected Representatives in this House better understand Trump's financial ties, if any, to Putin's Russia; Whereas, the American people have a right to know whether financial conflicts of interest exist between the President of the United States and a hostile foreign power; Whereas, the chairmen of the House Ways and Means Committee, Joint Committee on Taxation, and Senate Finance Committee have the authority to request Donald Trump's tax returns under section 6103 of the Tax Code; and Whereas, the FBI is conducting a criminal and counterintelligence investigation into Russian interference with the recent Presidential election, including possible collusion between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin: Now, therefore, be it resolved that the House of Representatives shall: One, immediately request tax return information of Donald J. Trump for tax years 2007 through 2016 for review in closed executive session by the Committee on Ways and Means, as provided under section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code, and vote to report the information therein to the full House of Representatives; and Two, postpone consideration of comprehensive tax reform legislation until after the elected Representatives of the American people in this House have been able to review Trump's tax returns and ascertain how any changes to the Tax Code might financially benefit the President of the United States.

Mr. JEFFRIES

Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, the Trump Presidency has been characterized by chaos, crisis, and confusion, and this Republican healthcare debacle has been no different. The American people clearly understand that TrumpCare will be an unmitigated disaster. Under TrumpCare, working families will pay more and get less. Under TrumpCare, premiums will increase. Under TrumpCare, copays will increase. Under TrumpCare, deductibles will increase. Under TrumpCare, out-of-pocket expenses will increase. Under TrumpCare, 24 million hardworking Americans will lose their health coverage. Under TrumpCare, individuals between the age of 50 and 64 will pay a regressive age tax. Health care is a matter of life and death; that is why we take it so seriously. TrumpCare will lead to increased death, disease, and destitution, and that is why we oppose this horrible piece of legislation.

Mr. JEFFRIES

Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, under the Republican healthcare plan, TrumpCare, hardworking Americans will pay more and get less. Your premiums will increase. Your copays will increase. Your deductibles will increase. Your out-of-pocket costs will increase. But the quality of your health care will go down. Tens of millions of Americans under TrumpCare will also lose their entire health coverage. And under the Republican healthcare plan, it will impose a draconian age tax on people between 50 and 64, some of whom will be forced to pay approximately $14,000 per year. Trump has said he is going to do health care in three phases. I have finally figured it out. Phase one, disease. Phase two, disaster. Phase three, destruction. Vote ``no'' against this reckless plan.

Mr. JEFFRIES

Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, this is a monumental week here on Capitol Hill as we will decide the fate of health care in America. Despite the evidence that the Affordable Care Act has made a positive difference in the lives of everyday Americans, Republicans are set to destroy it. But the Affordable Care Act has improved the quality of life for tens of millions of people all across this country. As a result of the Affordable Care Act, people born with preexisting conditions can no longer be denied health insurance. As a result of the Affordable Care Act, young people can remain on their parents' health insurance all the way through to the age of 26. As a result of the Affordable Care Act, women can no longer be discriminated against with respect to the issuance of insurance simply based on their gender. As a result of the Affordable Care Act, seniors are paying less for lifesaving prescription drug medication. As a result of the Affordable Care Act, more than 1 million people throughout this country--including in rural America--are able to receive substance abuse treatment because of them being caught up in the opioid addiction epidemic. The Affordable Care Act has made a positive difference in the lives of everyday Americans, yet this President says it has been a disaster. This is the same President who, for 5 years, perpetrated the racist lie that Barack Obama was not born in the United States of America, who said that he received more votes than Hillary Clinton, who claimed that there were more people at the inauguration than in 2009. This is an individual who still maintains that his predecessor, Barack Obama, committed a felony and ordered a wiretap, despite testimony from the FBI Director to the contrary. Let's be clear. What will be an unmitigated disaster is TrumpCare, which House Republicans are working to jam down the throats of the American people. TrumpCare, the Republican healthcare plan, will result in 24 million Americans losing their health care. TrumpCare, the Republican plan, will gut Medicaid, stripping it of $880 billion, taking dead aim at seniors, the poor, and the afflicted. TrumpCare will impose an age tax on people between the ages of 50 and 64, causing some in that category who are currently paying approximately $1,700 per year to pay close to $14,000 in age tax--on people between 50 and 64. That is TrumpCare, the Republican plan, an unmitigated disaster taking dead aim at the American people. It will result in tens of thousands of Americans dying. It is a death sentence. Seniors will die. The poor will die. The chronically ill will die. Rural Americans will die. People between the age of 50 and 64 will die. And the executioner will be the authors and those who support the Republican healthcare plan.

