have a right to exist. it is like the boy scouts trying to advise the marines. i totally support israel. another thing is, i hope that more people will begin to think about and give strong consideration on how they are going to vote on november 5 because if we don't get our border fixed, we have no national security if we don't have border security. host: the house is about to come in and expected to work on legislation centering around law enforcement. it is national law enforcement week in washington, d.c.. that legislation will be taken up in a few minutes. that is it for our program. another addition of "washington

journal" comes your way tomorrow at 7:00. we take you to the house of representatives.

. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by guest chaplain pastor mark westerfield, central baptist church, round rock, in round rock, texas. the chaplain: let us pray. our father in heaven, i am humbled to stand before you in these honored and distinguished men and women today. to stand in the gap and offer this prayer. today we gratefully recognize the gift of life, liberty, and responsibility you have given us to lead this great country. on behalf of these men and women, i ask for wisdom,

discernment, and unity as they carry the weight of caring for the close to 350 million citizens of this land. they care the -- carry the weight of protecting our lives and making sure that justice is paramount. we stand today on the backs of many that have gone before. and we stand grateful that you have shown grace and mercy to each of us. please give each of these servants the skin of a rhino and the heart of a lamb. we humbly ask this in your holy name. amen. the speaker: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house the approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentlewoman from texas, ms. garcia. ms. garcia: i pledge allegiance

to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker: without objection, the gentleman from texas, mr. carter, is recognized for one minute. mr. carter: i thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise this morning to introduce my long time friend, pastor mark westerfield, who i have had the honor of hosting as our guest chaplain in the house today. mark is the senior pastor at central baptist church in my hometown of round rock, texas. where he began his ministry nearly 40 years ago. under this -- his leadership, central baptist has expanded a house of worship services,

variety of ministries, bible studies, and the prestigious round rock christian academy. he has impacted -- his impact has extended far beyond the walls of his church. he's been instrumental in organizing the annual love the rock volunteer event that marshalls volunteers from 40 different churches to unite on a single day in service to help their neighbors in round rock. mark embodies what is great about the close knit central texas community where i live. and how we come together to make our city a better place to live. i'm grateful that mark westerfield is joining us as our guest chaplain. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain up to five

further requests for one-minute speeches on each side. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? mr. wilson: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. wilson: thank you, mr. speaker. roger, director of the ron reagan institute and former general counsel of the house armed services committee, published an op-ed on wednesday in the "washington post" calling for freeing american hostages from iran pepet hamas terrorists. quote, shifting away from mediation to a more aggressive stance to demonstrate that the united states does not leave its citizens behind, end of quote. corruption modifies daily for my invitation as a guest at the trump administration trump inauguration. i'm glad untrue thoughts, salacious details of marchan has

not been admitted as lies of his illegal conduct is ignored. donald trump will be re-elected due to the rejection of corrupt judge marchan derangement. in conclusion, god bless our troops who have successfully protected america for 20 years in the global war on terrorism as it moves from the afghanistan safe haven to america. we do not need new border laws. we need to enforce existing border laws. biden shamefully opens the borders for dictators as more 9/11 attacks across america are imminent as warned by the f.b.i. christians appreciate the courage of the truth of kansas city kicker harrison butkner, coach lou holtz is correct. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from texas seek recognition? ms. garcia: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute -- the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. garcia: mr. speaker, i rise

today to honor the life of reverend william "bill" lawson. reverend lawson was a giant in houston. he was a warrior against the evils of discrimination, poverty, homelessness. lifting dignity to its highest heights. during the peak season of the civil rights era, he was a key leader in houston where his best work was often behind the scenes. a patriot for peace, reverend lawson organized quiet desegregation of houston through secret meetings with the business community, a plan that kept away violence and bombings that were rampant across the south. reverend lawson was always on the right side of good trouble. the positivity he brought to our community will be felt for years to come. houston will miss reverend lawson and his quiet demeanor

and his endearing smile. i send my love and condolences to the entire lawson family as we remember him and all that he accomplished. well-done good and faithful servant. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from iowa seek recognition? >> to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. mrs. hinson: thank you, mr. speaker. i was born and raised in iowa, and i have always known that it was the place that i wanted to live and raise my family. and recently the "u.s. news and world report" caught up to what iowans have known for a long time. officially ranked iowa as one of the best states to live. they also ranked iowa third for new opportunities. under governor kim reynolds, iowa is flourishing. while president biden spent trillions of taxpayer dollars or woke priorities and created rampant inflation, iowa cut taxes for families.

while president biden opened our borders and allowed countless illegal immigrants to invade, iowa is working to deport illegals who endanger our communities. iowa is a model for the rest of the country. our prosperity under governor reynolds is the first contract to joe biden's national failures. iowa is leading the way with commonsense conservatism and our future is bright. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland seek recognition? mr. harris: to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. harris: mr. speaker, as we commemorate national police week, i want to take a moment to honor the memory of by comic could he county sheriff deputy glenn hilliard. an eastern shore police officer killed in the line of duty while protecting his community from a violent criminal. unfortunately, all too often occurrence in today's america. in the evening hours of june 12, 2022, he received a call that a

fleeing fugitive was in the surrounding area. while certainly potentially dangerous, this call wasn't much different from the hundreds of calls for help the police department and police departments across the country receive daily as they confront crime to protect our communities. sadly for officer hilliard, this call to duty would be his last. he pursued the wanted criminal, the fugitive turned and fled, and fired ultimately taking the life of officer hilliard. as officer hilliard's family reminds us, he died doing what he loved, and left behind a legacy of selflessly defending his community. in the end, it was not the way officer hilliard died but the way he lived. as we honor national police week, let's take a moment to thank the many police officers who risk their lives so we can be safe. may the memory of officer glen hilliard and all our fallen police officers never be forgotten. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition?

mr. burchett: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. burchett: thank you, mr. speaker. i appreciate you letting me speak today. i want to recognize the good folks at pratt's country store in fountain city. they have been long time friends of mine and my family's. perry's grandfather and brother bought the acreage in the 20's and it's been family owned and operated ever since, mr. speaker. pratt sells fresh produce, dairy, baked goose. the whole family grew up working in and around the store and you can tell. they treat everyone like family when they walk in. i also have never have to worry about where the produce come from, mr. speaker. because pratt's is known for locally sourcing their food from east tennessee farmers.

i also love walking into the store because it smells good. it smells like an old country store. it smells fresh and clean. they do things the old-fashioned way. they make people feel like they are stepping back in time. they were recently honored as found yea city's men of the year due to their amazing customer service. and everyone that goes there knows how delicious everything is and they have some really great vegetables. as good as their produce is, mr. speaker, they are best known for the family sphere. there are god fearing people and always been respected in our community. they have been here for three generations for a reason. i want them to know they are appreciated and i hope they are around for several foregenerations. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield the remainder of my t time.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? gleek, pursuant to house res. -- mr. speaker, pursuant to house resolution 227, i call up house resolution 1213 and ask for its immediate consideration in the house. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 1213.

resolution regarding violence against law enforcement officers. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 1227, the resolution is considered read. the resolution shall be debated for one hour, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on the jurisdiction or their respective designees. the gentleman from virginia, mrn from maryland, mr. ivy, will each control 30 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia. mr. cline: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. cline: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cline: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, it's my pleasure to welcome so many fine men and women in blue here in our nation's capital for police week. however, as always, i'm concerned every day for the safety and well-being of these brave men and women in the communities across this great nation where they live and work.

radical policies in states and cities across the country continue to promote a disastrous rise in crime and a dangerous environment for police officers. now more than ever, we must show our support for our law enforcement officers. as a former local prosecutor, i know just how important a robust police force is to keeping our communities safe. for effective crime deterrence you need prosecutors willing to pursue convictions, and judges willing to sentence and incarcerate. but first and foremost, you need police willing to arrest and charge offenders for crimes committed. and you need local and state governments willing to fund and support our police forces. let me be clear. this effort to defund the police has had a detrimental impact on efforts to combat crime, but also on recruitment, retention and morale among our law enforcement officers.

in democrat-run cities across the country, areas where they defunded the police saw a spike in crime and continue to struggle today with keeping their cities safe. despite democrats' calls to defund the police and the emotional toll that that takes, we know that law enforcement officers answer every call for help regardless of who the person is, what they believe, and regardless of the threat to their own lives. so many of those brave men and women who answer the call of duty, put on the uniform, go to work in the morning never return home in the evening. today there are 23,785 names of law enforcement officers who have been killed in the line of duty that are inscribed on the national law enforcement officers memorial here in washington, d.c. words can never express our gratitude to each and every individual whose name is on that wall. unfortunately we still see

warning signs that the environment does not show any promise of becoming safer. according to the fraternal order of police, 378 officers were shot in the line of duty in 2023. the highest number recorded since f.o.p. began collecting the data. so far in 2024, 136 officers have been shot. that must end. that is completely unacceptable. we must take a stand against these attacks and honor our fallen law enforcement officers. this resolution does just that. this resolution condemns calls to defund the police, it also recognizes that law enforcement officers must have the training and the resources necessary to protect the health and safety of the public, as well as their fellow law enforcement officers on the job. we must never forget those who have made the ultimate sacrifice in the line of duty. it is up to us in congress to honor their memories and to stand up and protect those who

do so much to protect us. i urge my colleagues to support this resolution and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. ivey: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. ivey: on august 29, 2022, two deputy sheriffs in prince george's county were ambushed in the home of the shooter's family. they had been called to the house to execute a warrant. a health warrant. because the parents were concerns about the erratic behavior of their son. elizabeth was shot in the back of the head. and james was shot and killed as well. he left behind a wife, two children and two grandchildren. she left behind a husband and a 3-year-old son.

i had just been elected state's attorney in prince george's county but i hadn't even been sworn in yet. one of my first duties was to attend the funerals for both of them. and my first memorial service during police week was in their honor. so i take this very seriously. the national police week commemoration i think is something that is very grave and we should treat it with great respect. and unfortunately the ambush that mcgreuder and arno faced that day, those haven't ended. we just saw recently the ambush in charlotte. four officers were killed, eight were shot. and we've had others like that all over the country. so my thought when we had police

week approaching was that we would approach this in a bipartisan mapper -- manner and i actually reached out and worked with congressman hunt from texas and we put together a bill that was aimed at expanding the number of police officers because we know that there are shortages across the country and we know that we need to increase the pipeline so more officers will come and take on these dangerous tasks. and stand in harm's way, stand in the gap, as the pastor said this morning. and it was a bipartisan effort, came out of the committee by voice vote. it was passed on the floor in a similar capacity. the senate companion bill is passed as well and we're looking forward to that becoming the law of the land in short order. unfortunately much of the legislation that's come after that has been anything but bipartisan. and the legislation we're speaking to today i'm afraid falls in that category.

i took a look at the bill, h.res. 1213, i'd hoped to see praise go out to our officers across the country for the work that they do. and the officers who have lost their lives in the line of duty. and indeed there are paragraphs that speak to that. but unfortunately there's passages that don't. and my colleague from virginia and his comments a few moments ago made some of the same kinds of comments with respect to, for example, the defund the police argument. somehow my republican colleagues have concluded that defund the police, a phrase that was used several years ago, is somehow fueling the rise of crime, in this particular instance, the death and attacks against police officers. but as i just mentioned a moment ago, mcgruder and arno were

killed over 20 years ago. we've been seeing deaths by officers in the line of duty for decades now. it's nothing new. so to kind of casually blame it on a slogan, that i'm not aware of anybody in the body here today that espoused that, certainly i didn't, to pretend that that's the reason that these shootings are occurring, that these killings is occurring, is, i think, unfortunate and an abuse of what this week is supposed to mean. now, in addition i would say this. i just mentioned, i don't know that anybody supports the defund the police slogan from a few years ago, but we do have colleagues in the house right now, house republican -- a house republican, who has a bill, h.r. 374, to defund a.t.f. and we have house republican colleagues who call for the defunding of the f.b.i. the irony of that, as those of

us who have worked in law enforcement know, i was a prosecutor for 12 years, four in the federal level, eight as a locally elected state's attorney, but the local and federal prosecutors worked together all of the time and it's critical, and sometimes they work together in task forces because they can bring the local, the state and the federal forces to bear and provide maximum support in protecting our communities. but unfortunately this piece of legislation and much of the legislation that's been discussed this week, that's been offered by my republican colleagues, intentionally ignores federal law enforcement. in fact, we had one that was marked up in my committee, judiciary committee, where i offered an amendment to include federal law enforcement and it was expressly rejected on a party line vote by my republican colleagues. and i got to say, you know, f.b.i., a.t.f., border patrol, they put their lives on the line too and we should respect them

as well. and so one of the reasons i can't support this legislation is that it really is disrespectful to those federal law officers. but the other, i guess, is back to the defund the police issue, there's a recognition in the legislation where it talks about the number of officers who have died in the line of duty in 2021, 2022 and 2023. and i can talk about the specific numbers in a moment. when we move forward in the debate. but one provision actually notes that 378 law enforcement officers were shot in the line of duty in 2023. and the one common thread between the vast majority of officers who have been killed in the line of duty, like arno and mcgruder, and the people ambushed in charlotte, like most of the people with their names on the wall a few blocks away from here, is they were shot. now, sadly my republican

colleagues are unable, unwilling, unsomething to take a step to address that gun violence. and, you know, the resolution here speaks in terms of defunding the police as the cause of their deaths. but all of us know that the greatest threat that these officers face is not being stabbed to death, it's not being beaten to death with a slogan like defund the police. it's being shot to death. and just briefly, in 2022, these are numbers from the cops, working with the national fraternal order of police, a total of 331 law enforcement officers were shot in the line of duty during calendar year 2022 and 267 separate shooting incidents, including 42 incidents where multiple officers were shot. now, i appreciate the fact that we're going to offer resolutions to praise officers, but if we're

really serious about protecting them, it's hard to ignore a data point like that. yet our officers have to go out there knowing that they face these threats all the time, they go -- traffic stops are particularly dangerous, but sometimes in the home, they can be ambushed there. stiemtion like in char -- sometimes like in charlotte, they can be ambushed in the open air. but taking that seriously i think is an important piece. yet the resolution doesn't even mention it. and i'll say this, and then i'll take a pause here for a moment, but there's legislation pending right now in the house of representatives. i offered one. assault weapons ban, i think, you know, i figured it might be a bridge too far for me to ask my republican colleagues to co-sponsor that. so i came up with a bill that's called raise the age and it would elevate the age from 18 to 21 to purchase assault weapons.

