Bonnie Watson Coleman

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in support of H.R. 366, the DHS Stop Asset and Vehicle Excess Act. H.R. 366 seeks to improve the Department of Homeland Security's management, acquisition, and oversight of its fleet of roughly 53,000 vehicles. H.R. 366 requires the Under Secretary for Management to provide departmental components with a standardized vehicle allocation methodology for components to utilize to develop fleet management plans. This legislation was informed by oversight that was conducted by the Department's inspector general. The inspector general found that, in 2014 and 2015, the DHS did not adequately manage or have the enforcement authority over components to ensure that the composition of its motor vehicle fleet was right sized. This lack of effective management led to the overuse of sports utility vehicles, unnecessary discretionary equipment packages, and overpayments to the GSA. Further, the Committee on Homeland Security received testimony from the Director of the Federal Protective Service that roughly half of the 1,100 vehicles in FPS' fleet were underutilized or had fewer than 12,000 miles. H.R. 366 grants authority to the DHS headquarters over components with respect to managing vehicle fleets. Specifically, under H.R. 366, the DHS is directed to establish requirements for components to more rigorously evaluate their fleets on an ongoing basis. Additionally, this bill directs the DHS to identify alternative methods for managing component fleets, such as a shared motor pool. The DHS has the second largest civilian vehicle fleet in the Federal Government at an operating cost of about $462 million. There is a critical linkage between the Department's operational effectiveness in national security missions and the effective management of the resources and requirements by the DHS leadership. As such, enhancing oversight and management should help the Department more effectively spend limited taxpayer dollars on what the Department actually needs to carry out its mission. H.R. 366 seeks to improve the management of DHS' vehicle fleet by strengthening the oversight and management of the Department's fleet by the Under Secretary for Management. It is also worth noting that H.R. 366 includes language that I authored to ensure that the inspector general's oversight of the DHS' management of its vehicle fleet continues. I commend the OIG for its robust and ongoing oversight of the Department's vehicle fleet. I also commend my colleague on the Homeland Security Committee, Mr. Perry, for introducing this legislation and working in a bipartisan fashion to advance it. I urge the passage of H.R. 366. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in support of H.R. 347, the DHS Acquisition Documentation Integrity Act of 2017. I reintroduced H.R. 347, a measure that the House unanimously approved on February 23, 2016, to ensure that the progress that the Department of Homeland Security has made with respect to how it manages acquisitions continues. H.R. 347 requires complete, accurate, timely, and valid documentation to be maintained for each of the Department's major acquisition programs, which is defined as one with a life cycle cost estimate of $300 million or more. The required documentation includes information regarding operational requirements, a complete life cycle cost estimate, a cost-benefit analysis, and a schedule. Under this legislation, the DHS component heads would also be required to submit certain documentation to the DHS Secretary for inclusion in an annual status report on the Department's acquisitions. While there have been improvements to acquisitions management under former Secretary Jeh Johnson, the Department has struggled when it comes to delivering a specific program on time and at an established cost. Most of the DHS' major acquisition programs continue to cost more than expected, take longer to deploy than planned, or deliver less capability than promised. For example, the DHS' efforts to deliver a Department-wide human resources IT system--HR-IT--have spanned almost 14 years and have cost millions of dollars with little to show for it. As can be seen with the case of HR-IT, anything less than up-to-date acquisition documentation increases the odds of cost and schedule overruns, risks delayed delivery of critical capabilities, and depletes resources needed to address future requirements. As such, H.R. 347 codifies ``best practices'' already embodied in the DHS' acquisition policy and necessary for the success of the DHS' mission. H.R. 347 requires the DHS Secretary, through the Under Secretary for Management, to require components to maintain specific types of acquisition documentation. Representatives McCaul and Thompson, the chairman and ranking member of our committee, and Representative Perry, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Management Efficiency, cosponsored this legislation, which reflects a strong commitment to bolstering the effectiveness of the DHS' acquisition programs in a bipartisan fashion. I urge the passage of H.R. 347, a bill that will help ensure that the DHS is a good steward of taxpayer dollars and can provide the DHS' operators in the field with the tools they need to protect the American people. