people are calling for him to resign, what is this white house saying about that and does the president said anything? >> i don't have a comment. >> jay, in terms of general sin she can si -- votes will be taken in the follow g r. will be conducted as a 15-minute vote. remaining electronic votes will be conduct d as a five-minute vote. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion by the gentleman from michigan to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 2203 as amended on with the i yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 2203, a bill to provide for the award of a gold medal on behalf of congress to jack nicklaus in recognition of his service to the nation in promoting excellence, good sportsmanship and philanthropy. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill as amended.

members will record their votes by electronic device. this is 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: the yeas are 371 and the nays are 10. the rules are suspended and the bill is passed and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 685. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 685 a bill to award a congressional gold medal to the american fighter aces congressional gold medal. the speaker pro tempore: the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill as amended. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-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 381, the nays are zero. 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and, without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from wisconsin seek recognition? ms. moore: mr. speaker, i have a unanimous consent request. i ask unanimous consent to be removed as a co-sponsor of h.r.

3717, the helping families in mental health crisis act. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. he house will be in order. the house will be in order. members, please take their conversations to the rear of the hall. he house will be in order. members will please remove their conversations from the floor. the chair will now entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from florida seek recognition? ms. ros-lehtinen: i ask unanimous consent to creates -- address the house for one minute, to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. ros-lehtinen: mr. speaker, i am proud to join my

colleagues this month of may to observe lupus awareness month. a time where we work to increase public understanding of this cruel mystery. affecting approximately 28,000 people in my south florida community and almost 1.5 million americans nationwide, lupus is a tragically misunderstood disease. with symptoms that imitate many other illnesses, lupus is extremely difficult to diagnose and usually develops anywhere between age 15 and 44. of those who are diagnosed, mr. speaker, 90% are women and it impacts minorities two to three times more than caucasians. along with my fellow co-chairs of the congressional lupus caucus, tom rooney, bill keating and jim moran, i am committed to increasing awareness about lupus and putting an end to this terrible disease. thank you, mr. speaker, for the

time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. the house is not in order. please remove conversations from the floor at this time. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? without objection. mr. garcia: mr. speaker, i rise today to commemorate national foster care month. in my home counties of miami-dade and monroe, there are 3,500 children in foster care who need loving families and the promise of a bright future. i would like to take a moment to recognize a true leader in south florida in the cause to help these children. working with the local organization our kids, she has led efforts to collect christmas gifts for thousands of foster children, ensuring that they experience the joy of

christmas morning. additionally, she has helped provide children aging out of the foster care system with the good housekeeping gift, basic household items that help ease the often too difficult transition to independent life. we should take inspiration from this charity and we commit ourselves during this month to guarantee that all children in foster care system receive the support that they need and deserve. thank you, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. poe: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. poe: mr. speaker, american warriors have died in lands far, far away. we honor them this memorial day. but now other american warriors are dying in the united states. waiting for v.a. health care. they are dying in line.

according to whistleblowers, at least 40, maybe more, have died before they could see a v.a. medical personnel. and it gets worse. allegations are the v.a. then secretly hid the long delays and told employees to cook the books. so it looked like there were no delays at all. incompetence, secrecy, death. reports indicate the v.a. may have known about the death line for years. rather than fix the problem, the death line scandal has grown to include colorado, texas, arizona and wyoming. so immediately, mr. speaker, give veterans the option through a voucher to see a private doctor, fire the people that caused this, put others that committed crimes in the line for the stockade and fix the problem. mr. speaker, american veterans should not wait in line just to die. and that's just the way it is. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition?

without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. swalwell: i rise today to honor a distinguished citizen and community advocate, the honorable michael sweeney. mayor of hayward, california, as he approaches retirement. mayor sweeney put himself through college, earning a bachelor's and master's degree from cal state-hayward. his career as a public servant spans 3 years, starting as a member of the hayward city council, serving in the california assembly and continuing his role now today as mayor. his service as an elected official is complimented by 38 years of advocacy for the underprivileged. since november, 2014, -- 2004, he has served as the executive director of spectrum community services, spectrum provides people with the tools necessary to sustain independent living and achieve financial stability. this month mayor sweeney will retire from his position as executive director of spectrum and he'll also be retiring from his service as mayor in july. as he begins a new chapter in his life, i want to take this opportunity to thank mayor

sweeney for his -- sweeney for his steadfast dedication to the people of hayward, his years of service are truly an inspiration. i wish him all the best. thank you, mayor sweeney, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i send to the desk a privileged report from the committee on rules for filing under the rule. the speaker pro tempore: report the title. the clerk: report to accompany house resolution 585, resolution providing for consideration of the bill h.r. 4660, making appropriations for the departments of commerce and justice, science and related agencies for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2015, and for what purpose does. and providing for consideration of the bill h.r. 3445, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2015 for military activities of the department of defense and for military construction, to prescribe military personnel strength for such fiscal year and for other purposes.

the speaker pro tempore: referred to the house calendar and ordered printed. for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. paulsen: mr. speaker, the time for the president to put politics say side and approve the keystone pipeline. it's been nearly six years since the application for keystone was submitted. recently i had the opportunity to see the domestic energy production happening in the oil fields in north dakota. the increased energy production in north dakota has lessened our dependence on foreign oil, created good-paying jobs and helped reduce the state's unemployment to the lowest in the country. approving the keystone pipeline would have the same affect, creating 42,000 construction jobs and as many as 118,000 spinoff jobs. mr. speaker, news of the recent oil tanker derailments remind us of the increased pressure that our railways are under from shipping more oil. keystone will absolutely help immediately ease this burden by removing 700,000 barrels a day through the pipeline.

the bottom line here is everyone is standing ready to move forward on this project. i urge my colleagues to continue their bipartisan support for approving the keystone pipeline and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from -- the gentlewoman from new hampshire seek recognition? without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> earlier today i attended the officers memorial ceremony. this year's ceremony was particularly somber as we added a new name, officer steven arkel, to new hampshire's role of honor. ms. shea-porter: he was a police officer in the rural community of brentwood. he was a husband, a proud father and he loved his town and its people. he was also an accomplished carpenter, respected youth sports coach and an avid outdoorsman. just a week ago the officer responded to a domestic disturbance in a senior housing complex. he walked into a situation that all men and women and their families who serve in our police departments know is

possible. and he was shot and killed trying to save a citizen. the officer is survived by his wife and his two daughters. my thoughts and prayers are with them as they face life without their hero, without our hero. . we all owe the officer a we all owe him our gratitude, he is a true hero, along with another officer who risked death himself to try to save him. i'm grateful for the bravery of the law enforcement personnel who respobbeded that day, particularly other officers from the brentwood police department, the fire fighters who had to put out the fires that the suspect started. i will never forget any of them and we are all grateful for their service. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from washington seek recognition? >> i ask 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. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i'd like to -- mrs. mcmorris rodgers: i'd like to recognize may as national military appreciation month and military -- and memorial day just around the corner. our military make sacrifices every day. they put their lives on the line for our freedom and safety and they do it expecting nothing in return this month we honor the brave americans who serve in our armed forces, including our guardsmen and reservists. we appreciate military spouses for their strength and loyalty and we remember the heroes who have died while serving our country. as co-founder of the military family caucus, i recognize that when a service member joins the military, it's not just a job. it's a family commitment to our country. as the house considers the national defense authorization act this week, i want to encourage the secretary of defense to continue working to