Mr. JEFFRIES

Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Chairman, I thank my distinguished colleagues in government and the lead Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee for their continued leadership. My amendment would amend from the underlying bill all actions where whistleblowers allege misconduct or malfeasance in connection with the Federal Government. A whistleblower is defined as one who reveals wrongdoing within an organization in the hope of stopping it. Our country has long recognized the importance of affording legal protections to whistleblowers. Under the protection and umbrella of these laws, whistleblowers have helped expose corruption, government waste, fraud, unconstitutional practices, and abuses of the public trust. They have risked, in many cases, their livelihoods to do what is right for this country and defend our democracy. It should not be our objective to create barriers that will stop people in good faith from coming forward by subjecting them or their representatives to mandatory sanctions, but that is exactly what this bill is designed to do. This amendment will ensure that whistleblowers are still protected under current law when they bring an action through our judicial system. The need for this amendment is clear now more than ever. Donald Trump and his team appear, at times, to be paranoid about the information that comes out of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. If the 45th President of the United States chooses to run the White House and the government in the same way that he ran many of his businesses, their fear may be well-founded. He does not have a great track record. Donald Trump has been sued by the Department of Justice for violating Federal antidiscrimination laws, refusing to rent apartments to people based on their race. I note that that lawsuit in the early 1970s was brought by the Nixon Justice Department. He was forced to shut down Trump University, an apparent scam that he used to rip off students, swindling them out of tens of thousands of dollars. And he has repeatedly failed to pay his workers and contractors for their services--hardworking Americans. He created a fake charity, the Trump Foundation, which apparently has been used to pay for a portrait of himself and pay off fines and bills. He has declared bankruptcy four times in his career after losing billions of dollars. Now, as President, this is the first time that Donald Trump has had to act in the best interest of someone other than himself or his family. His Cabinet, however, consists of the superwealthy, many of whom are unfamiliar with the programs that their departments oversee and who are inexperienced in handling billions and billions of taxpayer dollars. Many others seem more concerned about helping out interests that are corporate in nature, not the people's interests. In the words of the legendary Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis: ``Sunlight is the best of disinfectants, electric light the most efficient policeman.'' Putting whistleblower protections at risk puts our democracy at risk, and for that reason, I urge adoption of this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Chairman, I would add that, in a democracy, the ability to use the Article III Federal court system is incredibly important as it relates to the chance for individual citizens who recognize that wrongdoing is taking place to do something about it and save taxpayers from the waste, fraud, and abuse that so many in this Chamber appear to often be concerned about. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. JEFFRIES

Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, this is day 49 of the Trump administration, which has been characterized by chaos, crisis, and confusion. Donald Trump promised to bring the jobs back, but the jobs bill must be in the witness protection program because, for the life of me, I can't find it. Instead, we get TrumpCare, a bill that would destroy health care in America as we know it. TrumpCare will increase premiums on the American people. TrumpCare will increase copays on the American people. TrumpCare will increase deductibles on the American people. TrumpCare will increase the cost of prescription drugs on the American people. TrumpCare will reduce coverage for the American people. TrumpCare will be a disaster. And that is why House Democrats are going to do everything in our power to stop this reckless version of health care for America.

Mr. JEFFRIES

Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman from Maryland for yielding. It was all a dream, I used to read Word Up! magazine. Salt-n-Pepa and Heavy D up in the limousine, Hangin' pictures on my wall, Every Saturday Rap Attack, Mr. Magic, Marley Marl. Those were the words of the late great Notorious B.I.G., Biggie Smalls, Frank White, the King of New York. He died 20 years ago today in a tragedy that occurred in Los Angeles, but his words live on forever. I have got the privilege of representing the district where Biggie Smalls was raised. We know he went from negative to positive and emerged as one of the world's most important hip-hop stars. His rags- to-riches life story is the classic embodiment of the American Dream. Biggie Smalls is gone, but he will never be forgotten. Rest in peace, Notorious B.I.G. Where Brooklyn at?

Mr. JEFFRIES

Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, it is with great sorrow that I rise today in recognition of the untimely passing of Valeriy ``Larry'' Savinkin, a dedicated and well-respected community leader and my congressional field representative who served the residents of the 8th Congressional District of New York with distinction. Larry Savinkin was born on October 25, 1955, to Igor and Ada Savinkin. He was brother to Viola, husband to Valentina, father to Galina and Vladimir, father-in-law to Vadim and grandfather to Victor. Before migrating to Brooklyn with his family from Odessa, Ukraine in 1996, Larry was a hardworking business owner where he operated a door- making company and a chain of merchant stores. Larry's commitment, core values and work ethic allowed him to excel in various positions. He was previously employed as a computer programmer, worked for the United States Census Bureau and served as a Community Liaison for former Congressman Bob Turner. More recently, he was a project manager at the Jewish Association for Serving the Aging (JASA), a local community- based organization that serves older adults of all races, religions and economic backgrounds across New York City. Larry's success and impact in the neighborhoods of Southern Brooklyn and Queens was not limited to his work with my congressional office. For over 20 years, he was involved in several prominent organizations including the September 11 Family Group, the Brighton Beach Business Improvement District, The Holocaust Memorial Committee, Odessa Community of New York, and Brooklyn's Community Planning Board 13. Larry had a magnetic personality and cared about his community immensely, approached his work with urgency, compassion and had a great sense of humor. I had the privilege of knowing Larry and working with him throughout the years. I recognize that his integrity was above reproach and his competence was extraordinary. I thank his family and friends for sharing him with us all. Mr. Speaker, I ask that you and my other distinguished colleagues join me in extending gratitude for Larry Savinkin's public service and his commitment to the people of Brooklyn, he is worthy of the highest praise.

