Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1153 and ask for its immediate consideration. Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30…
Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1153 and ask for its immediate consideration.
Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Mrs. Fischbach), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.
General Leave
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks.
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, yesterday, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 1153, for two measures.
First, it provides for consideration of H.R. 2377 under a closed rule. The rule self-executes a manager's amendment, provides 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, and provides one motion to recommit.
Second, the rule provides for consideration of H.R. 7910 under a closed rule. The rule provides 2 hours of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee. It provides that following debate the House will vote separately on retaining each title of the bill and provides one motion to recommit.
Additionally, the rule deems passage of H. Res. 1151 and H. Res. 1152.
Finally, the rule extends recess instructions, suspension authority, and same-day authority through June 17.
Madam Speaker, I am struggling to put into words right now the tremendous pain that so many Americans feel in the wake of the mass shootings in Uvalde, Texas, and Buffalo, New York, pain because, once again, we are burying America's children.
The hopes and dreams and futures of our kids, birthday parties and bar mitzvahs, and summer breaks and high school graduations stolen by a senseless, unceasing drumbeat of gun violence. The lives of innocent shoppers ended in a hate-fueled rampage of white supremacy.
It does not have to be this way. What kind of country are we if we let this happen and do nothing? What does that say about our values and our priorities as a society?
I am so deeply disappointed and frustrated as a Member of Congress, but even more as a parent. What happened in Uvalde is unconscionable.
For God's sake, the parents had to submit DNA because the bodies of their fourth graders were unrecognizable. They had to identify them by their shoes because the exit wounds produced by an AR-15 were so large that their bodies were torn apart by the bullets.
Madam Speaker, 18-year-olds can't even rent a car, but they can buy guns that can tear people apart. It just doesn't make any sense.
When I think of the trauma the parents had to go through, burying their kids, knowing that this could have been prevented if bills like the ones we are considering today were passed into law, it is beyond heartbreaking.
There are no words, just sadness, when I think of my kids. Then, I think of all the parents who won't get to watch their own kids grow up.
For Uvalde, for Parkland, for Sandy Hook, for Buffalo, and all the mass shootings that have torn apart communities all across this country, I am pleading with my colleagues: Do not throw away this opportunity to get something done. Do not let partisan talking points get in the way of reasonable gun safety measures.
None of these ideas are extreme. In fact, they are what the vast majority of people in this country want us to do.
This vote will unequivocally show where each and every one of us stands: on red flag laws, on raising the age to purchase a semiautomatic rifle from 18 to 21, on gun trafficking and straw purchases, on ghost guns, on the safe storage of firearms, particularly when a minor is likely to gain access to them, on bump stocks, and on large-capacity magazines.
We will have separate votes on all of these issues. This week there will be no excuses.
Really, think about that list. None of these proposals are aimed at taking firearms away from law-abiding gun owners. They are aimed at stopping people from getting slaughtered in their schools, in churches, in grocery stores, in homes.
These bills would have stopped the shooters in Buffalo and Uvalde from buying their guns.
Madam Speaker, I am pleading with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to work with us, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The gentlewoman said Republicans stand ready to address school safety and other root causes of gun violence.
I include in the Record a May 26, 2022, article from The Texas Tribune entitled: ``Texas already `hardened' schools. It didn't save Uvalde.''
[From The Texas Tribune, May 26, 2022]
Texas Already ``Hardened'' Schools. It Didn't Save Uvalde.
(By Jolie McCullough and Kate McGee)
Four years after an armed 17-year-old opened fire inside a
Texas high school, killing 10, Gov. Greg Abbott tried to tell
another shell-shocked community that lost 19 children and two
teachers to a teen gunman about his wins in what is now an
ongoing effort against mass shootings.
``We consider what we did in 2019 to be one of the most
profound legislative sessions not just in Texas but in any
state to address school shootings,'' Abbott said inside a
Uvalde auditorium Wednesday as he sat flanked by state and
local officials. ``But to be clear, we understand our work is
not done, our work must continue.''
Throughout the 60-minute news conference, he and other
Republican leaders said a 2019 law allowed districts to
``harden'' schools from external threats after a deadly
shooting inside an art classroom at Santa Fe High School near
Houston the year before. After the Uvalde gunman was
reportedly able to enter Robb Elementary School through a
back door this week, their calls to secure buildings
resurfaced yet again.
But a deeper dive into the 2019 law revealed many of its
``hardening'' elements have fallen short. Schools didn't
receive enough state money to make the types of physical
improvements lawmakers are touting publicly. Few school
employees signed up to bring guns to work. And many school
districts either don't have an active shooting plan or
produced insufficient ones.
In January 2020, the Uvalde Consolidated Independent School
District received $69,000 from a one-time, $100 million state
grant to enhance physical security in Texas public schools,
according to a dataset detailing the Texas Education Agency
grants. The funds were comparable to what similarly sized
districts received.
Even with more funds and better enforcement of policies,
experts have said there is no indication that beefing up
security in schools has prevented any violence. Plus, they
said, it can be detrimental to children, especially children
of color.
``This concept of hardening, the more it has been done,
it's not shown the results,'' said Jagdish Khubchandani, a
public health professor at New Mexico State University who
studies school security practices and their effectiveness.
Khubchandani said the majority of public schools in the
United States already implement the security measures most
often promoted by public officials, including locked doors to
the outside and in classrooms, active shooter plans and
security cameras.
After a review of 18 years of school security measures,
Khubchandani and James Price from the University of Toledo
did not find any evidence that such tactics or more armed
teachers reduced gun violence in schools.
``It's not just guns. It's not just security,''
Khubchandani said. ``It's a combination of issues, and if you
have a piecemeal approach, then you'll never succeed. You
need a comprehensive approach.''
