Zoe Lofgren

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Tennessee seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida received 11 votes for President and Michael R. Pence of the State of Indiana received 11 votes for Vice President.

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of California seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the State of Delaware received 55 votes for President and Kamala D. Harris of the State of California received 55 votes for Vice President.

Ms. LOFGREN. Madam Speaker, our duty today is significant but straightforward. We must count the votes of the electors as cast in the electoral college and announce the results. As discussed, our roles and responsibilities are established by the Constitution and Federal law, and they are clear. The facts before us are also clear. Pennsylvania submitted one slate of electors, as chosen by the voters of the State. The slate was certified according to State law. Now those lawful results must be counted and announced. Despite disinformation and any number of false claims that you may have heard, including here today, as former Attorney General Barr said: ``We have not seen fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election.'' This is not simply a conclusory statement. The results of the election have been litigated. The record is clear: The lawsuits challenging the election results failed. They failed because there is simply no evidence to support these baseless claims. Now, it is one thing to tweet a belief, quite another to provide actual evidence. These cases failed because there is no evidence. Judges ruled in the lawsuits that the 2020 election was sound. It should come as no surprise that Republican officeholders have recognized the election results as legitimate and accurately determined in an election that was conducted safely, securely, and with integrity. We all take an oath to support and defend the Constitution. As we near the end of the task before us, let's remember the beginning of the Constitution. Before Article II and the 12th Amendment, which spell out the electoral college, and before Article I, which creates Congress, the Constitution begins with the preamble. The preamble is short and bold: ``We the people.'' The people spoke in historic numbers. Their votes have been counted. Their choice is clear. It is time, as the law requires, to announce the state of the people's vote. The violence and disorder inflicted on our democracy by seditious rioters today is an indication of why adherence to our Constitution is so vital. I urge all of us to stand up for law, for democracy, for our Constitution, and to stand up for America and reject this objection.

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Alaska seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida received 3 votes for President and Michael R. Pence of the State of Indiana received 3 votes for Vice President.

Ms. LOFGREN. Madam Speaker, I rise to strike the last word.

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the Commonwealth of Virginia seems to be in regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the State of Delaware received 13 votes for President and Kamala D. Harris of the State of California received 13 votes for Vice President.

Ms. LOFGREN. Madam Speaker, this day marks a crossroads for American democracy. Those who object to the counting of the electoral college votes, which reflect the votes of the American people, want to substitute their preferences for the voters' choice. That is not what our Constitution requires, and it is at odds with our American democratic Republic. If Congress selects the next President instead of the American voters, we would have no need for an electoral college. In fact, we would have no need for Presidential elections at all. We would be moving from a government elected by the people to a government selected by those already governing. That is not America. In the United States, we abide by the choices of the people, not by an elite few. The Framers of our Constitution considered to have Congress select the President and specifically rejected it. Instead, they wrote Article II and the 12th Amendment. Article II creates the electoral college, where each State appoints electors. Laws of all 50 States and D.C. require electors to vote for the winner of the State's popular election. Each State provides for the orderly conduct of elections, including lawful challenges, recounts, and the like. The 12th Amendment is what brings us to today. It says the electors meet in their States. That happened December 14. The amendment says the electors shall cast their votes, sign and certify them, and transmit them to us, sealed. That has been done. The sealed envelopes containing the signed and certified ballots from each State's electors reflecting the votes of the people are in those mahogany boxes. The 12th Amendment directs the Vice President, as the President of the Senate, to do only this: open the sealed envelopes and then the votes shall be counted. Simple. It doesn't say counted in a manner that some Members of Congress or the Vice President might prefer. No. The votes are simply to be counted as certified and transmitted by the States. During reconstruction after the Civil War, more than one slate of electors were appointed by States. Dueling lists were sent and protracted processes were undertaken in Presidential elections. And, as a result, to make an orderly process, Congress enacted the Electoral Count Act of 1887. This law governs our proceedings today. The act provides dispute resolution mechanisms. Under the ECA, if a Governor certifies a slate of electors and there are no competing slates in that State, the Governor-certified must be counted. Today, every single slate of electors won by Joe Biden, or won by Donald Trump, got their Governor's certification. Not a single State submitted a competing slate. There is no dispute to resolve. The 2020 election was the most secure election conducted in modern history. Challenges were resolved by lawful recounts and audits. The result? Vice President Biden won the 2020 election. More than 60 lawsuits were filed contesting elements of the election process. None of these lawsuits prevailed. Why? As even President Trump's own judicial appointees ruled, there was no evidence of any wrongdoing that would change the outcome. The people spoke. It was not a close election. The margin of victory for Biden in 2020 was larger than Trump's margin in 2016. In fact, the Biden victory is one of the most decisive in modern times, exceeding the margin enjoyed by Reagan when he defeated Carter in 1980. Congress has gathered in a joint session to count electoral votes every four years since 1789. I understand the disappointment people feel when their candidate for President loses. I have felt the same several times in my voting life. When that happens, it is not an invitation to upend the Constitution and the laws of the United States. It is an invitation to work with the new President for the good of the country and to wait for the next election in 4 years if you are dissatisfied. In that spirit, I urge my colleagues to uphold the American democracy and reject the objection.