reduce unemployment and underemployment of military spouses and support closing the wage gap between military spouses and their civilian counterparts. this month i offer great thanks and appreciation to our military men and women and their families because they deserve our frat dude for the sack -- our gratitude for the sacrifices they have made and they are essential to keeping america safe. may marks national military appreciation month but really every month, the members of our military and their families should be celebrated, appreciated and thanked for the commitment they have made. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? for what purpose does the gentlewoman from texas seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. jackson lee: it was quiet

around the dormitory deep in the heart of burno in northern nigeria, where the landscape is barren and life is hard. in the middle of that april night, gunshots fired. then almost 300 girls were kidnapped and they remain missing. a night that no one can forget. this picture shows it all. a mother with a candle mourning that loss. mr. speaker, we can no longer remain silent in any way. i thank president obama for the assets of the f.b.i. and intelligence and certainly some military assets but to the nigerian government, those of us who have been friends and worked with this government, enough is enough. we need to find every resource, u.n. peace keepers, the african union, and any other resource that will help strategize to find those girls. there needs to be a targeted

military unit from the nigerian military that's utilizing the resources of others to help them safety -- safely rescue those girls. enough is enough. the slaughter of this tragic and terrorist group must stop. boko haram must stop and end it now. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman rise? >> 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 recognize. mr. burgess: disturbing news from general motors in the case continues. internal emails were sent telling general motors employees to avoid using certain words, words like problem, words like safety. this raises questions about what g.m. knew and when they knew it, but mr. speaker, it also raises questions about the national highway traffic safety administration. what did they know and when did they know it? from our committee work we know

ver the last decade, nhtsa had reasons to open up investigations but decided to do nothing. how could the nation's watchdog on highway safety see the problem and do nothing? the committee's investigation will continue. we have questions to the national highway traffic safety administration submitted at the last hearing. they need to be forthcoming. america deserves answers. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields, for what purpose does the gentleman from nevada seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. it was with great sadness that i learned that scott craig, the former chief of staff for governor bob miller of nevada, passed away last tuesday. mr. horsford: he was a tireless advocate for seniors and children and an effective one at that. scott knew how to get things done. that's why he was put in charge

of the successful education first constitutional amendment campaign in 2004, which forced the state legislateture to vote on an education funding -- legislature to vote on an education funding bill. scott also gave me my first start in public service he hired me for my first professional job in the legislative world and i owe him my career. he believed in me and gave me a chance. scott, i will do my best to continue fighting for those who need someone to stand up for them. rest in peace, my friend. my thoughts and prayers are with your family, with our friends, and with the people of nevada whose lives were touched because of you. god bless you. the speaker pro tempore: the the chair layss, before the house the following personal requests. the clerk: leave of absence requested for mr. grace of georgia for today, mr. gary miller of california today and

the balance of the week, mr. danny davis for today, ms. mccollum of minnesota for today and tomorrow. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the requests are granted. under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2013, the gentleman from nevada, mr. horsford is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. mr. horsford: thank you, mr. speaker. 60 years ago, america was a country entrenched in an inequality. whites and african-americans were treated as two separate classes. our society's education system, perhaps our most influential and important institution for future success, kept whites and black children separate and wholly unequal. and then, in 1954, the supreme court's decision in brown vs.

the board of education argued and won by the legendary justice thurgood marshall, rewove the fabric of our divided nation and moved our country down the path toward the civil rights victories of the 1960's. the decision was, according to the current president of the naacp legal defense and education fund, quote, the beginning of the end of legal apartheid in the united states. laws of the jim crow that were intentionally designed to ensure that blacks and whites were not treated equally were finally questioned by our nation's highest courts. the dream of a country where all men are created equal and treated equally under the law became a potential reality. but it would still take decades

of tireless activism by multiple generations of civil rights leaders and organizers to get us where we are today. brown vs. board, this decision was the first step toward a reality of equality and was a drastic change for a court that had previously been detrimental to past civil rights actions and cases. so we're here today as the congressional black caucus to reflect on america's 60 -- on america 60 years after the brown vs. board of education decision. what impacts have we seen and what challenges still remain with achieving a society that truly lives up to the 14th amendment's equal protection under the law clause? what steps must still be taken to achieve a society that lives up to the dream of the civil rights movement, where the color

of one's skin does not determine their ability to succeed. mr. speaker, tonight, i am proud to be joined by colleagues who effort, part of this this ongoing effort toward realizing the full potential of what the brown decision means for every single child in america. we'd like to start first with the gentleman from virginia, my good friend, who has been a champion for working families d who recently was part of a forum at george mason university, talking about the issue of the brown decision and where we are today. i'd like to yield to the gentleman from virginia, representative bobby scott.

mr. scott: thank you. thank you, mr. speaker, and thank you to the gentleman from nevada for calling this special occasion to give us the opportunity to sell prate the 60 -- to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the supreme court case of brown vs. the board of education. as a representative from virginia i take personal pride in celebrating this anniversary because virginia played such a prominent role in that case. in fact, one of the cases, four cases combined that the brown decision, that were combined into the brown decision, was davis vs. the county school board of prince edward county in virginia, two of the nation's premiere constitutional lawyers were involved in the case, both from virginia, in the brown decision, the united states supreme court unanimously struck down the legal footing for racially -- for racial

segregation in public schools in this country. the decision overturned plessy v. ferguson, an 1896 case that maintained a state could maintain separate but equal public acome cases. and brown, the court highlighted the importance of education in language that still rings true today. the court said today education is perhaps the most important function of state and local governments, compulsory school attendance laws and the great expenditures for education both demonstrate our recognition of the importance of education to our democratic society. it is required in the performance of our most basic public responsibilities, even service in the armed forces. it is the very foundation of good citizenship. today it is a principal instrument in awakening your child to cultural values and preparing him for later professional training and helping him adjust normally to his environment. these days it is doubtful that

any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he's denied the opportunity of an education. such an opportunity, where the state has undertaken to provide it, is a right that must be made available to all on equal terms. we come then to the question presented -- does segregation of children in public schools solely on the basis of race, even though the physical facilities and other tangible factors may be equal, deprive the children of the minority group of equal educational opportunities? we believe that it is. -- that it does. the court concluded that in the field of public education, the doctrine of separate but equal has no place. separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. unfortunately, although the decision was a victory for minority students, not everyone was eager to comply. virginia led the resistance to the brown decision, ironically, virginia used the language in the brown decision as its legal

grounds for what they called massive resistance, which said such an opportunity where the state has undertaken to provide it is a right which we -- which must be made to all on equal terms. virginia reasoned it could avoid integrating the schools by having no schools at all and so in prince edward county they closed the schools for several years. scoo schools were also closed in norfolk and charlottesville. we overcame massive resistance after several years and those schools eventually reopened. now here we are six decades after brown, thankfully we have made progress but we still is work to do. the promise of equal educational opportunities envisioned by brown remains unfulfilled. for example, equal educational opportunity does not occur when one jurisdiction spends substantially more per student than an adjacent jurisdiction

because of the relative differences in wealth between the two jurisdictions. unequal funding results in unequal educational opportunities when you consider the studies have shown that one-half of low income students were qualified to attend college do not attend because they can't afford to. in fact, today, a high income, low achieving student is more likely to attend college than a high achieving, low income student. another example of educational inequality is the current debate over publicly financed school vouchers which can be used at private schools which might provide educational opportunities to a privileged few but will definitely deprive the public schools of desperately needed resources. the supporters of vouchers frequently claim that this is a choice, but actually, all it is is a chance. if you win the lottery, off chance to go to the private school. but if you lose the lottery,

then you're stuck in public schools with fewer resources because all the money spent on vouchers. obviously we have a lot of work to do to complete the promise of the brown decision. the 60th anniversary of the decision offers us an opportunity to rededicate ourselves to achieving these lofty ideals. >> i thank the gentleman from virginia on the 60th anniversary of the brown decision. mr. horsford: i'd next like to yield time to a true champion for working families in his district in new york and for people all across this country, a fighter for average everyday working people and for children who deserve a quality education. i yield now time to the gentleman from new york, representative charlie rangel.

