Condemning the false, inflammatory, and racially offensive statements made by the President of the United States regarding four women of color who are duly elected Members of the One Hundred Sixteenth Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I said earlier today that I wish we were not here, but we are here. Now, I wish to indicate that I am appalled at any commentary that demeans or hurts a fellow human being or a fellow American or fellow world citizen. So the recounting of various statements, I realize and recognize that comments were made about statements to ease the pain of those who were receiving it.

Right now, we are talking about comments that came from the highest office in the land, which really does reflect what this little book, the Constitution, says, that this Nation was organized to create a more perfect union. Yet, unfortunately, the officer in the White House, the President of the United States, took to tweeting and talked about the first African American woman from the Seventh District, the first Palestinian American woman, the youngest woman elected to Congress, and the first Somali American woman, women of color.

It is imperative today that, along with H. Res. 494, my resolution, we condemn this action, and we do it together. I ask my Republican colleagues to vote for the underlying resolution.

Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the Committees on the Judiciary and Homeland Security, I rise in support of H. Res. 489, a resolution condemning President Trump's racist comments directed at Members of Congress.

Mr. Speaker, on November 6, 2018, in an election widely regarded as a referendum on the performance and disapproval of the Administration of President Donald J. Trump, the American people voted to vest control of the U.S. House of Representatives in the Democratic Party to restore the system of checks and balances designed by the Framers in 1787 in Philadelphia.

The Representatives elected to the 116th Congress comprise the most diverse class in American history with respect to its racial, ethnic, and religious composition, and also includes the largest contingent of female Representatives and the most members ever of the LGBTQ community.

Among the cohort of the 40 Representatives first elected to the Congress in the November 2018 election are several whose membership is historic, including the Representative for the Seventh District of Massachusetts, the first African American woman elected from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts; the Representative from the Thirteenth District of Michigan, the first Palestinian-American woman elected to Congress; the Representative from the Fourteenth District of New York, the youngest woman ever elected to Congress; and the Representative from the Fifth District of Minnesota, the first Somali-American elected to Congress.

In the discharge of their official duties as Members of Congress, these talented and dedicated Members of Congress traveled to the southern border of the United States to observe the living conditions and treatment received by migrants and refugees seeking asylum in the United States who are currently being held in detention facilities operated under control or supervision of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), some consisting of nothing more than tent villages cordoned off under highways.

Upon their return to the Capitol, these Members of Congress reported their shock and horror regarding the appalling and inhumane conditions to which detainees were being subjected by CPB at a public hearing of a House Committee on Oversight and Reform.

On July 14, 2019, the President of the United States reacted to the criticism of his Administration's treatment of detainees by these Members of Congress in a series of unhinged tweets that questioned their loyalty to the United States and implied that due to the circumstances of their birth they had no right to exercise the responsibilities and privileges of duly elected Members of Congress.

Specifically, the President tweeted that it was:

``So interesting to see ``Progressive'' Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world (if they even have a functioning government at all), now loudly . . . and viciously telling the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful Nation on earth, how our government is to be run. Why don't they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came.''

The President's statements are false in that three of Members of Congress he impugned are in fact natural born citizens and the fourth- is a naturalized citizen.

Although the recent statements of the President are inaccurate and offensive, they are consistent with prior statements he has made to stoke to division, discord, and disharmony among the American people.

Let us not forget that the current President of the United States burnished his political reputation by claiming falsely for more than 5 years that his predecessor was born in Kenya and not in the United States and thus was an illegitimate President. The current President of the United States launched his 2016 campaign for the Presidency by saying of persons from Mexico seeking to immigrate to the United States: ``They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists.''

The current President of the United States claimed that a Hispanic federal jurist could not preside over a court proceeding to which then presidential candidate Donald J. Trump and the Trump Organization were defendants accused of civil fraud because ``He's a Mexican!''

In January 2018 the current President of the United States is reported to have inquired of his advisors: ``Why are we having all these people from (expletive deleted) countries come here?'', referring to persons from countries in Africa, the Caribbean, and Central and South America.

