Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3233) to establish the National Commission to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol Complex, and for other purposes; and providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3237) making emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2021, and for other purposes..

Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 409 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole), my friend, 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 be given 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

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

Yesterday, the Committee on Rules met and reported a rule, House Resolution 409. The rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3233 to establish a National Commission to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol Complex Act, under a closed rule.

The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Homeland Security or their designees and provides one motion to recommit.

The rule also provides for consideration of H.R. 3237, the Emergency Security Supplemental to Respond to January 6 Appropriations Act, 2021, under a closed rule.

The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Oversight and Reform or their designees, and provides for one motion to recommit.

Madam Speaker, it has been 133 days since an angry mob of insurrectionists tried to stop the certification of a free and fair election in America. The question before us today is this: What are we going to do about it?

Some of my colleagues on the other side want to sweep this dark chapter under the rug. Just last week, one Republican said the events of January 6 resembled a ``normal tourist visit.''

Madam Speaker, I was here presiding over the House on January 6. People died that day. Police officers were beaten and bloodied. America's Capitol, the symbol of our freedom and the

citadel of our democracy, was desecrated by a mob that wanted to invalidate an election. There was nothing normal about it.

It is not normal for a mob to break into this complex to try and hang the Vice President of the United States and harm other elected officials.

It is not normal for insurrectionists to try to stop the certification of an American election, one that judge after judge after judge said was free and fair. And it is not normal for Congress to respond by doing nothing. That is why we are considering the underlying legislation contained in this rule. It will establish a bipartisan 9/ 11-style commission to investigate what happened, a commission led not by politicians, but by experts.

Now let me say this plainly: A vote for this commission is a vote to make sure this never happens again. And I want to recognize the incredible work of the chairman and ranking member of the Committee on Homeland Security in navigating this truly bipartisan deal. It is one that will keep the focus where it should be, solely on the events of January 6. And I look forward to the Commission's report at the end of the year. But the truth is, we cannot wait until then to fix what we already know needs fixing.

We need to upgrade the physical safety of this and other Federal buildings. We need to increase security in district offices, repay the National Guard for their service in the aftermath of the insurrection, and provide support to the overworked Capitol Police force that keep us all safe day after day.

Madam Speaker, this is how you respond responsibly to what happened 4 months ago, not with deflection or mistruths, but by taking action to protect not only this complex and those who work, serve, and visit here, but to also protect our very democracy, and making sure we never become a country that lets any angry mob decide who the next President will be.

Madam Speaker, only the voters can do that. We need to put the facts on Record here, to tell the truth and not spread lies. And the truth is that some on the other side are afraid to do anything around here because they are afraid, afraid of the truth, afraid because their leadership doesn't want to offend the ex-President and his big lie. That is all I could think of when I read the minority leader's deeply troubling statement opposing the January 6 commission.

Now, even though it is bipartisan, even though his own ranking member negotiated the deal, even though we gave him virtually everything he asked for during the negotiations, a Republican aide said it best when they were quoted in the press yesterday saying this: ``I think Kevin was hoping that the Democrats would never agree to our requests; That way the commission would be partisan and we can all vote ``no'' and say it is a sham operation, because he knows Trump is going to lose his mind.'' Lose his mind over a bipartisan commission.

Madam Speaker, this moment is a choice, a choice between the truth or siding with the originator of the big lie. To my friends on the other side, I am asking you to lead with the courage of your convictions. Vote your conscience. Support this bipartisan commission, not just because it is the right thing to do, but support it out of respect, out of respect for your colleagues, for your staff and the support staff here, for the Capitol Police, but, most importantly, respect for this institution.

Now, I have cast some tough votes in my career, but casting a vote to establish a bipartisan commission to establish an insurrection is not one of them. I appeal to my colleagues to do the right thing, to lead with courage, and support this legislation.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

I also agree with the gentleman that Chairman Thompson and Ranking Member Katko deserve an enormous amount of credit. They negotiated a truly bipartisan deal.

I have taken note of the letter that Minority Leader McCarthy sent to Speaker Pelosi of all the things he wanted in this deal, and he got virtually every one of them, all in this bipartisan deal. Now, all of a sudden, it is not good enough.

All of the concerns that my good friend raised are addressed in this bill. The commission could look at anything and investigate anything related to the violence that occurred here on January 6.

I mean, what happened here, isn't that a big enough deal to merit an investigation?

I don't get it.

In the bill, by the way, is language that is quite clear about how this commission will not interfere with any other ongoing investigations. In fact, very similar to the 9/11 commission, it will be informed by other investigations and complement other investigations.

So, again, I urge my colleagues, Democrats and Republicans, to vote for this commission, out of respect for the people who work here, out of respect for this institution, out of respect for our democracy.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).

Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia.

Madam Speaker, I reference the text of S. 937 and H. Res. 275, a bill and a resolution we are considering this week. S. 937 was passed yesterday, and right after this debate, we are going to adopt H. Res. 275. They are two pieces of legislation condemning hate crimes against Asian Americans in this country.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New Jersey (Ms. Sherrill).

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gallego).

Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a statement from the family of United States Capitol Officer Howie Liebengood, who died by suicide. His death was a direct result of the trauma and strain from the January 6 attack.

Madam Speaker, in the statement, the family of Officer Liebengood states: ``We believe a thorough, nonpartisan investigation into the root causes of and the response to the January 6 riot is essential for our Nation to move forward. Howie's death was an immediate outgrowth of those events.''

Liebengood Family Statement on the January 6th Commission and Security

Supplemental

Family of fallen USCP Officer Howie Liebengood calls on Congress to

pass both pieces of legislation

Washington, DC--Today, the Office of Congresswoman Jennifer

Wexton (D-VA) released the following statement from the

family of United States Capitol Police Officer Howie

Liebengood regarding the National Commission to Investigate

the January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol Complex Act

and the Emergency Security Supplemental to Respond to January

6th Appropriations Act.

``We believe a thorough, non-partisan investigation into

the root causes of and the response to the January 6th riot

is essential for our nation to move forward. Howie's death

was an immediate outgrowth of those events. Every officer who

worked that day, as well as their families, should have a

better understanding of what happened. Uncovering the facts

will help our nation heal and may lessen the lingering

emotional bitterness that has divided our country. We implore

Congress to work as one and establish the proposed

Commission.

``Additionally, improved mental health for USCP officers

has been one of our goals for the past four months. Through

the tireless efforts of Congresswoman Wexton, we are honored

a wellness program bearing Howie's name has been proposed in

the security supplemental along with more resources for the

program. We welcome and support the new funding and staffing

initiatives that will help prevent future tragedies among the

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

Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a May 19 letter

from the Bipartisan Policy Center in support of H.R. 3233, the National Commission to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol Complex Act.

In the letter, the cochairs of the 9/11 Commission, Governor Tom Kean and Representative Lee Hamilton state: ``A full accounting of the events of January 6 and the identification of measures to strengthen the Congress can help our country heal.''