Mr. JEFFRIES

Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, we have a reality show host masquerading as President of the United States of America who came to this Chamber yesterday in a Hollywood-style production and pretended to act Presidential. But the question that we confront is one that Richard Nixon actually first raised, in November of 1973, when he said that the American people deserve to know whether or not the President is a crook. That was an observation that Richard Nixon made in the context of the Watergate scandal which began as a nickel-and-dime break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters in the summer of 1972, and, obviously, concluded with impeachment proceedings and the ultimate resignation of a President in disgrace. Nixon made the observation that the American people deserve to know whether or not the President is a crook, and many people across the country are raising a similar question because 17 different intelligence agencies have concluded that the Russians, at the explicit direction of Vladimir Putin, interfered in our election for the purpose of helping Donald Trump. Yet, it is hard to get an independent investigation going in this place because my friends on the other side of the aisle continue to put party ahead of the country. But that is just the beginning. We know that, as early as December of 2015, at least four different cronies of Donald Trump were in regular communication with Russian intelligence agents at the same time these individuals were hacking into the DNC, the DCCC, and the Clinton campaign, interfering with our democracy. These individuals were Michael Flynn, who came to become Trump's first national security adviser; Carter Page, who was his former foreign policy adviser; Paul Manafort, who was the chairman of the Trump campaign; and Roger Stone, a longtime affiliate. If they were having these conversations at this time, we know they probably weren't talking about Russian vodka. What were they talking about? The American people deserve to know. We also are aware that Michael Flynn had an illegal conversation, in December of 2016, with the Russian Ambassador where he discussed sanctions that were imposed on Russia because of their hacking. He then apparently lied about this conversation to the Vice President who then went out and misrepresented facts to the American people, and then Michael Flynn resigned in disgrace. But we still can't get an independent, nonpartisan investigation in this place. But that is not all. We know that Donald Trump has not been bashful when going after our allies like Mexico or Australia or NATO or the European Union or, this past weekend, France. He is not bashful about being critical, but he can't say a negative word about Vladimir Putin, a brutal dictator. It appears that this President is more determined to make the Kremlin great again. But that is not all. He refuses to release his taxes despite promising the American people that he was going to do so prior to November of last year. What exactly is he hiding in these tax documents? Yet, we still can't get an independent investigation. We also know that the White House Chief of Staff engaged in potentially unlawful conversations with the FBI, perhaps trying to get them to obstruct justice in the public sphere in the midst of an ongoing investigation. All we are saying is connect the dots. This should not be a Democratic issue or a Republican issue. The American people deserve to know whether or not the President is a crook.

Mr. JEFFRIES

Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, Donald Trump poses the greatest Presidential threat to our democracy since Richard Nixon. It is about the potential crimes and the potential coverup. Seventeen different intelligence agencies have concluded that the Russians interfered with the election in order to help Donald Trump. Top Trump cronies like Carter Page, Paul Manafort, and Michael Flynn all had regular communications with high-level Russian intelligence agents at the same time they were engaging in hacking. The National Security Adviser resigned in disgrace because of illegal communication with the Russian Ambassador. The President refuses to denounce Vladimir Putin and continues to try to make Russia great again. Connect the dots. It is time for House Republicans to do their job and put country ahead of party. Join us in a bipartisan investigation of the White House. What did the President know, and when did he know it?

Mr. JEFFRIES

Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, the House of Representatives is a separate and coequal branch of government. And yet, House Republicans refuse to investigate the swamp of corruption that is percolating at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Michael Flynn has resigned in disgrace. And yet, the Trump administration has jeopardized our national security by continuing to play footsie with Vladimir Putin and the Russians. House Republicans have done nothing. It is impossible to figure out where the Trump family business ends and the White House begins, yet House Republicans have done nothing. Seventeen different intelligence agencies have concluded that the Russians interfered in the election to help Donald Trump, yet House Republicans have done nothing. It is time for House Republicans to investigate this White House and stop acting like puppets of the Trump administration. The American people deserve answers. What exactly did Donald Trump know, and when did he know it?