Insufficient Active Shooter Plans
Since the shooting, GOP lawmakers have repeatedly suggested
limiting access to schools to one door.
``We've got to, in our smaller schools where we can, get
down to one entrance,'' Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick offered at the
press conference Wednesday. ``One entrance might be one of
those solutions. If he had taken three more minutes to find
that open door . . . the police were there pretty quickly.''
There are still questions about the timing and details of
the tragedy, however, including whether the shooter busted a
lock to get into the school or if a door was unlocked. A
state police official reported Thursday that the door
appeared to be unlocked but that it was still under
investigation.
Khubchandani and education advocates said locking doors and
routing everyone through one entrance is already standard
practice in most districts. And safety leaders said locking
exterior doors is a best practice, but it's one strategy that
needs to be strictly enforced.
``Sometimes convenience can take priority over safety and
you can have a plan in place, you can have policies in
place,'' said Kathy Martinez Prather, director of the Texas
School Safety Center at Texas State University. ``They're
only as effective as they're being implemented.''
At Wednesday's press conference, Abbott emphasized that the
package of school safety laws passed in 2019 required school
districts to submit emergency operations plans to the Texas
School Safety Center and make sure they have adequate active
shooter strategies to employ in an emergency.
State law dictates that districts must be able to show how
they will prepare for, respond to and recover from disasters
like active threats, but also extreme weather and
communicable disease. These plans must include training
mechanisms, communication plans and mandatory drills. Schools
must create safety committees and establish a way to assess
threats.
But a three-year audit by the center in 2020 found that out
of the 1,022 school districts in the state, just 200 had
active shooter policies, even though most districts reported
having one. The audit revealed 626 districts did not have
active shooter policies in place and 196 districts had
insufficient policies.
Just 67 school districts had viable emergency operations
plans overall, the report found.
Martinez Prather wouldn't say if Uvalde's emergency plan
was considered adequate because of ongoing investigations
into the shooting. But said the center's review did not find
any areas of noncompliance.
The audit reviewed school districts' emergency plans in
June 2020, and Martinez Prather said she was ``absolutely''
surprised that so many schools did not have clear-cut plans,
especially after the Santa Fe shooting and others around the
country.
``Our attention to this issue should not be as close to the
nearest and latest school shooting,'' she said. ``We need to
keep sending that message that this can happen at any point
in time and to anybody.''
She said the center has spent the last year and a half
following up with schools to get their plans up to standard.
Arming Teachers and Staff With Guns
Texas leaders have already shunned the idea of restricting
gun access in the aftermath of the Uvalde shooting. In fact,
in recent years, Texas lawmakers have loosened gun laws after
mass shootings.
Instead, lawmakers point to the nearly decade-old school
marshal program in Texas as another measure to deter and
prevent mass shootings. That program was created in response
to the deadly shooting at an elementary school in Newtown,
Connecticut, that left 26 people dead, including 20 first-
graders.
Designated school employees who take an 80-hour training
course and pass a psychological exam are allowed to keep a
firearm in a lockbox on school grounds, an idea most
attractive to rural schools in areas where law enforcement
response can take longer.
After the school shooting in Santa Fe, state lawmakers
removed the cap that limited schools to one marshal per 200
students. Today, according to the Texas Commission on Law
Enforcement, which oversees the training for the program,
there are 256 marshals across the state.
While lawmakers tout it as a potential tool to prevent mass
shootings, just 6% of school districts use it, according to a
report from the Texas School Safety Center. Martinez Prather
at the Texas School Safety Center said many school districts
say it's expensive
and the training is time-consuming for educators.
Meanwhile, 280 schools are utilizing an unregulated option
known as the Guardian Program, which allows local school
boards to approve individuals in schools to carry concealed
weapons. Each ``guardian'' must have a handgun license and
take 15 to 20 hours of specialized training by the Texas
Department of Public Safety.
Nicole Golden, executive director of Texas Gun Sense, said
she's concerned by the ``minimal'' level of training school
staff go through before they are approved to have a weapon in
the classroom.
``These aren't law enforcement officers,'' she said.
``These are school staff who have some training, and there's
really not a lot of data to support that that's the safe
direction to go in.''
Plus, Golden said, placing more guns on school grounds can
be problematic when data shows students of color are
disproportionately disciplined.
When lawmakers decided to expand the number of marshals in
Texas schools in 2019, Black students and parents said the
idea made them feel less safe in school, knowing they are
disciplined more than other students.
The study from Khubchandani and Price pointed to a 2018
shooting at a high school in Kentucky where the shooter
killed two and injured 14 students in 10 seconds.
``Armed school personnel would have needed to be in the
exact same spot in the school as the shooter to significantly
reduce this level of trauma,'' the researchers wrote. ``Ten
seconds is too fast to stop a school shooter with a
semiautomatic firearm when the armed school guard is in
another place in the school.''
$10 per Student for Safety
Big changes often take big money, and officials have noted
that the 2019 school safety bill gives about $100 million per
biennium to the Texas Education Agency. The agency then
distributes the money to school districts to use on
equipment, programs and training related to school safety and
security, a little less than $10 per student based on average
daily attendance. The money can be used broadly, ranging from
physical security enhancements to suicide prevention
programs.
According to a self-reported survey of districts by the
Texas School Safety Center, more than two thirds of school
districts have used this money for security cameras. 20% used
it for active shooter response training. Nearly 40% of
districts installed physical barriers with the allotment.
But Zeph Capo, president of the Texas chapter of the
American Federation of Teachers, said that money wasn't
enough to pay for the more expensive projects lawmakers were
suggesting.