[From BPC Action]

BPC Action Urges Support for H.R. 3233

H.R. 3233, the ``National Commission to Investigate the

January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol Complex Act,''

is a crucial step for the country to get the truth of those

shocking events and agree on how to ensure they never occur

again. The Bipartisan Policy Center is encouraged that the

agreement reflects the principles of 9-11 Commission chairs

Gov. Tom Kean and Rep. Lee Hamilton, who stated, ``A full

accounting of the events of January 6th and the

identification of measures to strengthen the Congress can

help our country heal.''

A single narrative of the facts of that day and actionable

recommendations for preventing them from recurring are the

predicate for ensuring our democracy is respected and

protected. This bipartisan, independent commission is

structured so experts will be empowered to objectively assess

the evidence and chart a path forward.

In this midst of opportunity for growth and healing, it is

crucial that we reflect on our history: the strength of the

9/11 commission was that it was bipartisan and unified by the

imperative of national security. Twenty years later, we are

reminded of the security challenges this nation faces, and we

must come together in the same way we did following 9/11.

We applaud the House and Senate committees and law

enforcement investigations that have laid groundwork for an

independent commission to begin its work--and House and

Senate leaders, especially Chairman Bennie Thompson and

Ranking Member John Katko, for creating a process that has a

real chance for success. We urge Congress to support H.R.

3233.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson), who is the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security.

Madam Speaker, let's be clear that opposition to this commission is not about substance or policy; it really is about politics, plain and simple. At least, my Republican colleagues in the Senate side are willing to admit that. Senator Thune said that there is concern among Republicans that the findings could be ``weaponized politically and drug into next year''.

I get that his members want to ``be moving forward and not looking backward,'' but this was an attack on the United States Capitol, and all the people who work here. It was an attack on our democracy.

Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a CNN article entitled ``Republicans fear January 6 probe could undercut 2022 midterm message.''

[From CNN, May 19, 2021]

Republicans Fear January 6 Probe Could Undercut 2022 Midterm Message

(By Manu Raju)

Senior Republicans are making clear they have little

interest in moving forward with a sweeping January 6

investigation in part because a detailed probe could become

politically damaging and amount to a distraction for their

party just as control of Congress is at stake in next year's

midterm elections.

Publicly and privately, Republicans are making that case,

with Senate GOP Whip John Thune noting that there's concern

among some GOP members that the findings of the probe ``could

be weaponized politically and drug into next year.'' ``I want

our midterm message to be on the kinds of things that the

American people are dealing with: That's jobs and wages and

the economy and national security, safe streets and strong

borders--not relitigating the 2020 elections,'' Thune told

CNN. ``A lot of our members, and I think this is true of a

lot of House Republicans, want to be moving forward and not

looking backward. Anything that gets us rehashing the 2020

elections I think is a day lost on being able to draw a

contrast between us the Democrats' very radical left-wing

agenda.''

Thune's comments came moments after Senate GOP Leader Mitch

McConnell announced his opposition on the floor, contending

it would duplicate ongoing probes

and contending the deal--which was reached between a House

Republican and House Democrat--is designed to find a

conclusion that would be in ``Democrats' hands.'' The

commission would be structured so 10 members--chosen equally

between the leaders from both political parties--could report

by year's end on what happened on January 6, as well as the

``influencing factors'' behind it.

It's clear that such an investigation would also look at

then-President Donald Trump's role in promoting the January 6

``Stop the Steal'' rally, his lies that the election was

stolen and his efforts to subvert the will of voters.

Moreover, it could put an uncomfortable focus on some

conservative GOP senators and House members who sought to

overturn the election results in Congress, while keeping the

issue front-and-center as the investigation plays out over

the next year.

And there are ample questions about whether House GOP

Leader Kevin McCarthy would be forced to testify to explain

what Trump was saying on January 6 given the two spoke during

a heated phone call that day.

``It would be a distraction,'' one senior GOP source told

CNN, arguing any investigation should also look at left-wing

extremism as well.

Similar concerns were voiced through the Senate Republican

Conference on Wednesday, coming hours after a group of

members huddled privately with McCarthy earlier in the

morning.

Sen. John Cornyn, a Texas Republican and member of

leadership, said that in addition to his concern about a

commission's work overlapping with criminal probes, he

accused House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of pushing the

investigation to help Democrats' chances at keeping control

of Congress.

``Well, part of the concern is that's the plan,'' Cornyn

said. ``That's Pelosi's plan.'' If the probe dragged out

until the next year, he added: ``That would be the Democrats'

dream. . . . I generally don't try to help Democrats.''

While the bill is expected to pass the House on Wednesday,

it's an open question whether it will pass the Senate, where

60 votes would be needed to break a GOP filibuster.

Thune, the chief GOP vote counter, said they haven't taken

the caucus' temperature yet on the plan.

``I would say that there's a skepticism about what's

happening in the House right now and whether or not what

comes out is a proposal that will be fair.''

Sen. Gary Peters, who chairs the Democratic Senatorial

Campaign Committee, said there's a reason why Republicans are

battling the commission.

``They're afraid of the truth because it puts them on the

wrong side of what is right,'' Peters, a Michigan Democrat,

said Wednesday.

Asked if he is concerned the probe could last into the

midterm season when the GOP wants to focus on jobs,

Republican Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina said: ``There's

a lot of stuff we need to focus on.''

``Why shift our attention away from that, when we already

have an infrastructure in place to address a lot of the

things that the commission seems to be stood up to address,''

Tillis asked. ``Seems redundant.''

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell).

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Espaillat).

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline).

Madam Speaker, I am having trouble trying to figure out exactly what the problem that some of my Republican colleagues may have with this bill. Maybe, based on the lack of speakers, they are having trouble figuring it out too.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Scanlon), who is a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

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

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time is remaining for us on both sides.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage all Members here today to read today's Washington Post editorial questioning Leader McCarthy's political courage in opposing this bill and calling for him to testify under oath about his eyewitness experience of the violence and former President Trump's apparent indifference to it.

The editorial also criticizes his false equivalence of Black Lives Matter protests to the Capitol invasion and his minimization of the insurrection's significance, which only encourages the lies on which it is based.

I include that article in the Record.

[From the Washington Post, May 18, 2021]

Opinion: Kevin McCarthy Plumbs New Depths of Political Cowardice

(Opinion by the Editorial Board)

Democratic and Republican negotiators agreed last week to

create a high-level, expert commission with subpoena power to

conduct an examination of the Jan. 6 Capitol invasion, one of

the lowest moments in U.S. history. But House Minority Leader

Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) on Tuesday threw his negotiators

under the bus, condemning the compromise and vowing to oppose

the bill creating the commission when it comes to a House

vote Wednesday.