Mr. JEFFRIES

Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands for her very kind remarks and for yielding and for the tremendous job that she and my classmate, Marc Veasey, have done in leading this CBC Special Order hour over this 115th Congress during the last few weeks. We stand here today in the midst of Black History Month where many African Americans throughout the country are asking the question: What do we do now that the unthinkable has occurred? As a community, as a nation, we have gone from the Presidency-- distinguished and dynamic 8 years--of Barack Obama to the current situation where we have a swamp percolating at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue under the leadership of Donald J. Trump. He began Black History Month by saying that he was convening folks for what he called his little Black history breakfast. Those of us who actually watched some of the coverage seemed perplexed by his reference to the great Frederick Douglass as if he was still alive. If anyone has any questions about the relevance of Black History Month, we can start by noting that perhaps it is important to make sure that the Nation's Commander in Chief understands the contributions that African Americans have made to the United States of America, going all the way back to the Boston Massacre, where one of its leaders, Crispus Attucks, was the first American killed at the onset of the American Revolution in connection with the Boston Massacre, challenging the unjust taxation policies of the British Empire. Now, the 45th President of the United States of America asked a question over the last several months: What exactly do Black folks have to lose? Many of us were perplexed by that question, given his history, and actually think that you have lost your mind if you come to the conclusion that the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue has any interest in making a positive difference in the lives of people of color generally, African Americans specifically, perhaps because of his own history. We know that in the early 1970s The Trump Organization, of which he was president, was sued by the Justice Department for racial discrimination in the housing stock that they owned, where they were denying African Americans and people of Puerto Rican ancestry access to apartments, notwithstanding their economic qualifications to be renters or co-op owners. I would just note parenthetically that it was the Nixon Justice Department--not the Kennedy Justice Department or the Johnson Justice Department or the Carter Justice Department or the Clinton Justice Department or the Obama Justice Department--that concluded that Donald J. Trump and his organization was discriminating on the basis of race. Those of us from New York understand that the current occupant of the White House was the leader of the high-tech lynch mob designed to try to get the wrongfully convicted Central Park Five sentenced to death, taking out a full-page ad in some of the local periodicals in New York calling for that. It turns out that all five individuals were wrongfully convicted and spent years in jail for a crime they did not commit. Donald J. Trump has never apologized for that reckless and irresponsible action. Then, of course, for 5 years he perpetrated the racist lie that Barack Obama was not born in the United States of America, all designed to undermine the legitimacy of the 44th President of the United States of America, which is why here in Black History Month it is very interesting to me that some of my friends on the other side of the aisle question whether we, as members of the Congressional Black Caucus, or others are being irresponsible in not giving the current President a chance. How dare you ask that question. From the beginning of the Presidency of Barack Obama, you declared war on him. You followed a philosophy that may be familiar to those of us who are familiar with the history of the Deep South: obstruction today, obstruction tomorrow, obstruction forever. Mr. McConnell declared that his top priority was to make Barack Obama a one-term President. And yet, he questions whether Americans, who are part of the growing resistance movement, have failed to give Donald Trump a chance. Let's be clear. He has zero credibility on the issue of lecturing us about Presidential etiquette. We will decide what the rules of engagement are when it comes to this current President. Pipe down as it relates to talking to any of us about how to engage the White House because he has no credibility on the issue. His obstruction took place in the midst of two failed wars in the worst economy since the Great Depression. So we have got a lot of issues that we have got to sort out with this current President here in Black History Month, both for the African- American community and for the broader community of Americans in blue States, in red States, in urban America, in rural America, in suburban America, in the north, the south, the east, and the west. And I look forward to working with my colleagues in the Congressional Black Caucus, and others, to tackle issues like criminal justice reform, to fix the Voting Rights Act that was damaged in such an irresponsible way by the Supreme Court decision in Shelby County v. Holder, and to work to build an economy that works for all Americans, not simply the millionaires and billionaires who dominate the Trump Cabinet. I thank my distinguished colleague from the Virgin Islands (Ms. Plaskett) for giving me the opportunity to share some thoughts today. I thank my colleague, Marc Veasey, for his continued leadership. And I look forward to hearing my distinguished colleague, Brenda Lawrence, from Motown.

Mr. JEFFRIES

Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Chairman, this is a sad day in the history of this country as Republicans begin the process of destroying health care in America. ``Repeal and replace'' is just a slogan. It is not a solution. For more than 6 years, we have been waiting for a credible Republican healthcare plan, and none has been forthcoming. All you have is smoke and mirrors, and the American people are getting ready to get screwed. Under the so-called Republican plan, seniors will be forced to pay more for their medicine. Under the so-called Republican plan, children with preexisting conditions, like pediatric cancer, will be at risk of being kicked off of their health plans or of being denied health coverage. Under the so-called Republican plan, young people in America will no longer be able to stay on their parents' health insurance through the age of 26. Under the so-called Republican plan, more than a million people who are receiving drug treatment because of opioid addiction will be at risk of being denied that lifesaving care. Under the so-called Republican plan, premiums will go up, co-pays will go up, deductibles will go up; and the American people will be screwed. People in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Ohio--screwed. Seniors in Florida--screwed. People on the west coast and on the east coast--screwed. People in Appalachia and rural America--screwed. The only folks who will benefit are the fat cats who are part of the healthcare cartel. The system, indeed, is rigged, and the American people should pay attention as to who is jamming them up.

Mr. JEFFRIES

Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, I thank my distinguished colleague and classmate, Representative Marc Veasey, for his leadership today; and the chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, Representative Cedric Richmond, for convening us and for the leadership that he has already shown. We have a President-elect who, for 5 years, perpetrated the racist lie that Barack Obama was not born in the United States of America, and who ran one of the most divisive campaigns in the Nation's history and then promised that he was going to bring all of us together. Then you have got his colleagues on the other side of the aisle who have said: Well, Democrats, people in the civil rights community, African Americans, we should give the new President a chance. This is the same group of people who declared war on Barack Obama on day one of his Presidency and governed themselves under the following approach: Obstruction today, obstruction tomorrow, obstruction forever. That should sound familiar to folks from Alabama and the Deep South. Now they want us to give them a chance. You can't lecture us on Presidential etiquette. You have no credibility in that area. We will decide how we want to engage. As it relates to your pick to head the Department of Justice, it is totally unacceptable, unreasonable, unjust, and unconscionable, not because of anything that he may have said 30 years ago, as offensive as that may be, but because of the positions that Senator Jeff Sessions has taken today. Today, in 2017, based on his recent track record, he supports the Confederate battle flag, not 30 years ago, but today. Today he supports voter suppression efforts that are advanced by his unwillingness to repair section 4 and section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. That is not 30 years ago. I don't care that you showed up in Selma, Alabama, for a photo op. Your position on the Voting Rights Act is unacceptable today. Today you support mass incarceration, the failed drug war, and the prison industrial complex. And because of your position today, reasonable Americans should oppose your ascension to the Department of Justice.

