Gregory Meeks

Mr. MEEKS

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, there is no more sacred responsibility of government than to ensure the safety and well-being of the American people and ensure that their human rights are respected. Tragically, the authoritarian regime in the Kremlin has taken to the practice of using that commitment against us, taking our citizens hostage for political leverage. In last year's State Department authorization act, which passed in the annual NDAA, we included additional tools for the State Department to address hostage taking. These include quicker notifications to Congress, expanded whistleblower rewards programs, and greater resources for the State Department. I look forward to these changes being put to use. In Evan's case, we can take an important step by passing this resolution and condemning hostage diplomacy in the strongest possible terms. We must continue to express support for the efforts of the administration to secure Evan's return and demonstrate our commitment to Evan and Paul, and all other Americans wrongfully detained overseas, for as long as it takes. As I close, I again thank Chairman McCaul for partnering with me on this important resolution. I hope my colleagues will join us unanimously in supporting this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this bipartisan resolution, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I am a strong supporter of H. Res. 377, calling for the immediate release of Evan Gershkovich, a United States citizen and journalist who was wrongfully detained by the Government of the Russian Federation in March 2023. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman McCaul for working with me to introduce H. Res. 377 in a bipartisan fashion. We may disagree on many issues in this body, but it is essential that the safe return of American citizens wrongfully detained overseas is not one of them. I appreciate the cooperation and the work together that Mr. McCaul and I do on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Evan Gershkovich, a journalist working in one of the most difficult media environments in the world, has dedicated his life to truth. His reporting has shed light on Russia's handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, the struggling Russian economy, and its horrific war against the people of Ukraine. With his detention, Russia has once again stooped to the lowest of lows, detaining an American journalist for the first time since the Cold War. He is detained on baseless charges to gain political leverage and further silence the brave members of the independent press who are undeterred by Russian threats. Evan, like Paul Whelan, like Brittney Griner, like Trevor Reed before him, continues to be denied his rights by Russian authorities, who are throwing up roadblock after roadblock to prevent our Embassy from getting access to him while he remains in detention. The sham legal processes he is subjected to are conducted without evidence, without transparency, and without due process. While the administration, with the unanimous support of this Congress, was able to secure the release of Trevor and Brittney, we must continue to do everything, and I mean everything, in our power to ensure that Evan and Paul are brought home safely to their families, as well. For as long as necessary, we must state unequivocally that we stand with Evan, that we stand with Paul, that we stand with their families suffering tremendous emotional and financial strain as a result of their detentions. By passing this resolution, we can do just that. I support this measure and hope we can continue to work in a bipartisan fashion with the executive branch on this and other critical legislation to better support Americans like Evan and their families. I encourage my colleagues, all of us, to join in supporting this measure. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MEEKS

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Dingell).

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time for the purpose of closing. Mr. Speaker, for far too long, Paul Whelan has suffered at the hands of the regime in the Kremlin. For far too long, he has been forced to endure the horrific conditions in a Russian labor camp, wondering when he will finally be able to see his family again. For far too long, he has been left to wonder whether he has been forgotten by the government that the Kremlin is using him to extort. By passing this legislation and taking other important steps to support Paul, to support Evan, and other Americans wrongfully detained overseas, we can speak with one voice, a single voice, that the United States Government will not rest until he and others like him are finally brought home to their families. One voice, that is what we will do today. I know that my colleagues will join me in support of this very important resolution. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MEEKS

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Torres), a friend.