mr. rangel: let me really thank the gentleman from nevada for constantly reminding us what a great country we live in and .ow it can be so improved having fought in the war, screaming and yelling and complaining, but recognizing how great this nation is, and it was an opportunity to say thank you for the blessings that have been bestowed on this nation, and thinking about those who drafted a constitution that didn't include slaves or women or people who didn't hold land, and yet they drafted a document that was flexible enough for us to be able to say that that great statue of liberty meant talents ould bring

from all over the world to come to make us the largest democracy, the strongest military and the greatest economic force in the world. and we've done that because we've always felt that no matter what your background is, that if you could get here could you make it here -- you could make it here. you know, when we talk about he brown decision, nobody ever thought that just sitting next to white folks or black folks that we were going to get a better education. what we try to overcome in our schools is that nobody of color that picked cotton, that fought in the battlefields, that had the highest patriotic record as any other group of people would not be able to be denied the opportunity to participate in

economic growth of this country. this dually to succeed in country means communities succeed in this country. that means communities succeed in this country. when the flag is saying the united states of america, there's no color involved or language involved in basically what people think. they know that we've been able to bring together a gorgeous mosaic. but it's because of color, it's st because of color, you associate it with poverty and lack of education, lack of decent housing, then this is a cancer that we must not only talk about, but this is a cancer that really prevents america from being all that she can be. recently a person in the other

body thought that the political opposition to president obama was based on his color. most of us know there's no question about it. most of us know that there's still parts of this great nation where people never believe that the union army prevailed and that president lincoln was a true patriot. some of those people hate our president with the same hatred that they hated abraham lincoln. but the truth of the matter is that more and more people of color are coming to this country. what will bind them, what will make us stronger is that they be able d, that they to get into the middle class, that they be able to prosper and the brown decision merely said that a person in america that's being denied an equal

opportunity to get an education is being denied due process. that's like sending a person to the wars without a rifle, without the resources to negotiate saving his life and destroying the enemy. and so we're not talking just about during the -- doing the right thing. you cannot love this country if you're not going to be prepared to educate everybody in this country. and it's going to take more than a court decision, especially this present court. it's going to take that this generation has to stop teaching their kids to hate people because of their color. because if you leave it up to kids, if you really just put them together and see how much they laugh and joke and not be aware that somebody somewhere had some poison venom that said that there's variations in

color means there's variations in respect and support. so i think that the congressional black caucus and especially you from nevada are the pate rots that we have today -- patriots that we have today, the willingness to tolerate the indifference and the lack of sensitivity to our need, but also the willing tons work and to come together and to make certain -- willingness to work and to come together and to make certain that color doesn't take away from our mutual respect and our ability to gain the tools that would allow us to make the maximum contribution to this great country. i thank the gentleman for this opportunity not only to salute those who drafted the constitution but in making it flexible enough for people that they never thought about to be able to participate and really make it work for all of us. thank you so much. mr. horsford: i thank the gentleman from new york.

thank you for your wisdom and sage advice and challenging us to even say, remember what the brown decision is all about. and that is for people to truly be treated equally, not by the basis of race. and we know based on where we are today in america there are some who want to say that we live in a postracial society, when you look at the outcomes of young people based on where they're from, clearly we have not lived up to the full promise of what brown has intended. so thank you for your advice. and for participating in this special order hour. i'd like to turn now to the chairman of the progressive caucus here in the house, the representative from minnesota, great man with great vision, representative keith ellison from minnesota. mr. ellison: let me thank you, congressman horsford, and thank you for leading this special

order on brown vs. board of education. i think it could be safely argued that there's really no more important supreme court decision in the history of the united states. i believe it is the most important decision and the reason why is that our country was founded on the idea that all men were created equal and endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, among them life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. 243 t for so many years, years, men and women were held in bondage in this nation dedicated to freedom. american slavery, racism and discrimination stands as an indictment and as evidence of the insincerity of that fundamental promise of america. and then for another 100 years after slavery ended, for black people to exist in the state of jim crow's sboord nation, -- sbord nation, is further

evidence that those original words were really not intended and not sincere. but brown vs. board of education was a restoration. it was an attempt to say, you know what, we've had an ugly past in this country, we have not lived up to our values, we have said -- we have called on freedom, we have declared freedom and yet we have given the people the opposite of freedom which is slavery. but with brown vs. board of education, the united states has begun a process of pushing the old, ugly past to the back. now, i know very well we could stand up here and we will stand up here and talk about the mission that we have to pursue to stand up, equal education opportunity for all. but if we take a minute just to look back at what we have achieved, brown vs. board of education represents a seminal moment in american history where we rejected that ugly history that was in conflict

and in sharp contradiction to the principles that this country stood for. i think it's also important, mr. horsford, to point out that brown vs. board of education was not some gift that fell out of the sky. this case was won and fought by some seriously committed soldsers for justice -- soldiers for justice. and know we will talk about thurgood marshall here tonight quite a bit. but before thurgood marshall there was a man named charles hamilton houston and charles hamilton houston was a brilliant man. a harvard trained lawyer, the assistant dean of howard law school. and at an early point in his career he was offended and outraged by jim crow's segregation, particularly in schools. and he got an old video camera and he went down south and he drove in his car and he couldn't stay in a hotel because black people were not allowed to stay in white hotels during those days. so he had to sleep in his car or maybe somebody will take new for the night. but he took that video camera

and showed and took film and footage of exactly what african-american students were living through. the harsh conditions, the fact that there were all grades of students in the same classroom. the fact that the buildings were inferior, the books were outdated, the facilities were in every way inferior and that this promise of separate but equal was anything but equal and was inherently unequal. charles hamilton houston trained up lawyers who would take on and fight american segregation, among those thurgood marshall, but there were others as well. there were many other great lawyers who back in the day, before it was even difficult for african-american lawyer to staund and do anything, these lawyers -- to stand up and do anything, these lawyers stood up and made the case that in america the ideals upon which this country was founded demanded that segregation be struck down. and so these lawyers, they

first of all didn't go straight to the schools. to the elementary schools. first they went to the graduate schools. and they desegregated the graduate schools. and they fought against white primaries. these are primaries where blacks in some states could vote in the general election but they couldn't participate in the primary so they had no choice in picking who was a democrat or a republican. they took on restrictive covenant cases, they took on all types of cases and attacked these standing monuments to segregation and beat them down. and then they got to the famous brown vs. board of education. but charles hamilton houston, a man who died at the age of 54, was not able to see the great work that his student, thurgood marshall, had done as they led the team to beat down segregation in public schools but his spirit was there. and so today as we commemorate this to youering victory of