Many Republicans do not want an impartial panel to remind

the public of their party's role in the event. A fair inquiry

would examine how GOP lawmakers fed the election lies that

inspired the mob, and how they built Jan. 6, which should

have featured a pro forma counting of electoral votes, into a

showdown over the 2020 presidential election. Republican

lawmakers who signed a spurious lawsuit seeking to overturn

the results bear some guilt; those who went on to object to

the counting of electoral votes from several swing states

bear even more.

An honest proceeding would also require Mr. McCarthy to

testify under oath about his eyewitness experience of the

violence--and to then-President Donald Trump's apparent

indifference. Mr. McCarthy has resisted offering the public a

frank accounting of his interactions with Mr. Trump,

including on a phone call during which Mr. McCarthy

reportedly begged Mr. Trump to stop the mob. Mr. McCarthy has

concluded that whatever political benefits he receives from

embracing Mr. Trump are worth the price of his integrity.

If there are to be hearings, Mr. McCarthy argued, they

should examine not only the Capitol invasion but other

politically motivated violence, such as the riots surrounding

the Black Lives Matter protests last summer. The point is to

draw a false equivalence between a historically unique attack

on the nation's seat of government, in which Mr. Trump and

other Republicans are directly implicated, and crimes that

left-leaning activists committed--crimes that did not occur

in the halls of Congress, that did not aim to interrupt the

peaceful transition of power, that did not reflect a plot to

overturn a presidential election.

Mr. McCarthy knows Democrats will never endorse a panel

designed to mislead the nation about Jan. 6, so his proposal

for a broader mandate is a ruse: He simply does not want any

investigation at all. House Democrats should nevertheless

advance the compromise plan on Wednesday. Then the public

will see whether there are 10 Senate Republicans willing to

approve the deal. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-

Ky.) on Tuesday did not rule out supporting it, raising minor

concerns about its structure that should be negotiable. But

if Senate Republicans capitulate to the calculations driving

Mr. McCarthy, House and Senate committees should use their

subpoena power to conduct their own investigations, even if

that means Democrats lead the inquiries without Republican

cooperation.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Raskin), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

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

Madam Speaker, I am deeply disappointed that any of my Republican colleagues would oppose the creation of this commission. There is a lot of talk all the time about the need for bipartisanship, and that is what we have here. This is true bipartisanship.

The distinguished minority leader sent a letter to Speaker Pelosi asking for an equal 5:5 ratio in appointments by Democrats and Republicans on this commission. He got it.

He asked for coequal subpoena power. He got it.

He asked for no inclusion of findings or other predetermined conclusions which ultimately should be rendered by the commission itself. He got it.

Now, maybe the gentleman didn't think he would, but Chairman Thompson and Ranking Member Katko, who was appointed by the minority leader to negotiate on behalf of the Republicans, came to a deal, a genuinely bipartisan deal to look into the horrific acts of what happened in this Chamber on January 6.

I was here that day. They were not ordinary tourists who came in here. My colleagues on the Republican side who are here today, there are pictures of them helping to barricade the doors. They know exactly what happened on January 6.

Those people who attacked the Capitol were not here to make a political point. They were here to desecrate this building and hurt people.

We, as Members of Congress, signed up for this job. But I want Members to vote for this commission, not because of us, but because of the people who work here, our staff, the support staff, the Capitol Police, the people who work in our cafeterias, the people who maintain this building. They were traumatized by what happened here.

Our response to all of this is: Well, let's move on. Let's not do this, in spite of a truly bipartisan negotiation and a bipartisan commission.

This is so disappointing. I mean, don't talk to us about bipartisanship, and then when you get it, you turn your back on it.

Madam Speaker, I am sick and tired of those who want to hover around mistruths and lies and spread conspiracy theories. What happened 133 days ago can never be normalized. We all have to speak the truth, and we must act to prevent it from ever happening again. That starts with not only passing this rule but passing this bipartisan bill to establish a bipartisan commission to produce a report for the American people so that we know clearly and credibly as to what happened and that we can take additional actions to make sure it never happens again.

As I said in my opening, vote for this out of respect for this institution, out of respect for our democracy, out of respect for the truth, out of respect for the people who work for you, who come here every day and work for you. We owe it to them and to this country to move forward.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 409, I call up the bill (H.R. 3233) to establish the National Commission to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol Complex, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on this measure.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3233, the National Commission to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol Complex Act.

On January 6, the world watched Americans storm the Capitol and engage in violence to try and intimidate and prevent Congress from carrying out its constitutional duty to certify a Presidential election, a solemn process central to the peaceful transfer of power in our democracy.

Many of us sitting here today were rushed out of this very Chamber by Capitol Police to safety as violent attackers roamed the halls, hunting for our colleagues and the Vice President.

I was in the gallery that day watching the debate when this temple of our democracy was desecrated and debased.

At least one Capitol Police officer died because of the violence that day. Others died, too.

And there were extensive injuries associated with the attacks, not the least of which was the body blow to Americans' confidence that the reforms undertaken after the 9/11 terrorist attacks would make us more secure.

Like the 9/11 attacks, the events of January 6 have cast a long shadow on our country. And like the 9/11 attacks, the January 6 attack raises fundamental questions about information sharing, coordination, preparedness, and response at all levels of government.

We need a bipartisan commission made up of experts to come together to give us an unvarnished view of what happened that day, examine why our systems failed, and develop bipartisan recommendations for reform to address any identified gaps.

I am proud to be here with my partner on the Homeland Security Committee, the gentleman from New York, John Katko, to debate a bill that establishes a 10-member commission that mirrors the 9/11 Commission, the gold standard for bipartisan commissions.

The January 6 commission would be required to investigate and report on the facts and causes of the attack, including relevant contributing factors.

A commission of this nature, in some form, has been talked about by Members of Congress, national security experts, and others for some time now. Over the past 4 months, discussion drafts have been circulated, pros and cons have been weighed, and obstacles have been overcome to get us to this day.

Given how politically charged the events of January 6 have become, we need to come together in a patriotic, bipartisan way and approve this independent body just as we created the 9/11 Commission.

The 9/11 Commission acted, not out of partisanship, but out of patriotism. We need that same sense of duty today.

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

Mr. Speaker, let me just say to the ranking member, this won't be the last time that we put together legislation for the good of this country, I assure you of that.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Torres), the vice chair of the Homeland Security Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Gottheimer).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin), the former Secretary of State from Rhode Island, who is now a member of the Committee on Homeland Security.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California, (Mr. Correa).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green), a member of the Committee on Homeland Security.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Clarke).

Mr. Speaker, how much time do we have remaining?

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York (Miss Rice).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Demings).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Barragan).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Virginia (Mrs. Luria).

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a listing of national security, military, and elected officials, former Members of Congress, U.S. Attorneys, diplomats, all who have specific expertise in this matter before the body today.