``Districts ended up spending money on some programs, some
electronic AV equipment, but I don't think it was nearly
enough to do what needs to be done in most of the schools,
which is really change the structures of the buildings so
there's better control over entrance and egress,'' he said,
noting that AFT believes more gun restrictions is a better
solution.
The TEA also received a separate one-time $100 million pool
of money to provide grants to districts specifically for
physical security enhancements, like metal detectors, door-
locking systems or bullet-resistant glass.
It's unclear how Uvalde CISD spent the $69,000 it received
from the state to enhance its physical security. School
officials did not respond to questions Wednesday. As of the
May 2 report, the district had spent about $48,000 of the
grant, which is set to end at the end of the month.
Other remote town school districts received comparable
grants per their student population, according to an analysis
by The Texas Tribune. For example, the Sulphur Springs
Independent School District in East Texas has only a slightly
larger student population and received about $71,000 in grant
funds.
According to a district document, Uvalde CISD, which
enrolls around 4,100 students, had a variety of so-called
hardening measures in place that lawmakers and school safety
leaders recommend.
The district employed four district police officers,
installed perimeter fencing meant to limit access around
schools, including Robb, and instituted a policy that all
classroom doors remain locked during the day.
There are campus teams that identify and address potential
threats, and schools hold emergency drills for students
``regularly.'' The district employed a threat reporting
system for community members to raise concerns. Some schools
had security vestibules at their entrances and buzz-in
systems to get inside from the outdoors.
But a security vestibule, which is basically a secure lobby
to the school, can be a huge expense for school districts
already tight on money. In 2019, the Waller Independent
School District estimated that the addition of two of these
entrances to the junior high school would cost $345,000.
Security cameras at a small elementary school can cost more
than $20,000, according to industry experts.
In recent years--even before the Santa Fe shooting--school
districts have begun to rely on bond proposals to find the
money to implement some of these changes.
But Texas voters have expressed hesitancy at the ballot box
to approve such bonds in recent years, which the Texas
Association of School Boards attributed to the lingering
pandemic and political polarization. Recent changes by the
Texas Legislature have also complicated bond requests for
schools after it started to require districts to write,
``This is a property tax increase,'' on bond project signs,
even when the proposals wouldn't affect the tax rate.
Overall, Monty Exter, a senior lobbyist with the
Association of Texas Professional Educators, said the per-
student allotment and one-time grants set aside for school
security could never pay for the types of construction
projects lawmakers have touted publicly in the wake of the
shooting.
``Thinking about making significant changes to 8,000-plus
campuses, $100 million doesn't necessarily go that far,'' he
said.
Madam Speaker, we keep hearing that the epidemic of mass school shootings can be solved by hardening schools. Guess what? Robb Elementary had been hardened. We can harden schools all we want, we can turn them into fortresses, but unless we deal with the underlying issue, it is going to keep happening.
The gentlewoman from Minnesota also said mental health is a root cause. I include in the Record a Bloomberg article published May 27, 2022, entitled: ``Republicans Push Unfounded Mental Health Claim for Gun Violence.''
[From Bloomberg, May 27, 2022]
Republicans Push Unfounded Mental Health Claim for Gun Violence
(By Emma Court)
Republican politicians from Senator Ted Cruz to Texas
Governor Greg Abbott have been quick to blame mental illness
following a deadly school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, that
killed 19 children and two teachers.
The problem with that thinking is that the evidence doesn't
support it--even if common sense suggests a mass shooting,
especially of children, is not the act of a person who is
mentally well.
While reporting from Texas following the May 24 shooting
makes clear the Uvalde gunman, Salvador Ramos, was a deeply
troubled individual, state officials have said he had no
documented mental health issues. Research shows that only a
very small percentage of violent behavior is connected to
mental illness.
``If we magically cured all these serious mental illnesses
tomorrow, which would be wonderful--imagine the alleviation
of suffering--our violence problem would go down by about
4%,'' said Jeffrey Swanson, a professor in psychiatry and
behavioral sciences at Duke University.
Firearm violence is a greater risk for young males,
individuals with a violent childhood and those who abuse
drugs and alcohol. While mental illness can contribute to gun
violence, the vast majority of those suffering from mental
illness will never engage in violent acts, Swanson said.
Attributing school shootings to mental illness, meanwhile,
increases the stigma around such conditions, which include
depression, schizophrenia and psychosis, according to
experts.
Gun Deaths
National Rifle Association leaders are expected to shift
the focus away from gun policies that put deadly weapons in
the hands of the public when their national convention kicks
off in Houston on Friday. The organization called the Uvalde
massacre ``the act of a lone, deranged criminal'' in a
statement.
Around 45,000 people died from gun-related deaths in the US
in 2020, according to the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention. More than half those deaths were suicides, and
many of the remainder were murders.
Guns are also now the leading cause of death among children
and adolescents, surpassing car crashes, drug overdoses and
drownings, according to recent CDC data.
Texas is fiercely pro-gun rights, and Abbott last year
signed legislation allowing Texans to carry handguns without
a license.
Abbott, at a press conference in Uvalde, suggested that
access to guns isn't the issue.
``We haven't had episodes like this before,'' Abbott said.
``One thing that has substantially changed is the status of
mental health in our communities.''
In truth, shooters in the US have tried to kill in places
like schools, malls and bars for decades.
Cruz, who is expected to be at the NRA event, has described
the shooting as the actions of a ``violent psychopath.'' He
also said none of the gun-law proposals made by Democrats
would have stopped it.
Democrats have been quick to dispute those claims. ``Spare
me the bull,'' Democrat Chris Murphy of Connecticut said to
reporters after urging his colleagues to take action against
gun violence.