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Florida seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida received 29 votes for President and Michael R. Pence of the State of Indiana received 29 votes for Vice President.

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of Montana seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump from the State of Florida received 3 votes for President and Michael R. Pence from the State of Indiana received 3 votes for Vice President.

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of the State of North Dakota seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida received 3 votes for President and Michael R. Pence of the State of Indiana received 3 votes for Vice President.

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Madam Speaker, Ranking Member Rodney Davis and I wish to recognize today a special group of dedicated and outstanding employees of the Officers (Clerk of the House, Sergeant at Arms, and Chief Administrative Officer) and of the Inspector General of the U.S. House of Representatives, and congratulate those who have reached the milestone of 25 years of service to the U.S. House of Representatives. These remarkable and steadfast employees are an amazing asset for the House of Representatives. The work they accomplish is essential to keeping the operations and services of the House running efficiently and effectively. The employees we acknowledge today are commended for their hard work, dedication, professionalism, and teamwork; support of House Members, their staffs, and their constituents; and for their contributions day-in and day-out to the overall operations of the House. These employees, whose work is often performed behind the scenes, possess a wide range of responsibilities and skills that support the legislative process, ensure the security of this great institution, maintain our technology and service infrastructure, and contribute to more efficient and productive House support operations. These devoted employees have accomplished many great and important things in a diverse range of activities, and the House of Representatives, its Members, its staff, and the American public are better served because of them. We recognize and honor the individuals named below for 25 years of loyal service to the House. Collectively, the employees listed below have provided 100 years of service to the U.S. House of Representatives. Anne Binsted, Office of the Chief Administrative Officer. Kenneth Burch, Office of the Chief Administrative Officer. Philip Hamner, Office of the Chief Administrative Officer. Cynthia Hibbs, Office of the Chief Administrative Officer. On behalf of the entire House community, I want to once again congratulate, acknowledge, and thank these employees for their professionalism and commitment to the U.S. House of Representatives as a whole, and in particular to their respective House Officer, the Inspector General, and collaboratively across these organizations. Their long hours, hard work, diverse skills, and team spirit are invaluable, and their years of unwavering service and dedication to the House set an example for their colleagues and raises the bar for the employees who will follow in their footsteps. I applaud all our honorees, and I am proud to stand before you and our great nation on their behalf to recognize the importance of their public service.

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate and offer gratitude to Mr. Tom Carroll. The Architect of the Capitol (AOC) is losing a valuable member of the Capitol Hill community with his forthcoming resignation on December 11, 2020. Tom has accepted an amazing opportunity to lead facility operations at Columbia University in New York City, and we wish him the best in his new endeavor. An engineer by trade and a respected U.S. Air Force veteran, Tom has been an indispensable member of the Architect of the Capitol's team since joining in 2009. He came on board first as Deputy Superintendent for House Office Buildings and quickly moved up to become the Chief Financial Officer responsible for ensuring sound financial stewardship and providing value-added analysis to give insight into the financial implications of program decisions. Tom was again promoted to Assistant to the Architect for Operations and Services in 2018, and he had the honor of serving as the Acting Architect of the Capitol from August 2019 to January 2020. Tom's due diligence and leadership ensured hundreds of projects across the Capitol campus were delivered on-time, on-budget and with high quality. Tom's hard work and contributions to Capitol Hill will be greatly missed. Congress' loss is Columbia's gain.