Letter From Former Senior National Security, Military, and Elected

Officials Calling On Congress To Create A Bipartisan 1/6 Commission

Dear Members of Congress: We are former senior national

security, military, and elected officials who have

represented or served Democrats, Republicans, or

administrations of both parties. We write to encourage this

Congress to establish an independent and bipartisan national

commission to investigate the January 6th assault of the U.S.

Capitol Complex and its direct causes, and to make

recommendations to prevent future assaults and strengthen the

resilience of our democratic institutions.

We also write to you with great urgency in light of what we

collectively see as an exigent and growing threat. The events

of January 6th exposed severe vulnerabilities in the nation's

preparedness for preventing and responding to domestic

terrorist attacks. The immediate security failings that

permitted a lethal breach of the Capitol Complex by armed

extremists raise serious questions and demand immediate

solutions.

But January 6th was also the result of complex national

security threats. These include coordinated disinformation

campaigns, nontransparent financing of extremist networks,

potential foreign influences, and white supremacist violent

extremism, which the Department of Homeland Security

identified in an October 2020 report as among ``the most

persistent and lethal threat[s] in the Homeland.'' As FBI

Director Christopher Wray testified to you recently,

``January 6th was not an isolated event. The problem of

domestic terrorism has been metastasizing across the country

for a long time now and it's not going away anytime soon.''

Understanding how these forces culminated in an attack on the

infrastructure of our democracy is critical to preventing

future attacks.

In the wake of September 11th, the administration and

Congress jointly acknowledged that the attack's causes were

complex and that an independent and well-equipped national

commission was an essential tool to aid the federal

government. Congressional inquiries, law enforcement

activities, and a national commission not only worked in

parallel, but critically complemented each other's necessary

work. An independent commission should not supplant the

ongoing work by the legislative and executive branches, but

it can uniquely support them by providing comprehensive and

expert recommendations for Congress to act upon.

Commissions--properly empowered, resourced, and led--can

establish a full picture of events and an analysis of their

causes, from which nonpartisan recommendations can

authoritatively flow. With dedicated time, resources, and

expert staffing, they can also exclusively focus on the

matter at hand over an appropriate time horizon. Given the

gravity of January 6th as a national security matter--the

violent disruption to the transition of power and the

continuing threat of future attacks--a national commission

examining the lead up to the January 6th assault, and the

attendant security lapses, is not only appropriate, but a

critical component of the national response.

A failure to deploy the full suite of tools available to

fully understand January 6th and address its causes will

leave the Capitol, and the nation, vulnerable to future

attacks. In bipartisan fashion, we have successfully

marshaled these tools before, and we implore you to do so

once again.

Sincerely,

(Note: All titles are former positions or military ranks

held prior to retirement.)

Javed Ali, Senior Director for Counterterrorism, National

Security Council.

Thad Allen, Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard; Commandant of the

Coast Guard.

Wendy R. Anderson, Deputy Chief of Staff, U.S. Department

of Defense.

Daniel Baer, U.S. Ambassador; Deputy Assistant Secretary of

State.

Brian Baird, U.S. Representative, 1999-2011.

Daniella Ballou-Aares, Senior Advisor to the Secretary of

State.

Rand Beers, Acting Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland

Security; Deputy Homeland Security Advisor.

John Bellinger, Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State;

Legal Advisor, National Security Council.

Tatyana Bolton, Cyber Policy Lead--Senior Policy Analyst,

U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

Charles Boustany, U.S. Representative, 2005-2017.

Steven Browning, U.S. Ambassador; Principal Deputy

Assistant Secretary of State.

Todd F. Buchwald, U.S. Ambassador, Office of Global

Criminal Justice, U.S. Department of State.

Sharon Burke, Assistant Secretary of Defense for

Operational Energy.

Daniel Byman, Professional Staff Member, 9/11 Commission.

Piper Campbell, U.S. Ambassador; Head U.S. Mission to

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a joint statement from Governor Tom Kean and former Congressman Lee Hamilton in support of this commission.

[From Issue One]

Joint Statement from Governor Tom Kean and Congressman Lee Hamilton,

Chairman and Vice Chairman of the 9/11 Commission

``We very strongly urge House Members to support H.R. 3233,

the bipartisan National Commission to Investigate the January

6 Attack on the United States Capitol Complex. That bill

would create a 9/11 style commission to investigate the

January 6th assault on the U.S. Capitol. That was a dark day

in American history, one of the darkest.

``As Chairman and Vice Chairman of the 9/11 Commission,

unity of purpose was key to the effectiveness of the group.

We put country above party, without bias, the events before,

during and after the attack. We sought to understand our

vulnerabilities in order to prevent future attacks or future

acts of terrorism.

Today, democracy faces a new threat. The January 6 attack

on the U.S. Capitol was one of the darkest days in the

history of our country. Americans deserve an objective and an

accurate account of what happened. As we did in the wake of

September 11, it's time to set aside partisan politics and

come together as Americans in common pursuit of truth and

justice.''

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from Protect Democracy, Ian Bassin, Executive Director.

Protect Democracy,

Washington, DC, May 19, 2021.

Protect Democracy Urges Representatives to Support H.R. 3233, the National Commission To Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United

States Capitol Complex Act

Dear Representative: On January 6th the very foundations of

our democracy--and our Congress and Capitol that lie at its

heart--came under attack. More than 130 days later, Members

of Congress, their staff, and their constituents are still

struggling to come together to understand what happened and

how to prevent it from ever happening again.

We strongly urge you to vote in favor of H.R. 3233, the

National Commission to Investigate the January 6 Attack on

the United States Capitol Complex Act, which would establish

an independent national commission to comprehensively

investigate the January 6th attack on the U.S. Capitol

Complex.

This bipartisan bill is a measured and thoughtful response

to the attack. It will bring together a bipartisan group of

experts to examine the facts and circumstances surrounding

the January 6th attack. The Commission is structured to

ensure it is a bipartisan endeavor: all reports must be

agreed to by a majority of Commission members and the

Commission may only issue subpoenas upon an agreement between

the Chair and the Vice Chair or a vote by a majority of

Commission members.

The Commission will build on the work that has begun in

various congressional committees to gather information and

hold hearings on the attack. It will not intefere with those

ongoing efforts nor will it delay immediate security fixes to

the Capitol Complex.

By creating this Commission, Congress can assure the

American people, and all who work in the Capitol Complex,

that these events and the circumstances leading up to them

are thoroughly investigated outside of the pressured and

partisan environment of Congress itself.

We are grateful to Chairman Bennie Thompson and Ranking

Member John Katko for their leadership in advancing this

critical legislation, and we urge continued bipartisan

support for the bill. Today marks an important milestone

toward seeking a shared understanding, protecting our

cherished freedoms, and restoring faith in government.

Sincerely,

Ian Bassin,

Executive Director, Protect Democracy.

Mr. Speaker, we have had a number of my colleagues come before us encouraging this body to support this commission and this legislation. They have spoken valiantly in support of it. They have put their hearts and souls into making sure that it is correct and proper.