And most contemptible of all, on August 15, 2017 the current President of the United States said he regarded as some ``very fine people,'' the neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and Ku Klux Klansmen who descended on the peaceful community of Charlottesville, Virginia to advocate racism and who were met by peaceful counterprotestors in a clash that the white supremacists turned violent and resulted in the death of Heather Heyer and left injured many other innocent persons who were gathered to affirm the principles of the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution, and to honor the sacrifice of unsung American heroes who devoted their lives to the ongoing quest to continue perfecting our union.

Mr. Speaker, the recent and past statements and actions of the current President of the United States demean the office he holds and falls short of the standard set by the 16th President, whose administration was devoted to unity, healing, and ending racial division.

In his famous March 4, 1861, Inaugural Address, President Abraham Lincoln foretold the reasons why the efforts of the current President of the United States to rend our union are destined to fail:

``We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory will swell when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.''

Before closing, Mr. Speaker, I think it appropriate to share my perspective on immigration and significant and positive impact it has in the development of this, the greatest nation in human history.

Like the Framers did in the summer of 1776, it is fitting that we gather in the nation's capital on a sweltering July day to reflect upon America's long and continuing struggle for justice, equality, and opportunity.

After all, all that any of us wants is an honored place in the American family.

I am often reminded that as I speak there is a family somewhere about to begin a dangerous but hopeful quest.

Somewhere south of the border, maybe across the Rio Grande from El Paso, Laredo, Corpus Christi, or Brownsville or maybe just south of Tucson or San Diego or Douglass, Arizona.

Somewhere there is a family in the Old Country anxiously about to embark on their own journey to the New World of America.

They come for the same reason so many millions came before them, in this century and last, from this continent and from every other.

They come for the same reason families have always come to America: to be free of fear and hunger, to better their condition, to begin their world anew, to give their children a chance for a better life.

Like previous waves of immigrants, they too will wage all and risk all to reach the sidewalks of Houston or Los Angeles or Phoenix or Chicago or Atlanta or Denver or Detroit.

They will risk death in the desert; they will brave the elements, they will risk capture and crime, they will endure separation from loved ones.

And if they make it to the Promised Land of America, no job will be beneath them.

They will cook our food, clean our houses, cut our grass, and care for our kids.

They will be cheated by some and exploited by others.

They work in sunlight but live in twilight, between the shadows; not fully welcome as new Americans but wanted as low-wage workers.

Somewhere near the borders tonight, a family will cross over into the New World, willed by the enduring power of the American Dream.

I urge all Members to join me in supporting H. Res. 489.

All American should take pride in and celebrate the ethnic, racial, and religious diversity that has made the United States the leader of the community of nations and the beacon of hope and inspiration to oppressed persons everywhere.

And in addition to the love and pride Americans justifiably have for their country, all persons in the United States should cherish and exercise the rights, privileges, and responsibilities guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Bass), who is a distinguished member of the Judiciary Committee.

Madam Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman from California an additional 15 seconds.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Jeffries), who is the distinguished Democratic chair of the Democratic Caucus of the House.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Swalwell).

The gentleman from California has 30 seconds.

Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from California (Mr. Swalwell).

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Ted Lieu).

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Washington State (Ms. Jayapal).

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Dean).

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis).

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan).

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, the way to move forward is by voting ``yes'' on the underlying resolution.

To paraphrase the Declaration of Independence, it is indicated that we all are created equal, with certain unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

That is immigrant and nonimmigrant. That is an individual whose religion you believe in and one you do not. That is a lifestyle that you may not know and understand. It may be a race or ethnicity that you have never come to be able to accept.

In this Nation, the founding Thirteen Colonies fleeing persecution were described as creating an experiment. It was not a perfect experiment.

There were some of us who came to this Nation in the bottom of the belly of a slave boat. There were some who were indentured servants. Many came by boat. Some walked across a border that has created havoc. But they were people desperate for freedom and the right to make their lives better.