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4990. Voting is the bedrock of our representative democracy. The integrity of our election infrastructure is essential to free and fair elections. Votes are cast and counted using a variety of systems, from hand-marked paper ballots to direct-recording electronic machines. There is a whole host of other technology that also supports the process, including electronic pollbooks, voter registration databases, and other components of comprehensive systems. I support H.R. 4990, the Election Technology Research Act of 2019, because it invests in science to bolster the resilience of election technology, and commend its sponsor, Representative Sherrill, for authoring the bill. This legislation is in keeping with other bills this House has passed in the 116th Congress to protect our democratic institutions, including H.R. 1 (the For the People Act), H.R. 2722 (the SAFE Act), and H.R. 4617 (the SHIELD Act). Russia attacked our democracy in 2016. Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation confirmed that Russian GRU officers ``targeted individuals and entities involved in the administration of the elections. Victims included U.S. state and local entities, such as state boards of elections (SBOEs), secretaries of state, and county governments, as well as individuals who worked for those entities. The GRU also targeted private technology firms responsible for manufacturing and administering election-related software and hardware, such as voter registration software and electronic polling stations.'' In July 2020, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) published an election infrastructure risk assessment. It found that ``compromises to the integrity of state-level voter registration systems, the preparation of election data (e.g., ballot programming), vote aggregation systems, and election websites present particular risk to the ability of jurisdictions to conduct elections.'' Our elections remain under threat from foreign adversaries. In August 2020, the Director of the United States Counterintelligence and Security Center said that foreign states may use the 2020 elections to ``seek to compromise our election infrastructure for a range of possible purposes, such as interfering with the voting process, stealing sensitive data, or calling into question the validity of the election results.'' H.R. 4990 is commonsense, bipartisan legislation that responds to these ongoing threats. It authorizes new research and standards for election infrastructure security. It directs the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the National Science Foundation (NSF) to carry out research that will increase the understanding of cyber and other threats to voting systems. It will lead to the development of technology, processes, and policies for more secure and accessible elections. This includes the cybersecurity of different components of voting systems, end-to-end verifiable systems, voter privacy and data protection, election auditing, interoperability of system technologies, and ballot tracking. Importantly, the bill also amends the Help America Vote Act to expand the definition of voting systems to include electronic pollbooks, voter registration databases, systems for carrying out post-election auditing, and related technology. This will lead to improved guidance to election administrators for these systems by the Election Assistance Commission and its partners, which include NIST. I am pleased to support H.R. 4990 and urge its passage.

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize and congratulate Sig Sanchez on his upcoming 100th birthday. Sig was born in Hollister, California as the second eldest of eleven children. Raised by his Spanish immigrant parents on his family farm, he would eventually have his own farm before entering public service. In our community, Sig is well known as a pillar of the community and champion of south Santa Clara County. Seven years ago, I rose to honor Sig's accomplishments and thank him for his dedication to our community. He spent over 55 years in public service before retiring, spending numerous years as a Gilroy City Councilmember and Mayor, before becoming a Santa Clara County Supervisor, and then joining as a Valley Water Board Director. He was a key player in the merger of water districts that allowed for full integration of all the county's reservoirs and groundwater facilities, as well as many other important projects. Sig guided the community through the floods in the 1980s and the 1987 drought. Sig's impact and influence is well documented in our community. He has been inducted into the Gilroy Hall of Fame and was named Man of the Year by Gilroy's Chamber of Commerce in 2013. Even a portion of Highway 101 is named after him. We are thankful for his many years of service and his presence in our community. Along with his family and friends, I extend my best wishes and heartfelt congratulations to Sig on his 100th birthday.

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 8015. This upcoming 2020 general election will be like no other we have witnessed. Americans will cast their vote to elect a new government amidst a dangerous pandemic that has devastated countless American families. To date, over 170,000 Americans have died due to COVID-19 and over 5.6 million Americans have been infected. The pandemic has disrupted our health, economy and our way of life, including our democratic traditions. Americans are rightfully worried about how to safely cast their vote this November. Public health experts agree that voters will be empowered to protect themselves and their families by having safe voting options, which includes absentee voting. Having the option to vote by mail ensures that voters who cannot vote in person don't have to choose between their health and their right to vote. The engine of voting by mail is the United States Postal Service. In every election, postal workers provide an essential service to our democracy by processing and delivering millions of absentee ballots for domestic, overseas and military voters. This November, several million Americans will depend on the Postal Service to exercise their right to vote. But in recent months, new leadership at the Postal Service directed drastic operational policy changes that disrupted mail processing and slowed mail delivery nationwide. The impact of the delays has been harmful to Americans, especially senior citizens, veterans and the sick, who depend on the Postal Service to receive medications, retirement checks and other essentials. Former Postal Service executives, election administrators and voter advocacy groups have warned that ongoing delays in mail services will likely disenfranchise voters that will cast absentee ballots this November. The Delivering for America Act will work to restore prompt and reliable mail delivery services to the American people. The bill rolls back the recent disruptive operational changes at the Postal Service and prohibits the Postal Service from implementing any further changes that will delay mail and reduce delivery standards. The bill also works to protect access to absentee voting and prevent voter disenfranchisement caused by delayed mail. It does this by ensuring that all election mail, including absentee ballots, will be treated as first-class mail, and will receive a postmark, or other indicia indicating date of receipt. In addition to protecting the absentee voting system, these changes will help maintain trust and confidence in the Postal Service. And lastly, the bill will appropriate much needed funding support to the Postal Service in the amount of $25 billion which will help ensure the long-term financial stability of the agency, and was requested by the Board of Governors appointed by President Donald Trump. As November 3rd nears, and the COVID-19 pandemic continues to threaten American life and health, our duty today, as representatives of the American people, is to safeguard the American people's right to essential mail services and the right to vote. The Delivering for America Act, if enacted, will put into the place the necessary measures to ensure we fulfill this duty, and so I urge my colleagues to support this critical legislation.