and i thought that would be a reasonable bill to offer because there was already a provision in the law for handguns. you had to be 21 to purchase a handgun. and i believe that was put in place during the reagan era. now, for my bill, raising it to 21, you got to be 21 to buy alcohol. i thought it might make sense to be 21 to buy an assault weapon as well. and i think we have 170-plus co-sponsors for that bill. but none of them are republican. not one. even though republicans had agreed to legislation similar to that in previous years. so, you know, i'll speak in a moment about the resources issue as well, in the 117th congress, democrats supported legislation to provide equipment to police officers, we'll get into the particular numbers of that in a moment. ...

none of that is moving forward in the house and none is certainly moving forward in police week. i just want to point out one little factoid from the cops document i mentioned before. it's under the heading bullet resistant vests. at least 34 officers were protected from gunshots that wore a vest. we are struggling to provide additional support and equipment for officers to help them stay safe on the street. that's what we ought to be doing during police week. and to the extent we'll talk in terms of resolutions in support of officers, let's strip out the political nonsense, the defund the police stuff i think really has no place in helping to protect police officers and make them safe. as i mentioned a moment ago, it's a slap in the face the way these legislative provisions have been proposed to always

exclude federal law enforcement. i know you guys have issues on the other side about some of them, but i think this isn't the time or the place to express it in that way. federal law enforcement deserves the same kind of respect, the same kind of appreciation, the same kind of protection that local and state law enforcement officers do. i'm going to urge my colleagues to oppose not only this resolution, but we have had others that have come through before. i think we have urge this many to oppose those as well. i urge my colleagues on the other side after this vote's over, you are in the majority so you can move this kind of stuff whether it really makes a difference or not, but hopefully after we get past this moment we can actually sit down and get back to the type of legislation that i worked with with congress manhunt that -- congressman hunt

that can really make a difference. to help get more police officers on the street. and to praise all of them for the great work that they do. with that i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. cline: i thank the speaker. i thank the gentleman for his remarks. i agree with him that we should stand in support of all of our law enforcement officers at the local, state, and federal level. in addition to the work that we have done together on bills affecting law enforcement in the judiciary committee, i'm also honored to serve on the commerce, justice, science subcommittee of appropriations where we deal specifically with support for federal law enforcement as well as programs for state and local law enforcement. i can commit to the gentleman that the appropriations process under chairman cole's leadership will be focusing on providing

that support for law enforcement across the country at all levels. i encourage him to keep a close watch on those bills as they move through and hopefully we can get his support for those pieces of legislation that provide that funding. we have loss of officers in every community. during national police week we pause to thank those brave men and women in blue in rural areas like mine, wearing brown uniforms as well, sheriff's deputies, and we remember those who were lost. we have have had lost in the sixth congressional district. we have had officers we have lost. it takes a toll not just on the families of the victims, but on the entire community. and we want to make sure that that number is reduced, eliminated, and we can do that

not only through funding efforts to support our police, but also through resolutions like this where we try and reverse the trend that we have seen across the country. in many democrat-run cities, frankly, where the antagonistic attitude toward men and women in law enforcement has reached a fever pitch. we have to turn that around. we have to restore that respect for law enforcement in our communities, that confidence in law enforcement in our communities, and through efforts like this, but also through efforts on the ground nothing can replace support for law enforcement among city council's, among elected officials at the local level, among teachers, among community members. that's what's going to be

ultimately the driving force behind the reversal in this anti-police, defund the police-type attitude in our communities. and the restoration of that respect. and a reduction in crime that would follow. because if you respect the police, hopefully it follows logically that you're not going to be someone who wants to cross the police in a way that -- by violating the laws. so we will continue to push legislation like this and legislation that we work on in a bipartisan manner. i'm sorry the gentleman says he can't support this resolution. i hope that we continue to work on these types of bills as we move forward. as to the issue of gun violence, i would say that efforts to raise the age at which adults in

this country can exercise their constitutional rights to defend their homes, defend their families, defend their communities are not the answer. we can only -- we only need to look in the district of columbia to see what has happened when the age at which juvenile cr crimes, the age for covering crimes and determining they are juveniles has been raised over the years and is now 25. if you are under 25 years old in the district of columbia, and you commit a crime, you can be considered a juvenile for purposes of sentencing and for purposes of punishment. that doesn't make sense. so we passed a bill this week that actually lowers that age from 24 down to 18.

because truly if you commit a crime and are a juvenile, i worked in juvenile courts so i understand that there need to be different approaches to pun punishing juveniles. they need much more restorative processes that bring them back to a point at which they will be law-abiding adults. once they are adults, once they are 18, treating them as juveniles only -- without any kind of punishment for the crimes that are committed, it really does nothing but encourage that type of illegal behavior once they reach adulthood. don't think that raising ages and pretending someone who is an adult is not an adult and can't exercise all of the rights enshrined to them under the constitution is appropriate. with that i would like to yield

such time as he may consume to the gentleman from minnesota, great law enforcement officer, mr. stauber. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. stauber: mr. speaker, i'm frustrated and angry but also deeply saddened. the law enforcement profession is an honorable one. to have so much compassion for others that you are willing to put your life on the line. it is as we say a call to service and not many hear that call today. if you had asked me a few years ago if my children should become law enforcement officers, i would have undoubtedly said yes. but after these last few years observing the treatment of our law enforcement officers, i would have to think twice about my answer. since 2020 i have watched the law enforcement profession become a punching bag, scapegoated by rabid media pundits more interested in click

bait than the facts. villainized by hollywood. and disparaged by city councils, members of this congress, both men and women, even our president. yet all these people expect law enforcement to respond to the calls for service. they expect them to take the verbal assault and show up with a smile on their face ready to serve. the wonderful thing about my brothers and sisters in uniform is that despite this treatment and abuse they will show up. they will answer every call. they will sacrifice their safety for others. they will help protect their community no matter how much ridicule or resentment they face. but i am here to say the things that they can't. i'm here to protect my brothers and sisters in the blue and brown because others won't.

enough is enough. law enforcement officers deserve our respect, our admiration, and our support to provide anything less is unacceptable. the resolution before us acknowledges the change in attitude towards law enforcement over the last few years and the subsequent violence directed toward them. it acknowledges that they respond to the calls for service no matter who is on the other line. it acknowledges that the job has only become more dangerous and more mentally and physically exhausting. yet they still show up for work not knowing if they have kissed their families goodbye for the last time. importantly, this resolution also acknowledges that we in this chamber set the standard. we are the ones who must demonstrate a respect for the rule of law and respect for our law enforcement officers if we are to expect the public to do the same.

we must do so on our actions and our conversations, and even the policies we consider. bills that never become law can have the most staggering ripple effect. they can persuade local municipalities to implement soft on crime policies and strip law enforcement of resources. they can encourage the public to cheat, steal, and disrespect fellow community members. they can cause good noble people to change their minds about entering the profession that i love so much. which is law enforcement. actions have consequences. and our communities are suffering as a result. let's take this moment to learn to change for the better, we can rise to the moment, stand with our law enforcement officers, re-establish law and order, and bring safety back to our communities. i encourage all of my colleagues to vote on this resolution. mr. chair, i want to take a few

minutes to respond to my good friend and colleague who is managing the time on the other side of the aisle. talked about a support for law enforcement, what he did. i want to read something to you. quote, it is not enough to hold the officers involved accountable, in the past year police killings have reached a record high, rogue, militant policing continues to run pam pant -- rampant across our country, threatening public safety in the lives of millions of americans are antiquated criminal justice system has long allowed -- has long aloud law enforcement to utilize excessive force and prejudicial policing practices while avoiding accountability. we need extensive reform now with de-escalation train -- de-escalation training and better policing. i'm urge my colleagues in congress to pass the george

floyd justice policing act. additionally we must invest in our communities through unarmed first responder agencies, mental health and crisis support treatment option, diversion programs, community intervention groups, and re-entry programs, we can and must do better to avoid tragedies and improve public safety. will i never stop working to support and enact changes that will make our country safer for all americans. the first part, this whole quote that i read was from my colleague who is managing time on the other side of the aisle. that's horrendous because the george floyd justice in policing act takes away qualified imm immunity. you take away qualified immunity from the american law enforcement officer, it will devastate our communities. it will devastate recruitment and retention and morale. you have to be kidding me.

mr. chair, this is what we are dealing with. i became a law enforcement officer in late 1994 when ron ryan and tim jones from the st. paul police department were ambushed and killed. i was a young officer, i didn't even have my funeral uniform yet. but i went to those funerals. wondering what profession i was getting in. even taking a second thought whether i should stay in this profession. one week on the job. in cottage grove, minnesota, i was working the night shift. myself and my partner stopped at a gas station, have a cup of coffee, midnight shift, talk about our families. we split up, he went one way, i went the other. .. within one minute he's screaming for help. he needs help on a traffic stop.

i couldn't get there fast enough. when my squad car got on that scene, the whole engine was shaking. i couldn't get to him fast enough. he was being attacked by the driver, the dog and the female passenger was crying. we find out when the officer went to make the traffic stop, the driver said to the female passenger, i'm going to kill him. when the officer went up to the window, the suspect was digging in his armrest, trying to get a handgun. and the female passenger was trying to move it away from him to save the officer's life. i got there during the struggle. and i left five minutes before that. he and i were having a cup of coffee talking about our families and our futures.

that's how quick it can change. and the cavalier attitude of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle is unconscionable. where were they during the summer of 2020 when officers were getting ambushed? where were they, mr. speaker? on december 15 of 1995, at 10:32 p.m., at the intersection of sixth avenue east and four street in duluth, minnesota, a career criminal tried to shoot me in the head, killing me, and -- kill me, and i survived by the grace of god. a career criminal that should have been put away years ago. don't tell me we don't have issues -- we have issues with prosecution too. the federal -- the federal prosecutor in minneapolis would not charge him with felon in

possession of a handgun. we couldn't figure out why. offduty police officer shot in the head by a career criminal, that should never have had the gun. wouldn't prosecute. but it was about eight years later when the drug task force supervisor woke me up in the middle of the night, called me, said, pete, we got him. egoing to prison for a long -- he's going to prison for a long time. we have stolen guns on him. he's not getting away with this one. it took them years after to put this guy away. then on a london road in duluth, minnesota, suspects tried to kidnap some folks. i get the call with my supervisor and i don't get to choose what call i go on. i don't get to say, i don't want to go on this gun call.

i don't want to go on that. i get the call and we go. every single police officer in this nation does the same thing. kidnapping, suspect with a gun. i go clear the room, mr. chair, and the suspect comes flying in the room, points a handgun right at me, pulls the trigger. and by the grace of god it didn't go off. and you know why i knew it didn't go off? it happened so fast. i saw it in his eyes. i was in a street fight for my life. and, yes, i needed some help after that call. and that's why i'm adamant that the professionals that serve our communities get the mental health they need and they need it now sometimes. so to listen to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle pretend they support law

enforcement, they've never worn the boots or many of them have never worn the boots. they have never answered a call, two shot, officer needs help. they've never, most of them have never had a suspect with a rifle in his hand ready to kill you. and i have to make a decision, mr. chair, if that rifle comes up, i have to save my life. i have to do that. i don't want to, but his actions are causing me to save my own life and the life of others. mr. chair, the honorable men and women in law enforcement in america deserve better treatment. this week we celebrated law enforcement week, police week.

