Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ. Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from New York, Representative Espaillat, for holding this incredibly important hour on not just the climate crisis but the Green New Deal, in particular. As I was preparing for this evening, I would be remiss but to say that, last night, we had a national Democratic debate, and not a single question was asked about our climate crisis. Right now, the global consensus, the IPCC report coming out the U.N., is sounding the alarm on what will happen if we do not keep emissions down to contain our warming levels below 1.5 degrees Celsius. But if you look at today, we are on track to hit 3 degrees Celsius by 2100. This can bring unprecedented chaos to our order. Throughout this entire year, as we discussed the Green New Deal, I have noticed that there has been an awful lot of misinformation about what is inside this resolution. A tremendous amount of wild claims, everything from saying we are seeking to ban airplanes to ending ice cream. As a consequence, I realized that many of my colleagues have never even read the resolution that they are speaking on. They haven't opened a single word of it. It is actually only about--I have it right in front of me--14 pages long. So I have decided that since some of my colleagues across the aisle could not, for some reason, read the resolution, that perhaps this hour would be spent best reading it to them for the public record. So, today, what I would like to do is to read the Green New Deal resolution for all those who are interested, who may want to fire this up on C-SPAN, or who may want to sit in the audience today. H. Res. 109, resolution recognizing the duty of the Federal Government to create a Green New Deal. Whereas the October 2018 report entitled ``Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 Celsius'' by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the November 2018 Fourth National Climate Assessment report found that-- (1) human activity is the dominant cause of observed climate change over the past century; (2) a changing climate is causing sea levels to rise and an increase in wildfires, severe storms, droughts, and other extreme weather events that threaten human life, healthy communities, and critical infrastructure; (3) global warming at or above 2 degrees Celsius beyond preindustrialized levels will cause-- (A) mass migration from the regions most affected by climate change; (B) more than $500 billion in lost annual economic output in the United States by the year 2100; (C) wildfires that, by 2050, will annually burn at least twice as much forest area in the Western United States than was typically burned by wildfires in the years preceding 2019; (D) a loss of more than 99 percent of all coral reefs on Earth; (E) more than 350 million more people to be exposed globally to deadly heat stress by 2050; and (F) a risk of damage to $1 trillion of public infrastructure and coastal real estate in the United States; and (4) global temperatures must be kept below 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrialized levels to avoid the most severe impacts of a changing climate, which will require-- (A) global reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from human sources of 40 to 60 percent from 2010 levels by 2030; and (B) net-zero global emissions by 2050; Whereas, because the United States has historically been responsible for a disproportionate amount of greenhouse gas emissions, having emitted 20 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions through 2014, and has a high technological capacity, the United States must take a leading role in reducing emissions through economic transformation; Whereas the United States is currently experiencing several related crises, with-- (1) life expectancy declining while basic needs, such as clean air, clean water, healthy food, and adequate healthcare, housing, transportation, and education, are inaccessible to a significant portion of the U.S. population; (2) a four-decade trend of wage stagnation, deindustrialization, and antilabor policies that has led to-- (A) hourly wages overall stagnating since the 1970s despite increased worker productivity; (B) the third-worst level of socioeconomic mobility in the developed world before the Great Recession; (C) the erosion of earning and bargaining power of workers in the United States; and (D) inadequate resources for public-sector workers to confront the challenges of climate change at local, State, and Federal levels; and (3) the greatest income inequality since the 1920s, with-- (A) the top 1 percent of earners accruing 91 percent of gains in the first few years of economic recovery after the Great Recession; (B) a large racial wealth divide amounting to a difference of 20 times more wealth between the average White family and the average Black family; and (C) a gender earnings gap that results in women earning approximately 80 percent as much as men, at the median; Whereas climate change, pollution, and environmental destruction have exacerbated systemic racial, regional, social, environmental, and economic injustices (referred to in this preamble as ``systemic injustices'') by disproportionately affecting indigenous peoples, communities of color, migrant communities, deindustrialized communities, depopulated rural communities, the