defeating jim crow segregation in schools, we have to also commemorate the heroic figures of charles hamilton houston, thurgood marshall and many, many more who fought these battles, these black lawyers who fought these battles and would not accept the status quo. so i want to commend you, mr. horsford, for leading this today and i certainly hope that americans all across this country, black, white, native american, hispanic, asian, all colors, all backgrounds will take a moment and thank those lawyers who fought for -- to defeat segregation in america because what they literally did, and they did this for every single american of every color, they allowed americans to stand up and say, we do in fact live in the land of the free and the home of the brave. whereas if we did not defeat segregation, we'd have to say we live in the white free and the white brave and the enslaved and segregated

everybody else and that is nothing to crow about. in fact, that stands as a shame on our nation's history. but the achievement of these brave lawyers restored our nation's honor and i think that this is why i think brown vs. board of cationd is the most important case -- education is the most important case in american history and i thank you for taking a moment focus our attention on it and yield back. mr. horsford: i thank the gentleman for reminding us of the great legal minds who contributed and helped build the case which resulted in the brown decision, the fact that it took a team, a strategic team of formidable legal minds to come up with the right strategy that ultimately resulted in this great decision. . i thank representative ellison for reminding us of their distinct contribution. i'd like to now turn to the gentlelady from california, represent i have barbara --

representative barbara lee, who comes to this caucus and this body with tremendous experience, working first in the community as a caseworker on behalf of people and always keeping the focus of people in the front of the policies that we are pursuing to advance in this great institution. i now yield time to the gentlelady from california, representative barbara lee. ms. lee: thank you very much. let me thank you, congressman horsford, for that grarkse introduction and also for your continued lead -- for that grarkse introduction and also for -- for that gracious sp introduction and also for your leadership. i want to thank you for making sure that the theme this evening of this special order, the 60th anniversary of the brown vs. board of education did not go unremarked. thank you so much. you're both doing really a fantastic job representing and working hard on behalf of your

constituents. i also just have to say, to our fearless chair, congresswoman marcia fudge, our congressional black caucus chair, she really serves as an excellent steward of the conscience of the congress. now, let me just say, i was just a child, congressman horsford, in el paso, texas, when the supreme court issued its landmark decision on brown vs. board of education on may 17, 1954. schools were segregated when i started school. and so that was not in the not so distant past. i remember it very well. my good friend, congressman bay toe o'rourke, so ably represents el paso today and i have to tell u the result and im-- impact of the decision strikes down the separate but equal doctrine is visible throughout the city. i'm proud to say also that in

1955, el paso became the first city in the state of texas to integrate its public schools. my mother, mildred parish massey, was one of the seven african-american students to boldly integrate the university of texas at el paso. in 1957, el paso elected the first mexican american mayor of a major city. on june 7, 1962, the peal sew city council, under the leadership oflederman burt williams, passed the first ordinance in the former confederacy outlawing segregation in hotels, motels, restaurants and theaters, public places that were previously barred to african-americans and in some cases in el paso, earlier, to mexican americans. this history has been recounted by congressman o'rourke during black history month, and i thank him for that, because i have to say, i lived this, my family

lived this, my friends lived this, just as so many millions of people throughout this country lived this shameful time in our history. this is just a bit of my personal background, but we know that despite the landmark decision, it would take decades in many cities and states for that first mandate of the supreme court to be carried out. but because of brown, we have the civil rights act of 1964, the voting rights act of 1965 and the civil rights act of 1986. of course we've come a long way since the 1950's and 1960's but the fact remains that the fight to end inequality in public education continues. the end of the legal doctrine argued then by the brilliant, great, thurgood marshall, who was the attorney and later a supreme court justice and the naacp legal defense fund, that did not mean, necessarily, the end of racial segregation by neighborhoods and communities,

resulting in schools that continued to see stark segregation by race and income. in fact, many schools have reversed the desegregation gains of the 1970's and the 1980's while many others schools remain as segregated as they ever were. as a new ucla report mentioned last week, i just have to cite this, congressman horsford, ucla, brown at 60, it's called, great progress a long retwreet on an uncertain future. black and latino students tend to be in schools with a substantial number of poor people. my home state of california along with new york and illinois is among the top three worst states for isolating black students. and latino students are the most segregated in california. and now with the attacks on affirmative action in states, including my own state, unfortunately, including proposition 209 many years ago,

and -- in the state of california many minority students are being systematically shut out of public higher education. but let's be clear. even in schools that are well integrated, minority students often are treated differently. as a result from the civil rights data collection survey showed which was recently released by the department of education, it showed that despite making up only 18% of enrollees, african-american students represented 42% of preschool students suspended once. 42% of preschool students suspended once, this is like 4 and 5-year-olds and nearly half of the students suspended more than once. african-american girls were suspended at rates 12% higher than girls of any other race or ethnicity and most boys, black boys, were suspended at higher rates of 20% than girls or boys of any other race or ethnicity.

these are kids who are 4 and 5 years old. this is simply unacceptable. as chair of the c.b.c.'s task force on poverty, the economy, and democratic task force on poverty, income, and opportunity, we as task force members recognize that equal access to quality public education, public school education, is key to lifting children out of poverty. and true equality cannot be achieved if systematic institutional barriers to opportunity are allowed to persist. it was the thurgood marshalls of the world, the med garr everse, the martin luther king jr. the malcolm x's, all those unsung heroes and sheroes at the local levels that ensures the -- ensured the nation would live up to its promise and the guarantee laid out in brown. on the 60th anniversary of this

tremendous supreme court victory, i hope that members of the body recognize that while legal segregation is ended, yes, the laws of the land will not allow it, de facto segregation and institutional and structural racism is alive and well. our public policy agenda must take that fact into account. we must complete the unfinished business of brown vs. board of education by supporting legislation and public policies and funding priorities that bring true equality and equity in education to all children. thank you again, congressman horsford, for allowing us to talk this evening on this historic, momentous, 60-year anniversary of brown vs. board of education. >> thank you. mr. horsford: thank you. thank you representative lee, for so much, and for explaining so well the link between poverty and race and that they both contribute to the cause of

segregation we continue to see even today. there are those who want to suggest that race has nothing to do with it, but yet, it's the de facto policy which -- policies which contribute greatly to why we see kind of the resegregation, if you will, despite the advances and in some communities, there are places still in america where the dream of brown has not been truly realized and where communities which were advancing are now taking steps back. i commend you for raising those points. i yield back. ms. lee: one second, i want to re-emphasize this recent statistic on this 60th anniversary. only 18% of enrollees, african-american students comprise, you're talking about 4 % of preschool students who are suspended. these are 4 and 5-year-olds. so just remember that as we

despite -- debate public policy in this body. thank you. mr. horsford: thank you. i thank the gentlelady from california. it's now my privilege to yield time to the gentlelady from new york, representative clark, who continues to make her mark here in congress. i'm so honored to serve with her in this body and i continue to be in awe in how you can engage your constituents, how you advocate on important legislation, and how you are advancing bold ideas to move our country forward. it's truly been an honor to learn from you as a freshman and i'd like to yield time now to the gentlelady from new york, representative yvette clarke. ms. clarke: mr. speaker, i thank the gentleman from nevada, mr. horsford, for his leadership and for being willing to be one of our distinguished anchors along with congressman hakim jeffries,