I am happy, again, to share with my colleague from New York. I appreciate working with him, and I appreciate the ability to work out our differences. I think it should be part of the role model for future legislation in this body.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I am not going to argue with the previous speaker. I just say: Read the bill. And if you read the bill, you will understand it is a bipartisan bill.

It is not a partisan bill; it is absolutely bipartisan. The staff will be picked just like the staff was picked for the 9/11 Commission. It is just like the earlier bill the ranking member talked about, the Rodney Davis bill.

We looked, Mr. Speaker, at this issue because the world saw what happened on January 6, and it is clear that we put together a bipartisan bill for the good of the country. It is in that spirit that we are here today.

Mr. Speaker, how much time is remaining?

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney), the chair of the Committee on Oversight and Reform.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands (Ms. Plaskett).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from New Jersey (Mrs. Watson Coleman).

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

At the outset, let me salute Mr. Katko for his agreeing to work in a bipartisan manner so that we can get this bill to the floor and adopted today.

Mr. Speaker, we are here today at a unique moment in American history. Trust in our government's ability to share information and coordinate at all levels to keep our democracy secure was severely shaken by the January 6 attack.

We need a bipartisan commission with experts who put country ahead of party to come together, just as the commission did, to lay out the facts and proposed solutions to make us more secure.

When the chairman of the 9/11 Commission issued their final report, they concluded a message to the public. It asked that each of us remember how we felt on that day of the attack. It asked that we recall the grief and sorrow.

This moment is no less historic, no less important, no less momentous, and it requires the same common action, both as Congress and as a country.

I, too, salute the brave men and women of the Capitol Police who put their lives on the line on January 6 protecting this citadel of democracy, and it is in their spirit that I ask that you vote in support of this legislation.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I also thank him for his great leadership working with Ranking Member Katko on bringing this bipartisan legislation to the floor for a bipartisan commission.

Let's talk about where we are. Here we are in the Capitol of the United States. The dome of the U.S. Capitol has always been a beacon of democracy and hope to America and to the world. Under this dome, our Nation has abolished slavery; secured equal protections for all; ended a civil war; enfranchised women; established Medicare and Medicaid, voting rights and civil rights; and met the needs of the American people.

Under this dome, schoolchildren learn about their country's history and what we are doing to advance their future. They come here and see us honor those who have contributed to the success of our country: Washington, Lincoln, Jefferson, et cetera. But they know that our Founders, those patriots, wanted us to be working for a better future as we honor our history.

Under this dome, when children learn about our country's history, they also learn about what we are doing for their futures. Legislators pass laws. The press engages with our democracy, reporting on it. Staff and workers enable all of this to happen.

This dome is a symbol of the determination of America. But this was not always so. Let us recall that the dome of the Capitol was built during the Civil War as our country was riven by brutal conflict. At the time, many said the iron and steel used for construction were needed for the war effort. They urged the President not to continue the work on the dome. President Lincoln said no. He knew that our country needed a symbol of strength and unity, a reminder of the shared ideals and common purpose that built our Nation.

It was a beacon of hope to guide us through times of darkness, and he knew that the work must continue as a sign of our strength and the unity of our country.

Mr. Speaker, on January 6, and in the days, weeks, and months after, the Capitol dome was, once again, such a beacon.

Would we prevail?

January 6 was the day called for in the Constitution to validate the Presidential election. It was not just another day in the life of Congress. That day, one of the darkest days in our history, our temple of democracy was under assault by insurrectionists.

The gleeful desecration of our Capitol resulted in multiple deaths and physical harm to over 140 members of law enforcement and terror and trauma among staff, workers, and even Members.

The insurrection was called for to impede our constitutional mandate, but the Congress returned to the Capitol that night to accomplish our purpose. We agreed in a bipartisan way that day that we would return to the Capitol, and that sent an important signal to the world.

The insurrection called for people to impede our constitutional mandate,

but we returned to the Capitol. Thanks to the courage of the Capitol Police, Members, and support workers, we showed the country and, indeed, the world that we would not be diverted from our duty and that we would respect our responsibility to the Constitution of the United States.

We take that oath to protect and defend the Constitution. Again, in a bipartisan way, we agreed to come back to the Capitol.

Today, over 4 months later, many questions regarding the circumstances of this assault on our democracy and response to it remain. It is imperative that we seek the truth of what happened on January 6.

To do that, Congress must, in a spirit, I believe, of bipartisanship and patriotism, establish an independent and bipartisan 9/11-type commission. Today, thanks to the leadership of Chairman Bennie Thompson and Ranking Member John Katko, legislation to create such a commission is on the House floor.

It is important to note, Mr. Speaker, that this is happening 4\1/2\ months after the January 6 insurrection. Mr. Speaker, my colleagues know, but many were not here at the time, legislation establishing the 9/11 Commission, 9/11/2001, was not signed into law until the end of November 2002, over 14 months after the attacks.

So, people have been saying: How come we don't have a commission?

It takes time to build bipartisanship and come to agreement. Let us hope that the leadership that Mr. Thompson and Mr. Katko have demonstrated will be leadership that we will follow and that we will continue in the most bipartisan way in order to seek the truth.

Today, 4 months later, many questions regarding the circumstances still exist. This commission is designed to be impartial and experienced. The legislation requires that the commissioners be ``prominent United States citizens with national recognition and significant depth of experience.''

It also indicates that they should not be Members of Congress or elected in another capacity. Commissioners will be appointed from the highest echelons of government service; law enforcement; civil rights, civil liberties, and privacy; Armed Forces; intelligence; counterterrorism; cybersecurity; technology; and law.

The commission will be, again, bipartisan and bicameral, with commissioners appointed by the majority and minority leadership in the House and Senate. It will be actionable and effective, culminating in a final report on the facts and causes of January 6, along with recommendations to prevent further attacks on our democratic institutions.

I heard earlier Chairman Thompson acknowledge the support and endorsement of the previous chairs of the 9/11 Commission, Governor Kean and Chairman Lee Hamilton from Congress, the co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission. They had written to us earlier about the need for such a bipartisan commission, but they also wanted not only to find out the truth so this doesn't happen again, but also to reinforce our commitment to democracy and take us on a path that is better and more unifying.

That is a responsibility we have, and that is a hope that I have emerging from this debate and this vote today, that we will be able to have a strong bipartisan vote that takes us down a path more unifying for our country. We have this opportunity.

Mr. Speaker, the press says to me: Why don't you just go do your own task force and your own select committee to investigate this? You have the votes, you have subpoena power, and you have this or that.

I said: I don't want to do that. We want this to be as it is shaped, bipartisan with shared responsibility and shared staff in a way that the public will have respect for the outcome.