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize and honor Rick Doyle on his retirement. In 1979, Mr. Doyle was admitted to the California State Bar, after receiving his law degree from the University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law. For ten years he specialized in municipal finance and business litigation with the Law Firm of Jensen and Doyle. In 1989, he began working with the City of San Jose as a Senior Deputy Attorney and was later promoted to Chief Deputy Attorney in 1992. He left for five years to work as City Attorney in Concord, but returned to San Jose in 2000, to be City Attorney. In his twenty years of service since then, he has advised three different mayors, 38 councilmembers and six city managers during his tenure. Throughout this time, he has dedicated himself to helping San Jose move forward no matter what challenges arose. As City Attorney, Mr. Doyle, worked on a wide array of issues from lawsuits against the city, to bringing initiatives forward, to making sure that the process is fair and followed by everyone. With each day, he would face new and interesting challenges from negotiating with the FAA for a new San Jose Airport curfew, to advising the city during challenges to pension reductions for public employees. While his work was at times in the background to the public, his impact was great on our community. Mr. Doyle has helped navigate our city through many obstacles and through many changes. We thank him for his commitment to San Jose and for dedicating his life to public service. I wish him the very best in his retirement and on this exciting next stage of his life.

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Madam Speaker, I include in the Record the following exchange of letters on H.R. 7512: House of Representatives, Committee on Oversight and Reform, Washington, DC, July 24, 2020. Hon. Zoe Lofgren, Chairwoman, Committee on House Administration, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Chairwoman Lofgren: I am writing to you concerning H.R. 7512, a bill to rename the House Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards as the House Communications Standards Commission and for other purposes. There are certain provisions in the legislation which fall within the Rule X jurisdiction of the Committee on Oversight and Reform. In the interest of permitting your Committee to proceed expeditiously on this bill, I am willing to waive this Committee's right to sequential referral. I do so with the understanding that by waiving consideration of the bill, the Committee on Oversight and Reform does not waive any future jurisdictional claim over the subject matters contained in the bill which fall within its Rule X jurisdiction. I request that you urge the Speaker to name Members of this Committee to any conference committee which is named to consider such provisions. Please place this letter into the Congressional Record during consideration of the measure on the House floor. Thank you for the cooperative spirit in which you have worked regarding this matter and others between our respective Committees. Sincerely, Carolyn B. Maloney, Chairwoman.

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2420, as amended. H.R. 2420 would establish the National Museum of the American Latino in the Smithsonian Institution and begin the process of bringing bricks and mortar reality to the dream of having a museum dedicated to telling another part of the American story. The genesis of this museum dates to 1994 and a Smithsonian task force report titled ``Willful Neglect: The Smithsonian Institution and U.S. Latinos.'' This report found a serious underrepresentation of Latinos and their contributions to our history at the Smithsonian. In 2008 a commission was established to study the need for a museum. In 2011, the Commission to Study the Potential Creation of the National Museum of the American Latino issued its report. The Commission reported that ``the time has come for the creation of a new museum on the National Mall'' that ``reflects the contributions of Latinos to every aspect of American History and Culture.'' In February, I was pleased to chair a hearing examining this and other opportunities for growth at the Smithsonian. At that hearing, our colleague and sponsor of this legislation, Representative Jose Serrano testified that ``Latinos have left an indelible mark on our nation's history and helped shape it in ways that most Americans, and even many in our own community, are unaware. We have served in every war since the American Revolution, fighting bravely and paying a heavy price on behalf of our Nation. We write award-winning Broadway plays and films. We are sports heroes and legends. We have been on the frontlines of the fights for civil rights. We have shaped the music we all dance to, the food we eat, and countless other staples of American life. But Latino art and history is noticeably absent from recognition in many cultural institutions across the Nation, including the Smithsonian. To deny the telling of these stories not only does a disservice to our contributions and sacrifices, but also renders American history incomplete. There is no doubt that without the significant contributions of Latinos, the country we know today would be much different.'' Passage of the measure before us is just the next step in this journey. But it is a critical one. I will remind my colleagues that these projects, even once authorized, take many years to complete. The legislation authorizing the National Museum of African American History and Culture was enacted in 2003, and that wonderful museum opened its doors in 2016. At the hearing in February I noted that I represent San Jose and Santa Clara county. San Jose is home to northern California's largest Mexican American community. For years, I have seen firsthand how this community, and all of the communities in my district embody the American experience, and the stories that each tell make the story of America richer and more complete. Later today we will say honor the life of our colleague, the late Representative John Lewis. At the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington, John said ``We are one people; we are only family. We are all living in the same house--not just the American house but the world house. And when we finally accept these truths, then we will be able to fulfill Dr. King's dream to build a beloved community, a nation, and a world at peace with itself.'' Telling the stories of Latino Americans is necessary part of building a beloved community. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2420 and take the next step in this important journey.