Mr. JEFFRIES

Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, I thank my distinguished colleague and good friend from the Third Congressional District (Mrs. Beatty). She is always elegant, eloquent, and effervescent, an erudite, anchor of the CBC Special Order who has made us all proud in the manner in which she has conducted herself on behalf of the people that she represents, as well as the entire Congressional Black Caucus and, of course, the class of 2012. Once again, it is my honor and my privilege to stand on the House floor and participate in the Congressional Black Caucus' Special Order hour where for 60 minutes we have an opportunity to speak directly to the American people about issues of great significance. I can think of no more profound moment by which we need to address the people throughout this country, who we are privileged to represent, than in the aftermath of the most recent election. I think it is important first to reflect upon the fact that in this country we already have made significant progress over the last 8 years. A lot of folks--some of our friends on the other side of the aisle--they don't want to acknowledge that fact. The reality of the situation quantitatively is very different. Under 8 years of George W. Bush, this country lost 650,000 jobs. In almost 8 years of Barack Obama, we have gained more than 15 million private-sector jobs, 79 consecutive months of private-sector job creation. The deficit has been reduced by more than a trillion dollars under the Presidency of Barack Obama. When President Barack Obama came into office, the unemployment rate was at 10 percent. Now, it is at 5 percent. When Barack Obama took office, the stock market was at 6,000. Now it is over 18,000. More than 20 million Americans who were previously uninsured now have health coverage, and more than 300 million Americans don't have to worry about being denied health coverage because of a preexisting condition, all as a result of the Presidency of Barack Obama. I could go on and on, but America is a better place today because of the 44th President of the United States of America. Of course, now we find ourselves in a situation where we have to continue to address the issues of great importance to the American people. In this democratic republic, time marches on. As Abraham Lincoln once referenced, we are in a constant march toward a more perfect union. So the question, of course, is: Well, what are some of the issues where we can find common ground here today? In the aftermath of one of the most divisive elections in our Nation's history, let me suggest that there are a few CBC priorities where some of my good friends on the other side of the aisle seemingly should take interest in addressing. The first thing, of course, relates to poverty. Despite what we have heard from the President-elect throughout the campaign, poverty is not simply an inner-city problem. Congresswoman Joyce Beatty is a testament to the fact that so many folks who live in great cities like Columbus are incredibly professional, built wonderful lives, pursued the American Dream. Poverty is not an inner-city problem; it is an American problem. In fact, a majority of persistently poor counties in this country-- parenthetically, that is defined as counties where 20 percent or more of the population has lived below the poverty line for 30 or more years--are represented by House Republicans. I don't know if the President-elect realizes that. So poverty and making sure that every single person in America has an opportunity to pursue the American Dream isn't a Democratic issue or a CBC issue. It is an American issue. Maybe we can figure out a way collectively to deal with this problem because it doesn't just impact the people I represent back home in Brooklyn. The second issue that I think we can find common ground on, hopefully, is criminal justice reform. The House Judiciary Committee has already passed bipartisan legislation unanimously to deal with our unjust sentencing laws, as well as to make sure that everyone has an opportunity for a second chance in life once they have paid their debt to society. There has been great cooperation from many of my friends on the other side of the aisle, leaders on criminal justice reform, people like Jason Chaffetz, Trey Gowdy, and Raul Labrador. These are people where there may be issues that we don't have a lot in common, but who recognize, along with a whole host of other folks, that we have an overcriminalization problem in America when we have 5 percent of the world's population, but 25 percent of the world's incarcerated individuals. We incarcerate more people in this country than any other country in the world. And if you take China and Russia's population combined, it is in excess of a billion individuals. Yet, we incarcerate more than those two countries put together. I would say to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle: I think that dealing with mass incarceration in America fits squarely within your philosophical approach to a whole bunch of things. I am not asking you to become a Progressive Democrat. Fiscal Conservatives should object to the fact that we spend 80- billion-plus dollars a year wasting economic resources, opportunity, and human capital, as States in places like Texas, Kentucky, Georgia, and Louisiana have done, not blue States like New York or California; red States who recognize that the fiscally conservative thing to do without sacrificing public safety is to deal with overcriminalization in America. I would also suggest that many of my friends, Christian Conservatives--I am a Conservative, I guess, in the sense that I am a proud member of the Cornerstone Baptist Church. I don't know what the distinction is, but Christian Conservatives, I guess, is the lingo and the language that is often used--all of us who believe in some form of religion, particularly those, of course, who define themselves as Christian Conservatives should embrace the notion that you should have a second chance in life. Because theologically underpinning your religious beliefs is the notion of redemption, that we are all sinners in the eyes of God, with the exception of one person who has walked this Earth. And once you pay your debt to society, you shouldn't have a permanent scarlet letter that prohibits you from being able to experience the American Dream. So I think criminal justice reform fits squarely within the philosophy of my fiscal Conservative friends, my Christian Conservative friends. I would also suggest that my Libertarian friends, as Rand Paul and Raul Labrador have already illustrated, should also object to the mass incarceration problem that we have got in America. I understand you don't like overtaxation. We can argue about what is the appropriate rate. I understand you don't like overregulation. This is all about government overreach. You should have a problem with overcriminalization because there is no area where the government can do more damage than when they have the ability to take away your life or your liberty. So we stand here as members of the CBC talking about unfinished business, not urging you to cross over and adopt our philosophy. Adopt your philosophy and apply it to criminal justice reform. The last issue I would suggest as we talk about unfinished business is the notion of the Voting Rights Act having been decimated. I am disappointed that so many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle think that this should be a partisan issue. If there is a Republican advantage, let's be honest, that is why we don't want to do anything to fix it. Because when you look at the proud history of the Voting Rights Act, it has always been bipartisan in nature. It would not have passed this Congress without support from moderate Republicans in the House and in the Senate. That is a fact. There were Members of the Democratic Party, so-called Dixiecrats, that opposed it with everything they had. It would not be law today without Republicans. Every time the Voting Rights Act was reauthorized, it was signed back into law by a Republican President: 1970, Richard Nixon. 1975, Gerald Ford. 1982, Ronald Reagan. 2006, George W. Bush. We are not asking you on the House floor to act like Progressive Democrats. Just act like Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, who recognized that voting rights is not a Democratic issue or a Republican issue; it is an American issue. So, with that, I would just conclude by saying this: It would be a mistake for my friends on the other side of the aisle to interpret too much from this election. I am trying to figure out what exactly is the mandate when it appears that more than 2 million Americans will have supported, in terms of the popular vote margin, the candidate who lost. And it was a mistake when others interpreted too much from an electoral college victory. Hubert Humphrey won the popular vote in 1968. The electoral college sent us Richard Nixon, and we got Watergate. Al Gore won the popular vote in 2000, and I think there was too much of a mandate interpretation. We got two failed wars and the worst economy since the Great Depression. So the question is: Are you going to learn from recent history or are you just going to celebrate this unexpected victory where you lost the popular vote? I would suggest let's just find common ground, maybe on some of the areas that we have laid out here today. We are not asking you to change your philosophy, change your ideology; but in areas like poverty where you have got just as much at stake based on your constituents as we do, or criminal justice reform where your philosophy is consistent with dealing with mass incarceration and overcriminalization in America, or the Voting Rights Act, which has a proud bipartisan history, let's start there and see what we can do as it relates to addressing the business of the American people as we go into the next Congress.