poor, low-income workers, women, the elderly, the unhoused, people with disabilities, and youth (referred to in this preamble as ``frontline and vulnerable communities''); Whereas, climate change constitutes a direct threat to the national security of the United States-- (1) by impacting the economic, environmental, and social stability of countries and communities around the world; and (2) by acting as a threat multiplier; Whereas the Federal Government-led mobilizations during World War II and the New Deal created the greatest middle class that the United States has ever seen, but many members of frontline and vulnerable communities were excluded from many of the economic and societal benefits of those mobilizations; and Whereas the House of Representatives recognizes that a new national, social, industrial, and economic mobilization on a scale not seen since World War II and the New Deal era is a historic opportunity-- (1) to create millions of good, high-wage jobs in the United States; (2) to provide unprecedented levels of prosperity and economic security for all people of the United States; and (3) to counteract systemic injustices: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that-- (1) it is the duty of the Federal Government to create a Green New Deal-- (A) to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions through a fair and just transition for all communities and workers; (B) to create millions of good, high-wage jobs and ensure prosperity and economic security for all people in the United States; (C) to invest in the infrastructure and industry of the United States to sustainably meet the challenges of the 21st century; (D) to secure for all people of the United States for generations to come-- (i) clean air and water; (ii) climate and community resiliency; (iii) healthy food; (iv) access to nature; and (v) a sustainable environment; and (E) to promote justice and equity by stopping current, preventing future, and repairing historic oppression of indigenous peoples, communities of color, migrant communities, deindustrialized communities, depopulated rural communities, the poor, low-income workers, women, the elderly, the unhoused, people with disabilities and youth (referred to in this resolution as ``frontline and vulnerable communities''); (2) the goals described in subparagraphs (A) through (E) of paragraph (1) (referred to in this resolution as the ``Green New Deal goals'') should be accomplished through a 10-year national mobilization (referred to in this resolution as the ``Green New Deal mobilization'') that will require the following goals and projects-- (A) building resiliency against climate change-related disasters, such as extreme weather, including by leveraging funding and providing investments for community-defined projects and strategies; (B) repairing and upgrading the infrastructure in the United States, including-- (i) by eliminating pollution and greenhouse gas emissions as much as technologically feasible; (ii) by guaranteeing universal access to clean water; (iii) by reducing the risks posed by climate impacts; and (iv) by ensuring that any infrastructure bill considered by Congress addresses climate change; (C) meeting 100 percent of the power demand in the United States through clean, renewable, and zero-emission energy sources, including-- (i) by dramatically expanding and upgrading renewable power sources; and (ii) by deploying new capacity; (D) building or upgrading energy-efficient, distributed, and ``smart'' power grids, and ensuring affordable access to electricity; (E) upgrading all existing buildings in the United States and building new buildings to achieve maximum energy efficiency, water efficiency, safety, affordability, comfort, and durability, including through electrification; (F) spurring massive growth in clean manufacturing in the United States and removing pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from manufacturing and industry as much as is technologically feasible, including by expanding renewable energy manufacturing and investing in existing manufacturing and industry; (G) working collaboratively with farmers and ranchers in the United States to remove pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the agricultural sector as much as is technologically feasible, including-- (i) by supporting family farming; (ii) by investing in sustainable farming and land use practices that increase soil health; and (iii) by building a more sustainable food system that ensures universal access to healthy food; (H) overhauling transportation systems in the United States to remove pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector as much as technologically feasible, including through investment in-- (i) zero-emission vehicle infrastructure and manufacturing; (ii) clean, affordable, and accessible public transit; and (iii) high-speed rail; (I) mitigating and managing the long-term adverse health, economic, and other effects of pollution and climate change, including by providing funding for community-defined projects and strategies; (J) removing greenhouse gases from the atmosphere and reducing pollution by restoring natural ecosystems through proven low-tech solutions that increase soil carbon storage, such as land preservation and afforestation; (K) restoring and protecting threatened, endangered, and fragile ecosystems through