Mr. MEEKS

Mr. MEEKS. As I said, we have seen companies employ these structures to access the public markets and open their profits to everyday investors. That is what it is about, the everyday investors. Open those profits so that we can see what they are, while still retaining the vision and the direction of their founders so it doesn't stop it. It makes sure there is transparency and information. Information is at the core of any well-working capital market system and more robust information is always best for investors. This bill will ensure that Main Street can make an informed decision as they look to invest in tomorrow's next successful business. Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge support of H.R. 2795, the Enhancing Multi-Class Share Disclosures Act. I thank Ranking Member Waters for her leadership, her continued support of this legislation as she just articulated, as well as Chairwoman Wagner, for her support so that we really have a bipartisan bill coming together for something that is really important. This bill, as indicated by both Ms. Waters and Mrs. Wagner, closes documented gaps in transparency around multi-class governance and structures for the benefit of traditional investors, which is important because traditional investors often come from Main Street, and we want to make sure that Main Street has all of the information it needs to go further with Wall Street. These structures, while they may add value, can pose, as indicated, significant risks for investors. As also indicated, multi-class governance structures allow corporate insiders or beneficial owners to own an outsized amount of voting power relative to their shares. This could limit other investors' abilities to influence management, direct strategy, and hold misaligned boards accountable. Accountability, having a voice, that is what this bill does. Let me be clear: I want to make sure that multi-class governance structures, while they do have their value, we know reforms are necessary, and their outright ban would do little for Main Street investors looking to gain a return on their next startup. We have seen companies employ these structures to access the public markets and open their profits to everyday investors, while still retaining the vision and direction of their founders. Information is at the core of any well-working capital market system.

Mr. MEEKS

Mr. MEEKS. Madam Speaker, I ask, where are they? Where did they go? Where are they? Did they leave us for a recession, allowing revenues to fall and borrowing costs to skyrocket? Where are they? Capital markets alone will be out of reach, and many small businesses won't make their payroll at the end of the month. Where are they? The world is looking at us and questioning our leadership and where we are going to move and how we are going to save our own people and our values. Where are they in this time of need? I know where the Democrats are. They are right here talking about how we will stand for them and not allow this Republican-made default on America last. Where are they? They need to get back here and get back here now for the sake of the American people. The world is watching us. They are looking. They are saying that we may not have to worry about our competitors. We don't have to worry about them. We have to worry about our MAGA Republicans who have decided to leave and not address the issues that are most important to America today. Where are they? Come on back here and get to work.

Mr. MEEKS

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close. The Foreign Affairs title of this bill should be about addressing the root causes of migration; about fixing the crime, corruption, poverty, and discrimination that causes people to flee north. The men and women coming to our borders do so reluctantly. They do not want the pain of leaving parents and children behind for an unknown time while they seek refuge in an unfamiliar land. They want to see their daughters when they come home from work, not on a video call. They want to hear their siblings' voices at the dinner table, not on a Zoom. The way to address the root causes of migration is through aid, assistance, investment, collaboration, and rule of law guidance. If we refuse to fund such programs and efforts, we are being penny-wise and pound-foolish; ignoring our hemispheric neighbors until they are knocking on our front door. What we need to do is address the root causes. This legislation is not in line with national security interests, our values, or our goals of curbing the migration crisis. It only exacerbates the situation on the border while reinstating the same inhumane policies that have endangered migrants. We have seen that done by the former administration. We have seen the actions. We know who he is, and we know why he put some of those policies forward. I can't close without saying that Chairman McCaul is a good man. I work with him on the committee. We talk and we debate and we do things. I don't want this to end with anyone thinking that I don't think Mr. McCaul is a good human being. He is. We do that together. However, I do have questions. I hear a lot of talk about President Biden and what he is doing or what his motivations are, et cetera. I, too, have questions about the policies of former President Trump. Coming from New York, I have been around a lot and seen and heard his motivations, particularly as it pertains to the bills that he put forward in regard to migration, and I know what he thinks of immigrants. I know what the former President thinks of immigrants. Why? Because he said it. He has said things that have been shocking to me, that reveal what he thought and why he put forward the principles that he started. It is not me making it up. Over 34 times he called these immigrants who are trying to come for better lives animals. That is not how we should look at these poor individuals who are running from crises, as they are doing in Afghanistan, Ukraine, Venezuela, and other parts of Latin America. I know because I come from New York. I have seen what he has done to his own employees and how he has treated them. I know because I heard from his own mouth, calling countries on the continent of Africa and in the Caribbean and South America ``asshole countries.'' I know because he also just wanted to put a ban on people because of their religious beliefs. I know because even after people were convicted in the Central Park 5 in New York, he still called them vicious names. I know his motivations, and that is reflective in the policies that he has passed. That is why we should not be supporting this bill. That is not who we are as Americans. Let's fight to show the rest of the world who we really are, that we want to take care, as that statue in New York City stands with that lady holding the torch--give me your tired, your poor. That is who we became as a country, not the motivations of the former President and his policies. This bill is a step in the wrong direction. It is in the wrong direction. Our partners in the region are watching us very closely today. I have been talking to those leaders. I have been talking to people from the various countries in Central and South America, many of whom are in my district. This is not the way to go. Mr. Speaker, I urge the Members of this august body, let's not fall into the same mistakes of the past. Let's sit down and figure out how we can work together in a bipartisan way for a strong immigration reform bill, so we can treat humans as humans, so we can show our actions are similar to what we pray. Whether we are in a church or a synagogue or a mosque, we pray for the poor and the helpless; we want to make a difference. We have an opportunity to do that. We have an opportunity to make sure that we keep our borders safe by dealing with the root causes of migration and treating people in a humane way, not just considering those in law enforcement, but thinking about the people. When I see their hands on the gates asking for a better life, saying all I want to do is see my child have an opportunity, and I am willing to go through whatever the process is. Let's think about them. Let's think about those images. Let's think about how we can do better. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from California.