Other countries have mental health problems too but rarely
have mass shootings, President Joe Biden said in a May 24
speech in which he pleaded for gun reform and called for
standing up to gun manufacturers.
``They have mental health problems. They have domestic
disputes in other countries. They have people who are lost,''
Biden said. ``But these kinds of mass shootings never happen
with the kind of frequency they happen in America.''
Widespread Misconception
Many people associate mental illness with violence, likely
because of how these conditions are portrayed in the media,
including in reporting about shootings like Uvalde.
Mental illness can also be an easy scapegoat for making
sense of tragedies like
Uvalde, which are devastating and hard to comprehend, said
Lynsay Ayer, a senior behavioral scientist at Rand Corp., a
nonprofit research organization.
``People want to explain it, to say `this person wasn't
thinking rationally, wasn't thinking like you and me,
something went wrong in their brain wiring,' '' she said.
Blaming mental illness is ``convenient, but it's overly
simplistic and runs the risk of hurting people who have
mental health problems.''
People with mental health disorders are, in fact, more
likely to be the victims of violence than a perpetrator, Ayer
said.
Using mental illness as an explanation for such events also
plays into outdated tropes, like the idea that ``something is
wrong with'' those individuals, said Hannah Wesolowski, chief
advocacy officer for the National Alliance on Mental Illness.
``I think people confuse having a mental health condition
with being troubled, and they are not one and the same,'' she
said. Mental illness is defined by specific medical
guidelines. It's also widespread, affecting one in five US
adults every year.
Gun violence remains poorly understood. One reason: Since
1996, Congress has limited federal funding of research into
the subject. While that's now changing, gaps in understanding
remain. Studying mass shootings is also challenging because
such events are relatively rare, Ayer said.
(Everytown for Gun Safety, which advocates for universal
background checks and gun-safety measures, is backed by
Michael Bloomberg, founder and majority owner of Bloomberg
News parent company Bloomberg LP.)
Madam Speaker, let me set the record straight.
Yes, we have people with mental health issues in America. So do other countries. Only here in America do we have widespread, fatal gun violence to the extent that we do, so spare us the lectures.
I should say, under GOP Governor Greg Abbott, Texas is last--last--in the Nation for mental health access.
Just one final thing. We keep hearing about the inconveniences of these proposals: safe storage, background checks, waiting lists. I get it. There may be some inconvenience here, but stack that up against the carnage, stack that up against the mass shootings, the daily killings in this country. I mean, for once, can we put that first over the inconvenience of going through a background check? This is a moment I hoped that we could actually do something, but instead we are complaining about inconveniences. Give me a break.
Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Bowman).
Madam Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, the gentlewoman from Minnesota made a reference to the United States in comparison to other countries. I am holding this chart up here. You may not be able to see, but this is the number of gun deaths. The U.K. is way down here, France, Germany, Denmark, Switzerland, all free countries. You may not be able to see because it is so small, compared to the United States. You sure as hell can see the number of gun deaths here in the United States. It is unacceptable. It is unacceptable. And it is about time that Democrats and Republicans all agree that it is unacceptable, and that is what this debate is about.
If we want to talk about other countries around the world that are free, lots of countries that enjoy freedom do not have the number of gun deaths and massacres. Their parliaments and their Congresses are not meeting to grieve over the execution and the mass killing of little children in schools like we do on a regular basis.
The only question for people here is whether we are going to do anything or whether this is going to be business as usual: Take the money from the gun lobby and do nothing.
Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Ross), a distinguished member of the Committee on Rules.
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I began this debate by appealing to my colleagues to try to find common ground and come together and do something about this gun violence epidemic. And yet, we hear the same old tired red State versus blue State talking points directly from the gun lobby.
Madam Speaker, since it was brought up, I include in the Record an April 4,
2022, Yahoo News article entitled, ``Republican-controlled States have higher murder rates than Democratic ones,'' according to the study.
[From Yahoo! News, April 4, 2022]
Republican-Controlled States Have Higher Murder Rates Than Democratic
Ones: Study
(By Ben Adler)
Republican politicians routinely claim that cities run by
Democrats have been experiencing crime waves caused by failed
governance, but a new study shows murder rates are actually
higher in states and cities controlled by Republicans.
``We're seeing murders in our cities, all Democrat-run,''
former President Donald Trump asserted at a March 26 rally in
Georgia. ``People are afraid to go out.''
In February, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., blamed Democrats for
a 2018 law that reduced some federal prison sentences--even
though it was signed by Trump after passing a GOP-controlled
Congress. ``It's your party who voted in lockstep for the
First Step Act that let thousands of violent felons on the
street who have now committed innumerable violent crimes,''
Cotton said during a speech in the Senate.
Last December, Rep. Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas, told Fox News
viewers, ``America's most beautiful cities are indeed being
ruined by liberal policies: There's a direct line between
death and decay and liberal policies.''
But a comparison of violent crime rates in jurisdictions
controlled by Democrats and Republicans tells a very
different story. In fact, a new study from the center-left
think tank Third Way shows that states won by Trump in the
2020 election have higher murder rates than those carried by
Joe Biden. The highest murder rates, the study found, are
often in conservative, rural states.
The study found that murder rates in the 25 states Trump
carried in 2020 are 40 percent higher overall than in the
states Biden won. (The report used 2020 data because 2021
data is not yet fully available.) The five states with the
highest per capita murder rate--Mississippi, Louisiana,
Kentucky, Alabama and Missouri--all lean Republican and voted
for Trump.