we saw the men and women in uniform, the proud men and women in uniform. come to our nation's capital and be proud of their profession. this week, law enforcement week should be 52 weeks a year. every week we should support law enforcement and protect law enforcement. i am sick and tired of seeing this happen to law enforcement men and women, mr. chair, throughout this nation. there's members in this body that stand at the microphone and vilify law enforcement. they'll go to their funerals, though. they'll go to their funerals. when it comes to supporting legislation that i have here, a

resolution regarding violence against law enforcement. my colleague says it's partisan. you have to be kidding me. a resolution regarding violence against law enforcement officers. and my good friend calls it partisan. and, yes, defund the police was real. we're seeing the effects of it today. the recruitment and retention and morale are at the lowest ever. shortages, mr. chair, in police departments across this nation, including my hometown. they want to sit up here in police week and pretend, no, we're not going to have it. you either support law enforcement or you don't. and you know what, mr. chair. we need to -- most departments today wear body cameras or have squad car cameras and squad

cameras. we as a nation, cooler heads must prevail on the support for law enforcement. we have to understand what they go through. we must push comply now, challenge later. comply now, challenge later. mr. chair, in 23 years of law enforcement, when i placed somebody under arrest, place your hands behind your back, palms out, don't resist, you understand? and i placed my handcuffs on them, double locked them, escorted to the right rear seat of my squad car, when they obeyed my lawful order, mr. chair, i didn't get hurt. the suspects didn't get hurt. the public didn't get hurt. when a law enforcement gives you a lawful order, obey her.

obey a lawful order. when a law enforcement officer says put your hands on the steering wheel, put your hands on the steering wheel. when a law enforcement officer says, sit on the sidewalk for safety purposes, sit on the sidewalk. when a law enforcement officer says, you are under arrest for domestic assault, obey a lawful order, mr. chair. where did society, where did we want to be judge, juror, executioner, on the streets of the united states of america? it's wrong. mr. chair, we have to change and it's up to leadership in our nation's capital and elected leaders at all levels in every state.

to the men and women who wear the uniform in this great nation, i will tell you, it's a noble, honorable profession. and no matter what you hear from some folks that you're not wanted, it's unwarranted, it's not a good career, i will tell you. i spent 23 years as a police officer in the city of duluth, minnesota. i helped build a community policing program. i love the profession and i enjoyed the profession. yes, mr. chair, the darkest hours of someone's life we deal with. and we deal with compassion and professionalism. it's not easy. but we need the good men and women. and, mr. chair, we also need

people that perform violent acts against innocent citizens, we need to hold them accountable. we need prosecutors to hold them accountable when they perform a violent crime. and i will tell you in closing, mr. chair, we in this country, we better reshape our thinking and our focus toward safety of all of us. and we do that by supporting the men and women in uniform and we do that by electing leaders at all levels of government that support law enforcement. we in law enforcement want to be held accountable.

ok? but let me tell you something. right now we have a rogue attorney general in minnesota that has is taking -- that is bringing murder charges against minnesota trooper for what he did to save his partner's life and the use of force expert opined to that. that the trooper used lawful force to save his partner's life. he's now being charged by an anti-law enforcement attorney general. in fact, she can't even find an attorney in her own department, mr. chair, to prosecute the case. she's spending over $1 million of taxpayer money, mr. chair, to come to this town and find a prosecutor. it's unbelievable. and the people of minnesota should understand what's

happening to that good man, that good trooper and his family. i will stand up to the good men in law enforcement, no matter what i have to do, no matter what i have to do. mr. chair, i will say this. if we don't, if we don't have a change of attitude toward law enforcement, this country's going to be in trouble. and before i close, i want to ask. this is an ask to the american people. every american. the next time you see a law enforcement officer, i want you to look her in her eye and you tell her, thank you for your service, we appreciate you. she will take that response and

carry it with her the rest of the day, rest of her shift and forever. we need to show appreciation. with that, mr. chair, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. ivey: i've got to say, i am deeply shocked and offended by the statements that were just made, especially regarding me. but the larger context too. so the gentleman from minnesota read a quote that he attributed to me and it's a statement i made but it was about the killing of tyree nichols. tyree nichols was the gentleman from tennessee who was beaten to death over a period of like 10 to 15 minutes by, i believe it was six police officers.

i remember watching the video and there were multiple videos because they had different angles. one of the officers who had been beating him got tired, stepped away so he could catch his breath, and then came back to continue beating him. i'd never seen anything like it. i was shocked. i had cases when i was the state's attorney where police officers used excessive force and i prosecuted those cases in some cases we -- cases in some cases we -- cases, in some cases we convicted those individuals. but i guess my colleague from minnesota thought that the beating death of mr. nichols was good policing. but keep something in mind. the chief of the police of that department fired those officers because he recognized that that had crossed the line that good police officers recognize and follow every day, under every singer and in every situation -- circumstance and in every situation. i thought that's what we were going to honor this police week.

to sort of hold up the tyree nichols scenario as an example of what police officers are supposed to be doing during police week is insane. i can't believe it. but that's what he did. let me say this. it's important for us to make sure that we walk and chew gum at the same time. ... we want to honor good policing for sure. every community needs it. we need police officers who go out and do -- they respond to calls for robberies or shootings or whatever. we need detectives who respond in homicide and rape prosecutions and investigations. both at the local, state, and federal level. we definitely need it. but even they have recognized over time that the bad apples and the ones in tyre nichols' case were clearly not just bad apples but about as bad as you can get. they have to be separated out. it's important for the police to police themselves.

i know it's hard. we have to make sure they do it. he mentioned body cameras a moment ago. guess why we have body cameras? that was one of the innovations that was made to address excessive force. guess what? one of the things that's led to is better policing. when i first ran for state's attorney general in prince george's county, one of the issues i want on is videotaping interrogations. i wrote an op-ed, called safeguards for the innocent. i was joined by the former head of the homicide unit here in washington, d.c. we wrote it together. and the reason we wrote it was because we knew that if you videotaped these interrogations, we had a flurry of false confessions that had been made in prince george's county, and we knew they were false because they were proven to be innocent by d.n.a. evidence, so we knew they were false confessions. so we made this change to try and address that.

and guess what happened? initially the police officers had opposed it, but the good detectives realized quickly that the videotape showed the great work that they were doing and they were going about it the right way. and the juries appreciated that, too. because then we could just bring it in, set up the video, hit the tape, and the jurors could see for themselves and make the decision. that's good policing. and i think it's important for us to make sure that we hold police officers, just like we do prosecutors or any other law enforcement profession, to a basic level of following the law even as they try and protect us from misconduct. i guess this is kind of the par for the course now for my republican colleagues the january 6 piece, for example, we've got people running around on the other side of the aisle who are calling the perpetrators

of january 6, the rioters of january 6, they are calling them hostages and patriots. the people who were patriots who participated in it. according to them. and the ones who have been prosecuted and convicted and jailed, even though i think over 900 of them pled guilty, but others were convicted after jury trials, they have had their day in court. they have had their due process. they were rightly convicted and held accountable. they have been sentenced to jail. we still have people over there calling them patriots and hostages. even though five officers died as a result of january 6. and many others were injured, too. i'm hoping, again this is police week, and i'm hoping that we can get back to trying to do things in bipartisan way here, but based on what i heard from my colleague from minnesota, that's not likely to happen. it's important to make sure we do this. we've got to make sure that we recognize the challenges we

faced in law enforcement, and i support law enforcement as i mentioned earlier, legislation to try and increase the number of police officers who will be out there on the street because we need more police officers on the street, but the george floyd act, which was referenced i think a minute ago, is aimed at making sure that in addition to having more on the street, they do the job in the right way. now, when i first got elected, we didn't have iphones very often. so we prosecute these cases. we present the evidence to the jury. excessive force cases. and many times the jury would reject it. one of the transformations that happened with the iphone, though, was that people standing there on the street while excessive force was taking place, they videotaped it. and then they were able to bring that to the police and cases that probably wouldn't even have been charged previously were not only charged but led to convictions.

the george floyd scenario, the person who that legislation's named after, is a paradigm example of that. derek chauvin was there with his neck -- knee on his neck for 9 1/2 minutes. the police report that he filled out and the other colleagues on the street made no mention of all of that. but the videos made it clear that derek chauvin had basically just tangled him to -- strangled him to death with his knee. he was held accountable. and the other officers around him who did nothing while it was happening, they were held accountable, too. hopefully my colleagues, maybe my colleague from minnesota had that in mind when he made some of the statements he just said a few minutes ago. i sure hope not. because officers who do that belong in jail. they shouldn't have a badge, a gun, and a license to kill. that has to be given to the people who we can trust to enforce the law in the right way. and the vast majority of police

officers, that's how they do it. that's why we appreciate and respect them. but when they cross the line, i hope we don't have people like the gentleman from minnesota who is going to act like that's ok. it's not. we have to hold them accountable. a minute ago i mentioned serious legislation. it's a little surprising to me we are having such a debate like this over legislation that's just a resolution, basically. it speaks only of defund the police anti-like. but the -- and the like. the democrats in the last congress, for example, we passed meaningful reforms to support police, even though many instances they were opposed by republicans. last police week we pass h.r. 6943, the public safety officers support act, which extended death benefits to law enforcement officers with ptsd. it came over the objection of 17 republicans. including four on the judiciary committee.

last police week, h.r. 2992, the traumatic brain injury, law enforcement and training act. passed legislation as well. 21 republicans objected to that as well. we keep passing legislation, or we did when the democrats were in control, to actually provide additional resources an benefits to police officers who get injured in the line of duty. i think that's important for us to continue to do. but our colleagues aren't doing that. they are bringing this political legislation. they got real political a minute ago when the gentleman from minnesota was up there frankly ranting about things he attributed to me, which i think was wrong and incorrect. but more importantly things he keeps trying to attribute to democrats anti-change in policy. a couple quick points about some of the things he said. the decline in police officers.

i got to be clear. one of the things we have in the billdy with mr. hunt was we got a report that has a common study, it will help address a lot of the misinformation that's coming out on the other side about why we are having shortages. they are saying it's based on the defund the police slogan, but the roots of these shortages started many, many years ago. and some instance, some jurisdictions, we just have a cycle of people coming up for their retirement, 20 or 30-year marks. in any event let's try and make sure we get the evidence and the data so we can correct those challenges. it's not just fixing the slogan on the street. it's a dangerous job. doesn't pay as much as it should. there are many of the officers are potentially officers find they can jobs that pay as much and don't have to work as hard. for example. homeland security i remember the border patrol agents testifying that they are having trouble

retaining officers at the border. not because of defund the police slogan, but because they can leave the job and make more money doing other things and stay in the same community. it's less taxing than being an officer. if we are honest about it, then we can come up with better solutions to try and retain them. like maybe paying them more money. if we just keep spreading rhetoric about this is defund the police, we won't fix the problem and we won't get more officers. if money is the issue, and of course it's a factor, then just standing here and haranguing about defunding the police doesn't fix it. we have to find ways to raise the salaries and help attract and retain more of them to go out on the street. i'm going to stop with this at the moment. i first went into law enforcement in 1990 as a propertior.

i took it seriously then. the gentleman on the other side is accusing democrats of not being serious about police. we have police officers, former police officer here on this side of the aisle who are democrats. and i know across the country. not only that, every time i have run for office i have been endorsed by the f.o.m. in my jurisdiction. it's -- f.o.p. in my disjigs. it's unfortunate to use those attacks to justify a resolution that is proposed here. let's get serious. let's get back to doing things that actually will address the problems and retain more police officers. recruit more police officers. address the concerns that we have with respect to keeping safe on the street. and, yes, gun violence is a big factor in the dangers they face on the streets. so i think it's kind of hard to be serious about protecting them if we are not even going to discuss that. my colleague from virginia

mentioned he thinks we want to make sure they are 21 -- if you wait until they are 21 it undermines their second amendment rights. i appreciate that. i don't agree with that take, but let me say this. ghost guns, i haven't come across anybody that thinks those make sense. they are intentionally designed to avoid prosecution. they don't have any numbers on them. in order to avoid being tracked in the event of use for a criminal enterprise. the use of ghost guns in crimes on the street is exploding. we need to get our republican colleagues to help us support legislation like that. we are having trouble finding it. but today would be the day -- by the way, talk about killing someone on the street, it's handguns primarily as i just mentioned a few minutes ago, that are leading the officers' death on the streets. if we are serious about

protecting police officers, can't we do something to try and address that? can't we do something to try to limit the number of guns on the street? by wait, too, i know the argument's going to be, hey, you guys are soft on crime and all of that. remember, a lot of the people who commit these crimes don't have prior offenses. like the two that killed the deputies, the guy that killed the two deputies in my jurisdiction, he didn't have any prior record. he had mental health issues. we can't just assume that all of these issues revolve around people who have long criminal records because they don't. many times police officers are killed on the street by people with no prior records. let's try and address all these issues in a serious way, in a bipartisan way, because that's the way to actually help keep our police officers safe on the street. with that i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the house will be in order.

the house will be in order. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. cline: inquire how much time remains. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia has one minute remaining. mr. cline: the other side? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland has 3 1/2 minutes. mr. cline: we reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. ivey: i'm prepared to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized to close. mr. ivey: mr. speaker, no member of congress questions the difficulty, danger or stress associated with serving in law enforcement. we are grateful for each and every federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement officer, agent, or employee working daily, putting their lives on the line to keep us safe in every corner and territory of this nation. this week we should come

together to honor their dedication to their jobs and communities. lift up the names of those officers and agents who gave their lives in service, and wrap our arms around their loved ones left behind. sadly, republicans have chosen partisanship over bipartisanship at this time. i therefore must oppose h.res. 1213. i urge my colleagues to do the same. thank you. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from virginia is recognized mr. klein: mr. speaker -- is recognized. mr. cline: mr. chairman, we should be coming together. standing united on this floor in support of law enforcement today. unfortunately it's the other side that is going to object to this legislation in support of police. and objecting to the defund the police movement. yes, that rhetoric has come from members in this chamber on the other side. and yes, that has been followed up by action in cities across the country. we just had a field hearing in

philadelphia where they defunded the police. where they took money away from police departments in philadelphia. the gentleman may call the testimony of the gentleman from minnesota, our colleague, former law enforcement officer, ranting, but instead i believe it was a passionate defense of each and every law enforcement officer in this country. we must stand and back the blue. i urge my colleagues to support this resolution. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. all time for debate has expired. the previous question is ordered on the resolution and the preamble. the question is on the adoption of the resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the resolution is agreed to. without objection -- mr. ivey: i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays have been requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are

ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 337 and the nays are 61. the resolution is adopted. without objection, a motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. van drew: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that when the house adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at noon on tuesday next, for morning hour debate, and 2:00 p.m. for legislative business. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. van drew: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to remove myself as a co-sponsor of h. h.r. 1822. the speaker pro tempore: your request is granted. mr. van drew: thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will now entertain requests for one-minute

speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, i rise to recognize the critical public health work carried on by our nation's mosquito control professionals. mosquitoes are vectors for deadly diseases like malaria, zika and the famous west nile virus. mr. rutherford: the world renowned mosquito control district which is located in my district in st. johns county in st. augustine, florida, was initially formed thanks to floridians who wanted to live

mosquito-free. the amcd has served more than 320,000 floridians in st. johns county. amcd is now the leader in education and applied research all across the world in the field of mosquito control, not just in florida, not just the united states, but literally across the globe. i urge my colleagues to meet with their mosquito control professionals to learn more about this critical mission because it truly is about our health care in america. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from north carolina seek recognition? >> i seek unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute.