Mr. JEFFRIES

Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous material on the subject of this Special Order.

Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, it is with great honor that I rise today once again to help coanchor, along with my distinguished colleague Representative Joyce Beatty, this Congressional Black Caucus Special Order hour where, for the next 60 minutes, we have an opportunity to speak directly to the American people on issues of great importance to the Congressional Black Caucus, to the House of Representatives, to the districts that we represent collectively, as well as to the United States of America. It is a very special week for us, and we are going to spend some time during the next 60 minutes discussing the trajectory of the Congressional Black Caucus, which has been serving in this body for the better part of the last 45 years. The Congressional Black Caucus was formally established on March 30, 1971, by 13 pioneering Members who had a vision of making sure that, within this great Article I institution, there was a body that could speak directly to the hopes, the dreams, the needs, and the aspirations of the African American people and all those underrepresented communities throughout America. We are going to talk a bit about that journey, about the accomplishments, and about the challenges that still remain. I want to yield now to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson), one of the very distinguished members of the Congressional Black Caucus, who happens to be the ranking member of the Science, Space, and Technology Committee and has ably represented the 30th Congressional District in Texas, anchored in Dallas, for almost 25 years. It has been an honor and a privilege for me and for others to work with her, to learn from her, and to be mentored by her.

Mr. JEFFRIES. I thank the distinguished gentlewoman from the great Lone Star State for her eloquent words and observations and, of course, for her leadership not just in the Congress, but for her past leadership as a distinguished former chair of the Congressional Black Caucus. It is now my honor and my privilege to yield to the distinguished gentlewoman from the great State of Ohio (Mrs. Beatty), my classmate, who is one of the most distinguished Members of the House of Representatives. She had an incredible career before she arrived here in the Congress as a leader in the Ohio Legislature, as a successful small-business woman, as a university administrator at The Ohio State University, and in so many other ways, and then, of course, has taken the House of Representatives by storm since her arrival as part of the class of 2012.

Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentlewoman from Ohio for laying out both the history of the Congressional Black Caucus as well as documenting what current membership continues to do and breaks new ground here in the House of Representatives on behalf of the people that they are charged to represent in this august body, as well as on behalf of the great Nation that we are all privileged to serve. As Representative Beatty mentioned, there were 13 individuals who had the vision and the foresight to found the Congressional Black Caucus back in March of 1971. The actual founding took place at a meeting between those 13 Members and President Richard Nixon, where the President was presented, by the newly formed Congressional Black Caucus, a statement of requests, goals, objectives, and demands related to the plight of African Americans here in these United States of America. The Congressional Black Caucus was founded on the premise that it was necessary to speak truth to power, given the unique plight of African Americans in this country. As was mentioned by Representative Beatty, there are two founding members who still serve in the House of Representatives; Representative John Conyers from Detroit, Michigan, and, of course, Charlie Rangel, the Lion of Lenox Avenue, the first African American ever to chair the Ways and Means Committee in this institution, a prolific legislator here in the House who has announced earlier this year his intention to retire. I am proud to serve a district that was once represented in part by the Honorable Shirley Chisholm, the first African American woman ever elected to the House of Representatives in a district in Brooklyn in 1968. She came here indicating that she was unbought and unbossed, and that tradition has been continued by people like Maxine Waters, Marcia Fudge, Joyce Beatty, and so many others who represent their district with passion and with integrity. The question has been asked: Why is there a need for a Congressional Black Caucus? We have come a long way in America. We have made a lot of progress. The 44th President of the United States of America happens to be African American. Why is there a need for a Congressional Black Caucus? That question was asked in 1971, of course. I think it takes an understanding of the unique journey of African Americans in this country to understand why the Congressional Black Caucus was first founded in 1971 and why it still remains relevant today. This country was founded, of course, on high-minded principles of liberty and justice for all and the notion that all men are created equally and were endowed with certain inalienable rights by the great democratic republic that was birthed by the Founding Fathers of this Nation. As many have observed, notwithstanding the tremendous nature of the principles embedded in the birth of this country, there was also a genetic defect on the question of race. That genetic defect first took the form, of course, of chattel slavery, which was one of the worst crimes ever perpetrated against humanity, resulting in the loss of tens of millions of individuals killed during the middle passage and the systemic oppression of African Americans, the kidnap, the rape, the enslavement here in the United States of America. This happened at the same time when the country was founded on these great, high-minded principles. Of course, the question of slavery was finally resolved with the victory of the North in 1865. The North, of course, was fighting the South in the Confederacy. The Confederacy has been put to rest, although some people still want to uplift the Confederate battle flag. That is an issue for another day. Slavery was put to rest. Then in an effort to correct the defect in our democracy, the 13th Amendment ending and outlawing chattel slavery was passed and added to the Constitution; the 14th Amendment, equal protection under the law; and the 15th Amendment related to the right to vote for African Americans. The so-called reconstruction amendments took place. But then, thereafter, something interesting happened. We were on the pathway to fulfilling the great promise of a colorblind society in America, but then the North pulled out of the South, the Reconstruction era ended, and it was replaced systematically with a system of Jim Crow, enforced segregation of the races, and the suppression of African Americans largely in the Deep South, notwithstanding the high-minded principles that were just embedded in the United States Constitution related to the 14th Amendment and the Equal Protection Clause and the 15th Amendment and the right to vote. Those were just words on a piece of paper, as far as many people were concerned in the Deep South who were perpetuating Jim Crow segregation. That Jim Crow segregation, of course, was accompanied by a lynching epidemic that claimed the lives of thousands of individuals, race riots directed at successful African Americans and African American communities, and so many other things that were documented in this country. Why is there a need for a Congressional Black Caucus? The country was founded under these great high-minded principles, but, at the same time on this journey, we have gone from slavery, a brief period of Reconstruction, into the Jim Crow era. As Representative Joyce Beatty so eloquently documented, in terms of the legislative efforts of African American Members who were here in partnership with people of goodwill of all races, Democrats and Republicans, we passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act here in this Congress endeavoring to end Jim Crow segregation, passed the 1965 Voting Rights Act here in this Congress to try to bring to life the 15th Amendment, largely ignored in many parts of this country, and then of course in 1968 passed the Fair Housing Act. Then an interesting thing happened. You have a President who is elected in the aftermath of the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., the Senator from New York, and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., the great civil rights leader on what he terms a Southern strategy of trying to capitalize on White backlash against the progress that has been made by African Americans. I am trying to figure out what was the nature of the backlash? The progress that was made was a Civil Rights Act to try to deal with the Jim Crow segregation that some people put into place in the aftermath of the end of slavery, and the 1965 Voting Rights Act that was put into place in order to try to bring to life the fact that there were people intentionally ignoring the 15th Amendment to the United States Constitution. Why is there a need for a Congressional Black Caucus? So we moved from slavery into Jim Crow, and that is all dealt with for a brief period in the 1960s in terms of the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act, the Fair Housing Act, but then we enter into this interesting period where Richard Nixon is elected on a strategy that played to the racial fears and anxieties of some in America. I don't want to get in trouble by putting a percentage onto it, but played into the anxieties and fears of some in America. History often repeats itself. And so the Congressional Black Caucus in 1971 made the decision that they were going to place a list of demands on the table for Richard Nixon to deal with, given this history. Little did they know--or perhaps they suspected--that in that same year what I would call the third defect that America has had to grapple with in terms of the African American community as compared to its high-minded aspirations was about to be visited on communities of color, and that was mass incarceration. It was in that year in 1971 where Richard Nixon declared a war on drugs by stating that drug abuse was public enemy number one. At the time in America, there were less than 350,000 people incarcerated in this country. Today, there are more than 2.1 million, the overwhelming majority of whom are Black and Latino. We know that African Americans are consistently incarcerated at levels much higher than others in the United States, notwithstanding a similar level of criminality as it relates to the crime that was committed, the activity that was engaged in, and the conduct that was prosecuted. The disparities are objectively clear. Mass incarceration has been devastating for African American communities all across this country, and it is shameful that America incarcerates more people here in the United States than any other country in the world. We incarcerate more people than Russia and China combined. This overcriminalization is something that I am hopeful we can deal with in this Congress before this President leaves and then continue to work with the next President of the United States of America. So people ask the question: Why do we need a Congressional Black Caucus? We have gone from slavery, a brief interruption with the Reconstruction Amendments into Jim Crow for another 100 years, 14th Amendment and 15th Amendment are ignored in large parts of the country, and then we get an interruption. Some progress was made with the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the 1965 Voting Rights Act, and the 1968 Fair Housing Act. Then we get Richard Nixon. And the Congressional Black Caucus is founded at the same time. For the last 45 years, we have been dealing with mass incarceration. But notwithstanding the intensity of the systematic issues put upon the African American community, we have seen tremendous progress during that same period of time because of Members like William Clay, Sr., a founder from St. Louis, or Louis Stokes from Cleveland, Ohio, and Augustus Hawkins from Los Angeles, people who understood that when Abraham Lincoln asked the question, how do we create a more perfect Union, and he asked that question in the context of the Civil War that was raging at the time, that America is a constant work in progress. And year after year, decade after decade, century after century, we can improve upon who we are, but there is still a lot more that needs to be done. Thankfully, we have seen increases in educational attainment, increases in employment over the last 8 years in the African American community since the height of the Great Recession, and we have seen a return of some of the homeownership that was lost during the recession, but there are still a lot of things that need to be done. And so a Congressional Black Caucus which has grown from the 13 original founding members to 46 members today, 45 in the House of Representatives, 1 of whom is a Republican, and a 46th member who serves in the United States Senate. We stand on the shoulders of these founding members, proud of what has been accomplished like the effort led by Ron Dellums which resulted in legislation to push back against the racist apartheid regime in 1986, a bill that was vetoed by Ronald Reagan, and then overridden by Democrats and Republicans in the House and the Senate, the first foreign policy bill overridden in the Congress passed by Ron Dellums that led the effort related to South African apartheid. So many issues have been championed by the founding members. John Conyers held a series of hearings on the issue of police brutality. It is ironic that right now, along with Chairman Bob Goodlatte, they are leading a bipartisan task force on police community relations to deal with what I view, at least, as an epidemic of police violence directed at unarmed African American men across this country, but John Conyers was involved in that effort in the early 1970s. And so there is a lot of things that we have been able to work on during this 45-year journey. Tremendous progress has been made, despite the efforts to paint the community as overrun by some out there in this country as a thriving Black middle class. A successful group of entrepreneurs, professionals, lawyers, doctors, engineers, scientists, and so many others have shown what can be done based on their promise and their potential despite the obstacles that exist as we move toward a more colorblind society. But we, of course, are not there yet. That is why we are of the view that, despite the fact that we have made tremendous progress in America, we still have a way to go. There is still a need, an urgent need for a Congressional Black Caucus, which has often stood up not just on behalf of African Americans but has stood up on behalf of those who are the least, the lost, and the left- behind in the United States of America, regardless of color. That is why the Congressional Black Caucus has been known over these four decades as the conscience of the Congress, and it has been an honor and a privilege for me, during my two terms, to serve in this august body. I want to yield for a moment to my colleague, Representative Joyce Beatty, and perhaps ask the question: What are some of the issues that you think are pressing as it relates to the Congressional Black Caucus moving forward, and what do you say to critics who make the argument, why is there a need for African Americans in the Congress to get together at this point on behalf of the communities we were elected to represent? Is there still a need for a Congressional Black Caucus in 2016?