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Davis).

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Castro), the ranking member on the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee.

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 2. Title III of this bill happens to fall under the House Foreign Affairs Committee's jurisdiction. There is undoubtedly a need to fix our broken immigration system. I think that we can all agree. It is undoubtedly correct that Congress needs to get involved in that. What Congress is not doing is talking about coming together for comprehensive immigration reform. If we want to get at the heart of how to improve, in a humane way, and protect our borders, we would be locked together to talk about comprehensive immigration reform that will keep us true to who we are and our values. Sometimes when I am listening to this debate and some of the policies that are here, I am saying: Who are we? Who are we as a people, as a nation? Do we practice what we preach, or do we say to others: Do what we say, not what we do? American values are important here. Title III seeks to codify and reinstate the Trump administration's failed Migrant Protection Protocols, known as MPP, and remain in Mexico policy. This is a disturbing and ineffective policy that returned asylum seekers at the border of Mexico and only allowed them to enter the United States for their court proceedings. Listening to my colleague: Return them to Mexico. That is it. Because there are thousands of backlogged cases and too few judges to effectively handle them, those that we return to Mexico, these asylum seekers, are forced to live in Mexican border towns for long periods of time. As a result of that, the exact same thing that my colleague talked about, these border towns in Mexico are the ones that are dangerous. They are the reason why people are raped. That is where the violence and the crime is. They do not have, these towns in Mexico, the capacity to safely house the thousands of people fleeing their countries of origin. We know that migrants face violence of all kinds, including murder, rape, trafficking, and kidnapping as they await their court appearance, the very things that we do agree is happening to these individuals, but we put blinders on. Just send them back. That will solve the problem of them living in tent encampments without adequate access to the basics. Just send them back to Mexico. Let them stay there with no clean water, no sanitation, no shelter, and no health services. Send them back. We don't care. The MPP puts tens of thousands of migrants in greater danger, including families with children who we are supposed to care about. It also puts America at odds with our regional partners in ways that were and still are a detriment to our national security and our global standing. Like Mr. McCaul, I have been here for 25 years. I have many families in my district who come to me all of the time with humanitarian concerns, asking for us to pass comprehensive immigration reform. While nations like Colombia and Peru took in millions of Venezuelans crossing their border in desperate need of safety, America, the United States of America, the most resourced Nation on Earth, a Nation of immigrants, turn our backs on asylum seekers and our very own values in the name of deterrence. Turn our backs. We don't care. Send them back. As CARICOM continues to work in a regional and multilateral way to find solutions to help Haiti, our neighbor in crisis, this body debates unilateral action that fails to see the collective challenge facing this hemisphere. This bill is more than just shortsighted; it is cruel and harmful to our interests. We should be embarrassed, absolutely embarrassed, that Colombia's migration agency had suspended a program meant to return Colombian nationals found at the U.S. border with Mexico due to ``cruel and degrading treatment.'' Come on now. We are facing a regional and global migration crisis. We have strong and divergent opinions about improving an imperfect immigration process and how to address the recent surge in migration since the pandemic. But Title III of this bill seeks to codify and reinitiate failed processes from the last administration that do not solve the