We can account for those people by the history books and the decades of heroes and sheroes who have come in a different skin, a different religion, a different basis. They have even put on the uniform of this Nation because they love this country.

I am reminded of the era of Dr. Martin Luther King, the many miles he walked with the soldiers, the Civil Rights soldiers, and his early book titled ``Why We Can't Wait.''

I join with the idea that we must work for the American people. We must provide for the increase in the minimum wage, good healthcare, and education.

At the same time, there is something in this Nation that our children demand that we do. What are the values of the red, white, and blue? What are the values of those stars that represent the many States of this Nation? The values are that we are a Nation based upon laws, morality, values, a love of country, due process, equality, and justice. It means that every single person must have the fundamental right of respect.

This resolution is simply that. It is a fundamental right to respect and dignity--in this instance, for four Members of the United States Congress from Boston, from New York, from Minnesota, and from Michigan.

As they go on to their places, it is very clear that they must have the respect that is deserving of this particular Congress.

These four women are no less deserving of dignity than anyone else. This resolution is simply one that is to seek--not condoning, as was said--a condemnation of attitudes that may parlay racist beliefs.

No one stands for that. We cannot go on to all that is good without saying to the Nation and the world that this is not good; it is not America; and we will not accept that as our definition because we do believe in the creation of a more perfect Union.

I conclude by saying that we condemn the hurtful and offensive comments that demean immigrants and people of color, especially if those comments originate from the White House. What we will do today is accept the challenge of Dr. Martin Luther King, a peacemaker, a man of hope, and we will say why we can't wait because the Nation calls upon our higher angels.

That is what we will do when we affirm this resolution on behalf of the people of the United States of America.

Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to vote for this very important resolution, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, this is the third time that I have stood in this well this year on this floor about this subject, and I have been clear at every juncture: Racism, bigotry, and anti-Semitism will find no refuge in the people's House.

We expect each other to speak fairly, truthfully, and respectfully of all our fellow Members of Congress and of the President--not because we agree with each other all the time, but because we have great respect for the Americans who elected us and to represent them from one end of Pennsylvania Avenue to the other.

I come here today, Mr. Speaker, with much grief and many questions. The first may be procedural, but it is not trivial.

The Democrats wrote a resolution last night. It is on the floor today. I just have a question: What happened to the 72-hour rule ensuring Members have an opportunity to review legislation and seek feedback from constituents before voting on it? What happened to regular order? This never came through committee.

Why does the House have rules if the Democratic majority only follows them when politically convenient? And, also, as was brought up in the rules debate, there was even no consultation with others who would want to be a part of this.

The President has every right to be frustrated with Congress for the work that we have failed to do on multiple fronts, including the border. I also understand that his recent tweets make it hard for us to move forward.

Attacks are like quicksand: They trap and they defeat us before we know it. They are distracting us from legislating. That was true when a lawmaker implied last week that a Member of the House leadership was singling out ``newly elected women of color'' and when other Representatives were accused of enabling a racist system.

It is true as we see little to no concern from my colleagues across the aisle when a foreign flag is raised over an American facility or a terrorist firebombed another facility.

It is true when the President of the United States, out of frustration, tweeted this weekend, and it is true of many comments coming from lawmakers today.

In fact, it is interesting for my chairman to say that they have called out the President every time but, also, many times--and this is just a small listing of every week that they have not called out their own Members for things that I cannot read on this floor.

Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, we are too quick this Congress to allow political ends to justify procedural means. But that is not democracy rooted in our unalienable rights, rights the second clause in this resolution affirms. The resolution is simply a lesson in political expediency.

Integrity is a prerequisite to our covenant to govern by the consent of the people, which this resolution also affirms.