There are some examples of states Biden won in 2020 that
also have high per capita murder rates, including New Mexico
and Georgia, which have the seventh- and eighth-highest
murder rates, respectively. And there are Trump-supporting
states with low murder rates, such as Idaho and Utah. Broadly
speaking, the South, and to a lesser extent the Midwest, has
more murders per capita than the Northeast, interior West and
West Coast, the study found.
Those findings are consistent with a pattern that has
existed for decades, in which the South has had higher rates
of violent crime than the nation as a whole.
``We as criminologists have known this for quite some
time,'' Jennifer Ortiz, a professor of criminology at Indiana
University Southeast, told Yahoo News. ``States like
Mississippi, Louisiana and Alabama have historically had high
crime rates.''
Criminologists say research shows higher rates of violent
crime are found in areas that have low average education
levels, high rates of poverty and relatively modest access to
government assistance. Those conditions characterize some
portions of the American South.
``They are among the poorest states in our union,'' Ortiz
said of the Deep South. ``They have among the highest rates
of child poverty. They are among the least-educated states.
They are among the states with the highest levels of
substance abuse. All of those factors contribute to people
engaging in criminal behavior.''
``I thought that was a very good study,'' Richard
Rosenfeld, a professor of criminology at the University of
Missouri-St. Louis and former president of the American
Society of Criminology, told Yahoo News about the Third Way
report. ``In Republican states, states with Republican
governors, crime rates tend to be higher. I'm not certain
that's related to the fact that the governor is a Republican,
but it's a fact nonetheless.''
(While the Third Way study divided states by presidential
vote in 2020, using gubernatorial party affiliation leads to
similar results because most states have recently chosen the
same party for governor and for president. Based on
presidential vote, eight of the 10 states with the highest
murder rates lean Republican, versus seven of the top 10 if
one uses the governor's party.)
Although murder rates tend to be highest in the South, the
biggest increases in 2020 were found in the Great Plains and
Midwest, according to Third Way. The largest jumps were in
Wyoming (91.7 percent higher than in 2019), South Dakota (69
percent), Wisconsin (63.2 percent), Nebraska (59.1 percent)
and Minnesota (58.1 percent). Wyoming, South Dakota and
Nebraska all voted for Trump and have Republican governors.
Wisconsin and Minnesota voted for Biden and are led by
Democrats.
Few large cities are governed by Republicans--only 26 of
the 100 largest U.S. cities have Republican mayors--making
apples-to-apples comparisons difficult. But cities that do
have Republican mayors do not have lower murder rates than
similarly sized Democratic-led cities, the study found.
Some experts warn against the impulse to use crime data to
score quick political points.
``Being a Republican or Democratic state or city is
correlated with many other issues,'' David Weisburd, a
professor of criminology and executive director of the Center
for Evidence-Based Crime Policy at George Mason University,
wrote in an email to Yahoo News. ``That means that the murder
rate may be due to the state being Republican, or it may be
due to the fact that Republican states have many other risk
factors related to crime or murder rates. Even with a very
comprehensive modeling of all of these factors, it is very
difficult to get a valid causal result for explaining crime
rates.''
That argument cuts both ways, however. Weisburd also thinks
the claims of Trump and other Republicans who say Democrats
have caused a crime wave in the cities and states they govern
are unfounded. ``I don't think this argument can be supported
no matter which way you go,'' Weisburd said.
Murder rates in the U.S. rose dramatically in 2020 from
record lows, and the increases are similar across states--
regardless of partisan preference. For homicides in 2020,
Third Way found a 32.2 percent uptick in Trump-backing states
versus a 30.8 percent rise in those that voted for Biden.
Some states with large cities, such as New York and
Pennsylvania, saw larger-than-average increases: New York
went up 47 percent and Pennsylvania is up 39 percent. But the
largest increases were in rural, Republican-led states,
including Montana (+84 percent and South Dakota (+81
percent).
The higher national murder rate is naturally causing public
concern, although violent crime does remain far below its
early 1990s high point. ``Using the FBI data, the violent
crime rate fell 49 percent between 1993 and 2019,'' from 757
incidents per 100,000 people to 379 per 100,000, the Pew
Research Center noted last November. Between 2019 and 2020,
the murder rate jumped from 6 homicides per 100,000 people to
7.8 homicides per 100,000, but that was still 22 percent
below the rate in 1991 of 10 homicides per 100,000.
Madam Speaker, Republicans would rather point fingers than look in the mirror, but a recent study found that the highest murder rates are often in conservative, rural States. The five States with the highest per capita murder rate: Mississippi, Louisiana, Kentucky, Alabama, Missouri--all lean Republican.
Madam Speaker, I include in the Record the summary of a December 16, 2021, report from Everytown Research & Policy, entitled, ``City Dashboard: Murder and Gun Homicide Report.''
[From Everytown Research, Dec. 16, 2021]
Summary: City Dashboard: Murder and Gun Homicide Report
(By Everytown Research & Policy)
In the midst of one public health epidemic, COVID-19, 2021
and 2020 were also two of the deadliest years on record for
another public health crisis--gun violence. The United States
saw a 33 percent increase from 2019 to 2020 in the rate of
gun homicides. This upward trend continued--but slowed--
through the end of 2021 during which time there was an
additional 7 percent increase in gun homicides relative to
2020.
Due to limited funding and inconsistent data collection,
data on city gun violence is too often old, incomplete, and
conflicting from one federal agency to another. Below is the
most recent, available, reliable data on murders (firearm and
non-firearm) from 2016 to the first three quarters of 2021
and on gun homicides from 2016 to 2020 in nearly 500 cities.
Madam Speaker, I will debunk some myths. Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, and San Francisco do not have the highest gun violence rates in the country.