locally appropriate and science- based projects that enhance biodiversity and support climate resiliency; (L) cleaning up existing hazardous waste and abandoned sites, ensuring economic development and sustainability on those sites; (M) identifying other emission and pollution sources and creating solutions to remove them; and (N) promoting the international exchange of technology, expertise, products, funding, and services, with the aim of making the United States the international leader on climate action, and to help other countries achieve a Green New Deal; (3) a Green New Deal must be developed through transparent and inclusive consultation, collaboration, and partnership with frontline and vulnerable communities, labor unions, worker cooperatives, civil society groups, academia, and businesses; and (4) to achieve the Green New Deal goals and mobilization, a Green New Deal will require the following goals and projects-- (A) providing and leveraging, in a way that ensures that the public receives appropriate ownership stakes and returns on investment, adequate capital (including through community grants, public banks, and other public financing), technical expertise, supporting policies, and other forms of assistance to communities, organizations, Federal, State, and local government agencies, and businesses working on the Green New Deal mobilization; (B) ensuring that the Federal Government takes into account the complete environmental and social costs and impacts of emissions through-- (i) existing laws; (ii) new policies and programs; and (iii) ensuring that frontline and vulnerable communities shall not be adversely affected; (C) providing resources, training, and high-quality education, including higher education, to all people of the United States, with a focus on frontline and vulnerable communities, so that all people of the United States may be full and equal participants in the Green New Deal mobilization; (D) making public investments in the research and development of new clean and renewable energy technologies and industries; (E) directing investments to spur economic development, deepen and diversify industry and business in local and regional economies, and build wealth and community ownership, while prioritizing high-quality job creation and economic, social, and environmental benefits in frontline and vulnerable communities, and deindustrialized communities, that may otherwise struggle with the transition away from greenhouse gas intensive industries; (F) ensuring the use of democratic and participatory processes that are inclusive of and led by frontline and vulnerable communities and workers to plan, implement, and administer the Green New Deal mobilization at the local level; (G) ensuring that the Green New Deal mobilization creates high-quality union jobs that pay prevailing wages, hires local workers, offers training and advancement opportunities, and guarantees wage and benefit parity for workers affected by the transition; (H) guaranteeing a job with a family-sustaining wage, adequate family and medical leave, paid vacations, and retirement security to all people of the United States; (I) strengthening and protecting the right of all workers to organize, unionize, and collectively bargain free of coercion, intimidation, and harassment; (J) strengthening and enforcing labor, workplace health and safety, antidiscrimination, and wage and hour standards across all employers, industries, and sectors; (K) enacting and enforcing trade rules, procurement standards, and border adjustments with strong labor and environmental protections-- (i) to stop the transfer of jobs and pollution overseas; and (ii) to grow domestic manufacturing in the United States; (L) ensuring that public lands, waters, and oceans are protected and that eminent domain is not abused; (M) obtaining the free, prior, and informed consent of indigenous peoples for all decisions that affect indigenous peoples and their traditional territories, honoring all treaties and agreements with indigenous peoples, and protecting and enforcing the sovereignty and land rights of indigenous peoples; (N) ensuring a commercial environment where every businessperson is free from unfair competition and domination by domestic or international monopolies; and (O) providing all people of the United States with-- (i) high-quality healthcare; (ii) affordable, safe, and adequate housing; (iii) economic security; and (iv) clean water, clean air, healthy and affordable food, and access to nature. That is every word in the Green New Deal, and I want every person in this body and across the country to ask themselves why this is so controversial. Why is healthcare for every American so controversial? Why is protecting our planet for the next generation so controversial? Why is dignified labor and protection at work so controversial? Why is taking on the fossil fuel industry so, so controversial? Because, for years, we have prioritized the pursuit of profit at any and all human and environmental cost. I humbly ask my colleagues and my country to question our priorities for once, because our priorities have led to an unprecedented amount of income inequality to millions of people living in poverty and many more who feel unstable in their economic life. So, please, as a moral, economic, and political prerogative, I humbly ask our country to care for our planet.