>> madam speaker, i rise today to honor the exceptional life of north carolina's peggy stapley who -- stamey who recently passed. a trailblazer for women, peggy shattered glass ceilings as the first woman elected chairperson of the wake county democratic party. ms. ross: elected to the north carolina house in 1982, peggy sponsored a number of bills that helped make north carolina a better place for all people. peggy's unparalleled commitment to progress and equality went far beyond her legislative accomplishments. during her final chapter of service to our state, peggy was appointed to the parole commission where he had service reflected -- where her service reflectedded her strong belief -- reflected her strong belief in second chances. madam speaker, today we mourn the loss of peggy stamey and celebrate the indelible mark she left on our state.

peggy's enduring legacy lives on through the barriers she broke and through the many lives she transformed. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> madam speaker, i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, girls sports should be reserved for biological girls. for decades title ix has provided young women the opportunity to compete in college athletes. mr. lalota: however, the biden administration's recent actions threaten these very principles. as a father of three girls and a husband to a former division i athlete who is currently a p.e. teacher, i am appalled by this administration's assault on title ix. allowing biological men to compete in women's sports denies young women the chance to develop physically and mentally as athletes and teammates. this undermines decades of

progress in gender equity in sports. fair competition is crucial to maintaining athletic integrity and the rights of female athletes. without proper protections, girls may face unfair disadvantages, discouraging their participation, hindering their dreams. upholding title ix safeguards the future of girls' sports, ensuring every young athlete can thrive and succeed. thank you, madam speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from ohio seek recognition? >> thank you, madam speaker. unanimous consent to address the house, revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. this police week i rise to recognize three incredibly dedicated veteran detectives of the akron police department who will be retiring from the force. detectives bertina king has served act ron community, each for a combined total of 99 years of experience. the trio started on the job

together in 1991 and since then they have each left their own personal mark on the department. detective king made history as the first black woman to join a.p.d.'s major crimes unit. she also helped establish the sexual assault nurse examiner unit at the former st. thomas hospital, to provide survivors of sexual assault with culturally sensitive and trauma informed evaluation and treatment. she led the effort to create the department's sexual assault kit initiative to bring justice to survivors. detective jones is a part of the street narcotics uniform detail which works to protect our communities from guns and drugs. he was also the first black k-9 handler in the unit with his dog, midnight. finally, detective williams is the longest serving member of the street narcotics unit, starting just one year after the unit was created in 1992. all three detectives have worked on high profile cases and helped bring dangerous criminals to justice. this trio has exemplified what it means to serve our city with dignity and respect and have demonstrated the power of having a force that reflects and represents the community they are sworn to protect and serve. we thank them for their many

years of service and wish them the best in their well-deserved retirement. thank you, madam speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. thompson: madam speaker, request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. thompson: thank you, madam speaker. madam speaker, i rise to recognize may as national foster care month and to say thank you to every parent, volunteer and mentor who worked with our foster children. i'm a proud member of the congressional caucus on foster youth and when i was 11 years old, a foster child came into our family, bob, and he continues to be my brother today. during this month, we renew our commitment to ensure that every child has a safe and loving family. i know firsthand how supportive -- how a supportive and loving home can make all the difference in a young person's life. madam speaker, there are more than 460,000 children and youth in foster care. these children and youth range from infants to 18 years old

when they age out. foster youth who transheition out of forest -- transition out of foster care system without a permanent home place them at high-risk of unemployment, poor educational outcomes, health issues, early parenthood, long-term dependency on public assistance, increased rates of incarceration, and homelessness. madam speaker, every child deserves every child deserves a permanent family and improve outcomes in the overall well-being of foster youth and their families. thank you. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from illinois seek recognition? >> i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: woiks. the gentlewoman is recognized. >> i rise to extend my thanks to the dedication and service of e.p.a. coordinator murphy. i asked e.p.a. administrator

michael regan to appoint a member to assist our response to the environmental health and safety crisis and he delivered. as the area's first dedicated federal coordinator beth has alleviated the assuming crisis. her evers to streamline collaboration will help ensure that federal, state and local government resources can be used collaboratively. it ha put a spotlight on the needs of communities. and i want to extend my deepest gratitude and appreciation for everything she has done for our community. as beth moves to her next assignment we welcome betsy nightin ga lmp emp and timely solve these problems once and for all.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. gaetz: i rise to alert this house of election interference going on in a manhattan courtroom right now and assert our equities to ensure that federal elections aren't subject to this devious. michael cohen is working around the planet earth who has lied to all three branches of government, he lied to investigators, sentencing judge and this very congress. if that wasn't enough, michael cohen led to this very jury tuesday, tuesday, he said that the correspondence he had was directly with president trump and completion of the payoff in reality it proves that he was complaining to keith shiller

about harassing phone calls from a 14-year-old and threat yepped to send him to secret service. he lies about matters large and small and reason he was held to the end of this case. it has failed and should be dismissed and the congress should certainly assert our equities to stop election interference. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from new mexico seek recognition? >> i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, i rise on this day of awareness to stand on the floor of the house of representatives, the peoples' house, to show support for each and every lgbtq person in the great state of new mexico and across the country. it is shocking and

unconscionable that there are still members of this chamber who act with hate instead of love. in fact, we just saw it moments ago who want to attack and criminalize who your who you love and how you live. i want the lgbtq community. i see you, i love you, i support you. you are not alone, not today, not tomorrow, not ever in this house, the people's house. i yield become. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> it's all fun and games until somebody gets hurt especially when it comes to youth sports, but that's j.s.m.p. comes in.

i rise to honor the jacksonville sports medicine program which allows local youth to swing through the fences without fearing for their safety. it was a joy to watch my kids play ball but what if they get hurt. we turn to jacksonville medicine sports program established in 1984 and guying light for families, coaches and doctors in sports safety. sudden cardiac arrest is the leading cause for death in kids in sports. 50,000 athletes have received free screenings, that is a stadium full of lives. we commend the leadership for their unwavering commitment to this cause. congratulations to the jacksonville medicine sports program. play ball. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman

from california seek recognition? >> i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. without objection. >> i rise today to remind this chamber and our nation that it has been over 100 days since congressional republicans blocked a bipartisan bill to restore order at the border and fix our immigration system. week after week, do-nothing resolutions attacking the president have been brought forward. but when they were presented with a bipartisan bill to actually tackle the chaos at our southern border and crack down on fept nil trafficking, they said this is not our problem to solve. this is a bill -- this is a bill that would have hired 200,000 border mere son ell and

immigration judges and making the process faster and narer and funded new inspection machines that could have been screening for deadly fentanyl for the past 100 days if only my republican colleagues brought this bill up for a vote. madam speaker, 100 days is already too long to wait. let's vote on this bill today. i yield become. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? mr. carter: i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. carter: i rise today to remember and to honor the life of robert bob merryman who passed away at the age of 69. he became his career in law enforcement and moved to chatham county in 1977 and became a

detective and moved to the savannah police force in 2004 and retired as captain in 2007. bob came out of retirement in 2013 to serve as chief of police in thunder bolt and retired five years later. his skills as a detective led him to solve some of the toughest cases in his department. he was truly one of our finest. he was known for treating his victims and their families with great dignity and respect. bob will continue to serve as a hero to many and will be remembered for his compassion, his selflessness and bravery. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> our men and women wearing the badge experience life

threatening risks every day. as an emergency medical physician, rirvetion -- access to resources have been a priority and increase funding to the law enforcement mental health and wellness act program five-fold to $10 million and increasing it to $12 million. this will improve the delivery and access for law enforcement and in closing i want to recognize the names of the officers from my district who made the ultimate sacrifice. brett harris, anthony ray gunnedo, jose gilbert vega, and k-9. i want to recognize their families for their immense service and sacrifice and as we

close national police week i urge my colleagues to improve the lives of fallen first responders' families. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from oregon seek recognition? >> i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> i rise today to share a simple truth, mental health care is health care. and we have to start treating it as such because these challenges are more common than people may think. several members of my own family have struggled with mental health challenges so i know how hard it is to watch the people you love suffer and not be able to help them. i introduced several bills to put an end to bring down costs and expand access to pier support programs and make sure americans can get the care they need. may is mental health awareness

month but raising awareness alone doesn't go far enough. we need bipartisan action. it is the only way to put an end to substance use crisis. as co-chair of the mental health care caucus i would like more policies passed people who are struggling like my family members and probably yours, too. i invite my colleagues to join me in this fight. my tore is always open and open to forging solutions together. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? >> i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. i rise to dr. rachel mam omp ump d, a fifth grade school teacher and illinois teacher of the

year. her dedication to education, service has made an impact on the lives of her students whether it help them succeed in their studies. she has become an indispensible leader pioneering cultural and social initiatives to create an inclusive environment where students connect with their peers. she embodies the qualities of an exceptional educator and inspiring leader. at the end of the 2023-2024 school year she will be touring schools around the state of illinois and sharing insights with fellow educators. i ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating rachel on being named teacher of the year and improving education for young people in the aurora community. i yield become.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> today is the 100th anniversary of santa cruise roller coaster the giant dipperrer. this roler coaster opened on this day and took 47 days to construct making it the fourth oldest roll earl coaster in the united states. despite its age it still packs a punch racing through a pitch black mine shaft and popping outside and going up a steep incline, it plunges straight did you know and races up and down its wooden brace tracks. just like any good roler coaster, it can turn your stomach. the giant dipper is exciting and

just plain fun. no wonder that more than 68 million people have taken this thrill ride. no wonder that the giant dipper is recognized as a national historic landmark. happy 100th birthday and congratulations to the santa cruz beachwalk. it is a fun and exciting ride that has pried generations of families with fun and fulfilling memories. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from new york seek recognition? >> i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. gentlewoman is recognized. >> i rise today to recognize rear dmirl mike rail fault use for his years of service. he served for 28 ms. ocasio-cortez: he served in

the coast guard rising to admiral. he began teaching at the u.s. coast guard academy and went on to become director and chief administrative officer at the university of connecticut. his consecutive years academic and professional leadership culminated in his tenure as the 11th president of suny maritime college. his leadership has transformed suny maritime and shaped the future of the maritime work force. his achievements include a $100 million in investments including for the establish. for the excellence of offshore energy. i was proud to help support the foundation for offshore energy with a $100,000 grant. as his time ends late they are month i'd like to thank president alfoltas personally

for his years of service to our country, academic institutions and people of new york. we wish you fair winds and following seas. i would like to submit -- i would like permission to submit an extension of my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? >> address the house for one minute and revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. davis: madam speaker, when insult, chaos and name calling become the norm it takes courage to come together, to work together, through our differences. america is facing significant challenges right here at home and around the world. i believe that the people of eastern north carolina sent me here to get things done. i work daily to be a champion for part of my state that's

often forgotten and left behind. my grandmother raised me to look for the best in others. because everyone is somebody. we must extend respect, we must extend dignity, we must extend civility, to each other. it's better to cross bridges together as opposed to sending one of the greatest institutions on earth over a cliff. we must put politics aside to achieve meaningful results for the people of eastern north carolina and our country. may god bless us. thank you, madam speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house the following personal requests. the clerk: leave of absence requested for mr. danny k. davis of illinois for today. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the request is granted.