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Madam Speaker, I rise to recognize the many contributions of Carmen Castellano to educational, philanthropic, and artistic pursuits in our San Jose community. Carmen has passed away at the age of 81 and is survived by her husband, Al, and their three children, Maria, Armando, and Carmela. This loss is deeply felt across our community. Carmen was born in Watsonville and graduated from Moreland Notre Dame High School, later completing the Executive Secretary program at Heald Business College. She worked as an Executive Secretary at Cabrillo College. I first met her when she worked as an administrative secretary and office manager at San Jose City College which she did for 33 years. During her time at City College, she was president of the classified employees' senate and co-founded the Latino Education Association. For her support of San Jose City College, the school named its arts center after her in 2012. I've never been a big fan of the California lottery, but it was wonderful and exciting when Carmen and Al won hundreds of millions in the lottery. It couldn't have happened to a nicer couple. When I knew Carmen and Al before the lottery win, I knew them as a team that was constantly volunteering for the community. I have very fond memories of the hours they dedicated to raising college scholarship money with the American GI Forum. It wasn't a surprise to me, then, that they took the lottery winnings and used them for good in our community. Almost immediately after their win, Carmen and Al formed the Castellano Family Foundation and started directing grants in support of Santa Clara County causes. They focused their Foundation on the Arts and Latino organizations, and it served to amplify artistic voices in our community. Through the Foundation, they helped fund a black-box theater at the MACLA gallery in downtown San Jose, the Castellano Playhouse, and, among many others, provided support to Cinequest, Teatro Vision, San Jose Jazz, and Los Lupenos de San Jose. The City of San Jose honored Carmen and Al for their work with the creative community with the Cornerstone of the Arts Award in 2015. In addition to the Castellano Family Foundation, Carmen was active on several Boards throughout the years, including the Board of the National Association of Latino Arts and Culture and the Latina Coalition of Silicon Valley, as well as the Santa Clara County Office of Education's Artspiration initiative steering committee. Admirably, Carmen pushed every organization that she worked with toward diversity and inclusion--toward equity. For many, she has been a role model and a beacon. Her legacy helps fuel the work that is still cut out for all of us in San Jose. Madam Speaker, it is a privilege to recognize and commend Carmen Castellano for her unwavering commitment to the vibrancy of our community. We miss her greatly.

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5581, the ``Access to Counsel Act of 2020'', a bill that will ensure that individuals who lawfully present themselves at our ports of entry are treated fairly and allowed to communicate with counsel and other parties if they are subjected to prolonged inspection. The Immigration and Nationality Act provides individuals in removal proceedings the right to representation at no expense to the government. Although federal regulations extend this right to immigration-related ``examinations,'' applicants for admission-- specifically those in primary or secondary inspection--are excluded unless they become the focus of a criminal investigation. However, our immigration laws are complex, and so are some questions regarding an individual's admissibility. Access to outside assistance is important to ensure that CBP has a complete understanding of the facts and the law before deciding admissibility. That is because grave consequences can result from being refused admission--consequences that extend well beyond simply turning around and getting back on a plane. Individuals who are refused admission may be unable to reunite with their families or receive critical medical care unavailable in their home country. They may be turned away from a U.S. employer who desperately needs their skills. Or they may be denied the opportunity to pursue higher education at a U.S. college or university. If that weren't enough, they could also be subject to a 5-year bar to returning to the United States if they are issued an expedited removal order. That is why this legislation is so critical. By allowing individuals who lawfully present themselves for inspection at a port of entry to communicate with counsel or other interested parties with information relevant to their request for admission, CBP will be better equipped to correctly resolve legal uncertainties and individuals will be treated more equitably. I would like to thank my friend and colleague, Representative Jayapal for her leadership and commitment to this issue. Her efforts led to the introduction of this legislation, and I urge all my colleagues to support the Access to Counsel Act.