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ. Madam Chair, I thank the chairwoman for the generous introduction and time on this bill. Madam Chair, the fact of the matter is that innocent children, families, and the elderly in Puerto Rico are dying. They are breathing poisoned air, and they are now enduring the psychological trauma of ongoing earthquakes. My own grandmother is oxygen dependent, and every day when the Earth shakes below her, we don't know if she will have the power to continue her equipment that is medically necessary. While everyone here is arguing over money and over the administration of a colonial state, we have to take a look at the actual reality on the ground. Ninety-five percent of schools in Puerto Rico are not up to code. They are leaving thousands of Puerto Rican children vulnerable to the effects of natural disasters. Many have lost all their belongings, and many more live with psychological trauma. But this administration is not releasing any of these funds that are supposed to be duly allocated for recovery. For that, we have to make sure that we support this bill, and I strongly support H.R. 5687.

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ. Madam Speaker, unfortunately, I missed the first vote due to a scheduled district meeting that went longer than expected. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 35 (H.R. 4044--Protect and Restore Americas Estuaries Act).

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ. Madam Speaker, I thank Congresswoman Tlaib for hosting this Special Order hour on housing and our chair for presiding during this very critical conversation. We are here today to talk about one of the most core, important issues facing the American people, which is housing. Each and every year, it feels as though, as our wages remain stable or the same, rent is going up, and it becomes harder and harder to afford the very things that keep ourselves afloat and alive, whether it is healthcare, housing, or an education. During the financial crisis of 2008, American households lost $16 trillion in wealth. Many lost their homes and saw their savings and retirement funds depleted. More than half of all renters in America, over 21 million households, were rent-burdened in 2015, meaning that they spent 30 percent or more of their income on rent. We are in one of the worst renter crises in a generation. At a time when our country is at its wealthiest, in the city of New York, we are seeing populations of people who are homeless at the highest rates since the Great Depression. But there is another way. When we start to legislate housing as a human right, we begin to change our priorities and move away from looking at housing as a for- profit commodity for speculation and toward something that should be guaranteed for all Americans at an affordable rate that can be accessible to all working people in America. That is one of the reasons why I have introduced A Place to Prosper Act, which includes provisions like universal rent control, just cause evictions, a ban on income discrimination, access to counsel, improving the quality of the housing stock, and a disclosures requirement on corporate landlords to rein in bad actors. Additionally, we also know that the area of housing and construction is one of the largest contributors to carbon emissions, which is why we have also introduced the Green New Deal for Public Housing Act. What that does is that it works and aims to decarbonize the entire public housing stock in the United States of America. It is what must be done; it is in accordance with the science; and it changes the value system through which we approach housing away from the volatile boom-and-bust speculative environment and toward a secure and stable economic environment that treats housing as a right.

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize a longtime public servant and NY-14 constituent, Linda Lauria. On November 30, 2019, Linda Lauria, Public Affairs Specialist, will retire from the Social Security Administration. Linda's retirement will mark the close of a career that spans over 34 years of service. Linda began her career with SSA in August 1973 as a Claims Development Clerk (GS-2, as she often proudly notes) in the East Bronx Social Security office. She was subsequently promoted to positions in the field including Service Representative, and Claims Representative before leaving the agency during February 1984 as a new mother. Linda rejoined SSA during July 1996, as a Service Representative in the Jamaica Teleservice Center, and was promoted to Benefit Authorizer at the Northeastern Program Service Center during January 1998. She returned to the East Bronx Social Security office as a Claims Representative during September 1998, and joined the Regional Public Affairs Office during November 2005, serving as primary liaison between SSA and the offices of federal, state, and local elected officials. Since that time, Linda has been instrumental in the timely resolution of several thousand constituent inquiries, eliminating barriers between our most vulnerable beneficiaries and their essential cash benefits. She was promoted to Public Affairs Specialist during 2015, the position from which she will retire. Linda's outstanding contributions to the Agency have been recognized with several awards including Deputy Commissioner's Citations, and the New York Regional Management Society's Regional Office Employee of the Year. Throughout Linda's career, she has brought intelligence, technical savvy, practical knowledge, and a strong commitment to excellence to every assignment. Madam Speaker, I ask our colleagues to join me in recognizing Ms. Linda Lauria and her dedication to public service and her community.