who hails from brooklyn, new york, like myself, of the congressional black caucus' special hour. i want to also acknowledge the chairwoman of the congressional black caucus, ms. fudge, for her leadership, speaking truth to power at all times. mr. speaker, i stand here today with my colleagues from the congressional black caucus to commemorate as a beneficiary an historic decision, a decision that changed this nation forever. brown vs. board of education, in which the supreme court held that racial segregation, the doctrine of separate but equal, violated the guarantee of equal protection in the 14th amendment to the constitution. the unanimous decision in brown vs. board of education called upon the conscience of this

nation and the principals on which -- principles on which it had been founded that each of us are created equal and we are entitled to the full protections of the laws of our land. before brown, the full participation of african-americans and other people of color in our public education system which was primarily a component of our civil society, were prevented, denied, almost everywhere in the united states. the promises of the declaration of independence and the constitution that we are created equal and entitled to equal protection of the law were, until the decision in brown, only words without substance for millions of people whose exclusion from our society has persisted in the century of -- after the civil war. millions of african-americans and other people of color could not eat in a restaurant. stay in a hotel. obtain a mortgage. or register to vote.

even though they were american citizens who paid their taxes, fought for our country and obeyed the law. as such, racial discrimination was not limited to the state of the former -- states of the former confederacy. jesse , after sprinter owen returned to the united states for a ticker tape parade in manhattan, he was forced to ter the waldorf astoria on a freight elevator to attend a celebration there because the hotel maintained a policy of segregation. we have a responsibility to not only remember the decision of brown vs. board of education but also to think of its relevance at this moment in history. a moment when our schools, particularly in new york city, have become more segregated by

race than at any other time in the past half century. when enormous disparities in income and wealth threaten to divide this nation. and when many of the same tactics used to disenfranchise our parents and grandparents are being used to disenfranchise african-americans in this generation. today, we have a responsibility, an obligation, if you will, to build on the legacy of the brown decision. to elimination in our schools, in our communities, other institutions, the practice of racial segregation, whether intended or unintended. -- or unintended, that continues to divide this nation and to protect for every american the civil rights to which we are entitled by the constitution. it falls on our shoulders to keep up that fight for equality and quite frankly to make sure that as a diverse nation we have

an appreciation of the diversity of culture, religious and ethnic backgrounds. mr. speaker, i recall the words of supreme court justice thurgood marshall, who wrote that, unless our children begin to learn together, there is little hope that our people will ever learn to live together. with that, mr. speaker, i thank the gentleman from nevada and i yield back. mr. horsford: i thank mr. horsford: thank you for changing us to take on the responsibility to end racial segregation. your words were eloquent and it is a responsibility that each one of us must take heed and it

won't be done unless we do it ourselves. i would like to yield time to the gentlelady from ohio, representative joyce beatey, who i'm honored to serve with on the freshman class. i'm so inspired by her leadership and such a din mike she is a public servapt and i yield time totive beatty. mrs. beatty: thank you so much for leading us in this congressional black caucus special order and my colleague from new york, mr. jeffries.

it is an honor to be here but someone who lived through our topic tonight. if we pause for a moment and go back in history, that unanimous opinion written by chief justice earl warren. and segregation of schools violate 14th and 5th amendments of the united states constitution. this decision, mr. speaker, signaled an end to the state-sanctioned segregation of public schools in the united states making it unluffle lawful to deny public facilities. striking segregation in our public schools provideded a atalyst for the civil rights

movement and desee degree eating and inexclusions of institutions of public education. we acknowledge and applaud those who endured and lived through those days of cries ease so all americans could enjoy the right to voit and the right to equal of protection of law. it is the brown's story. but we heard from congressman lee, the congressman lee, because i grew up during the mother of of time, a and father who understood the linching of discriminating against african-americans who understood the difference

between red-lining and education nd they made a step to move to neighborhood. oliver brown, when his young daughter had to walk some 21 blocks through all kinds of elements and traffic and danger zones to get to the segregated schools. when six blocks away from where all-bhite where an 1c508. he stook to on this challenge because of his young daughter and at that time, having another daughter, not even knowing there would be a third daughter to follow. but at the age of 32. at the time of the suit against

he school system, he baptist minister, a welder, a person who was active in his compluent decided that he would let his name be put on the losses. he testified that many times his daughter had to wait in the cold, to wait tore a bus to take awayo monroe, seven blocks from an all-white elementary school. that's the oliver story. when we think of the brown story and when we think of mr. brown o opened up the schools it created eastern opportunity for millions of americans sadly the promise of the brown decision

remains unfulfilled in many ways today. millions of american families face trials and tribulations to their color, and religion. the legacy of this discrimination can be found in our schools. if you look at graduation rates. in the university, and yes, in the workplace, today and every day, we must rededicate ourselves to raise a new generation that may seize their opportunity. lawmakers mbent as that we make sure that americans are able to have a quality education, that they are able to succeed in all that they

endeavor. and while we pause in celebration of the 60th anniversary of the brown decision, we should not rest until quality is a reality. just this morning a columbus school board member reminded me as shawna gibbses wrote this note, she said no longer integrate, but still fighting for equality. as i close, i ask us to look at this visual and know that oliver's brown's fight was for all of us. 60 years ago and for today. thank you, mr. speaker and i yield back. mr. horsford: i thank the gentlelady for her personal remarks and reminding us that e decision of brown has very

real impact on the lives of individuals and for some in this body who lived during the time of segregation to be reminded of how important the brown decision was to changing that and to also remind us that we have a commitment to the current and future generations to ensure that we never go back to those dause. i thank the gentlelady very much for giving us that personal reflection on what the brown decision means to her. now as a member of the house of representatives, just think how far you've come and how far so many children in america deserve to go and that's what the brown situation is really all about. i would like to invite the co-anchor to this hour. each time the congressional black caucus takes time to the

floor for this special order our, it's intended to bring in issues, discuss important policies that deserve time and also to challenge this august body to focus about issues that don't always dominate the mainstream agenda. but thr there is no one who does is more effectively than the co-anchor. i learned so much from him. he brings a personal passion, experience, and education to the issues that we try to bring forward under the le of our fudge, and esswoman it's his words will be so poignant as we reflect on the on 0th affers of the brown

versus board of education decision. i yield to representative jeffries from new york. mr. jeffries: i thank representative horsford for his anchoring this special order on this supreme court decision and i look forward to our continued partnership as we move forward to dealing with issues -- not just in the districts we represent in nevada and brooklyn and queens, new york. with you we appreciate the opportunity that we have every week, this hour of pour, to come before the people of this great country and speak directly to

them for an issue of great importance. we have heard about the nature of the supreme court's decision, brown versus board of education, an important decision, striking down this principle of separate but equal, exposing it for the fraud that it was, recognizing that inherently this doctrine as designed to hold up the segregation under a false remise that you can have institutions of learning that would have separate but equal. and this reverse, decades of supreme court jurisprudence that had been designed to uphold segregation and jim crow laws and racial hate red, first

codified by the supreme court, dredd-scott decision, the supreme court justice held that blacks had no rights whether they were free or slaves that the white man was bound to respect. in this country that is what the supreme court concluded in 1857. the war was fought as relates to the conflict between the north and the south. lives were lost. a lot of blood was spilled. nd you have the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments. but there were a lot of people that there were not going to ccept all men were created equal. and so we got the black codes

and we got lynchings in the south and jim crow segregation. and the supreme court felt the need to step in and raise segregation up to the constitutional level and conclude in this supreme court various board of education, that it was constitutional in the united states of america. and so the naacp was formed in brilliant legal minds came together to help bring to life the democratic principles and ideals contained in the constitution of the united states of america. but not actually practiced in

this great country. some of the names have already been called. thurgood marshal was the chief legal architect that led to the dismantling of see degree gation of this country. he recruited jack greenberg and constance notly baker and robert carter who went on to become a robinson -- and brilliant legal minds who came together in 19 h in a unanimous decision struck down this constitutionally upheld principle and decided that separate but equal was constitutionally suspect and shut it down.