Ms. LOFGREN. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2214 the ``National Origin-Based Antidiscrimination for Non immigrants Act,'' or NO BAN Act. I wish this bill was not necessary, but unfortunately, it is now more imperative than ever. As a result of the President's relentless attempts to rewrite our immigration laws, we must take immediate steps to rein in his repeated abuse of executive authority. As a candidate for president, Donald Trump promised to ban all Muslims from entering the United States, suggesting--without any evidence--that it would somehow make our country safer. Immediately upon entering office, he tried to make good on that promise. Ultimately, it took the President 10 months, 3 attempts, and the inclusion of a sham waiver process to craft a ban that stood up to Supreme Court scrutiny. In a decision rightly criticized by Justices Breyer and Sotomayor-- and many of us in this chamber--the majority concluded that despite statements calling for a ``total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States,'' the President's ban was somehow not inspired by blatant religious animus. Seeking to distance itself from these remarks, the Administration later claimed that the ban was necessary to keep our country safe from terrorist threats. And yet, a bipartisan coalition of more than 50 former national security officials found that rather than making our country safer, the ban actually undermines U.S. national security. H.R. 2214 not only invalidates the various iterations of the Muslim Ban, it also amends the authority the President relied on in invoking the ban--section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. But rather than gutting it, as some of my Republican colleagues have claimed, H.R. 2214 maintains its basic structure, and incorporates checks and balances to ensure that it can no longer be so flagrantly abused. H.R. 2214 will thus ensure that section 212(f) can only be used in a manner consistent with its intended purpose and historical norms, and that no President--Democratic or Republican--will be able to utilize it to usurp congressional authority. I would like to thank my friend and colleague, Representative Chu for her leadership and steadfast commitment to this issue. Her efforts led to the introduction of this legislation and I urge all of my colleagues to support the NO BAN Act.

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 7573, as amended. H.R. 7573 directs the Joint Committee on the Library to remove the bust of Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, the author of the Dred Scott decision in the Old Supreme Court Chamber with a bust of Justice Thurgood Marshall, and requires the Joint Committee on the Library to remove statues of Charles B. Aycock, James P. Clarke, and John C. Calhoun, as well as a bust of John C. Breckinridge. H.R. 7573 would also amend section 1814 of the Revised Statutes (2 U.S.C. 2131) to change the criteria for those eligible for inclusion to prohibit those who ``served as an officer or voluntarily with the Confederate States of America or of the military forces or government of a State while the State was in rebellion against the United States.'' The Architect of the Capitol would be charged with identifying those statues which do not meet the revised criteria and the Joint Committee on the Library would remove the statues and turn them over to the Smithsonian Institution or their respective states, if desired. As Chairperson of the House Fine Arts Board and the Vice Chairperson of the Joint Committee on the Library I am more than pleased to remove these symbols of cruelty and bigotry from the halls of the Capitol. This has been a long time coming, and it is long past time to act. The United States Capitol is one of the most visible, and most visited, symbols of liberty, freedom and democracy in the entire world. Who we choose to honor in this space is uniquely indicative of our values and principles. Contrary to those who argue in opposition to this long overdue action, this action does not seek to erase history nor ask that we forget that history. We must never forget the shameful scar of slavery, segregation and racism. Instead this is about who we honor. When we think about the holocaust the words ``never forget'' admonish us to always remember the millions murdered by the Nazis. But we do not accomplish that by erecting a statue of Adolf Hitler to put in a place of honor. Those who violently rebelled against our government upon the belief, as Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens infamously said, ``that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition,'' and those who enabled and protected the practice of holding human beings as property deserve no place of honor in the halls of our nation's Capitol. Slavery is the ``original sin'' of our country, and its disastrous effects are felt to this day. It is long past time to remove these symbols of bigotry and cruelty from the halls of Congress, and it is long past time to repair the lasting damage their hatred and racism has visited on the fabric of this country. The removal of these symbols from the People's House is a necessary step in this long-overdue work, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 7573 and in working to right the wrongs of the past to better perfect the promises of our country.

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor a musical icon and celebrated community member, Eddie Gale, who passed away on July 10, 2020. Since making his home in San Jose in 1972, he enriched many lives through his music and community involvement. An accomplished jazz musician and trumpeter, Eddie Gale, grew up in New York. He was the third of five children of Edward and Daisy Stevens. His young life was filled with music, from gospel at Rose Hill Baptist Church, to his Cub Scout's marching band where he played the bugle, to his lessons with jazz legend, Kenny Dorham. In the early 1960s, Eddie Gale joined Sun Ra's Arkestra and released two Blue Note albums in 1968 and 1969. Throughout his career, he played alongside acclaimed jazz figures including John Coltrane, Cecil Taylor, Jackie McLean, Larry Young, Art Blakey, Elvin Jones, and Max Roach. After moving to the West Coast, Eddie Gale started to focus on teaching and sharing music with local youths. He was an Artist in Residence at Stanford and San Jose State University. He also worked with Monroe Middle School, McClymonds High School, EastSide Arts Alliance, and Black Dot Artists Collective. To create spaces where music could thrive, he helped establish the Evergreen Youth Adult Jazz Society, the We're Jazzed! Youth/Adult Jazz Festival and the annual Concert for World Peace and Peace Poetry Contest. Mr. Gale was an important part of Bay Area music culture and was known as ``San Jose's Ambassador of Jazz.'' He was also named an Ambassador of Music, from the Association of World Citizens, San Francisco. His dedication to sharing music was well known in the Bay Area. He received the Jefferson Award for community service in the arts and received the Sankofa Award from the California Arts Council for 25 years of service in the arts for training youth and adults in music. In the community, he coordinated the giveaway of trumpets and helped raise money for the Bay Area Jazz Musicians Self-Help Healthcare Project. Eddie Gale made a lasting impression on our community through his music and service to others. He is survived by his wife, Georgette, three of his siblings, his six children, 12 grandchildren and 11 great grandchildren. I enjoyed the many times I was able to talk with Eddie and to enjoy his music. I join Mr. Gale's family, colleagues, and our neighbors in expressing my great sense of loss and appreciation for the 78 years he shared with us. He will be dearly missed but he leaves our community and world a better place.