real-life challenges regarding the movement of people, those people fleeing from instability and violence and lack of economic opportunity and education in their home countries. Why? Because, apparently, we don't care. We don't care. Send them back. Who cares what happens to them? Send them back. We don't have comprehensive immigration reform to make sure that we are working and fixing the system because that is what we should be working on. This isn't the first surge of migrants on our border, and it won't be the last, particularly as climate change will further limit resources and displace people across the region. To solve complex multicountry challenges, we must invest in multilateral solutions. When we invest in multilateral solutions, as we do in other parts of the world, that is how we win--not America alone, America by ourselves. That is not leadership. No one follows you if you are just by yourself, not working with others and not working with our allies. The Los Angeles Declaration on Migration and Protection from the Summit of the Americas in 2022 included proposals for collaborative problem solving on this issue with leaders across the region to address the root causes of forced displacement and irregular migration. Working with our allies, as we are doing in other parts of the world, as we are doing with our NATO allies, as we are doing with our EU allies, as we are doing with our Indo-Pacific allies, we should be doing the same thing with our Western Hemisphere allies. Why? Because our strength is not rooted in the sticks that we use to coerce outcomes. It is in the depth of our relationships and collaboration across the region to address the root causes of forced displacement and a regular migration, including by combating corruption and impunity, upholding our obligations to protect refugees, and partnering to promote opportunity and prosperity for people and communities, especially those most vulnerable across the region. When I get on my knees at night and pray, when I am in church and pray, I pray for the poor and for those who cannot care for themselves. When I read books that I believe in, they talk about taking care of the poor, taking care of those who can't take care of themselves. When I eat my dinner, my lunch, or my breakfast and I pray, I say: Bless those who are hungry and have no food. Bless those who may have food and no appetite. Bless those who have less than me. We are the richest country in the world. Let's work toward resolving the root causes. This bill doesn't address the migration crisis. It only creates further chaos by shutting the door on mechanisms that reunite families. That is what I believe. That is what I pray. That is what I think mankind is all about or should be all about, keeping people safe from perilous journeys to our borders. These attempts to sow seeds of fear and distrust about migrants are as counterproductive as they are reprehensible. Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, the broader bill undermines Congress' bipartisan work to grant humanitarian parole to hundreds of thousands of Afghans. We have been working together on that, and we should be working together to help those who are trying to cross the border from our Western Hemisphere allies. But this also prevents and goes against thousands of Afghans, Ukrainians, and others, by restricting DHS parole authority. If we are truly interested in a constructive agenda that is aimed at providing viable and durable solutions to migration challenges, I stand ready. Democrats stand ready to collaborate on addressing the root causes of migration through congressional action, through working on comprehensive immigration reform to try to make sure that we lead by example and we live true to our values, that we become the shining example for others in other countries who are looking at us to see how we react to it. We should do that by showing in a bipartisan way we are ready for comprehensive immigration reform. We will do it in a bipartisan way. We will do it so that we can also maintain our values and who we are--at least who we say we are--as a nation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Kamlager-Dove), an esteemed member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman.