Mr. JEFFRIES. I mentioned during my remarks that we have been on this journey of the 15th Amendment to the United States Constitution to try to guarantee the right to vote, regardless of race, coming out of the oppression of chattel slavery. And then we moved, Representative Beatty, from the 15th Amendment to this Jim Crow period and the 1965 Voting Rights Act to try to bring to life what is a fundamental tenet of American democracy, which is the ability of the people to represent those who will represent them in government--government of the people, by the people, and for the people. But yet, as a result of a recent Supreme Court decision, Shelby County v. Holder, the 1965 Voting Rights Act, section 4 and section 5, the preclearance provisions, have been eviscerated because of, in my view, an inappropriate reading of that statute relative to the United States Constitution. So the Congressional Black Caucus continues to fight to uplift for all Americans the ability to participate in our democracy. The shame is that voting in this country seems to have become a partisan issue, notwithstanding the fact that the Voting Rights Act has a great bipartisan tradition. It was passed with the support of Democrats and Republicans because, of course, we know at the time there were Dixiecrats in this Congress--Democrats, by registration, in the Deep South who fought hard against voting rights. So it took Republicans on the other side of the aisle in both the House and the Senate in order to get the legislation passed. It is interesting to me that, every year, the Voting Rights Act was reauthorized. Four times it was signed back into law by a Republican President: in 1970, Richard Nixon; 1975, Gerald Ford; 1982, Ronald Reagan; 2006, George W. Bush. So when we come to the floor of the House of Representatives or when I sit on the Judiciary Committee or we work with John Lewis and John Conyers and Terri Sewell and Jim Clyburn and others to try to move voting rights legislation forward, we are just saying: return to the great bipartisan tradition of making sure that every single American in this country has an opportunity to participate in the right to vote. Until that happens, the Congressional Black Caucus has an urgent issue that we need to deal with for the communities that we represent in African American or Latino neighborhoods and for all Americans. The other thing I will point out and ask my colleague to perhaps react to is that what I found fascinating here in terms of common ground, the opportunity to uplift everyone through the mission and the work of the Congressional Black Caucus, is the fact that when you look at persistently poor counties in America, counties that will be defined as 20 percent or more of the population living below the poverty line for 30 or more years, persistently poor counties, a majority of those counties are represented by Republicans in the House of Representatives and not by Democrats. So when Jim Clyburn, for instance, presents things like 10-20-30, a funding formula where 10 percent of any funding allocation will be given to communities where 20 percent or more of that county has been living below the poverty line for 30 or more years, it would actually benefit Republican-represented counties more than it would Democrat- represented counties. This is because the Congressional Black Caucus really is interested in uplifting the plight of all Americans who have been left behind. We are hoping that we can find some bipartisan cooperation in that area as well. I yield to Representative Joyce Beatty.