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 965, a measure to ensure that the House can continue to govern during the coronavirus pandemic. The proposals before us offer new ways to conduct our legislative business. In some respects, they present new tools for governing--but they are within our authority to implement and they are not intended to replace our regular order. To the contrary, they present a fallback option to ensure that the House can continue to lead during this crisis, and as the resolution makes clear, they are intended to be used only during extraordinary circumstances. And there can be no doubt that these are extraordinary times. We know that to date, about 1.4 million Americans have already contracted this deadly virus. To put this in perspective, that's more than the entire population of my hometown, San Jose, California, which is the tenth largest city in the country. In just three months, more Americans have died from the coronavirus than were killed in all the wars we have fought in more than a half century combined--including in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan. According to one model, which the White House has relied on, by August of this year the toll could be as high as 147,000 deaths. That's nearly twice as many as the same model forecast only two weeks ago. At the same time, we face dire economic conditions. In the past eight weeks, more than 36.5 million unemployment claims have been filed, and the unemployment rate has quadrupled, soaring to 14.7 percent. It has previously been estimated that the nation's highest ever unemployment rate was 24.9 percent, during the Great Depression in 1933. Yesterday, California's Employment Development Department released new data which show that the unemployment rate in my state may already be 24.4 percent. The coronavirus pandemic has affected nearly every aspect of our daily lives, upending businesses and grinding our economy to a halt. This crisis demands legislative action and oversight. However, the health guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the advice of the Attending Physician show that there are significant challenges to the House operating as if nothing has changed, including the need for social distancing, use of masks or facial coverings, cancelling any gatherings of more than 250 individuals or more than 10 individuals in a high-risk category, and others. Moreover, we are still learning about how this highly contagious deadly virus is spread and what steps can be taken to mitigate its further spread. I represent Santa Clara County, which experts now believe suffered the first death from the coronavirus in the United States. But experts did not know until mid-April that a death which occurred on February 6 was actually a result of the coronavirus. I am mindful that many people are putting themselves at risk by working on the frontlines every day: from doctors and nurses, to police officers, firefighters, and paramedics, to transit workers and truck drivers, among others. As the daughter of a truck driver and a cafeteria cook, I deeply appreciate everything all of these people are doing to support their communities and the country, even at risk to their own health. However, we in Congress have an option that most of these vital frontline workers do not: we can do our work remotely in a safe, secure, online format. It is clear that we need rules that allow the House to conduct oversight of the coronavirus response, mark up legislation, and take votes on the House Floor without needlessly putting Members, Capitol Police, staff, press, and non-partisan institutional staff at risk. The resolution before us would provide mechanisms to do just that, both at the committee level and on the House floor. A series of events this week prove that the highest levels of our government recognize the need to adapt our work to the 21st century-- and that we can do so in a safe, secure, and transparent way. The Supreme Court--which has long resisted modest attempts to increase transparency and public access to its proceedings--heard oral arguments by conference call, as it has done during the pandemic. Those important cases involve critical congressional oversight prerogatives. The Senate held a hearing that included remote participation, as it has done during the pandemic. This time, it included an entire panel of witnesses testifying remotely, as well as a Chairman and Ranking Member who led the hearing remotely, in addition to other Senators. For its part, the executive branch recognized the legitimacy and need for these virtual proceedings by participating in the proceedings of both the legislative and judicial branches--including by having high ranking members of the White House Task Force testify remotely in a Senate hearing about the Administration's response. Expanding congressional activity online ensures that we can continue to act, while reserving precious testing equipment and supplies for frontline workers who don't have jobs that can be performed remotely. The House has not always been quick to adopt technology to its legislative procedures. It is not unusual for any institution steeped in history and precedent to resist technological change. That was the case for the House when it came to advances like electronic voting and televising our proceedings--both of which we take for granted today. The first bill to permit a form of electrical and mechanical voting was introduced in 1886, but the House did not take its first electronic vote until 1973, nearly 90 years later. Similarly, it took more than 40 years from the time Members of the House first appeared on live television to the time that cameras were allowed to broadcast live proceedings on the House floor. Resistance to technological change for governing has not been unique to the House. The Senate took another seven years after the House to permit television coverage of its proceedings, and it still does not permit electronic voting. Even today, the Supreme Court does not televise its proceedings. Yet, as we have seen this week, both of those institutions have recognized that we are living in extraordinary times, and that it is essential to change the way they operate. We can--and we must--act swiftly to ensure that Congress can continue its legislative and oversight work online during these unique and extraordinary times. Working with Leader Hoyer, Chairman McGovern, and the staffs of the Rules and House Administration committees, together we have prepared a proposal that encompasses two distinct components: remote, directed voting on the House floor, and remote committee hearings and markups to ensure that we can continue to develop additional legislative solutions and carry out oversight of the Administration's response. For committee operations, the resolution provides for the use of suitable, secure online platforms for committee proceedings. The intent of the resolution is not to provide an advantage to either the majority or the minority, but to permit committees' proceedings to have the same status and significance as if they were held entirely in-person. For voting on the floor, we will rely on a secure email system, coupled with Member-driven, remotely-directed authorizations. This system would use secure email for proxy votes: a solid, well known, resilient technology with very low bandwidth requirements that we understand very well from a cybersecurity standpoint. These new provisions build on steps we have already taken to expand the use of technology during the pandemic to promote social distancing and other safeguards consistent with the advice of the Attending Physician and the CDC. For example, last month the Speaker directed the creation of an electronic hopper to permit the virtual submission of all Floor documents--including bills, resolutions, co-sponsors and extensions of remarks--via a dedicated and secure email system. Since the policy took effect, 489 measures have been filed, and of those, 482 measures were filed electronically and just 7 were filed using the old process. And in my capacity as Chairperson of the Joint Committee on Printing, I directed the GPO to accept for publication in the Congressional Record extensions of remarks submitted with a Member's electronic signature. Under this new, more convenient system Members have filed 356 extensions of remarks by email. I represent Silicon Valley, which has become synonymous around the world for technology and the spirit of innovation. We in Congress must adopt the entrepreneurial spirit and openness to new technology that made that community a global leader and apply it to the procedural and logistical challenges we face in our legislative operations--as well as to a strategy to respond to and overcome the coronavirus.