but then fl were a lot of folks in america who had to try to bring this principle to light. ou had the desee degree gation struggles that took place. james meredith and the university of mississippi in early 1960's and the little rock the who had to desegregate little rock central school district. these are brave individuals, young people confronted by angry mobs, blood thift ofthirsty rounds and all sorts of intolerable things all in america simply to get an education and we know that education pays. nd we

way to -- we still have a long way to go and in new york state, we still have one of the most racially segregated schools in terms of its racial composition in the country. california is at the top of the list, illinois is at the top of the list, maryland is at the top of the list. so we've got to deal with the continuation of this legacy, not because it's legally sanctioned at this point, but we still have far too many children educated in schools all across this country who are not being exposed to the diversity of this gorgeous mosaic we have in america and perhaps as a result of being isolated into schools with a high concentration of poverty, high concentration of racial minorities, that those

schools don't necessarily have the same level of resources as we might find in other, more affluent parts of america. so we still have some barriers that we have to strike down. the road to equality in america is still under construction. but i think we as member os they have congressional black caucus are hopeful because we understand that if you trace the progress that has been made, we've come a long way over a pretty short period of time. yet we know we still have a long, long way to go. with that, i think i'll yield back because i believe we've got another distinguished member of the c.b.c. who has joined us this evening. >> i thank the co-anchor for yielding back time. mr. horsford: i'd like to extend time to the gentlelady from texas, you just mentioned that e -- the fact that new york,

california and texas lead this issue and while we have made tremendous progress as the ucla study that was referenced by representative lee earlier today -- this evening spoke about, students of color are much more likely to be grouped with their specific demographic. now with the changing demographic, we're seeing a real increase and a striking finding among the segregation of latino students and so in new york, california, and texas, more than half of all latino students go to schools that are 90% minority or more. so to speak about that or other topics, let me yield time to representative sheila jackson lee from the great state of texas. -- mr. son lee: horsford: mr. speaker, while

she's coming may i inquire how much time we have remaining? the speaker pro tempore: four minutes. ms. jackson lee: let me thank the gentleman very much for his leadership on this very important night, this very important opportunity to discuss equality in america and joined by his colleague and our colleague, mr. jeffries of new york and of course our chair, chairwoman fudge, we have led on issues, topical issues but painful issues, issues that are important not only to the people of color but certainly to people around the nation and i might say, as they look upon the united states, as a beacon of light to people around the world, it's often when i travel internationally i'll hear people speak of the work we do on the floor of the house. so i too come to celebrate the 60th anniversary of brown vs. board of education and remind my

leagues that some 60 years ago, the supreme court unlocked the schoolhouse doors, broke down yet another barrier to equality and beat the long arc of moral history toward justice. but we come now, 60 years later, i want to speak of a few points for many of my colleagues have already been on the floor of the house but i i wanted to express some of the consternation that really unwinds if you will, the goodness of the warren court and its efforts to make a difference in the lives of so many americans. let me read these words that were in "newsweek" of years ago about this decision. it was the most momentous court decision in the history they have negro struggle to achieve equal rights in the united states and the result will be nothing short of social upheaval. the challenges, it says, personal prejudice against the negro will, of course, linger on for although a court decision can restain -- restrain the actions of man, it cannot change overnight the way he thinks. prejudice, however no longer

will become institutionalized. jim crow will become an outlaw. in the background of bundy and sterling and the recent decision by the supreme court, one would wonder how we're moving forward and how this supreme court decision, brown vs. topeka, not be undermined. quickly i want to say, the court got it wrong in the affirmative action decision and brown lays the framework for equality and opportunity and exposure and the affirmative action decision took awhy the polio vaccination if you will, for this ongoing divide between people of color. as you can see in higher education, at the university of michigan, michigan state, you see the numbers going down of people of color, african-americans, berkley in california, numbers going down. affirmative action was not a handout. it was a partner to brown vs. to pee can ka -- to 350e ka. it was the opportunity to carry -- topeka. it was the opportunity to carry

out the dream that martin luther king had. all of us have to come together and share each other's experiences. we have to stand in the shoes of young people who want opportunity, whether they're hispanic or african-american or asian or anglo. in the state of texas, there's a sizable group of hispanic children, because of regional location. what i would argue is excellence has to go beyond that we as -- as we stand here looking for integration, we must demand excellence for our children and we must ask the supreme court for its reconsideration depr the affirmative action decision which undermines brown vs. topeka. let me celebrate this great decision, brown vs. topeka, and let me commit to working to better our children's lives. mr. horsford: mr. speaker, if i can just close by saying, if we want the next generation of students to live the american dream and achieve the success they're capable of, we must challenge the growing trend of

inequality in our schools throughout america. that was the eventual dream that emerged from the brown decision and so far we have fallen short of a fair and equal school system that gives each student their best chance to succeed. i yield my time back, thank you for recognizing this special order hour on this the 60th anniversary of the brown decision. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2013, the gentleman from texas, mr. gohmert, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader. r. gohmert:

mr. gohmert: thank you, mr. speaker. tonight i wanted to discuss issues regarding the patriot act and as i understand it, we will be taking up a vote come thursday on what's called the u.s.a. freedom act, i believe. i know that there was a lot of work that was put into negotiating a compromise there and i still had a concern, as i did when i was a freshman, with language in the patriot act and this is language here from the patriot act, 50 u.s.c., section 1861, that allows the federal

government to go into very personal matters, very personal documentation, of individuals. some of us felt like it was allowing the federal government to get more than the federal government should be entitled to get. there's similar language in the fisa act, but this language says that the director of the f.b.i. or a designee of the director may make an application for an order requiring the production of tangible things including books, records, papers, documents and other items, for an investigation to obtain foreign intelligence information not concerning a united states rson or to protect against

international terrorism or clan december tine intelligence activities and there was a provision put in there that -- and it says that such investigation of a united states person is not conducted solely on the basis of activities protected by the first amendment of the constitution. and back when i was a freshman and this language was being discussed, back in 2005, 2006, during that time frame, i pointed out that it seems like through the the patriot act, they keep referring to international, foreign, as this does, foreign intelligence information, international errorism, other language has milar references, and so i thought, well that's strange, though, that when it mentioned

clandestine intelligence activities, that's a vague enough term it doesn't include the word foreign, international, and so i was quite concerned about that and the bush administration representatives de clear, look, congressman, foreign, international, that's all the way through this stuff. you don't have to worry about -- it has to do with foreign contacts. and so if there is no foreign contact, then the patriot act doesn't apply. because that's through the the -- throughout the act. it's got to be foreign, it's got to have an international element to it. and so much so that i encouraged my colleagues that were concerned about their own phone logs being gathered that if they simply avoided using their phone

or had foreign terrorists call another number and not their own phone, they ought to be ok. being a bit sar katzic. it turns out that my concerns about the use of the terms clandestine intelligence spot ty were apparently on. that despite assurances from the gonzalez -- gonzales justice department that, oh, no, it has to be foreign, it has to be international, if there's not that element, it doesn't really comply, i said, but it doesn't say that with regard to clandestine intelligence activities. so as i raised -- i mean, clandestine so somebody peeping over a wall to see what they can see, technically, that could be considered clandestine. gathering intelligence. look up the word intelligence.