To that end, 140 national security leaders have called for such a commission. This is what they have said: ``The events of January 6 exposed severe vulnerabilities in the Nation's preparedness for preventing and responding to domestic terrorist attacks. The immediate security failings that permitted a lethal breach of the Capitol complex by armed extremists raise serious questions and demand immediate solutions. . . . A failure to deploy the full suite of tools available to fully understand January 6 and address its causes will leave the Capitol, and the Nation, vulnerable to future attacks.''

This list is nonpartisan, 140 Democrats and Republicans. I don't even know what party some of them are.

I include their statement in the Record, Mr. Speaker.

Letter From Former Senior National Security, Military, and Elected

Officials Calling On Congress To Create a Bipartisan 1/6 Commission

Dear Members of Congress: We are former senior national

security, military, and elected officials who have

represented or served Democrats, Republicans, or

administrations of both parties. We write to encourage this

Congress to establish an independent and bipartisan national

commission to investigate the January 6th assault of the U.S.

Capitol Complex and its direct causes, and to make

recommendations to prevent future assaults and strengthen the

resilience of our democratic institutions.

We also write to you with great urgency in light of what we

collectively see as an exigent and growing threat. The events

of January 6th exposed severe vulnerabilities in the nation's

preparedness for preventing and responding to domestic

terrorist attacks. The immediate security failings that

permitted a lethal breach of the Capitol Complex by armed

extremists raise serious questions and demand immediate

solutions.

But January 6th was also the result of complex national

security threats. These include coordinated disinformation

campaigns, nontransparent financing of extremist networks,

potential foreign influences, and white supremacist violent

extremism, which the Department of Homeland Security

identified in an October 2020 report as among ``the most

persistent and lethal threat[s] in the Homeland.'' As FBI

Director Christopher Wray testified to you recently,

``January 6th was not an isolated event. The problem of

domestic terrorism has been metastasizing across the country

for a long time now and it's not going away anytime soon.''

Understanding how these forces culminated in an attack on the

infrastructure of our democracy is critical to preventing

future attacks.

In the wake of September 11th, the administration and

Congress jointly acknowledged that the attack's causes were

complex and that an independent and well-equipped national

commission was an essential tool to aid the federal

government. Congressional inquiries, law enforcement

activities, and a national commission not only worked in

parallel, but critically complemented each other's necessary

work. An independent commission should not supplant the

ongoing work by the legislative and executive branches, but

it can uniquely support them by providing comprehensive and

expert recommendations for Congress to act upon.

Commissions--properly empowered, resourced, and led--can

establish a full picture of events and an analysis of their

causes, from which nonpartisan recommendations can

authoritatively flow. With dedicated time, resources, and

expert staffing, they can also exclusively focus on the

matter at hand over an appropriate time horizon. Given the

gravity of January 6th as a national security matter--the

violent disruption to the transition of power and the

continuing threat of future attacks--a national commission

examining the lead up to the January 6th assault, and the

attendant security lapses, is not only appropriate, but a

critical component of the national response.

A failure to deploy the full suite of tools available to

fully understand January 6th and address its causes will

leave the Capitol, and the nation, vulnerable to future

attacks. In bipartisan fashion, we have successfully

marshaled these tools before, and we implore you to do so

once again.

Sincerely,

(Note: All titles are former positions or military ranks

held prior to retirement.)

Javed Ali, Senior Director for Counterterrorism, National

Security Council.

Thad Allen, Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard; Commandant of the

Coast Guard.

Wendy R. Anderson, Deputy Chief of Staff, U.S. Department

of Defense.

Daniel Baer, U.S. Ambassador; Deputy Assistant Secretary of

State.

Brian Baird, U.S. Representative, 1999-2011.

Daniella Ballou-Aares, Senior Advisor to the Secretary of

State.

Rand Beers, Acting Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland

Security; Deputy Homeland Security Advisor.

John Bellinger, Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State;

Legal Advisor, National Security Council.

Tatyana Bolton, Cyber Policy Lead--Senior Policy Analyst,

U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

Charles Boustany, U.S. Representative, 2005-2017.

Steven Browning, U.S. Ambassador; Principal Deputy

Assistant Secretary of State.

Todd F. Buchwald, U.S. Ambassador, Office of Global

Criminal Justice, U.S. Department of State.

Sharon Burke, Assistant Secretary of Defense for

Operational Energy.

Daniel Byman, Professional Staff Member, 9/11 Commission.

Piper Campbell, U.S. Ambassador; Head U.S. Mission to

After the bipartisan agreement on this commission was reached, the respected bipartisan chairs of the 9/11 Commission, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, endorsed it, as was mentioned by the chairman and as I referenced earlier.

I want to repeat it because I think it bears repetition:

We very strongly urge House Members to support H.R. 3233,

the bipartisan National Commission to Investigate the January

6 Attack on the United States Capitol Complex bill that would

create a 9/11-style commission to investigate the January 6

assault on the U.S. Capitol. That was a dark day in American

history, one of the darkest.

As chairman and vice chairman of the 9/11 Commission, unity

of purpose was key to the effectiveness of the group. We put

country above party, without bias, the events before, during,

and after the attack. We sought to understand our

vulnerabilities in order to prevent future acts of terrorism.

The chair and vice chair went on to say:

Today, democracy faces a new threat. The January 6 attack

on the U.S. Capitol was one of the darkest days in the

history of our country. Americans deserve an objective and

accurate account of what happened.

Mr. Hamilton and Governor Kean said:

As we did in the wake of 9/11, it is time to set aside

partisan politics and come together as Americans in common

pursuit of truth and justice.

As I said earlier, Mr. Speaker, the Capitol of the United States has always been a glorious beacon of democracy for the American people and for the world.

This legislation is about something larger even than the commission, vital as the commission is. This legislation is about our democracy, about ensuring that the Capitol dome remains a symbol of freedom and about preserving America's role as an emblem of resilience, determination, and hope to the world.

Indeed, creating this commission sends a resounding message to terrorists both at home and abroad: The commitment of the United States Congress to the Constitution and to the American people is unshakeable.

In establishing the truth of January 6, this commission will protect our temple of democracy and our democracy itself. It will ensure that such an attack shall never happen again.

Can we just not wait, Mr. Speaker, for a time very soon when children come here to learn, where the press can cover in a more open way, and where the American people can come into the people's House?

That is what this Chamber has been called, the people's House. They come to witness the debate that affects their lives. And whatever our disagreement about policy, they are assured that we are unified in our commitment in honoring our Constitution and respecting the institution in which we serve.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a strong bipartisan vote for H.R. 3233 to establish the national commission to investigate the January 6 attack on the United States Capitol complex. I do so with the greatest appreciation and respect to Chairman Bennie Thompson and to Ranking Member Katko, and I hope, again, that the spirit of bipartisanship that they engendered in bringing this legislation to the floor will only grow as we go forward with the commission and with its recommendations.

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

Mr. Speaker, this year, we will observe the 20th anniversary of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. It will serve as a somber reminder of the fragility of our security, the bravery of our law enforcement and first responders, and the resilience of our democracy.