Ms. LOFGREN

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, during this unique and difficult time for our nation, I support The Heroes Act to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic and the related economic catastrophe. This bill will provide relief to my constituents in California's 19th District by providing nearly $1 trillion for state and local governments and the added flexibility to use these funds to address significant revenue shortfalls. The State of California is projecting a $54 billion shortfall through the next fiscal year, and this additional funding and flexibility will help maintain various health and welfare programs as well as keep our teachers, first responders, public health and other essential workers employed. Throughout the pandemic, more than 3,000 constituents and small business owners have contacted me to share the financial hardships they are facing. The Heroes Act addresses these challenges with a second round of direct payments for individuals and families, an extension of unemployment benefits, and $175 billion for rental and mortgage assistance. Plus, it strengthens the Paycheck Protection Program and expands eligibility to nonprofits of all sizes. The bill also makes key investments in food security by boosting SNAP maximum benefits by 15 percent and nearly doubling the minimum monthly benefit from $16 to $30. The bill provides $25 billion for the Postal Service to prevent its demise during this time when increasing numbers of Americans rely on it as a lifeline to receive medicine and vital materials. COVID-19 has put an enormous strain on our education system, and this bill provides critical relief for students and schools. Our Santa Clara County institutions of higher education will be eligible for direct emergency funding and billions more will be available for California to support elementary and secondary schools. The Heroes Act also provides $7 billion for childcare providers and extends student loan debt relief. The Heroes Act is also forward-facing, with $75 billion for testing, tracing, and treatment. California has been following science and medical professionals, and our national plan for reopening must also be strategic and science-based. As Chair of the Immigration and Citizenship Subcommittee, I authored provisions to provide temporary protections for essential critical immigrant infrastructure workers and help keep detention centers safe. As Chair of the Committee on House Administration, I secured safeguards for our democracy, including funding and protections to ensure elections can be held in 2020. Working with the Chair of the Rules Committee, I helped craft provisions that bring Congress into the 21st Century, which will allow the House to play a full and robust legislative and oversight role during the pandemic. A crisis of this magnitude requires bold legislative actions, and this bill will provide relief for American workers, families, students, small businesses, and healthcare systems. I vow to continue working with my colleagues in the House and Senate to help jumpstart our economic recovery and address specific community needs during and after this public health emergency.