under the speaker's announced policy of january 9, 2023, the gentlewoman from ohio, mrs. beatty is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. mrs. beatty: thank you so much, madam speaker. i rise today to sound the alarm regarding attempts to eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion, referred to as d.e.i., initiatives in medical education. any anti-d.e.i. efforts endanger our nation's health care and threaten ours global leadership in medical science. many in this chamber owe their health and lives to the ground breaking work of physicians of color. specifically today, black

physicians. many of our loved ones are living healthier and longer lives thanks to black physicians and medical pioneers. madam speaker, let me just ask this chamber and those watching. to listen. and then you be the judgment when i say to you, let's start with doctor kinsey courtman, who led the go the moderna covid vaccine. madam speaker, many in this very chamber, republicans, democrats, those in leadership, received the vaccine. and we can thank her for pioneering leadership for not contracting covid or being hospitalized or dying from severe covid symptoms.

so what are we afraid of? for physicians of color to be in medical schools that receive federal funding and that the school is sensitive to cultural needs. to d, e, and i. one in eight women in the united states will be diagnosed with breast cancer during her lifetime. whether you are republican or democrat, if you or a loved one have benefited from early breast cancer detection, it's thanks to dr. myra logan, a black woman. she developed early methods for breast cancer detection and treatment along with new antibiotics. others have benefited from advancement in chemotherapy

because of dr. jane wright, pioneered this vital cancer treatment in 1949 when it was still experimental. madam speaker, there are people in this chamber who have gone through chemotherapy, there are members of this chamber, democrats and republicans, who have benefited from the pioneering efforts of black physicians, so now we want to say that we would remove federal funding if a medical school wants to have programs for the underserved for those who are representing the great diversity in this america that we live in? simply put, doctors of color and black medical doctors in particular have shaped medical

science, saving countless lives globally, despite their essential medical contributions. systemic barriers. they are underrepresented in the ranks of medical doctors. as a result, d.e.i. programs and practices are key to their increased participation in our nation's health care system. listen to this. 60% of physicians in the united states are white. compared to just 5.7% of black physicians and that is with the support, madam speaker, d.e.i. programs and practices. so the question is today, what are republicans atrade of? d.e.i. offices in medical

schools promote racial diversity, cultural competencies among physicians. both improve health care for all americans. all americans. especially underserved communities of color. d, e, and i practices and training help correct biases about racial differences and adversely impact medical judgment, treatment decisions, and patient interactions regardless of social economic status. we therefore need to be doing more. let me say this again. we therefore need to be doing more and not less to ensure that our nation's health care work force is diverse and culturally

competent. why am i doing this today? why do i take this hour to come to this floor, in chamber -- in this chamber, where we will make decisions that affect the lives of all americans? we celebrate our rich history, the 70th anniversary of brown vs. the board of education, all about education and our children. you would think in 70 years that we have moved away from the systemic racism, that we have moved away from not wanting us to be culturally sensitive to help us serve all americans. you see, i am here today because some of my republican colleagues supporting this bill, the so-called education act, which

would cut off federal funding to medical schools pursuing deform e.i. initiatives. let me say this again. i know it's hard to believe for those who are watching me in this chamber, this chamber where we are elected to represent all people. we know there's not a competitive edge. you've already heard the facts that only 5.7% of the physicians are black americans. so this so-called education act again would cut off federal funding to medical schools pursuing d, e, and i initiatives. this harmful legislation and similar d.e.i. threats prioritize intolerance over innovation and stifle cultural competencies in the medical profession.

what if i suggested and wrote legislation that would say we will withdraw federal funding from medical schools that fail to implement culturally sensitive d, e, and i policies and practices? what if? let's take it a step forward, madam speaker. this morning. what if i were to say that legacy programs at medical schools should be abolished. and that relatives and donors that -- who simply write a check to have their name listed on the wing of a medical school, that their children could not go there. that they would not be able to have a legacy program where simply because of writing a check, you could be admitted to a medical school. tholed they receive, or should

they not receive preferential treatment in medical admissions? we know that this happens. over 60% of the united states doctors are white. while white people comprise just over 50% of the population. you do the math. who is overrepresented here? look at the legacies admission policies and other forms of systemic racism and you tell me who has an unfair advantage. we should support and not stop initiatives that help diversity. or helps to diversify our physician painline. such as a program called made for medicine, which support ofs black and middle and high school

students interested in medicine with training and mentoring to the best position, to best position them for success. this program, made for medicine is such an incredible program. and madam speaker it gives me great honor today because the founder of that program, a young, brilliant physician who just happens to be a black american, who just happens to be someone that i have watched her grow up, watched the dedication of doctor laura espy veil, who decided for all communities that it would be good to have a program that educated our children so they could see faces like them because the research shows, when we go into a hospital, whether you are black -- how great it is to see

someone that looks like you. whether you are hispanic to see someone, or asian american, and the list could go on. to be able to have that appreciation. you see, not only is dr. laura espy veil the founder of made for medicine, she could have just talked about herself, she brought other doctors along with her. some are photographed here, i have another photo we'll get on the floor soon of black male doctors. you see, as shown in this photo, you have a young physician, i call him dr. b.j. he is a cardiovascular neurologist. he did his internship and his residency at the henry ford

hospital. not only is he a brilliant, brilliant neurologist, but he gives back to the national american heart association. he is revered as one of the top in the nation. but guess what? he just doesn't serve black americans, he serves white and brown americans, like all of these physicians. this brilliant doctor comes from a line, family line of physicians. his father and a dear friend and a constituent in my 3rd congressional district, the world would put his reputation as an oncologist among the best of white physicians and black physicians. now just think for the young doctors william hicks and b.j.

hicks, that we are denying that right like spencer, my grandson who may want to follow in their footsteps if they went to a medical school that had federal funding and said we want to have d.e. and i. programs. when you walk into her downtown-owned, have graham, her office is is as diverse looking if we look to the left and right. but again, we would not have brilliant doctors like the hicks if this legislation goes forward. and i go on and on. i could tell you about dr. joshua joseph who did his

internship and residency at yale medical school. and his wife is a neurologist. two young black physicians who are saving black and brown and white lives. but here we are today in this chamber dealing with a piece of legislation that says, medical schools shouldn't be culturally sensitive, that medical schools should not have d.e. and i. programs and yet our country is built on a history, thank goodness, pioneers in medicine who have saved black, brown and white lives, democrats and republicans, and a republican would bring to this house floor,

a bill that should not see the light of day. let me just say these physicians and thousands more were trained at institutions, thank goodness that understood teaching and cultural sensitivity and leading health care educator that partners with organizations to address their future work force needs. 80% of their medical graduates serve low-income communities. and 44% in immediately underserved areas. when you look at these two programs, they are just a few examples of how d, e and i initiatives can enrich our physician pipeline. earlier this month, i proudly

filed a resolution with congressman castor that stands in contrast to the so-called education act. rather than cutting federal funding to medical schools, pursue d, e and i initiatives as outlined in the education act, our resolution reaffirms the importance of efforts in medical education. our resolution is supported with over 25 medical and medical education organizations including the association of american medical colleges, the american college of physicians and the american federation of teachers. so make no mistake the education act is yet another misguided

republican effort to diminish the quality of health care of all americans, especially communities of color. whether it is proposing a voucher-like system for medicare, reducing the aft -- affordable care act with or attempting to substitute the a.c.a. coverage for medicaid recipients, republicans continue to attack equitable, quality health care access. meanwhile, my side of the aisle continues to work for accessibility and affordable health care by lowering the costs of prescription drugs. i could tell you how many people are diabetic and went to get their insulin and could not

afford it. madam speaker, that's not just black americans, black, brown and white. someone in this gallery today is diabetic and when we were able to lower that cost to $35 a month, we did not care whether they were democrat, republican, black, brown or white. it was about putting people in politics. it was about serving the wonderful america that i have the opportunity to serve. and so if it seems like i am passionate today, it is. i lost my late husband just a few years ago unexpect he hadly, but i am thankful there were doctors there in his time of need, black and white physicians. yes, they went to medical school

that had federal funding. yes, they up understood our life, our culture, because they were sensitive to cultural and diversity issues. so all i am asking today of my colleagues is to just look at what's right for our children, for our families. today we had 300 and some students in the 8th grade here in this chamber. a week ago, i had 200 and some 8th graders in touring this wonderful institution. and madam speaker, do you know how proud i was to be able to tell them about the rich culture, the rich history and how i am fighting for civility

and how i am fighting for us to work together in the days of rosa parks not being able to sit in that 7th row in the seat for colored women and men without being arrested. that we should be far beyond 1955, far beyond 70 years ago when we couldn't attend the same schools because of segregation. here, in this house, is no place for us to deny black physicians who serve black, white and brown constituents the opportunity to ma trick can you late in a -- matriculate in a medical school because that medical school believed in training brilliant minds like these physicians to

go out in the world and not, and not, not understand the value of taking care immediately, socially people of all colors, of all ethnicities, of all races. but today in this chamber, we have members who want to take away the rights of medical schools to be able to teach cultural sensitivity and to have de e and i programs. i am grateful to this opportunity and this hour to share my views, to share my passion. and madam speaker, to ask this chamber to not allow that bill

to see the light of day. thank you. and for the people inputting people over politics, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentlelady -- the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced policy of january 9, 2023, the gentleman from california, mr. kiley is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader. mr. kiley: i would like to share a remarkable moment from a

committee hearing this week with health and human services secretary becerra. he began his testimony by saying that we can now manage covid like we do the flu. and so i asked mr. becerra, if that is true then what about these 30 colleges and universities across the country that still have covid-19 vaccine mandates, that is they require students to get a vaccine in order to enroll and will expel students who do not comply with that mandate. i asked the secretary, if it is true we can now manage covid like the flu, will you call on these 30 universities that right now in may of 2024 still have covid vaccine mandates and the secretary refused to do it. he is just fine with these institutions continuing to

impose these exclusionary policies. now, at this point in time, it is so beyond the pale to continue to have these mandates that i think it's important to specifically call out the universities that still have them. we now know there wasn't any public health justification for universities to have covid vaccine mandates and not consistent with the values of our country or values of higher education. but to still have them are so beyond the pale that i think we should recognize each and every university that still has them. cal state, cal poly humble. c.s.u. san francisco state, harry mud college. mount st. mary's university.

ponoma college, university of san francisco, scripps college, mitchell college, trinity washington university, clark atlanta university, more house, more is brown college, owing will thorpe university, spellman, methodist college, dillard university, southern university system, wellsly. wayne state university, franklin pierce, mount st. vincent, kinder land, worcester, written march and swarthmore. i am calling on these 30 universities to end your covid vaccine mandates immediately and end your status as bass tans of ignorance in american higher education.

madam speaker, two days ago, i rose on the floor of this house to call for the resignation of the president of sonoma state university in california. this institution is one of a disturbing number that have chosen to deal with this highly disruptive trend of encampments on campuses not by even handedly enforcing university's rules and enforcing the law but rather by caving to the demands of the small minority of unlawful protesters. caving to their demands, appeasing their desire of changes in university policy, in order to make university policy anti-israel and anti-semitic in nature. what happened at sonoma state

was particularly egregious. in response to the demands of the illegal encampment, the university president agreed to divest, agreed to an academic boycott, agreed to even scrub any mention of israel from university materials. perhaps worst of all, he agreed to convert the unlawful encampment into a permanent advisory council with the members of the encampment responsible for picking who is part of it and they would then have the power to enforce these anti-israel policies going forward. well, we finally have a little bit of good news. in that this call was heard by the chancellor of cal state university, and that university president is now on administrative leave. of course that doesn't go far enough. he has no business leading the university in our state or in

this country when you are willing to institutionalize the anti-semitic demands of those who are disrupting the university by unlawful means. unfortunately, sonoma state university is not alone in california, as you can see right here from these headlines. there are a number of other universities within the california state university system, within the university of california system, and in other institutions public and private across our state and across the country where suddenly administrators have decided to negotiate with these encampments and to reach agreements with them. based on what they want. it is hard to overstate just how perverse this truly is. let's leave aside for a moment the substance of what they're

agreed to and just consider the message that this sends. the precedent that it sets. that the way to get your -- the way to get what you want on the university campus is not by presenting a reasoned argument, not by convincing the governing body and your fellow students and other stake holders. rather it is to try to use force to get your way. and these unlawful encampments, we heard an example from a student at harvard in a committee hearing the other day. they are refusing to leave. they are occupying public spaces, they are disrupting the function of the university. in this particular example they had self-appointed campus monitors who would follow jewish students on campus around and monitor their activities. we've seen examples of occupying buildings. we've seen students being stalked from -- stopped from entering the campus, entering the library, entering other

public spaces. we have seen loud disruptions that stop academic activities from proceeding in. a number of cases, universities have responded in a way that's also unacceptable which is by canceling classes, canceling graduation ceremonies and thereby punishing all students. but what message does this send that those who are engaging in these unlawful activities, many of them not student, by the way work a lot of funding coming from the outside, we're going to give them what they want. we're going to reward those tactics. what exactly does that encourage in the future? of course what it does is encourages these tactics to be repeated. and the reason that these tactics are being resorted to is because those who are behind the encampments know that their argument is completely morally bankrupt and bigoted and would

never prevail in a reasoned dialogue. which is why it's such a farce that some of tease university leaders have patted themselves on the back and said, oh, die slog the answer. negotiations are the answer. the problem is, they are only giving voice to those who are creating the disruption. when these so-called negotiations are going on, it's only those who are responsible for the problem that are being listened to. we're not seeing any evidence that they're bringing in representatives from jewish student groups, or for that matter the broader law-abiding student community. student body. to come and have their voice heard. rather, they're elevating this small, disruptive minority and privileging their despicable points of view. i want to submit for the record

a letter i have written to the leaders of our public education systems in california. this is to president drake, the president of the university of california, and chancellor garcia, who is the chancellor of california state university. i'll read a few excerpts here, we're sending them this letter today, i'm hoping it will put a stop to this incredibly disturbing trend. over the past month campuses in both the u.c. and c.s.u. systems have been disrupted by illegal encampments. these encampments violate university rules, violate the law, and have given rise to other disruptive activities posing a threat to the safety, civil rights and learning of students. some u.c. and c.s.u. state of the unions have responded by rewarding the perpetrators and incorporating their anti-semitic demands into university policy. specifically, a number have agreed to boycott, divest and sanction programs b.d.s.