We knew when we voted for the House rules this January that we could not, in this Chamber, use certain language about other democratically elected leaders. We agreed to let ideas compete for our votes and use rhetoric as a tool to build bridges instead of as kindling to burn those bridges down. Yet not a week goes by, as we have already pointed out, without Members of this body issuing statements or tweets that I could not and will not read from this floor without violating our rules.

It is amazing, but not surprising, that some of my colleagues are using this platform to call for impeachment since many have been making that call since November of 2016--no justification then, and definitely not now.

You see, Mr. Speaker, pleas for decorum are not merely a refuge for lawmakers who find themselves in the minority. Decorum is a symptom of a healthy and confident democracy. When we can debate ideas on this floor, decorum ensures democracy's every voice can be heard.

I would like to lend my voice to the chorus of lawmakers supporting the first 15 clauses of this resolution, but for the misguided title and the fourth page of this resolution, we could have had a suspension vote.

To its credit, the resolution states the House of Representatives ``is committed to keeping America open to those lawfully seeking refuge and asylum.'' I agree.

Everyone who votes for this resolution will now be on record as opposing illegal immigration, and I hope we can all work together to address the border crisis based on that common foundation.

Again, you don't need a vote on this resolution to do that. You simply have to look at the border and acknowledge the crisis.

But we will still have a problem with this resolution. We cannot, by our own House rules, support a resolution that labels the President in this way, and I will not.

The rules that have governed this body since the first United States Congress do not allow us to devolve in that way. However, it doesn't mean that we can't condemn racial or ethnic prejudice. It doesn't mean we can't decisively reject anti-Semitism, as we have on this floor. In my view, we have not done it so far in this Congress to that extent, but we have time for a clarion call on that front. I know some colleagues on both sides of the aisle who could join each other in that conviction.

Our own standards of decorum, however, in fact, empower us to welcome to America every person who respects our laws and wants to help defend our freedoms. These standards also give us a platform to admit when we and those around us make mistakes.

When we consider the power of this Chamber to legislate for the common good, I wonder why my colleagues have become so eager to attack the President that they are willing to sacrifice the rules, precedents, and the integrity of the people's House for an unprecedented vote that undercuts its very democratic processes.

I wonder, if the comments in view today are what some of my colleagues say they are, why this resolution had to rephrase them to make its point. The resolution condemns comments in a way that exposes the breathtaking partisanship of today's exercise.

The resolution quotes only three words from the comments it rejects-- the words ``go back'' and ``invaders.'' Beyond those three words, the resolution substitutes its own phrasing and editorializing for the words this resolution has in view.

Again, a partisan show. That is a tell that today's resolution is more of a political jab than anything else. It is, therefore, a signal for us to take a moment to look inward.

I wonder if, when we are tempted to accuse our sister, our brother, our fellow American, political foe, or Madam Speaker of racism--by the way, I do not believe that the President is a racist. I do not believe the Speaker of this House is a racist. I do not believe the majority leader is a racist. I do not believe the minority leader is a racist. We can go down this line. I do not believe that. Then why do we insist on using this floor to litigate the propriety of statements made outside these walls?

We assign a lot of wicked intent to a lot of tweets, even though 280 characters offers us the least context for making our points and endless potential for misunderstanding each other.

To be fair, a lot of political speech today seems to be made to deepen our divide by highlighting our differences, and that is a cause for sadness. That is exactly what the rules of decorum in this body are designed to guard against.

We have a choice this afternoon, Mr. Speaker. We can pursue escalation against our fellow Americans, or we can pursue reconciliation on their behalf. Only one of those options makes room for this body to do its job: the legislating of the solutions for the challenges of the American people.

Many of the Members are my friends, and I am thankful for the chance to work alongside each of them every day. But, today, we renew our commitment to the democratic ideals of this Chamber by voting against a flawed resolution, against a political statement, against something that could not even be written in a proper way without adding editorial and paraphrased comments.

I would ask each of my friends on both sides of the aisle to evaluate what is before them, evaluate what we have done, and evaluate what we don't take up for political convenience when it is our side saying it.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Gonzalez).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Meuser).