it's pretty all encompassing. anything that gathers information. so it wouldn't take much to get an order granting virtually any information the federal government is seeking, even though there is no contact with a federal agent, federal of rnment, foreign entity any kind, it's not there and it needs to be there. unfortunately, when i raised people ring hole, the who negotiated this bill, my friend jim sensenbrenner from wisconsin and i think bobby scott, they were a bit defensive, gee, we have our deal, and so you can't -- we kvent allow an amendment, even -- we can't allow an amendment even though it's got wide, bipartisan support. and if one goes back and looks

at how the vote on my amendment it was very passed bipartisan. we had some folks that would be considered very liberal democrats along with some of us who are considered very conservative. but the united concern that allowed my amendment to pass was about having terms clandestine intelligence activities, that would allow the federal government basically to get an order to go snooping on fishing expeditions based on very little and certainly nothing to do with terrorism. they had no link whatsoever to terrorism. if they wanted to do fishing ex

pe dishons. ann, ashured by a text he ashured us that the national security letters were not being abused, that there were no abuses in the patriot act. and i.g. inspector' report indicated that there was widespread massive abuse from federal agents who were simply additions, x pe gathering information. so i was hoping to get this fixed. it's a hole big enough in the agents act that federal

are unloading private information that american citizens may have even though american citizens have no ties th terrorism, no ties with foreign governments. they left a gaping hole in what the ng called a fix to patriot act abuses. unfortunately, though, my amendment passed to remedy this oblem, though it passed in committee. a few amendments later, maybe one or two amendments later, we had votes. we had to come to the floor for. and i had a conflict and by the time i came back, they called a revote on my amendment and

ithout a recorded vote, it was voice-voted and the amendment was voted down. mr. speaker, i'm hoping that people in america will get the message that this administration wants to protect its ability to get information on any american, whether they have any ties to terrorism or foreign governments or ties to foreign agents, any ties to anything that might give some of us some concern, you don't have to. if they can assert that you may gathering clandestine intelligence, intelligence, meaning any information, you may

callal federal office and ask for information. they may decide that is a clandestine attempt to gather intelligence. there used to be an old joke aat isn't funny anymore where guy called and said i demand to know if you have an f.b.i. file me and the answer is, we do now. that used to be a joke. that used to be cute. that us nt so could you tell anymore. because under the language under the so-called negotiators negotiated, that massive hole that allows the gathering of information on american citizens will remain in the bill, will

remain part of the patriot act and unless it's fixed, i will have an amendment to this bill, the rules committee may not allow it to come to the floor. and if that's the case i will have to vote against this actalled fix to the patriot because it doesn't fix. it just allows more cover for the federal government with a massive hole for anybody who wants to galt they are information on anybody. we need to fix it. we don't need to have an act that allows federal agents shes whether it was the bush administration, whether it was the obama administration or

future administration, whether epublican or democrat ks, we ed to stop fishing expeditions. it was bipartisan until the so-called fix got very protective and decided they weren't accepting such an amendment that would close this gaping hole. i hope it will be reconsidered. but unless there is a lot of mush from the public, mr. speaker, i doubt that they are going to be any less protective of their negotiated work and so it will allow this administration to continue spying, getting information on american citizens that i would contend is not appropriate at

all. that terminology is used a number of other places in the patriot act. there is another place, 18 regarding pen registers. phone logs, trap and trace a devices to allow the federal government to trace calls. they use similar language. there in that part of federal the attorney es general or designated attorney for the government to get an investigation that or tempting to obtain

against anybody who is attempting to get -- not concerning a united states person, number one, or, number two, to protect against international terrorism, or, three, clan destin international activities. , was concerned about that clandestine international activities that doesn't protect american citizens. look up fl. american concerning a citizen. it says international terrorism. it has to be international. t after that, it has another or, to any one of these can

apply or for clandestine activities even if it is a united states citizen and not involving international andorism or someone who had it references a certification by the applicant -- well this is the exact wording. the information likely to be obtained is foreign intelligence information not concerning a united states person or is relevant to an ongoing investigation totaling protect international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities. in n, that third part, even

this statute leaves that gaping hole, clandestine intelligence activities, that is a wide open phrase. it is such a hole. it doesn't limit to foreign agents or citizens who have contacts with foreign agents or some kind of international terrorism scheme. it allows federal agents as it did under the bush administration and been allowing under the obama administration and would allow under republican or democratic administrations, any american citizen that the federal government contends might be getting information about something in a h that they consider private.

clandestine intelligence activities. a lovely triple term, friendship will-word term that could be a gaping hole and is a gaping hole in federal law that needs to be fixed. but unless members of both sides of the aisle come forward as they initially did when i first proposed the amendment to fix this gaping hole and vote in a bipartisan manner to close that gaping hole, then it's going to continue to be a problem with the federal government gathering information on u.s. citizens that have nothing to do with terrorism, nothing. there is no requirement of anything to do with terrorism and still be caught in this federal web if they determine

that you have been picking up information somewhere. maybe you visited a federal web site and they thought they might be looking like they are trying to gather information. let's go get an order and see what they have been doing lately. news. 's the bad the law needs to be fixed . the patriot act needs to be fixed desperately. there is a bill coming on thursday that says it will be fixing the problem, but it doesn't fix the problem. it leaves the hole for the federal government. might as well not have a bill even though there are good things in it. so i hope that people will wake and know the bill's pronets

don't want any amendments. their they will mess up ticklish deal they presented, which is a bit of a plob. there will be who will come to the floor this bill has gone through the regular record fer order. it has gone through a ski hearing, committee, full committee markup where we vote on amendments and anybody can bring amendments. but mr. speaker, i don't believe that when somebody negotiates a backroom deal and then they come to committee and convince the that this peaker this deal is too ticklish, you

can't allow any amendments to actually pass that committee, that's not regular order. regular order is when you are allowed to bring amendments and have full debate and if you make your case as i did and the vote passes, the amendment becomes part. it does not mean that you come back because the proponents that convinced the members and others, gee, we have to slip this amendment back up for another vote and vote it down because we don't want any amendments to the deal we negotiated. that's not regular order. debate t getting full at the committee level when someone negotiates a bamroom deal and says you can't ever amend it because we have a special bamroom deal here.