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize a long- term public servant and New York-14 constituent, Linda Lauria. On November 30, 2019, Linda Lauria, public affairs specialist, will retire from the Social Security Administration. Linda's retirement will mark the close of a phenomenal 34-year career that spans multiple decades of public service. Linda began her career with the Social Security Administration in August 1973 as a claims development clerk in the east Bronx Social Security office as a GS-2, as she proudly notes. Linda was subsequently promoted to positions in the field, including service representative and claims representative. Linda has been instrumental in the timely resolution of several thousand cases, eliminating barriers between our most vulnerable people and their essential benefits. Linda's outstanding contributions to the agency have been recognized with several awards, including the Deputy Commissioner Citation and the New York Regional Management Society's Regional Office Employee of the Year. She has also been instrumental in helping my own district team from the very beginning. Throughout Linda's career, she has brought intelligence, technical savvy, practical knowledge, and a strong commitment to excellence to every assignment. Today my staff, the Social Security Administration, and I thank Linda for her dedication, passion, and commitment to our community.

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ. Madam Speaker, I rise to recognize Claudette Colvin, an American Civil Rights pioneer, who on March 2, 1955, at the age of 15, was arrested in Montgomery, Alabama for refusing to give up her seat to a young white woman passenger, becoming one of many to be arrested for challenging Montgomery's bus segregation policies. Nine months later, Rosa Parks was famously arrested for performing the same act of defiance. Although there were hundreds of people arrested before Claudette and Rosa Parks, Claudette along with Aurelia Browder, Susie McDonald, and Mary Louise Smith, were the first to challenge the law in the Alabama courts. Prior to her historic 1955 stand against racial injustice, Claudette had been studying Black leaders like Harriet Tubman and Sojourner Truth during Negro History Month in her segregated school. Claudette's classroom conversations led to discussions around the current day Jim Crow laws she and all her peers were experiencing. In describing the significant moment when a bus driver ordered her to give up her seat to a young white woman, and she refused, Claudette says: ``Whenever people ask me: 'Why didn't you get up when the bus driver asked you?' I say it felt as though Harriet Tubman's hands were pushing me down on one shoulder and Sojourner Truth's hands were pushing me down on the other shoulder. I felt inspired by these women because my teacher taught us about them in so much detail.'' After a year-long battle in the courts, being ostracized by her peers and the community, an older man befriended her, and she became pregnant. In addition, she was a 15-year-old teenager, from a low- income family, and she had very dark skin. Therefore, the leaders deemed Claudette inappropriate to be the face of the Bus Boycott. Claudette's heroic story was nearly forgotten by history. The story of Claudette illustrates how the role of women in the Civil Rights movement has been largely overlooked. Her actions led to monumental progress in our nation's history. Not only that, her heroic actions led to the rise of other great African Americans. If not for Claudette's brave act, there may not have been a Thurgood Marshall, Robert L. Carter, Martin Luther King, Jr., or Rosa Parks. She truly paved the way for our nation's history. Claudette, Aurelia Browder, Susie McDonald, and Mary Louise Smith were among the four women plaintiffs to testify in the federal court case filed by civil rights attorney Fred Gray on February 1, 1956, as Browder v. Gayle. On June 13, 1956, the three- judge panel that heard the case in the United States District Court determined that the state and local laws requiring bus segregation in Alabama were unconstitutional. The case went to the United States Supreme Court, which upheld their ruling on December 17, 1956. Three days later, the Supreme Court issued an order to Montgomery and the state of Alabama to end bus segregation. This order not only ended bus segregation in Alabama, but