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. In his first full week as President, Donald Trump continued to make a mockery of the ideas upon which our Nation was founded. In addition, his de facto Muslim ban is contrary to the national security interests of the United States. His actions are not only discriminatory and bigoted, but also reckless, dangerous, and counterproductive to any authentic effort to defeat terrorism. As a member of the House Homeland Security Committee, I am concerned this will only serve to stoke anti-American sentiment across the globe, including our international partners committed to eradicating global terror threats. My colleagues have outlined the ways in which men and women they represent have been impacted at this present moment, and highlight the uncertainty that those constituents feel about the future. But we cannot forget those who have come to this country in pursuit of the future that the American Dream has promised. Close to 17,000 students from the seven affected countries attend U.S. colleges and universities. The 12th District of New Jersey represents these men and women, both young and old, at a multitude of 2-year, 4-year, and technical institutions. The President of Princeton University--one of the most revered institutions in the world, housed in the heart of my district--released a statement concerned that the success of Princeton and many other institutions of higher education across this Nation depend on America's ability to attract and engage with talented people from around the world. Rutgers University, the flagship public university in my State, has students, researchers, and professors from all seven countries on Trump's barred entry list who are currently traveling outside of this country. The impact on university personnel was felt most immediately after the executive order went into effect. Two Iranian nationals who are associate professors at the University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth were detained Saturday upon arrival at Boston Logan International Airport. Today I talked with university officials in my district who have faculty members that need to return home in order to renew visas, but are afraid to leave. At another college, one-fourth of their applicants come from the countries that are impacted by this ban. A constituent in East Brunswick, who is a non-Syrian political refugee, sits in limbo as only one of her four minor children passed through our already thorough and extensive processing and was approved for a visa. USCIS put a hold on the process of the remaining three due to lack of communication and direction and understanding from this travel ban. By feeding off of fear, hatred, and bigotry, this administration's incendiary Muslim ban has created confusion, disruption, and chaos that is rippling around the world. As our Federal agencies and international partners seek to understand and combat this meritless policy, I call on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, on which I sit, to hold an immediate hearing with leadership at the Department of Homeland Security to review concerning reports about the crafting and execution of this President's order. I also requested that the House Homeland Security Committee, which I also serve on, to move up its February 7 hearing on this issue so that we may urgently address the national security implications of this administration's actions. In short, Mr. Speaker, this is the United States of America. We respect diversity because this is a nation founded and made great because of immigrants. We are not going to stand by and allow President Trump, with his un-American ideals, to push forward on American policies. Understand that we will resist at every turn.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. H.R. 7 will make permanent the harmful and discriminatory Hyde amendment, penalizing small businesses who want to provide comprehensive health coverage to their employees and, once again, trampling on the District of Columbia by prohibiting the District from spending its own local funds for abortion coverage. Yet again, the GOP has put our bodies and the choices we should get to make about them in the middle of a political firestorm. With every exhaustingly repetitive argument about when, how, and where a woman should be able to make those decisions, our country suffers. If my Republican colleagues are so concerned about the life of a child, why isn't there priority to put forth a plan for public education? Why haven't we seen a comprehensive plan to continue the job growth that President Barack Obama started? Their motives are transparent and I refuse to let this White House or any elected official play politics with women's bodies. As we continue down this dangerous road, today, tomorrow, and every day thereafter will be a day of resistance. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, we are in week 2 of this 115th Congress, and, as promised, my colleagues and I are here to stand up for this good Nation. Unfortunately, House Republicans cannot say the same. Last night, they decided that nursing home coverage for millions of seniors, comprehensive health care for young children, and the benefits earned after a lifetime of hard work are not worth fighting for. That is exactly why the gentleman from Wisconsin offered an amendment to ensure that the budget resolution being considered today could not be used to cut benefits from three critically important programs: Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security. In fact, the President-elect promised many times that he would neither cut Social Security benefits for seniors nor would he support cuts to Medicaid and Medicare. But the rule under consideration this morning fails to allow a debate or vote on this amendment, which places the earned benefits and the financial future of American people at risk. Who are my Republican colleagues looking out for? Certainly not their constituents. It is clear that we are faced with a Republican-controlled Congress that is ensuring the divided and self-serving rhetoric that echoed throughout this campaign season rings true. This is not democracy. This is not outlined in our Constitution. This is not the democracy we are sworn to protect. With that, I urge my colleagues to reject this rule.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am here this evening representing the Congressional Progressive Caucus in this Special Order hour, and I will be joined by colleagues as we will examine what our future appears to look like as we plan for the transition which is taking place. We are 8 days away from a new President and administration that continues to refuse to put Americans first and complicit with Republican- controlled Congress that will help them execute that mission. At 1 a.m. this morning, 51 Republican Senators voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act with no replacement. After 6 years of hollow grandstanding, Republicans now know that their plan to repeal the ACA would dump massive costs on families, businesses, and the Federal budget. The facts are clear, Mr. Speaker. Republicans' repeal of the ACA would result in the loss of 2.6 million jobs and more than 250 billion--that is billion, B--of gross State products in 2019 alone. Family budgets and State budgets alike would be rocked by the reverberations of the repeal. And we cannot forget about our healthcare providers. The repeal of the ACA will crumble our critical healthcare infrastructure, decimating hospitals' and healthcare systems' ability to provide services, weaken local economies that hospitals help sustain and grow, and result in massive job losses of healthcare professionals. While Republicans claim to champion reducing the deficit, OMB calculates that the Republican budget resolution and repealing of ACA would lead to significantly larger deficits in each year and add more than $2 trillion in debt over the next decade. Taking away 30 million Americans' health care, blowing a hole in our budget, and saddling future generations with debt is the height of irresponsibility. It is important to note that just 20 percent of Americans support this repeal and delay plan. In fact, the American people want Congress to focus on raising wages and creating good-paying jobs for everyone everywhere in America. The American people want to be assured that their Federal Government is working for all of their interests. That is what I want to do as well. I stand ready to work with anyone who is serious about these priorities. Mr. Speaker, the nominees that this President-elect has put forth are focused on everything but the true interests of the American people. Maybe they are focused on the personal interests of the President- elect. Today, the nominee to lead the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Dr. Ben Carson, could not even promise that not one decision or dollar would go to benefit the President-elect or his family. This is a problem. Maybe they are focused on rolling back hard fought freedoms or protections. Yesterday, New Jersey Senator Cory Booker reminded us that the nominee for the Attorney General, Senator Jeff Sessions, has not demonstrated a commitment to the central requirement of the job, that is to aggressively pursue the congressional mandate of civil rights, equal rights, and justice for all. This, Mr. Speaker, is a problem. Perhaps maybe they are not even interested in siphoning money from children and public schools. Nominee Betsy DeVos, the nominee for the Secretary of Education, has made a career of advocating for the shutdown of public schools and supporting legislation that has reduced oversight and accountability in Michigan charter schools. Her life work is the very antithesis of everything that the Department of Education represents. This is a problem, and to speak to this problem I would like to yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Takano), who has experience in standing up for public education for our children.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. I thank the Congresswoman. It is true. As we see the unfolding of some of the drama that is taking place, including that which affects us and is associated with Russia, it is even more important than ever that the President show us that he is not hiding anything regarding his relationships that potentially present a contradiction of his first and foremost responsibility to us and show us his tax returns. I thank the gentlewoman from California very much for being here. I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler).