relating to israel. we saw sonoma state's president agree to end all study abroad programs in israel and divest from companies in israel. they will scrub references to israel and convert the encampment into a new council charged with enforcing the new anti-israel policies. the letter goes on to list several other u.c. systems. c.s.u. san francisco, u.c. sacramento. and continues, irrespective of the merits of these policy change which to be clear are altogether unmerit oirs, bigote, bigoted, to allow a small minority to get their way through force is no way to run a campus. it's not clear what everis were

made to consult with jewish student group before capitulating to these demands. there's a need for action to restore order on campus, stop the adoption of b.d.s. policies and where appropriate appoint new campus leadership. i'm a member of the education and work force committee and chair of the work force production subcommittee and i'm actively involved in the house of representatives' ongoing investigations of anti-semitism in higher education. i tell these university system leaders that i would like oa timely response as to what steps they are taking to avoid further damage to california's universities which have long been a tremendous asset to our state and country. i will of course share with the public the response that i received from these university officials and moreover this next week we have the leader of one campus, ucla, who will be

appearing before our committee on education in the work force to be held to account for the horrifying events that unfolded on that campus. thanks to the university's failure to take action to protect students. madam speaker, i would like to call the house's attention to a extremely concerning statement made by the secretary of health and human services, javier becerra, at a hearing this week. i asked secretary becerra about the illegal chinese bio lab that

had been discovered in california with choughs ties to the chinese communist party. this lab was discovered in a town outside of fresno in 2022 or early last year, actually. and was discovered to have many dangerous pathogens. that were labeled, some were labeled in mandarin. some were labeled in some code that was not decipherable. there were 32 refrigerators and freezers containing pathogens like e. coli, hepatitis b, hepatitis c, h.i.v., malaier yasm you had mice, about a thousand of them, some dead by the time they were discovered, that were by some reports genetically engineered to carry the covid-19 virus. at the time that this was discovered, i called for an investigation and eventually the select committee on the chinese communist party produced an incredibly disturbing report. about how this lab had been set

up by a gentleman named jessie zhu, who had come from china and ran several companies linked to the c.c.p., he had then gone to canada where he started a company designed specifically to steal american i.p., he was found liable in court for hundreds of millions of dollars in damages, so eventually fled as a fugitive to the u.s. where he eventually set up his lab that was illegal, that was violating all sorts of laws, and had all manner of code violations. and it wasn't exactly clear at all what the lab was for because they said it was there to make test kits, pregnancy test kits, covid test kits, but that's not actually what they were doing. the test kits they were selling were coming from china and being sold as counterfeits.

mr. zhu, by the way, is now under federal indictment. but i asked secretary becerra at this week's hear, can you tell us with confidence that there are not similar such labs operating secretly in ill -- and illegally throughout the united states. he said no. that he could not say that. with confidence. this is an incredibly disturbing situation. i am authoring boish legislation with representative costa de designed to close the regulatory loophole that allowed for those dangerous pathogens to be in this lab undetected. i also recently sent a director to the -- a letter to the director the c.d.c., mandy cohen, which is under the direction of secretary becerra's health and human services. because one of the truly disturbing parts of the story is the c.d.c. completely dropped the ball and ignored the

situation long after it had been discovered this select committee on the c.c.p.'s report found that local officials had begged the c.d.c. to come in and investigate after they found the lab and the c.d.c. repeatedly ignored them and even hung up on them. i've spoken to the city manager myself, and they said their cries for help from the federal and state were completely ignored. it was only after representative costa, who represents that area, got involved that the c.d.c. came to investigate. even then, their investigation was completely inadequate. incredibly, they didn't test any of the actual samples. so some of these were labeled with e. coli or hepatitis or whatever it was. and they just sort of assumed that that was accurate. some of them were labeled in

some indecipherable code and they didn't bostonner to test those. there was a refrigerator labeled ebola found by local officials afterwards that completely escaped the c.d.c.'s notice. so i've sent a letter to director cohen asking for an explanation. as to how it is that the c.d.c. ignored and then failed to sufficiently investigate this danger to public health. with pathogens that the c.d.c. itself cites as being a grave danger to human health and to communities. these are the questions that i have posed to director cohen. why were local officials ignored by the c.d.c.? why were none of the unlabeled agents tested? why did the c.d.c. falsify claims it could not test unlabeled select agents when they previously tested unlabeled

select agents in many cases, such as when anthrax was sent to this building. why did the c.d.c. order state officials not to test any samples themselves even though this would result in an abatement order causing all samples to be destroyed. how did you miss a freezer that was labeled ebola? how did this lab escape detection in the first place? what is the c.d.c. doing to prevent future labs of the same nature being built? what path yen enforcement gaps allowed the illegal importation of deadly pathogens? what efforts are being made to crack the code used to label ties there any investigation into what the samples were being used for since there is little market for any tests? indeed, there is little apparent financial motive for the

activities in the lab given that the kits that they were selling were coming directly from china. and mr. zu who ran the lab who is now under federal indictment was receiving regular payments from china while the lab was in operation. so would ask the director for a timely response to these questions and i am also urging my colleagues in the house to pass my legislation with representative costa to do everything possible to get to the level where we have the confidence that secretary becerra by his own admission lacks and say there are no illegal biolabs operating in this country.

madam speaker, i want to address an extraordinary development that happened yesterday, right before a judiciary committee hearing in which we ultimately voted to cite the attorney general of the united states merrick garland for contempt of congress for defying a congressional subpoena. just minutes before this hearing happened, we received a letter from the president's counsel invoking executive privilege with respect to the materials that our committee has been seeking. those materials being recordings of president biden's interviews with special council robert hur. i want to take a moment to

address just how absurd this invocation of executive privilege is. indeed, i want to identify the six absurdities of this invocation of executive privilege. just as a little bit of background first as to how we got here. in 2022 attorney general merrick garland ordered an unprecedented raid of mar-a-lago purportedly in search of classified documents. this became awkward for the administration when it was soon revealed that president biden himself had various classified documents scattered about his personal properties. so attorney general garland in an attempt, i suppose, to appear even handed, appointed a special counsel, appointed robert hur,

special counsel to investigate president biden's possession of classified documents. earlier this year, we received the report from special counsel hur, and the report found considerable evidence that president biden had willfully obtained classified documents in violation of the law. he found evidence as to each of the elements of that criminal offense. i asked special counsel hur when he came to testify before our committee, could a reasonable juror have voted to convict the president? and special counsel hur answered yes. now it's important to note that some at that hearing tried to cast dispetitioners on mr. hur's

integrity when garland appointed him, he praised his long career and distinguished career as a career. now despite those findings, special council hur opted not to charge the president citing his age and lapses of memory that he displayed during his interviews with hur. so the judiciary committee sought access to these records of those interviews given the obvious public interest in matters pertaining to his competency or his potential criminality. and eventually the justice department responded by producing redacted transcripts of president biden's interviews with special counsel hur. however they continually refused

to produce the actual recordings of those interviews, which shifts explanations over time until the judiciary committee was forced to convene a hearing yesterday to cite the attorney general for contempt because the subpoena that had been dually issued for those materials was being defied. attorney general garland refused. after months of back and forth, that suddenly this letter lands from the white house that says, well, we are invoking executive privilege with respect to those recordings of president biden's interviews. i want to go through the six absurdities of that particular use of executive privilege. the first is just the timing, as i have already mentioned, that this had been going on for a

long time and right when we are to begin a hearing that they suddenly come in and invoke this privilege. the second absurdity is that this is not at all what executive privilege is meant for. executive privilege is a facet of the separation of powers that is designed to protect the president's internal deliberations so that, for example, his advisers can give unvarnished advice when it comes to policy decisions and don't have to fear that anything they say, even if it's advice that the president doesn't ultimately take will suddenly be made public. that is the purpose of executive privilege is to protect these internal deliberations of the president on matters of policy. this is an entirely different situation. it's not pertaining to the

collaborative discussions involved in policy making, rather it is the adversarial situation of an investigation of the president himself and the president's interview with his investigator. there was no decision on the part of the president that was being made, it was a decision on the part of the special counsel that was being made as to whether or not the president ought to be charged with a crime. and so the justification nor executive privilege simply doesn't exist in this scenario. the third absurdity is that the president already waived the privilege at the time that this was invoked that we received the letter yesterday, we already had the transcrypts of the interview. how is it the transcripts of the

interview are not privileged but the recordings of the interview are? the fourth absurdity is that the justification for invoking the privilege completely contradicted the justification of the attorney general had been giving for not complying with the subpoena and handing over the recordings. the attorney general has maintained throughout this process that he doesn't need to hand over the recordings because they are cumulative meaning they are the same as what has already been produced and don't need to keep producing the same thing. now we have the president's counsel coming in and saying, no, no, no, they are so different, the transcripts versus the recordings that one is not privileged and the other is. the fifth absurdity of this letter from the president's counsel is that it explicitly

cites a political motivation for invoking the privilege. the president's council edward siskell fierce that the recordings will be used for political gain. suffice it to say, a fear of political fallout, an adverse of political consequences is not an adequate basis for invoking executive privilege. now, of course, the letter tries to couch it a little differently. the letter says, what we are actually afraid of is that the recordings are only being requested for political purposes and that once they are obtained, they will be sliced and diced and used to politically damage the president. but that amounts to saying the same thing as we fear the political consequences of handing over these recordings.

there is no precedent and nor will there be a press den in a court or otherwise for executive privilege to be invoked explicitly for political purposes or spare the president political embarrassment. the final absurdity of this invocation of executive privilege by president biden is the claim that it will make -- there will be a chilling effect if he hands over the recordings, that this will make it less likely that witnesses will cooperate in future law enforcement investigations. and there are several layers of absurdity to that claim. they have already produced the redacted transcript. so they are saying there will be a chilling effect if someone knows the transcript will be revealed but there will be a chilling effect if the actual

recording will be released. but the problem is deeper than that because the statement i just read, the justification that was given by the attorney general and given by the president's counsel is that this is going to deter witnesses from participating in the future, but the president is not a witness. he was the target of an investigation initiated by his own department of justice. so what exactly is the chilling effect here? who does it apply to? the only possible future scenario that this could affect is if at some point in the future another president is under investigation by his own administration and so what is the fear that we release the recordings here that future president will not want to sit for an interview?

the president would have to answer for his refusal to cooperate, which would be a pretty good incentive to be cooperative in the first place. whichever way you look at this, there is no legitimate basis for invoking executive privilege in this scenario, which is why the judiciary committee did move ahead yesterday and pass a resolution citing attorney general garland for contempt. i would encourage the president and the attorney general to assure that this doesn't go any further and the way to do that is hand over the requested recordings. let the american people see them for themselves. truly, the president shouldn't be in a position where he deprives the public of information of this kind and especially when it pertains to

vital matters of his competency and culpability with respect to the matters being investigated. there is a clear case of the public's right to know. i would encourage the administration to do the right thing here albeit belatedly. i would like to move on to recognize some truly outstanding individuals in my district. madam speaker. placer county lieutenant brandon oliverra who has served as a law enforcement officer since 1996. in his 27-year career he worked on patrol, investigations, as a

swat officer and leads california's more successful narcotics investigation units. the lieutenant works with local, state and federal agencies to investigate drug trafficking organizations with the goal of reducing their impact on the northern california central valley region. he has led his team to remove 4, pounds of methamphetamine, 129 pounds of cocaine and 643 pounds of fentanyl from the streets of our community. those are staggering numbers. in 2021, his team seized 344, 465 counterfeit fentanyl tablets. we are losing our youth currently, we are losing our youth to fentanyl at an alarming rate.