also impacted public transportation throughout the Unites States, including airplanes, taxis and trains. In 1987, The 100th Congress designated March as ``Women's History Month'' in honor of the tremendous contributions of women to society, and to recognize that despite these contributions, the role of women in history has consistently been overlooked and undervalued in our history books. Claudette is testament to the fact that we are still discovering new accomplishments of historical women, and we will continue to shine a light on these amazing icons for years to come. Though their historic acts of civil disobedience were separated by nine-months, Claudette and Rosa Parks remain intertwined in the same movement. Claudette knew Rosa very well, was active in Rosa's youth group, and considered Rosa an inspiration to her own beliefs and actions. Rosa and Claudette's mother, Mary Jane Austin (Gadson), grew up together in Pine Level, Alabama. Her mother used to play with Rosa and her brother Sylvester at Ms. Leona's house, Rosa's mother. Rosa also knew Claudette's great grandfather, Gus Vaughn, who has been mentioned in several of her books. Madam Speaker, I ask our colleagues to join me in recognizing Ms. Claudette Calvin's courage to stand in the face of injustice and demand her recognition of her inalienable rights. Because in her own courage to fight for her freedom, she paved a path for millions of others to do the same--because it was her constitutional right.

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Claudette Colvin, a Parkchester resident and American civil rights pioneer who, on March 2, 1955, at the age of 15 years old, was arrested in Montgomery, Alabama, for refusing to give up her seat to a young passenger, becoming one of the many to be arrested for challenging Montgomery's bus segregation policies. Nine months after Claudette Colvin, Rosa Parks was famously arrested for a similar act of civil nonviolence. Claudette's heroic story was nearly forgotten by history. Her actions led to monumental progress in our Nation's history. Not only that, her heroic actions amplified and set the stage for other great African American civil rights leaders and their actions. Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing Ms. Claudette Colvin's courage to stand in the face of injustice and demand recognition of her inalienable rights. Because, in her courage to fight for her freedom, she paved a path for millions of others to do the same.

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ. Madam Chair, this amendment prohibits the executive branch from deploying troops on the southern border if the purpose of this deployment is to enforce immigration law. According to the Congressional Research Service, the armed services do not have a clear legislative mandate to protect or patrol the border. That is under the guidance of other aspects of our legislative and executive branch. The militarization of our immigration system, particularly under this administration, must be stopped. This amendment ensures that our troops are to be deployed only in the most exigent circumstances to address actual national security threats. This amendment would rescind the authority granted in the 2016 NDAA, which empowers the President to needlessly deploy troops to the border to enforce immigration law. The amendment would not interfere with any mission that is truly humanitarian or a true national security concern. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ. Madam Chair, the deployment of troops on our border is a relatively new phenomenon. It is one that is unprecedented, and it represents an unnecessary militarization toward what should be seen as a humanitarian crisis. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Castro).

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ. Madam Chair, I think it is important that we clarify that in order to have a humane immigration system, we do not require militarization or cruelty to children. Asking that children not be caged and asking that human beings' rights--human rights--be respected does not mean ``open borders.'' It means that we be a humane nation that respects our mission as one that guarantees liberty, prosperity, and the pursuit of happiness for all people who live on American soil. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ. Madam Chair, I present an amendment at the desk.