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the subject of my Special Order.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. I want to thank my colleague for coming and taking the time and speaking on behalf of public education and students everywhere. We talked about it before, and I am happy to announce that we will be working as part of the House Public Education Caucus and looking very closely at those issues that are being brought forth and those plans that are being offered. I know if you look at my district in my State of New Jersey, you see some of the finest public schools in the country. At the same time, just 12 miles away, you see some of the most challenging. I know in my district that, if Elizabeth DeVos would take a look at what is happening in my district, she would see schoolteachers anxious to teach but have textbooks in what is considered advanced placement classes that don't even have the cover on the top of the book that those children are using. I know this because I have seen it for myself. So higher education is, indeed, that issue, that opportunity, that difference between living a life of poverty and being able to educate yourself and prepare yourself for a future that we must stand up for, and we will. I thank the gentleman for the time that he has given us.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. By nominating Tom Price as the Secretary of Health and Human Services, President-elect Trump will continue his assault on the health of Americans. The HHS nominee has made a career on lining the pockets of insurance companies at the expense of the sick, on behalf of the rich, and his unwavering support of cuts to Medicaid and Medicare are forever known. This signals yet another broken promise by the incoming President to pledge to leave the essential Federal programs alone, and he is doing the opposite. This is, indeed, a problem. Defending the sanctity of American democracy is more important than any partisan consideration. Yet, after reports of Russia's attack on our democracy were confirmed, Rex Tillerson, nominee for Secretary of State, wouldn't say if he would support sanctions against the country. In fact, Mr. Tillerson admitted that he had not yet spoken with the President-elect about the conflict. This is a huge problem, not the least of which is one whether or not we can believe it. I now yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee), a champion for all progressive needs and for all families.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. I thank my colleague for sharing his insights and his experience with us. We have a lot of work to do, and we are ready to do it. Mr. Speaker, in addition to those that my colleague has mentioned, I would like to bring attention to some of the other nominees that we should be considering here. We haven't mentioned the Department of Energy and the nominee, Governor Rick Perry, who disregarded this agency so much that he couldn't even remember that he wanted to eliminate it when he was running for President, or even Linda McMahon, who is the wife of a billionaire. It seems to me that this litany of nominees belongs to the millionaire-billionaire club. They know each other well, and the one thing that they are committed to is ensuring that their interests and the interests of this President-elect, in his private life, are advanced. I think that the people in this country need to understand how troublesome this is. I yield to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Clarke), the co-chair of the Caucus on Black Women and Girls and a fighter for the rights of all working families and all vulnerable families.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. I thank my friend and my colleague. Mr. Speaker, defending the sanctity of American democracy is more important than any partisan consideration. We are at a juncture at which we will experience a President-elect who has displayed breathtaking ignorance about the powers and the basic functions of government and who has identified the nominees for these cabinet positions who, if confirmed, will dismantle equality, equity, and opportunity at every turn, capped off by a Republican-controlled Congress that would rather make good on divisive rhetoric instead of working in the best interests of Americans. There is just so much at stake as we go forth in the next couple of weeks and as the President-elect identifies and puts forth his nominees. Whether it is in the Department of State or in the Department of Education or in Energy or in HUD or in Health and Human Services or in Justice or in the Environmental Protection Agency--where a nominee, as Attorney General, spends his time dismantling and litigating against the Environmental Protection Agency--or whether it is Labor, where the Labor Secretary doesn't seem to care about working individuals and protecting workers' rights, or whether it is an SBA administrator who doesn't have any idea what it is to be a part of a working class or a middle class, or whether it is even the Treasurer of the country, who comes from massive wealth and Big Business, each of these illustrations, in combination with there being the decisions already to dismantle--to take health care away from millions of families, to create the loss of jobs as a result of dismantling the Affordable Care Act without placing anything in its place--represent the dismantling of the democracy that we have fought so hard to sustain. If we are going to watch these serious attacks on the equality and opportunity for all people, then we must make sure that the people in this country see these things. I have a question for all of us to answer. As we look toward all of these issues, either individually or collectively, at what point do we conclude with the question: Is what is happening in America un-American? Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, what is more important than being the President of the United States? For all of us here, that is a no- brainer; but, each day, I find myself asking that of the President- elect. Last night, we watched President Obama say farewell to the country he served. For the past 8 years, parts of our country disparaged him, and some of our colleagues fought him tooth and nail at the expense of their constituents; but, each day, we were assured that our outgoing President put this country and our interests first. President-elect Trump seems to serve himself. Yesterday, several news sources reported the possibility of a continuing exchange of information between Russia and Trump campaign officials during the election; so, in the face of yet another troubling revelation that further sullies the ground on which his loyalty to America stands, I have questions: Is our President-elect willing to sacrifice his personal gain for the good of this great Nation? When will we find out if he has fulfilled his legal obligation to pay taxes like millions of Americans do? How can we be sure that our interests will take precedence if we don't even know that they ever have? Will this White House serve as ``Trump Tower South''? The actions and words of the President of the United States have a loud and reverberating effect through the world economy and the international political system. To date, President-elect Trump's promises to America have been hollow and his actions self-serving. President-elect Donald Trump does not merely offer an alternative direction for our Nation; he, it seems, offers to use the Presidency primarily for his personal benefit. When given an opportunity to set these concerns aside, he scoffs at his critics and embraces our Nation's enemies. Instead of making reasonable attempts to reassure the American public, whom he will soon swear to protect, he gaslights us with tweets, mockery, and lies. In the past, we have seen the term ``un-American'' used to indict members of the public executing their civil liberties. Antiwar advocates protesting for peace have been called un-American. Civil rights leaders standing against discrimination have been called un- American--just ask Senator Jeff Sessions. Professional athletes taking a knee to acknowledge sordid realities within our justice system are deemed un-American, and comedians and pastors, alike, for using their microphones to criticize our Nation. But, quite frankly, dissent is American; protest is American; criticism is American. Healthy skepticism toward our national intelligence is American. Disparaging and discrediting it is not. Working with foreign powers to ensure peace is not only American, but also Presidential; inviting a foreign power to compromise the cybersecurity of private citizens is not. Empowering Americans to become involved in the political process, to take action, and to even be critical of you is American; attacking them when they call untruths and inciting your supporters to do the same is not. For these reasons and a host of others, I simply ask the question: At what point do the actions of our next President--President-elect Donald Trump--meet that threshold of un-American?

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues who have spoken this evening. As I have said, I would have liked to have spent this transition period working with the President-elect on ways to solve our Nation's issues. I would have liked to have been reassured that, despite disparaging and divisive rhetoric, his actions would have worked to unite us all. Instead, we are battling against a nominee who has already been deemed unfit for a Federal judgeship. So what can possibly make him fit to serve as our Nation's top law enforcement officer? The definition of justice is the quality of being just, impartial, or fair. Synonyms include equity, objectivity, and neutrality. Senator Sessions has built a reputation and a voting record that does not align with justice. I do not wish to relitigate the past, and while it cannot be ignored, we don't have to look too far back to identify Senator Sessions' priorities. In 2006, he voted to renew the Voting Rights Act. In 2013, he supported the Supreme Court decision to strike key provisions of that law. Following being denied a Federal judgeship, Senator Sessions cosponsored legislation to honor Rosa Parks with a Congressional Gold Medal while also voting against legislation in 2009 to extend Federal hate crime protections against people targeted because of their sexual orientation. Further, he has been the ringleader to immigration reform. How can we in good faith recommend, nominate, or confirm a person to a post that is solely responsible for protecting the civil rights of all Americans, including those who are vulnerable, disadvantaged, and discriminated against? This administration is continuing to ask us to put aside our intellect and to trust their intentions. I refuse. This administration would like us to support a man who, throughout his career, has determined the rights of those who look like me, like constituents I serve, as inferior. I refuse, and I ask the Senators to please consider this as they listen to whether or not this gentleman deserves to be confirmed. Mr. Speaker, as I've said before, I would have liked to have spent the transition period working with the President-Elect, Trump, on ways to solve our Nation's issues. I would have liked to have been reassured that despite disparaging and divisive campaign rhetoric--President-Elect Trump's actions would work to unite us all. Yet, instead we're here battling against