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from West Virginia (Mrs. Miller).

Mr. Speaker, I ask for a time check on both sides, please.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Duffy).

Mr. Speaker, point of order.

Point of order.

Mr. Speaker, I was just going to ask the gentle Speaker of the House if she would like to rephrase that comment.

Mr. Speaker, I make a point of order the gentlewoman's words are unparliamentary and request that the words be taken down.

Mr. Speaker, I made a point of order that the gentlewoman's words were unparliamentary and request they be taken down.

Mr. Speaker, I request that the gentlewoman's words are unparliamentary and request that they be taken down.

Mr. Speaker, I have a motion at the desk.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. McCarthy), the minority leader.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, point of order.

Madam Speaker, I make a point of order that the gentleman's words are unparliamentary, and I insist they be taken down.

Madam Speaker, I now withdraw my point of order.

Madam Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise).

Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I will not belabor this. I have made many of the points that I have said before. I think this was rushed to the floor. I think this is what happens, unfortunately, when things are rushed.

There are things that need to be done, and the decorum of this House is important. We have had a long lesson of that today.

The very essence of the resolution, which has issues beyond, needs to be considered. When we do this, then I think, as I said in my opening-- and I will stick by what I said then--this needs to be voted down. This does not need to go forward.

We need to get to a certain time when we are back to, literally, doing the people's business. This is the third time, Madam Speaker, that I have been on the floor doing this--third time--more time than I have done on immigration, more time than I have done on any other bills, bills that could actually get signed into law.

As my whip said a few moments ago, there are things we could sit down and find common ground on, but it seems like common ground is gone.

There are some of us willing to reach our hands across the aisle and say, ``Let's find common ground because people are hurting. Why don't we solve those?'' Instead, we continue, seemingly, to want to continue to go to the press release or to the political statement, which is frustrating. I understand, but we have to get better.

We have to look at this and ask: What happens to the American people? What happens to the people who sent us here, who are looking at this and asking what they need to do to make their lives better, not the lives in this body?

When we understand that, that is when we come together. That is when we take the decorum of this House. That is when we find ways to speak to each other as friends who have been elected to serve a common purpose. That is our higher aim. When we denigrate that, we are not being honest with ourselves.

Let's get to the people's business. There are budget issues looming. There are caps looming. There is a debt ceiling looming. There are still problems at our border, which is a crisis. These need to be fixed.

Let's take up those bills. Let's have honest debate. I will put a bill up; you put a bill up. Let's do what we are supposed to do here, have markups, run things through committee. Let's take seriously what we said to do.

We both, at times, as parties, have been guilty of not doing that. Let's focus now--at least where we are now--and say this is not the way forward and this is not where we need to be because of the many problems inherent in the resolution itself but, also, the way it was brought to us. We have seen that play out on the floor today.

Is that really how we are going to leave it with the American people, that rules can be broken and then nothing is done about it? Is that really where we are going to be, that we are not going to bring issues to the floor that can be discussed, that have been brought through committee, that actually affect people's lives?

That is the frustration I have, Madam Speaker.

Time for debate on this needs to be done. We need to vote ``no.'' We need to move forward.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I thank him for his leadership in so many ways in this Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I commend Mr. Malinowski and Mr. Raskin for bringing this important resolution to the floor.

Mr. Speaker, I come to this floor prayerfully. It is really very sad. It was interesting to me--and I spoke out about this--that on Sunday in Catholic Masses, and I don't know beyond that, that the gospel of the day was the gospel of the Good Samaritan. A person asked Jesus, ``What do I have to do to enter the kingdom of Heaven?''

And Christ replied, ``Love thy neighbor as thyself. Show mercy.'' That very same day he went on to talk and then he said, ``Well, how do I do this?''

And Jesus gave him the example of the Good Samaritan. Everyone is familiar with how a stranger helped another stranger, a foreigner helped another foreigner, the Good Samaritan. Love thy neighbor as thyself, show mercy.