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ. Madam Chair, this amendment prohibits the executive branch from using the authorized funds to detain undocumented immigrants in Department of Defense facilities. One of the central aspects of the crisis at our border is that the administration is asking agencies and departments that are unprepared to house and detain refugees and asylum seekers when that is simply not what they are trained or resourced to do. This amendment will ensure that military and migrant families alike will not be forced into operating or living in facilities never intended for mass detention of human beings. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ. Madam Chair, I think it is important for us to clarify when we talk about ``unaccompanied children'' whom the administration is labeling an ``unaccompanied child.'' If a child comes with their grandmother, they are deemed unaccompanied. If the child comes with their older brother or sister, they are deemed unaccompanied. If a child comes with a family member that is anyone but their biological mother or father, they are deemed unaccompanied. Their family is labeled as human traffickers, often by the press or otherwise. I think it is important that we add a cultural context to this conversation. We have to reassert that seeking asylum is not a crime. We should not be expanding a system of detention and criminalization of people who have committed no crime and hurt no person, aside from just simply trying to seek asylum, which is their human right. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ. Madam Chair, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ. Mr. Chair, had I been present, I would have voted ``YEA'' on rollcall No. 421. Amendment No. 40 Offered by Mr. Malinowski

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ. Mr. Chair, I rise today to offer an amendment moving $5 million from the Drug Enforcement Administration into the Comprehensive Opioid Abuse Program, which is part of the Department of Justice funding of initiatives to combat the opioid epidemic. I offer this amendment because ending the war on drugs has to mean changing our priorities in order to keep all communities safe and healthy. The best way we do that is by offering people the help and support they need before arrest and criminalization should be considered in the first place. The amendment is a relatively commonsense one. As of now, the DEA will be funded at $2.36 billion, which is nearly a $90 million 1-year increase and $77.7 million above even the President's request. The Bronx has an unprecedented opioid crisis with deadly overdoses nearly doubling in just a few years. As families across our Nation know, the opioid crisis is not limited just to the Bronx. Just yesterday in the Oversight and Reform Committee, we heard testimony from medical experts and providers, and the testimony from Nurse Gray from West Virginia struck me. She said that we cannot arrest ourselves out of this. We have to make sure that we are caring for people in order to prevent this crisis from exploding. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano).

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ. Mr. Chair, I think in that common spirit and our desire to make sure that we address the opioid epidemic, just as the epidemic is exploding, so should our commitment to address this problem. This amendment is supported by the NAACP, the ACLU, the Drug Policy Alliance, and dozens of other organizations. Again, this is a relatively commonsense amendment. We have overfunded one agency, and we should move that to make sure we are getting people the care that they need. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ. Madam Chair, I rise to offer an amendment transferring $15 million to the CDC's Opioid-Related Infectious Disease program. Madam Chair, one of the deadly consequences of the opioid crisis and its related use of contaminated drug equipment has been the increased incidence of blood-borne infections, including hepatitis, HIV, and bacteria-caused heart infections. The CDC's infectious disease program works to implement evidence- based drug prevention in schools and community settings. The opioid crisis has impacted nearly every community in the United States, rich and poor, rural and urban, and people of all racial and cultural identities. In my own home borough of the Bronx, fatal overdoses are now at their highest rate since official data has even been made public, and 85 percent of those overdoses involved opioids. In order for us to really approach and solve this issue, we have to make sure that we are adequately funding programs that are backed by evidence and backed by studies and funded in a way that reduces the load and reduces the incidence of fatality. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ. Madam Chair, I think it is important that we acknowledge and really recognize that this amendment is addressing the appropriation--it is an amendment to the appropriation in health and human services. The opioid crisis is here, and there is no denying that this is a crisis on our doorstep. There are multiple levers and multiple solutions that we can approach in order to treat the amount of pain that is being experienced across the country. So with that being said, what we really need to focus on is what those levers are, and one of these is the fact that infectious diseases, the rates of hepatitis B, hepatitis C are exploding due to the injection methods in the opioid crisis and self-administering opioids. That being said, we have to address this issue. We are not even asking for an increased appropriation. We are asking for a transfer of funds. So it is the same amount of funding, but we are just transferring it to a place where it is going to be most effective and treat and impact more families positively. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.