You don't measure gun violence rates by the raw number. These are big cities. Of course, they are going to have more gun deaths than other places. You measure these rates by measuring per 100,000 people. When you do that, these cities aren't even in the top 20.
Jackson, Mississippi; Gary, Indiana; St. Louis, Missouri; New Orleans; Memphis--the list goes on and on. Find a new talking point.
Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a February 28, 2018, piece from ABC News entitled, ``Trump calls for raising minimum age to buy all guns to 21.''
[From ABC News, Feb. 28, 2018]
Trump Calls for Raising Minimum Age To Buy All Guns to 21
(By Jordyn Phelps)
President Trump again called for raising the minimum legal
age to purchase all guns to age 21 during a meeting with
lawmakers on guns and school safety Wednesday, while
suggesting that those who are staying silent on the topic are
``afraid'' to come up against the NRA,
``I'm going to give it a lot of consideration,'' Trump
said. ``People aren't bringing it up because they're afraid
to bring it up. You can't buy a handgun at 18, 19 or 20. You
have to wait until you're 21. You could buy the weapon used
in this horrible shooting at 18. You are going to decide--the
people in
this room pretty much--are going to decide. I would give very
serious thought to it.''
While noting the NRA's opposition to proposals to raise the
minimum age to purchase firearms, the president made the case
that raising the minimum age is common sense.
``The NRA is opposed to it and I'm a fan of the NRA. No
bigger fan. I'm a big fan of the NRA. These are great people.
Great patriots. They love our country but that doesn't mean
we have to agree on everything,'' Trump said. ``It doesn't
make sense that I have to wait till I'm 21 to get a handgun
but I can get this.''
The president also signaled his support for the Manchin-
Toomey proposal that was defeated back in 2013, and is in the
process of being reworked, that calls for expanding
background checks on guns sales to include firearms sold at
gun shows and on the internet.
The president suggested that the measure failed back in
2013 because President Barack Obama was in office at the
time, saying ``that was your problem,'' in reference to
Obama. But in fact, Obama backed the bill at the time.
He asked Sen. Pat Toomey, a Pennsylvania Republican, if the
bill he's sponsoring with Senator Joe Manchin, a West
Virginia Democrat, would proposing raising the purchasing age
for certain guns.
``We don't address it,'' Toomey told the president.
``You know why, because you're afraid of the NRA,'' the
president said in reply.
Wednesday evening, the NRA responded to Trump's proposals.
In a statement, spokesperson Jennifer Baker said: ``While
today's meeting made for great tv, the gun-control proposals
discussed would make for bad policy that would not keep our
children safe. Instead of punishing law-abiding gun owners
for the acts of a deranged lunatic our leaders should pass
meaningful reforms that would actually prevent future
tragedies.''
``They can start by fixing the broken mental health
system,'' her statement continued, ``strengthening background
checks to ensure the records of people who are prohibited
from possessing firearms are in the NICS system, securing our
schools and preventing the dangerously mentally ill from
accessing firearms.''
At the White House meeting, the president repeatedly
expressed his support for legislation to improve the nation's
background check system but said such a measure should not
also include a provision to expand concealed carry law to
allow people with concealed carry licenses to carry their
firearms across state line.
``I'm with you but let it be a separate bill,'' Trump told
Louisiana Republican Rep. Steve Scalise, who was gunned down
during a congressional baseball practice last year. ``You'll
never get this passed if you add concealed carry to this,
you'll never get it passed. I don't think--again, you'll
never get it passed. We want to get something done.''
The president also vowed to ban bump stocks through
executive action, telling the lawmakers that the rapid-fire
devices are ``gone.''
``I'm going to write that out. We can do that by executive
order,'' the president said, noting that ``the lawyers'' are
working on the language.
Last week, Trump said he ordered the Justice Department to
move to ban the rapid-fire devices that were used in the Las
Vegas massacre last year. Bump stocks were not used in the
Parkland shooting.
Madam Speaker, the very person that everybody on the other side of the aisle is so afraid to take on, so frightened of, says that we should raise the age to 21.
Madam Speaker, former President Donald Trump said it himself: ``You can't buy a handgun at 18, 19, or 20. You have to wait until you're 21. You could buy the weapon,'' meaning an AR-15, ``used in this horrible shooting at 18 . . . It doesn't make sense.''
I mean, come on. Trump said this in 2018, and these guys here are telling us that somehow this is a violation of the Constitution? Give me a break.
We are here to try to save the lives of America's kids. And there should be more outrage on the other side of the aisle, not the usual talking points that we hear over and over and over again from the gun lobby. If this isn't important, then nothing is.
Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Morelle), a distinguished member of the Committee on Rules.
Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Takano).
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Let me remind everybody that 21 people were killed in Uvalde, 19 children. Ten people were killed in Buffalo. I say that because I think my colleagues need to be reminded about why we are here today, not to talk about the budget, but to talk about saving lives.
I also remind them that the shooter in Buffalo and the shooter in Uvalde went in and legally purchased an AR-15 at 18 years old.
Our bill that we are talking about here today would have prevented that. Whatever they are doing for the previous question--I don't know what it is--would not.
I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Scanlon), a member of the Rules Committee.
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, you got to be kidding me. The gentleman from Missouri comes down here for 3 minutes and unloads on everybody here about a technical provision that doesn't even spend any money. It is a technical provision to allow us to go forward with our appropriations work.
Not a mention of the children who were killed in Uvalde or the people who were killed in Buffalo--not a mention. What the hell is wrong with this place?
Madam Speaker, I include in the Record--since the gentleman didn't have the dignity to acknowledge those who were killed--the names of those who were murdered in Uvalde and Buffalo.