On that very same day, coincidentally, ironically, sadly, whatever adverb you want to use, the President was instituting raids into the homes of families.

I went to Spanish mass this weekend and saw the dignity of those families, the beauty of the children, and the fear that the President had struck in their hearts, as we were listening to the Gospel of the Good Samaritan to show mercy and love thy neighbor as thyself. That very same day, unfortunately, there were those who were not informed by that Gospel.

So here we are later in that day, it was stunning to hear the words that were used, go home, to some of our colleagues, the same words that were used to so many people in our country whether because they weren't born here or because they didn't look like some others here: Go home.

As annoyed and as insulted as we all should be about the President saying that about our colleagues, it is also not showing mercy for him to say that about so many people in our country, as he wants to split up families.

So, Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Malinowski and Mr. Raskin for the opportunity to speak to the statements that the President made later in the day of the Gospel of the Good Samaritan: Mr. Malinowski, who was born abroad; Mr. Raskin for his firm leadership in advancing this important resolution.

The House hopefully has come together standing as one to denounce the White House's xenophobic attacks on our Members, on our people, and to defend the values of America.

And what is America? America is many things: the land of a great Constitution, which is under threat; a beautiful land that God has given us, which is being degraded; values that we share that are being undermined. But America is also a Nation largely, but not totally, largely of immigrants.

As this resolution so beautifully states, `` . . . the Founders conceived America as a haven for refuge for people fleeing from religious and political persecution, and Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison all emphasized that the Nation gained as it attracted new people in search of freedom and livelihood for their families.''

The resolution quotes our most iconic Presidents, who all recognized that immigrants are the constant reinvigoration of America, of hope, determination, optimism, and courage to make the future better.

Those are American values. Those are American traits: hope, optimism, courage. Many of these immigrants, when they come here with those values and those traits, make America more American.

Franklin Roosevelt said: ``Remember always that all of us, and you and I especially, are descended from immigrants.''

President John F. Kennedy wrote that: ``The contribution of immigrants can be seen in every aspect of our national life.''

President Ronald Reagan so beautifully in his last speech as President of the United States, which is quoted in this resolution, said: ``If we ever closed the door to new Americans, our leadership in the world would soon be lost.''

Yet, the President's comments about our colleagues this weekend showed that he does not share those American values. These comments from the White House are disgraceful and disgusting, and the comments are racist. How shameful to hear him continue to defend those offensive words, words that we have all heard him repeat not only about our Members, but about countless others.

Our caucus will continue to forcefully respond to those attacks on our Members, which reflect a fundamental disrespect for the beautiful diversity of America. There is no place anywhere for the President's words, which are not only divisive, but dangerous, and have legitimized and increased fear and hatred of new Americans and people of color.

It is so sad, because you would think that there would be a given that we would universally in this body just say, of course. And there is no excuse for any response to those words but a swift and strong, unified condemnation.

Every single Member of this institution, Democratic and Republican, should join us in condemning the President's racist tweets. To do anything less would be a shocking rejection of our values and a shameful abdication of our oath of office.

To protect the American people, I urge a unanimous vote.

Mr. Speaker, I cleared my remarks with the Parliamentarian before I read them.

Point of Order

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 491, I call up the resolution (H. Res. 489) condemning President Trump's racist comments directed at Members of Congress, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material on H. Res. 489.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, the comments described in this resolution were not just offensive to our colleagues; they were inconsistent with the principles and values upon which this Nation was founded.

In urging four female Members of Congress of color to ``go back'' where they came from, these comments were not only factually incorrect, but they were also deeply hurtful and divisive.

These were shocking comments, even from an administration that rips children from the arms of their parents and warehouses asylum seekers in facilities under inhumane conditions. We cannot let this moment pass without a forceful condemnation.

Need I remind the Speaker that this is the same President who defended the ``very fine people'' at the neo-Nazi march in Charlottesville, who denounced the ``s-hole countries'' in Africa and the Caribbean, who claimed that Haitian immigrants ``all have AIDS,''

and who declared that a Mexican American judge who was born in the United States had an ``inherent conflict of interest'' against him.