After the attacks on 9/11, Congress recognized the importance of establishing a bipartisan commission to investigate these brazen acts of terrorism. This body recognized the need to find the truth and help all of us understand how these heinous acts that not only forever changed our country, but also the entire world, could have been carried out.

The highly respected 9/11 Commission identified numerous challenges that needed to be addressed, which ultimately led to many concrete recommendations that were later enacted into law. These critical reforms vastly improved our information sharing, intelligence collection, vetting capabilities, and broader homeland security enterprise.

The security breach that took place at the U.S. Capitol on January 6 was completely unacceptable. It was a major breakdown in information sharing and preparedness, much like the shortfalls that existed prior to 9/11. It was not only an attack on this institution but an attack on our law enforcement brethren who defend us every day.

Unfortunately, we know that the Capitol, Federal buildings, and even Members of Congress remain a target for extremists of all ideologies, as we all saw most recently during the April 2 vehicle attack that took the life of Capitol Police Officer William ``Billy'' Evans.

The bill before us today, H.R. 3233, would create an independent, bipartisan commission to investigate the relevant facts and circumstances relating to the January 6 attack on the Capitol, as well as targeted violence and domestic terrorism relevant to that attack.

It also charges the commission with providing and finding recommendations to, among other things, prevent, prepare for, and respond to similar attacks; improve the security posture of the Capitol complex; and ensure the security of Members of Congress and congressional staff.

Modeled after the 9/11 Commission, this bill creates a 10-member panel with five commissioners appointed by each party and equal subpoena authority.

While the expedited December 2021 deadline would only give the commission about 6 months to do its job, there is good reason for that: The American people and the Capitol Police deserve answers and action as soon as possible to ensure that nothing like this ever happens again.

We must find answers to the many questions surrounding that day. What information was known leading up to January 6? Why was that information not shared with the proper entities? Why were Capitol Police officers left so unprepared? Who failed to provide them with support? Why did it take so long for reinforcements to come to their aid? How can we improve the decisionmaking and bureaucracy that is clearly hampering the Capitol Police and the security of the Capitol complex? How can we ensure that the Capitol, Members of Congress, and our staffs are secure from attacks? And how do we ensure that this is a safer place for the members of the Capitol Police force who risk their lives every day to protect us?

These are only a few of the many questions that need to be answered. The American people and the Capitol Police deserve those answers.

As I have called for since the days just after the attack, an independent, 9/11-style review is critical for removing the politics around January 6 and focusing solely on the facts and circumstances of the security breach at the Capitol, as well as other instances of violence relevant to such a review.

Make no mistake about it, Mr. Thompson and I know this is about facts. It is not partisan politics. We would have never gotten to this point if it was about partisan politics.

Thanks to the strong partnership with Mr. Thompson, the Homeland Security Committee remains a bipartisan committee focused on securing the Nation while leaving partisanship at the door, which is exactly what the American people expect of us.

Chairman Thompson and I were able to work together to block out all the political noise surrounding the January 6 attack and turn the Speaker's partisan proposal into a reasonable, nonpartisan bill.

Now, H.R. 3233 is nearly identical to the original commission bill, H.R. 275, that I, along with 30 other Republican cosponsors, introduced on January 13, 6 days after the attack.

I sincerely appreciate Chairman Thompson's robust collaboration and strong commitment, as well as his friendship, by working together on this effort. The American people expect Congress to put partisanship aside for the sake of our homeland security.

I fully recognize that in a diverse body like this, Members come down on different sides of different issues. I welcome that. We all should. That is America; because, after all, none of this is personal. It is about our mutual desire to keep America safe and secure. To my friends on both sides of the aisle, I welcome honest, vigorous, and civil debate.

At the end of the day, I strongly believe this is fair and necessary legislation. I encourage all Members, Republicans and Democrats alike, to put down their swords just for once and support this bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Meijer).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton).

Mr. Speaker, I just want to note for the Record that the subpoena to which my colleague from California mentioned can only be issued if there is a consensus by both sides of the aisle on the commission. It is not something that one side can do unilaterally. And that is one of the key provisions of this, because it depoliticizes the process and it is a consensus-driven process.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the Speaker for her comments.

I want to reiterate for everyone to understand: The way that Mr. Thompson and I crafted this bill, we crafted it in such a manner to make sure it would be depoliticized entirely. There is an equal number of members on both sides appointed by both sides. They have equal subpoena power. They can't subpoena one person without the other person on the other side of the aisle agreeing. They have to hire staff together, all those things.

I want to make sure people understand that we did this for a reason because that is exactly what made the 9/11 Commission successful and made it effective.

As someone who was in Federal law enforcement for 20 years before I took this job, I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that our country is infinitely safer because of what the 9/11 Commission did. We are much stronger against terrorism, and we share information in much better ways than we ever did--for example, the Joint Terrorism Task Forces, which are all over this country.

I ask my colleagues to consider the fact that this commission is built to work. It will be depoliticized, and it will get the results we need because the Capitol itself and the Capitol Police officers will be better off for it.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Georgia (Mrs. Greene).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Bishop).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy).

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

Mr. Speaker, I just want to take a few moments to address some of the arguments that have been made here today, and some of the arguments that have been made in opposition to this bill.

One of them is talking about the scope of the commission being too narrow. I want to note that the commission is granted sufficient scope and flexibility to investigate targeted violence and domestic terrorism relevant to the January 6 attack. It will be up to the commission to decide how far they want to go with that perimeter.

Do I feel that the attack on the Capitol on April 2 that killed a Capitol Police Officer is relevant? I do. I hope the commission does, too.

Do I feel that the June 17 attack on Republican Members of Congress is relevant to the January 6 attack? I do. I hope the commission does. They have the flexibility to do so, if they want.

If there are other issues outside of this scope, we can look into them. We can have separate legislation. I encourage my colleagues, who are concerned about that, to do that.

Another charge I heard was that the commission could be controlled by partisan staff hired unilaterally by the commission chair. That is simply not true.

Here is what the bill does. It requires consultation between the chair, appointed by the Democrats, and the vice chair, appointed by the Republicans, for any hiring of staff. Further, it requires that it be in accordance with the rules agreed upon by the commission. The commission creates the rules as a team. They then hire as a team.

Lastly, there has been some concerns or arguments made about the criminal investigations. Make no mistake about it. This commission has nothing to do with the criminal investigations. This commission, by law, cannot interfere with criminal investigations. Criminal investigations alone won't get us what we need, like the 9/11 Commission concluded. It won't get us the recommendations, the insight, the expertise from the people on the commission who can come in, look at the Capitol security matrix, and say this is what needs fixing. A prosecutor can't tell you that. The commission can. That is what we want to do.

Second, the bill specifically requires the commission to respect ongoing investigations and build upon the investigations, learn from them, and avoid unnecessary duplication.

This language, in that respect, goes further than the 9/11 Commission in H.R. 275 in granting deference to other ongoing investigations.