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MEEKS

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time for the purpose of closing. I, again, oppose this resolution because it is not an effective or constitutionally sound approach to resolving the war powers questions in Somalia that many of us here are, in fact, looking to address. This resolution will harm U.S. interests in the Horn of Africa and make the American people less safe. Mr. Speaker, I say to my colleagues who are serious about asserting Congress' constitutional role on issues of war and peace: I have some encouragement from this debate that we will have further debates talking about Congress' responsibility. I look forward to joining with the gentleman from Florida where I heard him talk about how climate change is affecting many of the areas on the continent. I look forward to working with him in that regard. I look forward to working with him and hope that we can get the Speaker to bring over the repeal of the AUMF of 2002 that the Senate recently has voted on that we passed 2 years ago in the 117th Congress. I will come out of here looking at some areas on which we can work collectively. I urge the gentleman to join me to talk and work so that we can repeal and replace the 2001 AUMF with a narrower and time-bound scope. The issues we are discussing here today are pressing and relevant, but there is a better approach. I look forward to undertaking that approach with both of my colleagues on the floor and all of my colleagues on a bipartisan basis and hope that we will have this conversation and work closely together. Let me also make a correction. I gave credit to General Kelly on the statement of if we don't put more money into diplomacy, we have got to spend more on bullets. That was General James Mattis. I want to make sure I give proper credit to the proper person in our military. Let's work together. I think we have a real window of opportunity. The President of South Korea, who just gave a wonderful speech here, talked about how we won World War II and the Korean war together with our allies, saving democracies, putting our values first. Let's do it. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing this resolution, and let's work together in a bipartisan manner, particularly to help the continent of Africa, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H. Con. Res. 30. This resolution was drafted in such a way that it is simultaneously overbroad and underinclusive. The resolution fails to end our involvement in hostilities in the region while preventing crucial security cooperation with local partners in Somalia. The resolution states that the United States forces must withdraw from Somalia, unless they are there for the purposes of protecting the Embassy. Historically, war powers resolutions such as this are thought of as attempting to force the President to withdraw American troops from a foreign country that are actively engaged in combat, but our forces on the ground in Somalia are there to provide security training and intelligence support. Our footprint in Somalia is not large. We have several hundred troops stationed in the country primarily to train host-nation troops in countering terrorism. The sponsor of this legislation sometimes references the lost blood and treasure from our overseas engagements. These are obviously essential considerations. It is why I supported President Biden's decision to end the war in Afghanistan. But no American has been killed in Somalia in over 4 years, and our security cooperation and assistance to the country amounts to a rounding error in the Federal budget. It is a fact that Al-Shabaab and other terrorist organizations like ISIS control large swaths of territory in Somalia, but local forces from the Somali Government and the African Union Transition Mission in Somalia have made steady gains the past several years. United States forces have been instrumental in some of these changes because of the very training and intelligence support we provide to local forces on the ground. By mandating that our forces cease security cooperation in Somalia, this resolution would roll back some of the gains that have been made to take back territory from terrorist organizations in the past several years. This measure doesn't end American hostilities in the region. It includes nothing about removing American forces from other nations in the region where groups like Al-Shabaab operate, and it does nothing to address over-the-horizon strikes. While I disagree with this measure, let me say that what I do agree with is that we are having this debate. It is one that is long overdue. American forces have been in Somalia and other parts of the world without proper engagement from the United States Congress. While I understand the logic that both Republican and Democratic administrations have used to include groups like Al-Shabaab under the 2001 AUMF, I can tell you that Members of Congress did not believe that they were authorizing force against Al-Shabaab when we passed the legislation decades ago. I can tell you this not just because I was here when Congress voted on that AUMF but because Al-Shabaab didn't even exist in September 2001. I believe, though, that the proper way to address the issues of matters of war and peace in Somalia is not through a legally dubious resolution such as this. I agree with Representative James in this, and we should work together, all three of us, I believe, because the right way to address this issue is through a repeal of the 2001 AUMF and its replacement with a narrow force authorization that provides the President authority to combat selected terrorists in selected countries where the United States' national security is at stake. Mr. Speaker, I have introduced just such a resolution, and I look forward to working with my colleagues on that. H.J. Res. 52, which narrows the list of terrorist organizations the executive branch can strike, limits the number of countries in which we could engage in hostilities, places curbs on executive branch additions of associated forces and successor groups, and includes a sunset requiring Congress to reauthorize the legislation. Reasserting Congress' proper role over matters of war and peace while ensuring that the President has the necessary authorities to strike those who mean to do us harm can be and is a tough balance to strike. I believe wholeheartedly it is our responsibility to make some of those hard decisions. We cannot punt it or give it off just to the executive. I am willing to work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to strike a balance. Let's take a look at H.J. Res. 52. From the debate we are having today, I think that we have some of the basics of what we agree with, that it is this body that the Constitution empowered to make sure there are checks and balances on the executive. Unfortunately, I cannot say that about H. Con. Res. 30 before us today. Therefore, I must oppose this legislation, urge my colleagues to do the same. Let's come together as Members of the United States House of Representatives and take our responsibility. Let's repeal and replace the 2001 AUMF and move forward. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let me just say, this debate is long overdue. We happen to be talking about the AUMF. I would hope that we end up having more debates on this floor talking about the continent of Africa, who has long been left off the debate in the United States Congress, which is a continent that we have got to focus on. I look forward to working with Mr. James as the chair of that subcommittee. We need to focus on the stability of Africa, the stability of its governments and its institutions, because if we don't, it is at our own danger. We should be doing it because it is the right thing. We should be listening to those allies that we have on the continent and to those Presidents, because they are the ones who are at threat and in danger of being destroyed by terrorist groups who have now moved over the continent. We have got to have this debate more and more and make sure that Africa is on our front burner, not our back burner. Because if Africa continues to be on our back burner, we will see Russia and China, as Mr. James has indicated, and others jumping in. We will see Wagner coming in to secure these countries. Let's have this debate. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. Omar), who came to the United States from the continent of Africa.