the nominee for the 84th attorney general of the United States who was already rejected as a federal judge. His disqualification was rooted in allegations that he called a black attorney ``boy'' and his suggestions that a white lawyer working for black clients was a race traitor. Not only that but Senator Sessions found humor in his only issue with the Ku Klux Klan was their drug use, and accused civil rights groups as being ``un-American'' organizations trying to ``force civil rights down the throats of people who were trying to put problems behind them.'' So what could possibly make him fit to serve as our Nation's top law enforcement officer at the Department of Justice? The definition of justice is the quality of being just, impartial, or fair. Synonyms for justice include equity, objectivity and neutrality. Senator Sessions has built a reputation and, most importantly, a voting record that does not align with that definition. I do not wish to re-litigate the past as I would not want to be judged on my actions and thoughts of 30 years ago. However, Senator Sessions' growth and commitment to inclusivity--even 30 years later-- remains to be seen. Following being denied a federal judgeship, in the early 90s, Senator Sessions co-sponsored legislation to honor Rosa Parks with the Congressional Gold Medal, while also voting against 2009 legislation that extended federal hate crime protections to people targeted because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. While in 2006 he voted to renew the Voting Rights Act, just years later in 2013 he supported the Supreme Court's decision to strike key provisions of the law. Furthermore, he has been the ringleader of opposition for immigration reform. How can we in good faith recommend, nominate, or confirm this person to the post that is solely responsible for protecting the civil liberties of all Americans--including those who are vulnerable, disadvantaged, and discriminated against. This administration is continually asking us to put aside our intellect and to trust their intention. I refuse. This administration would like us to support a man who throughout his career has determined the rights of those who look like me and the constituents I serve are inferior. I refuse. This administration would like us to sit idly by as Donald Trump tries to overwhelm us into tacit submission to his dangerous agenda. I refuse. A Trump-Sessions Department of Justice would be not only an attack on our civil rights and equality; it would be an insult to the intelligence of the American people.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Article II, section 1: ``The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his office during the term of four years, and, together with the Vice President chosen for the same term, be elected as follows:''

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Madam Speaker, I am disappointed that we are here today asking the American taxpayers to waste another $800,000 on an unnecessary, dangerous investigation. This select panel was formed based on fraudulent videos created by anti-abortion extremists to attack Planned Parenthood, an organization that has always fought for women's rights and provides healthcare services to 3 million women and men each year. I was proud to be the first Member of Congress to speak out against these videos immediately after their release. And here we are, a year and a half later, with no evidence of wrongdoing after 17 separate investigations in three House committees, 13 States, and one grand jury. Yet Republicans continue to chase false, inflammatory allegations, at a severe cost to advances in medicine and to the safety of those involved in this lifesaving research. Panel Republicans have conducted themselves in ways reminiscent of Joe McCarthy's abusive tactics: witnesses have been harassed and intimated during testimony; names of researchers, students, clinical personnel, and doctors have been released publicly, placing their lives in great danger; misleading ``exhibits'' have been manufactured; critical documents have been withheld from Democrats; and Republicans have continued to fan the flames of anti-abortion extremism with their inflammatory rhetoric. Let us not forget the horrible tragedy that occurred in a Colorado Planned Parenthood clinic where a gunman shot 12 people and killed 3, echoing the same anti-abortion rhetoric used by Republicans to this day. What this investigation truly is is an attack on women's rights and women's access to legal health services. The select panel comes at a time when Republicans have repeatedly voted to defund Planned Parenthood, eliminate family planning services, and restrict access to abortions. This investigation dishonors this institution and hurts the American people that Congress is elected to serve. Let's put an end to the witch hunt, stop wasting taxpayer dollars, and reject this resolution.