time to wake up and fix the patriot act. and if it's not fixed, we need to get rid of it. it's that simple. if you are a big fan of big rother, all-seeing eye-watching, the american citizen is doing, you will be encouraged because under rorkrork, the administration is going to have everyone's health care records. whoever you see, whatever it's for, no matter how personal and private it is, the federal government will have your records. . . you may say, but the federal government has firewall, they don't let people see things who are not supposed to. tell that to the 1,000 or so people whose f.b.i. records were

found in the clinton white house . just possessing one f.b.i. file inappropriately sent chuck colston prison. yet the clinton white house had 1,000 of them, but fortunately for the clinton administration, they had an attorney general who was not about to prosecute their bossdzes at the white house, but as i understand it, 1,000 f.b.i. files could be 2,000 years in prison. could be 4,000. but i think it's 2,000. i think it's two minimum per file that you have. if i recall correctly, i think chuck colson did about a year and a half for having one f.b.i. file. so it is interesting, some people we were told whose f.b.i. files were located at the white

house may have changed their positions on legislation that was before the congress. when you know the most secret, most intimate secrets about people in this country, sometimes it's amazing what you can get them to do. so, federal government, if they have all of your health care records, they know everything. and having listened to friends across the aisle stand down here and berate republicans, we don't want the federal government in our bedroom, and yet they turn around and vote for a bill without a single republican vote that puts the federal government in the bedroom, bathroom, kitchen, dining room, it puts the federal government in every

aspect of your life. and then we've got this consumer financial protection board who apparently is now determined that, gee, they need people's credit card, debit card records so they can protect them. they will service them. back home i grew up and heard cattlemen talk about taking the cow down the road to be serviced by a bull, i can't help but wonder what kind of service it is the consumer financial protection board is giving to the american citizens. they say wea we want to gather everybody's records so we can protect them, when the federal government has everybody's personal information, americans are not protected. they are subjected to being subjects because the federal government can manipulate people as they wish.

this is the very kind of thing that the founders were afraid of, one of the many they were afraid of, and thought that they had protected us from. because they gave the congress the power of the purse and they really believed that if an executive branch become taos abusive, as with the gonzales justice department, i don't believe for a minute that attorney general gonzales had any idea that all these thousands of letters were going out with the power of the subpoena to get people's most personal information, just some fishing expedition, i don't think he knew. but just like if someone is in charge of the v.a. for 5 1/2 yearsened the v.a. has become -- years and the v.a. has become abusive to the detriment and

death of people they were supposed to be taking care of, it's time to get a new coach. somebody, whether they are a war hero or not, as the current head of the v.a., somebody that will come in an clean house, demand accountability and get it. it's time. we've been hearing discussions also here in washington for quite some time about how we have got to provide legal status, come seend of amnesty, young people who came into the united states without being adults so they didn't really have a say, therefore we need to give them some type of amnesty. as i repeatedly contended and submit, we have got to stop talking about legal status amnesty anything -- about legal status, amnesty, anything of

that kind, until the border is secured. anyone who has said i advocated for the border being sealed is a liar. i have advocated and continue to advocate that the border be sevure. i want immigration, we need immigration in the united states, but it needs to be legal, it needs to be people that are authorized to come into the united states. we also need immigration reform but until we have a president, i would welcome it being this president, but until we have a president who will secure the border and make sure that it is only people who legally come into the country, then there is no reason to pass an immigration reform bill because he will continue to ignore the laws he doesn't like and only follow laws he does like just as he has already done on immigration issues. and we have heard from chris

crain as the union representative for the border patrol, i've talked to a number of border patrolmen, they say the same thing that when people talk about legal status or amnesty here in washington, it creates a magnet drawing people from foreign countries into this country because they think, gee, i've got to get there quickly before the border is secured because i'm going to get amnesty if i can just get there. hadn't been that many years ago when there were only a handful of children who came into the country illegally that we knew of, the estimates were many, many, many times that, it was estimated this year there will

probably be 60,000 children come into this country by the end of this year. and now we hear that we've had more than 60,000 come in already and it's just may. the conservative bastion of newspapers, the "new york times" , mr. speaker, i am prone to sarcasm, has an article, dated may 16, u.s. setting up emergency shelter in texas as youths come across border alone. this article by julia preston says the following -- with border authorities in south texas overwhelmed by a surge of young illegal migrants, traveling by themselves, the department of homeland security declares a crisis this week and move -- moved to set up an

emergency shelter for the use at an air force base in san antonio, officials said friday. after seeing children packed in a border patrol station in mcallen, texas, during a visit last sunday, homeland security secretary jay johnson on monday declared, quote, a level 4 condition of readiness, unquote, in the rio grande valley. the alert was an official recognition that federal agencies overseeing borders, immigration enforcement and child weafer had been outstripped by a sudden increase in unaccompanied minors in recent weeks. mr. speaker, let me injecked here, when i talked about the fact din inject here, when i talked -- let me inject here, when i talked about the fact that when legal status and amnesty has been talked about

here in washington it becomes a magnet and draws people in, and for all the children drawn in illegally, you know that some slavery.d into sex human trafficking becomes an even bigger business. and reporters say, gee, what makes you think they're coming in greater numbers? just because people are talking about amnesty here in the united states congress, the proof is there for anyone who has eyes to see and ears to hear. this "new york times" article goes on, on sunday, department of health and human services officials will open a shelter for up to 1,000 minors at lackland air force base in texas. authorities said, and will begin transferring youth there by land and air. the level four alert is the

highest for agencies handling children crossing the border illegally and allows homeland security officials to call on emergency resources from other agencies, officials said. in an interview on friday, mr. johnson said, the influx of inaccompanied youth had, quote, zoomed to the top of my agenda, unquote. after his encounters at the mcallen border patrol station with small children, one of whom was 3. the children are coming primarily from el salvador, guatemala and honduras, making the perilous journey north through mexico, to texas, without parents or close adult relatives. last weekend alone, more than 1,000 unaccompanied youths were being held at overflowing border stations, texas officials said. the flow of child migrants has en building since 2011, when

4,059 unaccompanied youths were apprehended by border agents. last year, more than 1,000 my no, sir were caught and border patrol officials had said they were expecting more than 60,000 this year but that projection has already been exceeded. by law, unaccompanied children caught crossing illegally from countries other than mexico are treated differently from other migrants. after being apprehended by border patrol, they must be turned over within 72 hours to a refugee settlement office that is part of the health department. health officials must try to find relatives or other adults in the united states who can care for them while their immigration cases move through the courts. they search -- a search that can take several weeks or more. the health department maintains shelters for the youths, most

run by private contractors in the border region, health -- region. health officials had had begun several months ago to add beds in the shelter, anticipating a seasonal increase, but the plans proved insufficient to handle a drastic increase of youths in recent weeks, a senior administration official said. mr. speaker, i spoke with thatne with a church group was called for help from the department of homeland security. we have exceeded our capacity to protect these children. we're asking church groups that an help, please come help. this person said it was clear that some of the young children,

females, had been raped. can't help but wonder for the 1,000 that made it across last week, in that one area in texas, how many got lured into sex trafficking, oh, sure, we'll get you to the united states, as a young child, we'll get you there. and then once you're there, president obama will make sure you're taken care of. and you just come with us. for heaven's sake, one of these is 3 years old. and we have people here in this building saying, oh, no children -- no, children never come by themselves. they would never make that choice to come by themselves. the only people who would ever come illegally would be parents who bring the children without choices. well because of the talk of amnesty in this town and because

we do not have a secured border, then this administration and this congress also is complicit sex lping lure people into horrible , into situations, even people trying to cross deserts who don't make it. that should not be. owe the ricans, we world the obligation to keep our oath to follow, to support the constitution of the united states and that requires us to follow the law. not pick and choose which federal laws we care to ignore, because we don't like