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I want to clarify for Mr. Mills that when I mentioned we had not had any deaths in Somalia, I said in the last 4 years. I was acknowledging what happened before. In the last 4 years we have not lost any American troops in Somalia. Let me also say, as I said earlier, I am happy that we are having this debate and talking about the continent of Africa. If we do that, we have to listen to the African--I can just recall, and sometimes many of my colleagues, especially on the other side of the aisle, argue that we don't get the votes we need at times in the U.N. from African countries. I recall when we were trying to get votes in regard to Russia's illegal invasion into Ukraine, and I had to call on African ambassadors. They said: Now you are calling? We haven't heard from the United States for a while. Now you want something from me? We have been asking for assistance in regard to security, and then I watched to see what was taking place when we looked at our diplomacy. It took over two decades before, in the 117th Congress, we passed a State Department authorization bill, and we had to do that through the NDAA as opposed to saying we were going to stand strongly on diplomacy. Guess what China did during that period of time? They doubled their diplomacy budget. Guess what else is happening? For the first time, China has more consulates than the United States of America. General Kelly said that either we do and get engaged in more diplomacy, or we are going to have to spend more money on bullets. We have an opportunity to engage and listen to allies and work with our allies. Many allies have more, and should have more, responsibility on the continent because they colonized it and are working with us collectively to try to make sure that the Chinas and the Russias of the world are not invested and that we are invested, and we are not. It is our challenge, and I hope that when we get past this debate, we will be able to have another one. I look forward to doing it, particularly in our committee, so that we can figure out collectively, as Ms. Ilhan Omar said, how we can work together and listen to make sure that we have an overall strategy. I say this in regard to both parties. I say this to the administration that should be doing more on the continent of Africa. So, yes, this is not a partisan debate. This is an American debate. This is an opportunity to be attentive to a continent that is the fastest growing and the youngest on this planet but that we have ignored for far too long. We have to wake up and do more for the continent of Africa and figure out diplomacy, figure out how we can help protect them from being victimized by terrorism, and figure out how we can strengthen institutions. We have a lot of work to do. We have to figure out how we reauthorize AGOA, figure out how we work with the African Union, and figure out how we work with the African organizations. That is our challenge because, if not, we imperil ourselves. I could agree that this is not just an investment in the continent; it is an investment for America and America's leadership. Let's lead. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).