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, it is indeed an honor to be here and standing with Congresswoman Beatty and with Congressman Jeffries as you bring forth truth to power here in what you speak of. It is definitely a timely topic to be discussing unfinished business, what we can do. People need to realize that we have but 15 legislative days left in this congressional session, and there are so many things that need to be done that haven't been appropriately addressed. I want to associate myself with the comments that were made by those who came before me as it relates to gun safety. I want to remind us that back in 2012, in Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, someone went in there and killed 20 children and 6 adults and killed himself. Since that time, there have been at least 1,100, close to 1,200 mass shootings, at least 1,300 deaths, and at least 4,700 that have been wounded; and that is just since November 6th. There are so many commonsense gun safety bills that are just waiting to be voted on. I know that, if given the opportunity, the majority in this House would vote appropriately and properly, taking into consideration the safety and security they represent to our communities. There are other things that we need to be thinking about. We need to ensure that we are protecting the environment; that we are protecting the environment against unnecessary fracking and unnecessary pipelines. We need to make sure that we are reforming criminal justice, that we are educating, not incarcerating; that we are putting our resources where we get the best value. We need to increase the minimum wage so that people can have a livable wage, raise their families, take care of their homes, and ensure that they have a little bit of money to spend so that they can churn up this economy. We need to restore the Voting Rights Act. We need to ensure that voting is accessible; that people have the opportunity and the encouragement to vote when they are supposed to and when they could. Finally, one last thought from me, we need to look at the kinds of protections that we have had in our banking system, protect just everyday families with their investments. We need to make sure that we are investing in the 21st century Glass-Steagall Act. Those are the things that the people, everyday working families, look for us to do our work. Together, we can do those things and make it better for each and every one of us.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of S. 1698, the Treatment of Certain Payments in Eugenics Compensation Act. In the early 20th century, over 30 States enacted eugenics and compulsory sterilization laws, resulting in the involuntary sterilization of over 60,000 Americans. These horrendous and discriminatory laws targeted low-income individuals, particularly single mothers, African Americans, children from large families, and people with disabilities. Recently, two States with the most aggressive eugenics programs, Virginia and North Carolina, passed State legislation to provide compensation to the living victims of these programs. In 2013, North Carolina set aside $10 million for compensation payments; and, as of January 2015, the State had awarded approximately $20,000 to each of the 220 victims. Last year, Virginia passed a bill awarding $25,000 to each of its surviving eugenics victims. While these payments are intended to compensate individuals for past wrongs, they may also have the unintended effect of causing victims to lose eligibility for Federal benefits determined by income thresholds. Under current law, victims who receive eugenics compensation could be denied Medicaid, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance, unemployment, or disability benefits should the payments raise their incomes above program eligibility levels. Most eugenics victims were poor and disadvantaged in the early 20th century, and many remain so today. As such, they rely on these important Federal benefits programs to make ends meet. S. 1698 would ensure that State eugenics payments are treated like other medical compensation payments and not included in eligibility determination for Federal benefits. This would guarantee that eugenics victims receive all benefits they rightfully deserve. We cannot undo the mistakes of the past, but we can do everything in our power to ensure that eugenics victims are not subjected to unfair treatment yet again. I urge my colleagues to support S. 1698. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R. 1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, to honor the memory of Rosemond Octavius, a victim of gun violence who never received a moment of action on the House floor.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with great concern as the Republic majority has allowed the House to head home for 52 days without addressing the gun violence epidemic, providing resources to respond to Zika, or doing anything about the Flint water crisis. And that is just to name a few issues. Mr. Speaker, our constituents elected us to focus on their needs: growing our economy, creating jobs, improving education for our children, improving and ensuring safety and security in their communities. Now, we are about to leave town without handling at least these three incredibly concerning issues. I urge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to see reason, work with us to find a path to compromise, get back to doing their jobs, and give us a vote.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in support of H.R. 4785, the DHS Stop Asset and Vehicle Excess Act. H.R. 4785 seeks to bolster how the Department of Homeland Security acquires, manages, and oversees its fleet of, roughly, 53,000 vehicles. In 2014, the Department's inspector general found that the DHS did not adequately manage or have the enforcement authority to ensure that the composition of its motor vehicle fleet was right-sized. The inspector general observed that each DHS component managed decisionmaking about its own fleet, thereby making it difficult for the DHS fleet manager to provide adequate oversight and ensure compliance with Federal laws, regulations, policies, and directives. One major issue that the inspector general identified is that, while the DHS fleet manager had decisionmaking authority regarding vehicle leases, it did not oversee and approve the acquisition of component- owned vehicles. Last year, the inspector general amplified concerns about how the DHS manages its vehicle fleet in a report that was focused on operations with the