in america, while drug use among the youth has trended down from 2019 to 2020, overdose deaths have increased 29% from 2019 to 2020 and 20% from 2020 to 2021. drug manufacturers have changed tactics, making rainbow colored fentanyl tablets, making them like like candy and more enticing to our nation's youth. lieutenantal vera has led the fight against these dangerous markets. he and his team seized the first rainbow colored fentanyl tablets in our state. he has saved lives though few will understand how many. through his dedicated service

and his dedication to protecting our community from drug trafficking organization, lieutenant olvera has made our community and its surrounding areas a safer place to live. i thank him for his years service and dedication. madam speaker, i wish to take a moment to recognize an outstanding educator. mr. kellen worth in california's third congressional district. in his eight years of instruction, as a science teacher in the loomis union school district, mr. worth has made remarkable contributions within the steam academy as well as in the general loomis union school district as a whole. kellen's tireless efforts have resulted in significant academic achievements as demonstrated through his model, a hands on approach to engage collaboration

and critical thinking. moreover, kellen's reach spans well beyond the classroom as he takes on various roles like leading science camps. showcasing his commitment and instilling wonder and passion in his students. alongside these achievements he's serving on the curriculum team and coaching multiple sports, exemplifying his holistic dedication to serving students. on behalf of the united states house of representatives, i am honored to recognize educator kellen worth for his years of hard work at our schools. madam speaker, i would like to highlight a teacher from dry creek joint elementary school district. jennifer debortaly who has dedicated 30 years to educating the students of her community

while acquiring accolades of high regard. jennifer is a distinguished educator and exceptional leader who contributes significantly to her school and district. she has a passion for writing and leads the area three writing program at her school as well as spearheading spark the fire committee, fostering a love for literature in her students. she also men torse new team members by offering valuable insight into lesson plan, guided reading and glaad strategies. her impact extends beyond her school as she conducts district-wide staff development and has become a resource for teachers looking to bring writing to life for their students. i commend her for exuding an immense level of passion and commitment to student success which has no doubt redowned to the benefit of many, many young people in our community.

madam speaker, i wish to take a moment to recognize amanda kuba, an outstanding educator in california's third congressional district. as an enlish and history teach eric ahman do embodies the effort of -- essence of going above and beyond for her students ensuring each student receiving an exceptional education. amanda's tireless efforts have resulted in significant academic achievements, as demonstrate through the significant improvements in test dispoars students with disabilities alongside a remarkable increase in overall scores. moreover, amanda's reach spans well beyond the classroom as she tinges various leadership roles as a behavior committee member, safe schools ambassador leader and recoordinator, highlighting her crew commitment in building a positive environment for her students. her enthusiastic dedication and unwavering connections with students enrich the live of both

her students and her peers. madam speaker, on behalf of the united states house of representatives, i am honored to recognize educator amanda kupa for her years of hard work in her community and the enormous difference she's made in the lives of her students. madam speaker, i wish to take a moment to recognize an outstanding educator of california's third congressional district. the community's -- the communities i represent offer both outstanding public and private school education to our student, due in large part to the dedication, sacrifice, and hard work of our community's teachers. i'd like to recognize julie ferguson, a dedicated third grade teacher from the roseville city school district at brownellmentry school. julie began her teaching journey

in 1998 and has continued to influence and better the youth of our district for the last 26 years. ms. ferguson has been a dedicated master teacher to countless student teachers. she participates in all professional development with student first and the student first focus and has written numerous grants to help obtain resources, giving her the ability to provide better experiences and opportunities for her students. julie ferguson is the definition of a teacher leader and will be serving as reform t.a. co-president this upcoming year. i would like to thank her for being a faithful, positive and thoughtful educator, contributing to the development of our community's students. so madam speaker, it is an honor on behalf of the united states house of representatives to recognize julie ferguson for her jut standing contributions as an educator in california's third congressional district. she's making and will continue to make, i know, an enormous difference in the lives of her

students. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. members are reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the president. under the speaker's announced policy of january 9, 2023, the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. green, for 30 minutes. mr. green: thank you, madam speaker. madam speaker, and still i rise. i am honored to have this preeminent privilege to speak on the floor if you will, or in the chamber of the house of representatives. it is a unique experience to be here. i never take it for grant. and i always appreciate the leadership for affording me the opportunity to speak. so i rise today as a person of

color, a person who understands the need for brown vs. the board of education. we needed it and still need brown. we needed it when we enshrined it into law in this country. and we still need it today. this is the day that marks the 70th anniversary of brown vs. the board of education, a lawsuit that has impacted the lives of all americans, but has a greater impact, i believe, on persons of color. because it eliminated the notion that we could have separate but equal institutions in the country, especially in the area of education. yes, we still need brown vs. the board of education. there is an article in today's

"usa today," it is styled, segregation is still alive and well. 70 years after brown, funding drives the divide. segregation is still alive and well. mr. speaker, i'd like to explain why we needed brown before delving a little bit more into this topic of funding. we needed brown because of 335 years of slavery, convict leasing, and lawful segregation. 335 years. started on august 20 of 1619.

when the white lion, a ship, docked at a place called point comfort. point comfort. near what we now call norfolk, virginia. when the white lion docked, it had some 20 persons of african ancestry. these 20 persons were traded to the colonies. the persons who were here to form the colonies if you will. they were traded. they became the first enslaved persons to be introduced into what would become the united states of america. these 20 persons marked the beginning of something that still haunts the united states of america. and that is invidious

discrimination. but these 20 persons became a part of millions of persons who would traverse the ocean. who would be treated as cargo. not as panels. persons who would be raped, robbed, murdered, incarcerated, persons who would be brought to this country because there was a desire to have in this country people who would be s subjugate. they would be persons who could be immediately identified because of color. they would be persons who would not be a part of a class,

because class is a socioeconomic circumstance. they were not a part of a class. madam speaker. they were a part of a c aste. not a -- a caste. not a class. a class is socioeconomic. you can move in and out of a class. but in a caste, it is associated with your heredity. if you were born into this caste, you would live in it, you would work in it, and you would die as a part of the caste. america had a caste system. persons of african ancestry were part of the caste. they were persons who were immediately identifiable. who were subjugated. and made a part of a caste. this caste system and the united

states -- in the united states of america lasted for some 246 years. a good many people assume that slavery only lasted for 20 or 30 years. no. 246 years. people were born into slavery. babies were enslaved. people lived their lives enslaved and died as slaves. 246 years of it. these persons became the economic foundational mothers and fathers of the country. they planted the seeds. they harvested the crops. they fed the nation. they built the capitol. this very building that we're in now.

their hands were a part of the construction of this facility. their hands were a part of the construction of the white house. they built the roads and the bridges. they were the economic foundational mothers and fathers and every person in the united states of america is standing on their shoulders. and yes, they have not been respected. they have not been respected since they were brought to this country. they have not been respected while they were here in the institution known as it moved from slavery. this is persons charged with black codes. they were charged with some offense. could be a minor offense. and after having been charged,

they were released to some plantation. and they would work on this plantation in houston, texas, a place called sugarland, texas, we have a gravesite with 95 bodies in it. called the sugarland 95. these were people who were leased and died as persons who were leased. convicts who were leased. it's a shame that the story of america contains these facts. but it's a truth. and we ought not be ashamed because only dealing with the truth can we get to a point where we are able to communicate fairly and properly with each other.

so these convict leases, persons who were leases, persons who were leased, this lasted 76 years. 76 years of convict leasing. 246 years of slavery followed by 76 years of convict leasing. i'm making the point for why we needed brown versus the board of education for those tuning in a little bit late. we needed brown versus board of education because of the 246 years of slavery and 76 years of convict leasing. but it did not end there. it did not end with the convict leasing. we suffered nearly 100 years of lawful segregation, lawful

segregation, wherein persons of color were splatted. persons of -- separated. persons of color had to go to the back door. in my lifetime i was relegated into going to the back door, where persons had to drink from separate water fountains, in my lifetime. i have been forced to drink from a colored water fountain and i might add, a filthy water fountain and never maintained to the extent that whitewater fountains were maintained. persons of color were required to sit in the back of buses. in my lifetime, i sat in the back of a bus. the laws that were enshrined in the constitution to protect me and give me equality under the

law as explained in the 14th amendment, my friends and neighbors took those rights away from me. they denied me those rights. the constitution said they were there for me but my friends and neighbors denied me those rights. i know what segregation is about. i have lived it. yes, we needed brown versus board of education then and we still need it now. segregation for nearly 100 years, 246 years of slavery, 76 years of convict leasing and nearly 100 years of lawful segregation. we needed brown versus board of education. and in the process of suffering

335 years, we had a chief justice of the supreme court in a case styled dred scott where chief justice penny in his infin it wisdom indicated that the negro or african-americans as we call ourselves now, persons of african ancestry, they indicated no rights which a white man was bound to respect and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit, not for his benefit, meaning the benefit of the negro but the benefit of the white man. that's what the chief justice of the supreme court said.

might be interesting to note that most scholars conclude that this is one of the worst decisions ever made by the united states supreme court of america. yes, we needed brown versus the board of education. but for some quirks in history, we might not have the same decision that judge chief justice warren arrived at. we might not have had it. but for some quirks in history, i want to talk about a couple of these quirks in history. thurgood marshall was the lead counsel for naacp, an organization that i belonged to. i wasn't of the houston naccp.

thurgood marshall lead counsel for the naacp, when he decided to go to law school, he tried to get into the university of maryland. he couldn't get in he then decided to go to howard university. at howard university, he had the pleasure of meeting a man who introduced him to a concept and that concept was use the constitution to right these wrongs associated with segregation. that's my paraphrasing of it. that concept was something that he would take to the courts. so i believe but for the university of maryland, thurgood

marshall may not have developed the philosophy that he did and in a strange sort of way, i have to say thank god for the university of maryland because had he gone there, he may have developed a different philosophy and as such would not have taken the case to the supreme court as he did. thurgood marshall won many cases before the supreme court, but not one of them surpassed what he did with brown versus board of education. so thurgood marshall takes the case to the supreme court. but when the case gets to the supreme court, the justice who was there at the time was a person that was unable to pull the court together to get a

decision by june of 1953 because he could not do so. the case was then to be reheard in december of 1953. between that time, the june date and the december date, the chief justice died. and then it became the duty of president eisenhower to appoint another chief justice to the supreme court. president eisenhower looked to california. there in california was a governor, a governor who is unique in history for many ways, but this one i find worthy of mentioning. he ran for governor as a democrat and as a republican. imagine trying to do that

today. was elected governor. ran on the democratic ticket and the republican ticket. never happen today. we are so divided here that neither party would tolerate it. the divide is so evident. the public wants us to span the chasm. we can't span the chasm because the public is divided. same people who are members of congress to compromise, don't want to see compromise on the issues that are important to them. compromise is about give and take. compromise is not winner take all, my way or the highway. the public itself has to understand that you are a part of the reason there's a divide.

but back to the case brown versus board of education. so chief justice warren becoming chief justice by virtue of president eisenhower having appointed him as such. president eisenhower thought he did the great country a great service when he appointed him, but he later said it was one of his greatest mistakes. he said he made two mistakes and they were both on the supreme court. and that one of those was chief justice warren because it was chief justice warren who pulled the court together. it was chief justice warren to get a unanimous decision in the brown case. i don't know that anybody else could have done it. he was a unique personality.

he understood the politics of the judiciary. he was a governor. he understood people, what motivated people and moved people. and he pulled together the court such that there was a unanimous decision. that unanimous decision was not as one might think a decision that would be immediately embraced by the country. it was not embraced immediately by the country. there were persons who still wanted separate but equal or separate but unequal blues that's what it was. when you have inferior schools for people of color, which is what i attended, and then you have superior schools, not in

the sense that the minds in the schools are superior or inferior but the sense that the facility, the books that i received were hand-me-down books from another school system. you could see the names of children who had books before i acquired them. hand-me-downs. the school systems were segregated in that fashion. this segregation did not end with may 17, 1954 and the brown decision. in fact, a nmp omp bmp el laureate, newt ton freeman, he had a clever idea, he was of the opinion, nobel laureate, milton freeman, that we ought to give

the public dollars to the parents and they could have these vouchers and they could use these vouchers to send their children to private schools. maintain segregation but under a different name. what a world. what a world. milton freeman, nobel laureate. if you believe that that was the end of vouchers, you are imminently incorrect. the governor of texas is still pushing for vouchers, still wants to take public dollars and give them to parents and let them take their children and put their children in private schools. that would have maintained

segregation if it had been done and there is a good likelihood i wouldn't be standing here now. do not believe that slavery had to end. it ended because of the will of abraham lincoln. it didn't have to end. they could have continued. the caste system could have continued. to this day i could be part of a caste but for brave people who took a stand and for a civil war that was fought for all the politicians that are listening because of slavery. . . we could easily find that the caste system exists today if not but for some brave people. so this, this notion that we integrated and it was about

desegregation, it wasn't about integration, the brown decision said that there should be desegregation, with the term all deliberate speed. but it didn't happen immediately. milton friedman tried his best to thwart it. and in fact, in fact, in prince edward county, virginia, the white house elite of that county defied the brown decision by closing the entire school system. they closed the school system. and they deferred -- and they diverted public education funds into vouchers to be used at segregated private academies. that were for whites only. it would have still been segregation, just by another name. so yes, we needed the brown decision. but do not be deceived into believing that the decision was immediately implemented. and we're still implementing it,

by the way. we needed it then. we need brown now. brown has made a difference. but brown hasn't brought us to the promised land. we're not there yet. the senate of the united states of america disrespects african-americans on a daily basis. some people don't believe i said that so i probably should say it again. the senate of the united states of america disrespects african-americans on a daily basis. the senate of the united states of america is a place of shame. the richard russell office building is a national disgrace.