At every turn, Democrats have denounced offensive comments that emanate from the White House, but the silence coming from the other side of the aisle has been deafening. I hope that will finally change today.

This Congress must speak--loudly and with one voice--to condemn the President's words and, more importantly, to condemn the sentiments behind them.

The United States should be a beacon of hope and a refuge to those who need its protection, and it should welcome with open arms those who embody our values and ideals.

From our earliest days as a nation, we have welcomed people fleeing persecution and violence and those who seek economic opportunity and freedom in a land whose diversity is one of its greatest strengths. But the President has, instead, pursued a relentless campaign to build both a literal and a figurative wall around this Nation.

We must not turn our backs on our historic commitment to immigration and to refuge, and we must not fall prey to racial stereotypes and nativist fear-mongering that thinks that some immigrants who came here years ago are okay but those who come here today, because they are from so-called s-hole countries, are not okay.

It was Martin Luther King who told us: ``I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.''

The offensive words by the President undermine that dream. They contradict that dream.

Mr. Chair, I hope that all of my colleagues will join me in denouncing racism and in supporting this resolution, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the distinguished majority leader of the House.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Malinowski), the sponsor of the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Tlaib).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen).

Mr. Speaker, I now yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), the distinguished Speaker of the House.

Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I move that the gentlewoman from California

(Ms. Pelosi) be permitted to proceed in order.

Mr. Speaker, when I saw the President's comments over the weekend, my first thought was, my politics may not always be the same as the Congresswomen he was attacking; but all of us are Americans. And unlike most of them, I was actually born in a foreign country.

I took the oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States when I was 10 years old, with my mom, when I was sworn in to be a citizen 5 years after we came here from Poland.

Does the President think I should go back because I am an immigrant who disagrees with his policies?

There are 44 million of us American citizens who were born somewhere else, and we new Americans know what it means to be American because we chose America. We know the alternative.

Many of us do come from broken countries, a communist country, in my case, broken by communism and, in many cases, broken by leaders who did just what we are condemning today, using race and religion to divide people.

The President may be doing it cynically. He wants the drama. He wants the reality show.

In my district, we have to deal with the reality that these words are dangerous. Every synagogue in my district either has armed security or is struggling with the question of whether to have it. Every mosque has State Police coming to Friday prayers.

We know that the words the President uses to drive up his ratings can be like sparks to the gasoline of disturbed minds in our country; that the man who massacred Jews in Pittsburgh was obsessed with migrant caravans and blamed Jews for helping refugees; that the man who murdered Muslims in Christchurch, New Zealand, believed immigrants are invaders who should go back to their country.

These fringe haters have always been with us. Never before have their twisted thoughts been legitimized by the highest leaders in our land.

Yesterday, after the President's tweets, the neo-Nazi Daily Stormer website gloated that this is the kind of white nationalism we voted for.

Now, we have to decide, is this the kind of politics that we want in our country?

Mr. Speaker, this resolution is not really about the President. We know who he is. My Republican colleagues know who he is.

The question is--the only question left to us is, who are we? Because this is not about him. This is about us.

Are we still the country of immigrants and of laws that every great American leader, from Ben Franklin, to FDR, to John F. Kennedy, to George Bush, believed in?

Do we still believe what Ronald Reagan said that: ``Americans lead the world because, unique among nations, we draw our people, our strength, from every country and every corner of the world;'' that new Americans ``renew our pride and gratitude in the United States of America, the greatest, freest Nation in the world''?

This is the choice that every Member of the House will have to make tonight. Do we agree with President Reagan's hopeful, confident, patriotic vision of America, or with President Trump's message of fear?

Mr. Speaker, Republicans and Democrats can afford to disagree about many things in this House; but let us not be divided on decency to our fellow Americans.

At this defining moment for our country and for this body, let us come together to support this resolution.