Federal Protective Service. In a review issued in October of 2015, the inspector general found that, among other things, the DHS was unable to oversee policies related to home- to-work vehicle use by FPS employees and that vehicle acquisition decisions by the FPS leadership were ad hoc. H.R. 4785 seeks to improve the management of the DHS vehicle fleet by strengthening the oversight and management of the Department's fleet by the Under Secretary for Management by requiring the Under Secretary to issue a standardized vehicle allocation methodology for use throughout the Department, to oversee vehicle acquisition and lease decisionmaking, and to ensure components compliance with Federal laws and Department policies that relate to fleet management. The DHS has the second largest civilian vehicle fleet in the Federal Government at an operating cost of about $462 million. As such, enhancing oversight and management should help the Department to more effectively spend limited taxpayer dollars on what the Department actually needs to carry out its missions. I would note that H.R. 4785 includes language I authored to ensure that the inspector general's oversight of the DHS' management of its vehicle fleet continues by reviewing the development, use, and submission of vehicle allocation tools and fleet management plans as required. It requires the inspector general to specifically report to Congress on the effectiveness of the submission requirements with respect to cost avoidance, savings realized, and component operations. As the IG has reported, the DHS' inability to adequately monitor and oversee the Department-wide vehicle fleet limits its ability to detect waste and abuse. Therefore, it is imperative that the DHS continue to work to develop proper processes for fleet management and to ensure that components heads utilize the appropriate procedures to inform efforts at achieving an optimal fleet size. I commend my colleague from Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry) for introducing this legislation and for working in a bipartisan fashion to advance it. I urge the passage of H.R. 4785. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in support of H.R. 5385, the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review Technical Correction Act of 2016. It would require the Department of Homeland Security to improve the quadrennial homeland security review that is conducted every 4 years. Pursuant to the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, the QHSR should be a unified, strategic framework for homeland security missions and goals. The review was intended to be modeled after the Quadrennial Defense Review that the Pentagon undertakes to review the Defense Department's strategy and priorities. To date, there have been two QHSRs issued by the Department, in 2010 and 2014. While, by all accounts, the 2014 QHSR was an improvement from the first QHSR, the Comptroller General found that the 2014 review fell short in several areas. I introduced H.R. 5385 to specifically address the Comptroller General's findings about weaknesses with respect to stakeholder engagement, risk analysis, and documentation. To help improve the quality of future QHSRs, my legislation requires the DHS to utilize and document a risk assessment to help determine homeland security missions and threats. H.R. 5385 also requires more robust stakeholder engagement and better documentation of the factors that inform the review's findings. H.R. 5385 places a major emphasis on stakeholder engagement by requiring documentation regarding communications with stakeholders and information on how feedback from stakeholders influences the review. It also seeks to enhance stakeholder engagement by specifying certain key stakeholders to be consulted. To ensure that the risk assessment undertaken to produce the QHSR is repeatable in future years, H.R. 5385 requires the DHS to retain all information regarding the risk assessment, including data used to generate the risk results and the sources of information to generate the risk assessment. As our Nation faces an ever-evolving threat, it is imperative that the Department of Homeland Security effectively analyzes and defines future threats facing the country. With the use of a defined, repeatable risk assessment, as required in H.R. 5385, the DHS will be better able to outline specific threats to the homeland and offer tactical strategies for handling these threats. The DHS will also be able to gain insight from the entire homeland security enterprise and valuable stakeholders through more documented communications. Improving stakeholder engagement is important not only for the quality of the QHSR, but for ensuring buy-in from critical homeland security enterprise partners who operate outside the Department. The improvements provided in H.R. 5385 will make the QHSR the impactful document it was designed to be. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 5385, which was approved unanimously by the Committee on Homeland Security. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R. 1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, to honor the memory of Tre Lane, a victim of gun violence who never received a moment of silence on this floor.

Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R. 1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, and this is to honor the memory of Carl Batie, a former Mercer County corrections officer who was an innocent bystander killed in a hail of gunfire in a gang-related fight in the city of Trenton in my district. I do this to honor Mr. Batie, who was that victim, and I do this because he never received a moment of silence and he has never received a moment of action on this House floor.