richard russell was a self-proclaimed white supremacist. richard russell fought anti-lynching legislation. richard russell fought civil rights legislation. richard russell co-authored the southern manifesto. his name is on the senate russell office building. that's the richard russell. the senate will not take richard russell's name off of the building. you're a place of national shame, senate. you ought to be ashamed of yourself. every one of you. every one of you. what is wrong with you? you know you're disrespecting african-americans. yet you leave the name of richard russell on a building being paid for with taxpayer

dollars. if that name was associated with the third reich, it would come down tonight. we are disrespecting people of color who happen to be of african ancestry. the rationale given for not changing the name is that the senators can't agree on a new name. well, i solved that problem. pardon me for using the perm pronoun. my mother taught me to say we, whenever possible. but in my business if you don't say i, other people will. we have solved that problem. here is the solution. let the name revert back to the name it had before it became the russell senate office building. let it revert back. and what was that name, al green? it was the old senate office

building. just take russell's name off. let i it -- let it revert to old senate office building. and then take as much as you want, add infinitum if you will, and let it become the name of your choice. i have no name. i'm not doing this because i want a name. i'm doing this and saying this this because it is not just the right thing to do, it's the righteous thing to do. his name needs to come off of that building. so brown vs. the board of education didn't bring us to the promised land. we still have problems here in the congress of the united states of america and this one is so obvious. it's intuitively obvious to the most casual observer. the name ought to come off. and i will say to every senator, you ought to be ashamed. you made the senate a place of national shame. and by the way, the news media

ought to be equally ashamed. because in the rotunda where richard russell's statue is, you've got the news media right there. above richard russell. he has a rotunda devoted to him. and above him is cnn. msnbc. fox. you ought to be ashamed. all of you. you're perpetuating this. it's been perpetrated by the senate and you're we are peach waiting it. well, al, you're probably going to get back on those stations or networks again. do you think that that matters to me? that someone would keep me off because i speak the truth not only to power, but about power? speaking truth to power is fairly easy. you say power, last problem, we

need to solve it. speaking truth about power is to say, power, there's a problem and you're it. you're it, cnn. you're it, fox, msnbc. you're it, senate. you don't have the courage to do the right thing. you ought to be denouncing what the senate is doing. but you're right there in the building where it's happening. you ought to be ashamed of yourselves. you're perpetuating this insult to african-americans. so brown vs. the board of education did a lot. make no mistake about it. it has made a difference in the lives of people of color. especially african-americans. it has made a difference.

it has made a difference in job opportunities. it has made a difference in opportunities for education. opportunities to hold public office. it has made a difference. but we're still not there. we aren't. because people of color are disproportionately poverty-stricken. people of color are not -- let me just close with this, i'm being told my time is up. s that to be continued. -- this is a to be continued. just know. this thank you, madam speaker, i appreciate your calling it to my attention. we have much work to do. is there a motion that you desire from me, madam speaker? the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman yield back in. mr. green: the gentleman yields back. the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced policy

of january 9, 2023, the chair recognizes the gentleman from wisconsin, mr. grothman, for 30 minutes. mr. grothman: thank you. i think one more time today it's important to update the chamber as far as what's going on with the biggest crisis in america today, that is of course the virtual invasion across our southern border. we recently had publish and estimate of the number of people who crossed the southern border in april, the most recent month available. and that number is about 204,000. per usual, frill is usually a low month, but per usual it appears we hit the all-time record number of people coming here in april. a year ago it was about 178,000. a year before that about 160,000. and if you go back to the final year, that president trump was president, it was about 6,000. so we have gone from about 6,000 people which is apparently

doable, to about 205,000. during that time, president biden, through executive orders, has changed the policy and is also allowing about 30,000 people here as parolees from countries such as haiti, such as venezuela, such askew ball so that number of 204,000 is probably upside stated by about 40,000. our country continues to struggle with this. it's very expensive. people put together free clinics, used to getting medicare payments, they find, one told me even a majority of people they're having to take care of, in essence, charity, are people who are here, what

some people would describe as illegal immigrants. and i assume that the number of illegal immigrants who are unaccompanied minors continues to be a concern. we have about 6,000 of the 205,000 unaccompanied minors. we heard testimony about this recently. but we still do not know exactly where all these folks are. we don't know if they are living with a so-called relative. whether we are consistently giving d.n.a. tests to see whether it really is a relative. we know that the "new york times" published articles that guessed that there are tens of thousands of unaccompanied minors not accounted for. it would be very easy to solve this problem. you reinstitute the stay in mexico policy. you get a parole and by the way with parole you get automatic

what we'd refer to as welfare benefits. as soon as you come here. you get rid of these programs and this drive to change america would change almost overnight. we can never forget that barack obama, living in the greatest country in the world, the united states, during his term, felt that one of his goals would be to fundamentally change america. when you change the people in america, how they're brought up, how they think about things, you will fundamentally change america. the greatest country in the history of the world. the only reason you continue to let, as far as i can see, about a quarter of a million people come in here every month is because you do want to change it and want it to be different. so i call upon president biden to return to the stay in mexico policy and i think primarily by doing that, you could get that quarter of a million figure back down around 20,000 or 10,000,

almost overnight. but again the takeaway for this body and for the american public should be one more time, in april, and we should never get bored of saying it, it appears one more time in april, we hit the all-time high for an april of the number of people crossing into our nation. the -- what i thought was the biggest crisis in the country when i became a congressman, now i guess i'd have to say it's second to the border, is the continued assault on marriage and the breakdown of the family. when i talk to people in my district they know something is wrong. in some ways america is different than the america they knew in the 1990's, the 1970's, the 1960's. and you ask them what the change is, they frequently say the number one change is the breakdown of the american family. the end of the old fashioned mother and father and children at home as we slowly increase

the number of children who are born without a father in the household. and of course this is a problem. two ways it's a problem for the children by every metric, they'd be better off if they had a mom and dad at home. it's also a problem for the men in society as usually men get their self-worth out of supporting their family. and as we have more and more families as an immigrant in my district tells me, in america or some communities, the woman marries the government. and because we have the situation in which we are encouraging the woman to marry the government we have a situation in which the men are no longer have their, what is for most men their most important function in life and that is supporting their wife and supporting their children.

so now we have to see what is being -- i want to point out by the way, that this is not a coincidence. when i talk to people around my district and say why do you think this family is breaking down, maybe they shrug their shoulders and say america's less religious or something. but they have to realize, there are people all on who want the breakdown of the family. that is their goal. in 1848, karl marx who was still read and still respected in some circles, wrote about the need to abolish the family in the communist man foes toe, he did not want children being raised by parents. he wanted the government to assume that role. i think it is not a coincidence that in the 1960's, at the time of great subsidy of fatherless homes, it was also a high tide

for feminism. and kate millay, a very important feminist that i think some young people don't know, said that destroying the american family was necessary to bring about the left wing cultural revolution. so i think today our children are sometimes taught that the feminist movement is a positive. we can't forget in their power in the 1960's their goal was to destroy the american family. remember a few years ago at a time remember a few years ago when so many congressmen in this institution would show up in places where black lives matter was having a rally or carrying signs that at that time before it was taken down out of embarrassment, they said that they were calling upon the end of the western proscribed nuclear family. let's not forget that despite the fact that on their website where black lives matter was calling for the end of the nuclear family, dozens, perhaps hundreds of people in this body

showed up at places, showing support of black lives matter, as well as the chief executives of our largest corporations frequently giving money to black lives matter because apparently they thought it was the trendy thing. the way america was going. last month in another bit of evidence that the hard left likes to believe the nuclear family is -- that the nuclear family is outdated, there was a supreme court decision dealing with adoption laws, this wasn't the reason for the decision. the decision wound up being unanimous. but justice jill of the wisconsin supreme court, and in wisconsin our supreme court justices are not partisan elections. everybody knows who the democrat is and who the republican is. so the democrat relatively new

justice up here writes that the notion that the marriage serves as the foundation of society is at best outdated and at worst misogynationic. think about that. in a state like wisconsin where frequently republicans win statewide. we have a u.s. senator, ron johnson here. but a woman got elected to the wisconsin state supreme court and here she declares that the notion that marriage serves as the foundation of society is at best outdaded and -- outdated and at worse misogynistic. letting the caught out of the bag the goal of the left is to destroy the american family. now, how is president biden responding to this in his proposed budget? there are many programs out there which are made available as long as there is not a breadwinner in the family, particularly as long as there is

not a man in the family, which i think they are aiming at, then those programs kick in. and some of these programs are -- it appears to me increased in this budget which in other words further pushes for financial reasons getting the man out of the household. president biden tries to increase more low-income housing. frequently available to one parent families, not to married couples. earned income tax credit, a horrible program, which was begun or pushed by a republican, jack kemp, but another program which discourages marriage. snap increases discourages marriage. things like pell grants. a program much easier to take advantage of, college scope

already -- scholarships, if you don't have a two-parent family at home. it's very disappointing that president biden has decided to put all this money into programs designed, i think, to assist primarily fatherless homes. we have to stand up as a congress and say no. we are no longer going to push one lifestyle over another. it would be a good thing if we went back to a time where the government was not so putting their thumb on the scale as to what type of family you have. and i hope that my republican colleagues in the appropriation committees when they see the increase in these programs, make sure they don't come about. but do the opposite. that they turn around and begin to work our way back to the

1980's, 1970's, 1960's, 1950's where we did not punish parents for getting married. i want to end on that pell grant thing talk about an anti-ic dote i talked about before. i have spoken about this topic for over 20 years now. i once was speaking to a group of primarily senior citizens. it was during the tea party thing. they were older people. i went through all the programs that you lost if you married a guy with an income. i talked to -- there was a young gallon -- gal working at that time, most of the people, most family with the tea party movement, know a lot of people that were older. this is a young gal. i asked her what she thought about my speech and all the benefits out there to discourage

people from getting married. she told me, she said, you know, me and my husband, we got married before i had a child. but none of my friends got married. they get free college. i realized even then that the 24, 25-year-olds, they had it figured out. they had sadly in the long wrong it's not their benefit, but they already realized the goal of the american government was to discourage marriage and do what they can to give programs based upon the idea of having not a man in the family. my hope is that we begin to work our way back to a time where the two-parent family, they are wonderful parents raising children and all sorts of circumstances, but no longer create a situation in which there are incentives to keep the man out of the household. my final comment, we had some

votes recently with regard to american aid to ukraine. and i believe that once we have gone down the path we have gone down we cannot allow ukraine to collapse. that being said, it bothers me that to this day the biden administration does not talk about trying to end this war. ok. we have two countries that are actually very closely related. in my district, when you run across someone that's russian, they very frequently have a spouse from ukraine. or the other way around. it seems to me a real tragedy that a huge number of people, tens of thousands of people, of both countries are dying because of that war. ukraine has the second most birth -- lowest birth ray in the world. it's always a tragedy when people die, but to have a country in which so many young people dying is truly a tragedy.

they have the same problem in russia. a birth rate that is too low. not overwhelm is the birth rate too low, however, but they also have a huge immigration problem. i know in this country having been down at the southern border it is not unusual to have russians come in there. i know a few people in my district, including a young couple with children, i'm sure russia would love to have. they left russia to come here before the war started. the goal of mr. zelenskyy and mr. putin ought to be try to get more young people to populate their rather large countries not to have this war going on. i think they both must realize this if they really want what's best for the future of our countries. i would hope that president biden, in addition to asking for more mine nations for the war -- munitions for the war, would find some country, israel, turningy, whatever country, to

try to negotiate an end to this war. it is such a tragedy to see tens of thousands of young people dying on both sides, when from what i can see, the biggest problem that both countries have is a lack of young people in the first place. i would ask president biden to spend a little time on that. when i have met in the past with his advisors or his cabinet on this issue, they really just seem dumbfounded when i asked them about when the war is going to end. it is something we should consider. it's also bad geopolitically for the united states. we saw earlier this week meetings between red china and russia. i know going back to president nixon we did not want close ties between russia and china, but we have been very careful to make sure that hasn't happened. you leave it to president biden we now have closer ties with

those countries. as well as closer try was iran, another country we don't like to necessarily see prosper or become part of an alliance against the united states. my third request for this body is that we try to prod the biden administration in looking to an end to this war so these two great historical countries do not continue to lose their younger population. to go over one more time, we have to have americans still be aware, we have records of people coming across the southern border. we have to remind people at home that this breakdown of the family did not just happen. it happened because this congress continues to dole out money virtually conditioned upon not having an old-fashioned nuclear family. and the biden administration is trying to throw gas on the fire in this budget. and finally, we hope members of

this body prod the biden administration to look towards a peace in eastern europe. with that being said, like to wrap up. and i hope the body proceeds as i would wish. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman have a motion? >> yes, think it's peopletime rewee adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly, the house stands adjourned until noon next tuesday for morning hour debate.

>> most people come here to make a better life, if not for them, for their kids. my italian grandparents never spoke english. i never had a conversation with

them. and yet they made america great. >> the question should the u.s. shut its borders. the debate is moderated by journalist barry wise. watch it tonight eastern at c-span. and online at c-span.org. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more. including spark like. >> greatest spoupb on earth is the place you call home. at sparklight it's our home too. we are facing our greatest challenge. that's why sparklight is working round-the-clock to keep you connected. we are doing our part so it's easier to do yours. >> sparklight supports c-span as a public service. along with these other television providers. giving you a front row seat to democracy.