Robb Elementary School--Uvalde, TX (May 24, 2022)
19 Children, 2 Teachers--21 Total Fatalities, 18 injured
Makenna Lee Elrod, age 10;
Layla Salazar, age 11;
Maranda Mathis, age 11;
Nevaeh Bravo, age 10;
Jose Manuel Flores Jr., age 10;
Xavier Lopez; age 10;
Tess Marie Mata, age 10;
Rojelio Torres, age 10;
Eliahna ``Ellie'' Amyah Garcia, age 9;
Eliahna A. Torres, age 10:
Annabell Guadalupe Rodriguez, age 10;
Jackie Cazares, age 9;
Uziyah Garcia, age 10;
Jayce Carmelo Luevanos, age 10;
Maite Yuleana Rodriguez, age 10;
Jailah Nicole Silguero, age 10;
Amerie Jo Garza, 10;
Alexandria ``Lexi'' Aniyah Rubio, age 10;
Alithia Ramirez, age 10;
Irma Garcia, age 48; and
Eva Mireles, age 44.
Madam Speaker, I will respond to the gentlewoman from Minnesota.
Madam Speaker, I include in the Record this Business Insider article entitled ``Host Republican leaders told their Members to vote against eight gun-safety bills, citing opposition from the NRA and Gun Owners of America.''
[From Insider, June 8, 2022]
House Republican Leaders Told Their Members To Vote Against 8 Gun- Safety Bills, Citing Opposition From the NRA and Gun Owners of America
(By Bryan Metzger)
House Republicans are poised to vote against eight bills
aimed at preventing gun violence on Tuesday, in part due to
opposition from powerful pro-gun groups on the right.
House Democratic leaders have scheduled votes for Wednesday
evening on the ``Protecting Our Kids Act''--a package of
seven gun violence-related measures that includes raising the
age for legal purchase of semiautomatic rifles and shotguns
to 21, closing the ``bump stock'' loophole, and other
measures aimed at preventing the illegal trafficking of guns.
The House will also vote on the ``Federal Extreme Risk
Protection Order Act,'' a federal ``red flag'' bill that
would allow family members and law enforcement officials to
temporarily block firearm access to those who a court
determines pose a danger to themselves or others.
In a ``whip notice'' sent to rank-and-file members on
Tuesday afternoon, House GOP leadership urged a ``no'' vote
on all eight bills, referring to the seven-bill package as
the ``Unconstitutional Gun Restrictions Act.'' They wrote
that House Democrats had ``thrown together this reactionary
package comprised of legislation that egregiously violates
law-abiding citizens' 2nd Amendment rights and hinders
Americans' ability to defend and protect themselves and their
families.''
The email also noted the opposition of the National Rifle
Association and Gun Owners of America, including links to
talking points from the NRA about both the gun package and
the red flag law. Leaders also noted the opposition of
Heritage Action for America, an advocacy group tied to the
conservative Heritage Foundation.
``Due to the importance of this issue, votes on this
legislation will be considered in future candidate ratings
and endorsements by the NRA Political Victory Fund,''
declares one of the memos shared by party leaders.
It's not uncommon for party leaders to note the opposition
of outside groups to major pieces of legislation. For
example, in a February whip notice urging Republicans to vote
against a major piece of legislation aimed at boosting the US
semiconductor industry, GOP leaders noted the opposition of
the Federation for American Immigration Reform, National
Taxpayers Union, and Americans for Prosperity.
But the two gun groups' inclusion--and the NRA's threat to
downgrade candidate ratings or withhold endorsements should
any Republicans back the measures--underscores the enduring
influence of pro-second amendment groups on the right,
despite the NRA's recent financial troubles and shrinking
membership.
Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Raskin), a member of the Rules Committee.
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, the gentlewoman mentioned our gun laws, and just to demonstrate the absurdity of the gun laws that are in place, I include in the Record the Texas Parks & Wildlife ``Migratory Game Bird Hunting Methods'' list of regulations, which is valid September 1, 2021 through August 31, 2022.
[From the Texas Parks & Wildlife, Sept. 1, 2021]
Migratory Game Bird Hunting Methods
(By Texas Parks & Wildlife)
Harvest Information Program (HIP)
No person shall hunt migratory game birds in this state
unless that person is HIP-certified in Texas. The federally-
mandated Harvest Information Program (HIP) improves harvest
information for all migratory game birds. Hunters who buy a
Migratory Game Bird Hunting Endorsement, including Super
Combos, will be asked a few simple questions about their
migratory bird hunting activities.
Please report Migratory Game Bird bands. Check migratory
game birds harvested (especially doves) for leg bands and
report them to reportband.gov.
Means and Methods
Shotguns, lawful archery equipment, falconry, dogs,
artificial decoys, and manual or mouth-operated bird calls
are legal.
A shotgun is the only legal firearm for hunting migratory
game birds. Shotguns must not be larger than 10-gauge, must
be fired from the shoulder, and must be incapable of holding
more than three shells. Shotguns capable of holding more than
three shells must be plugged with a one-piece filler which
cannot be removed without disassembling the gun, so the gun's
total capacity does not exceed three shells.
Hunting is permitted in the open or from a blind or other
type of concealment or from floating craft or motor boat
provided that all motion resulting from sail or motor has
ceased. Sails must be furled and motor turned off before
shooting starts.
A craft under power may be used to retrieve dead or
crippled birds; however, crippled birds may not be shot from
such craft under power.
No person, while hunting waterfowl anywhere in the state,
may possess shotgun shells containing lead shot or loose lead
shot for use in muzzleloaders. Approved shot includes steel
(including copper, nickel or zinc-coated steel), bismuth-tin,
tungsten-iron, tungsten-polymer (e.g. moly-shot), and any
other nontoxic material approved by the Director of the
Madam Speaker, shotguns used for duck hunting can't hold more than three shells. Let me repeat: In order to protect the duck population in Texas, shotguns cannot hold more than three shells. Imagine if our Republican friends could muster the same courage to protect America's children.
Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Higgins).
Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Massachusetts (Mrs. Trahan).
Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Tlaib).
Madam Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman an additional 15 seconds.
Madam Speaker, we have no further requests for time on our side, and I am ready to close. I reserve the balance of my time.
Madam Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?
Madam Speaker, I include in the Record Newsweek's May 27, 2022, article entitled ``More Children Have Been Shot Dead in 2022 Than Police in the Line of Duty.''
[From Newsweek, May 27, 2022]
More Children Have Been Shot Dead in 2022 Than Police in the Line of
Duty
(By Gerrard Kaonga)
More children have been shot and killed in the U.S. this
year than police while on duty, according to new data.
The Officer Down Memorial Page website records the death of
police officers across the country and honors them for their
service.
As well as showing a picture of the deceased officer, it
also shows where they were stationed, the date of their death
and the cause.
According to the website, in 2022, 20 officers have been
killed after being involved in a shooting.
In comparison, in 2022, 24 students have been killed as a
result of shootings at school, according to data collected by
Education Week.
``School shootings, terrifying to students, educators,
parents and communities, always reignite polarizing debates
about gun rights and school safety,'' the Education Week
report read.
``To bring context to these debates, Education Week
journalists began tracking shootings on K-12 school property
that resulted in firearm-related injuries or deaths.''
According to the Education Week report, there have been 27
school shootings in 2022 and 119 in total since 2018, when
they began tracking such incidents.
The Robb Elementary School shooting, which resulted in 21
people being killed--19 children and two adult staff, lifted
the number of children killed in school shootings above the
number of police officers shot dead in the line of duty.
The other school shootings that brought the total number to
24 deaths included an attack at Tanglewood Middle School,
Greenville, South Carolina, on March 31.
A 12-year old student was shot and killed at the school. At
the time, this was the youngest age a student had been killed
in a school shooting in 2022.
Another incident that contributed was the Eisenhower High
School shooting, Yakima, Washington, on March 15, that
resulted in one student being killed and another injured.
There was also a shooting at East High School in Des
Moines, Iowa, on March 7 that resulted in a 15-year-old boy
being killed and two female students getting injured.
The second shooting of 2022 that resulted in a fatality of
a student was at the South Education Center, Richfield,
Minnesota, on February 1.
Large Number of School Shootings
A shooting outside the South Education Center left a 15-
year-old student dead and a 17-year-old student critically
wounded.
The first incident of 2022 that resulted in a student's
death was at Oliver Citywide Academy, in Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania on January 19. This resulted in a 15-year-old
boy
being shot and killed as he waited to go home.
President Joe Biden addressed the issue in a speech on
Tuesday and said it was time America stood up to the gun
manufacturing industry. Biden also reflected on the frequency
of mass shootings in America in his speech.
``It's been 3,448 days--10 years since I stood up at a high
school in Connecticut--a grade school in Connecticut, where
another gunman massacred 26 people, including 20 first-
graders, at Sandy Hook Elementary School,'' he said.
``Since then, there have been over 900 incidents of gunfire
reported on school grounds. Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High
School in Parkland, Florida. Santa Fe High School in Texas.
Oxford High School in Michigan. The list goes on and on,''
Biden said. ``And the list grows when it includes mass
shootings at places like movie theaters, houses of worship,
and, as we saw just 10 days ago, at a grocery store in
Buffalo, New York.''
``I am sick and tired of it. We have to act. And don't tell
me we can't have an impact on this carnage,'' Biden said.
Madam Speaker, I yield myself the remainder of my time.
Madam Speaker, will the bills before us pass the Senate? I sure as hell hope so. None of these proposals are extreme. Quite the opposite. In fact, they are what the vast majority of people in this country-- Democrats, Republicans, Independents--want us to do. Maybe they will get changed in the Senate. Even if our Senate colleagues do not take up these exact bills, I will tell you what this process we are going through will absolutely do and why our efforts here are worthwhile.
This process will unequivocally show where each and every one of us stand in the wake of this unspeakable tragedy. More importantly, it will demonstrate which of the solutions we are putting forward have majority support in this half of the Congress.
As our Senate colleagues discuss gun violence solutions, they will have no doubt as to where the House of Representatives stands on red flag laws; raising the age to purchase a semiautomatic rifle from 18 to 21; gun trafficking and straw purchases; ghost guns; safe storage of firearms, particularly when a minor is likely to gain access; bump stocks; and large-capacity magazines.
We will have separate votes on all of these issues. This is on top of the background check bill and the Charleston loophole bills we have already sent them.
This week there will be no excuses. We will vote on these ideas one issue at a time. None of these proposals are aimed at taking guns away from law-abiding citizens. They are aimed at stopping people from getting slaughtered in their schools, in their churches, in grocery stores, and in their homes. These ideas won't solve every problem or stop every shooting, but no sane person can come to the conclusion that these proposals would not save lives.
I know that things like background checks and waiting until you are 21 to buy an AR-15 and smaller magazine capacity may seem like an inconvenience to some people. But when stacked up against the carnage we have seen in this country, I think we can all live with a little inconvenience.
Madam Speaker, I cannot be any clearer. These bills will keep people from dying, but only if they become law or if similar bills become law.
I know that everybody hates Congress. Hell, I even hate Congress sometimes. But, Madam Speaker, don't listen to the NRA or extremists on this bill. Vote your conscience.
Madam Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and the previous question.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.