So I just want to make sure people are clear about that going forward.

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

Mr. Speaker, I ask that we all take a deep breath right now. Everybody breathe for a minute and everybody stop the theatrics, and everybody stop the arguments that are not relevant to this issue.

This is a very solemn moment. We are here to talk about something that is very important to the entire of our Government and the entire of our country. I ask that we think about the officers and their families and conduct ourselves accordingly.

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

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time remains?

Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close and I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, this legislation is not about partisan politics. It is about finding the truth and addressing the vulnerabilities of our security apparatus so that we can emerge stronger and better prepared.

The January 6 attack was a completely preventable failure of intelligence, information sharing, decisionmaking, and preparedness. The Capitol Police and D.C. police suffered greatly and continue to suffer as a result.

The institutions of our democracy are and will continue to be a target for extremists set on using violence to further their ideology. We, in Congress, owe it to this Nation, to our constituents, and to the dedicated men and women who risk their lives every single day to protect those institutions--and I honor them--to see that we learn from those attacks, that we get answers to the hard questions, and that we do not repeat the mistakes of the past.

Capitol Police Officers Brian Sicknick and Howard Liebengood, as well as D.C. Police Officer Jeffrey Smith, all lost their lives in the wake of the January 6 attack. Over 140 more law enforcement officers--140-- were injured as a result of that attack.

Less than 4 months later, on April 2, Capitol Police Officer William ``Billy'' Evans was killed and another officer was injured when yet another extremist attacked the Capitol.

And, of course, we can't forget the 2017 terrorist attack against Republican Members of Congress during practice for the Congressional Baseball Game. Were it not for the officers involved, there would be scores of dead Congressmen. That is the plain truth. I acknowledge the heroic efforts of David Bailey and Crystal Griner.

We owe it to all of these officers and their families to ensure that nothing like this ever happens again. This legislation is modeled directly on the legislation that created the 9/11 Commission. I sincerely believe that this commission, with strong support from this body, will embark on an objective, nonpartisan search for answers and solutions, just as the 9/11 Commission did.

Again, I want to thank my friend, Chairman Thompson, for his partnership.

I urge everyone in the body, on both sides--not just my side and not just the other side, all of us--to set aside politics just this once-- just this once. I beg Members to pass this bill.

I was a prosecutor for 20 years prior to coming here to Congress, and many times we would meet at 4:30 in the morning or 5:00 in the morning, and they would get ready to go out and do the raids and arrest very, very dangerous people. I was always the last person to see them before they went out to get these awful, dangerous people off the street: drug dealers, murderers, violent people. They did their job every day, and I was sending them into harm's way. It always made my heart sink.

Imagine being a family member of these officers who do this. So let's take a deep breath and think about what is really important here. These people, every single day, are willing to lay down their lives for us.

They deserve better, and we are going to deliver this. We are going to deliver it on behalf of Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick. We are going to deliver it on behalf of Capitol Police Officer Howard Liebengood. We are going to deliver it on behalf of Capitol Police Officer William ``Billy'' Evans. We are going to deliver it on behalf of D.C. Police Officer Jeffrey Smith. We are going to deliver it on behalf of D.C. Police Officer Michael Fanone and so many others who struggle with the events of that day. We do so on behalf of the people who risked their lives for us and continue to, like Capitol Police

Officer David Bailey and Capitol Police Officer Crystal Griner.

I want these officers and their families to know that we are doing it not for us and not for politics. We are doing it for them. We are doing it for them.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Madam Speaker, I thank my good friend, the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts, Chairman McGovern, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, today's rule covers two items. The first item I will discuss is H.R. 3237, a supplemental appropriations bill intended to provide security funding for the Capitol complex, including funding for the U.S. Capitol Police, the National Guard, and other agencies that responded to the January 6 attack on the Capitol complex, as well as to provide funds to address the coronavirus throughout a variety of agencies Congress directly controls.

Although the process leading to this bill started out with bipartisan negotiations, unfortunately, no deal was reached. Instead of negotiating with Republicans on our counterproposal, as is typical in these discussions, Democrats walked away, once again, choosing to go it alone with the bipartisan bill before us today.

Madam Speaker, it is truly disappointing that Democrats were unwilling to continue to work towards an agreement with Republicans on a matter of this magnitude, and given that the Senate is in no hurry to take up this legislation, a few additional weeks of discussion could and likely would have led to a bipartisan product instead of a product destined for the legislative graveyard.

In the wake of the January 6 attack, I would hope that the majority would join with Republicans and choose to speak with one voice. Instead, like so many items in this Congress, the majority has insisted on its way or the highway. And today, they are doing it so again with this partisan bill.

House Republicans and even some Senate Democrats have concerns with this package. The bill creates a rapid response force with the D.C. National Guard. Any rapid response force intended to provide backup for the United States Capitol Police and to protect the Capitol complex should be under the control of, and housed within Congress.

As a number of my colleagues mentioned during the debate in the Committee on Rules yesterday, housing these capabilities within the D.C. National Guard introduces the exact same concerns my friends on the other side raised in the aftermath of January 6, that Congress would be reliant on the executive branch to deploy this rapid response force.

Madam Speaker, I have deep concerns about putting this rapid response force under the control of any other entity, whether that is the government or the District of Columbia or the executive branch. I also have grave concerns about assigning this role to the military since this is undoubtedly a law enforcement function.

Further bipartisan and bicameral negotiations would have helped us to tailor the package to allay some of the serious concerns Members have, and at the same time would direct funds to where they are needed most.

Madam Speaker, I do know that what the House passes this week will not be the final word. And I am hopeful that in the not-too-distant future, the House will take up a different version of this package, one that has been negotiated with Republicans and that can pass the Senate, and I look forward to supporting that package before the President signs it into law.

Madam Speaker, our second item for today is H.R. 3233, a bill which establishes a national commission to investigate the January 6 attack on the United States Capitol complex.

I thank Ranking Member John Katko and Chairman Bennie Thompson of the Committee on Homeland Security for their hard work in putting this legislation together. They took an unworkable and hyper-partisan proposal from the Speaker and turned it into a far better bill. I commend these two gentlemen for their desire to find bipartisan agreement.

However, I continue to have concerns with the legislation, concerns that could have been addressed if several of the amendments proposed at our Committee on Rules hearing would have been made in order.

On an issue this serious, the full House deserves the opportunity to debate and discuss areas of disagreement to see if we can find common ground. One of these areas of continued disagreement is that of scope, which remains too narrow in the proposal.

As the culture of our national politics has coarsened over the past several years, there has been a resulting broader wave of political violence in this country. This includes events like the 2017 domestic terror attack that targeted Republican Members of Congress at a baseball practice, and which would have been catastrophically worse but for the bravery of the U.S. Capitol Police officers who were present that day.

It includes the April 2 attack that killed U.S. Capitol Police Officer Billy Evans.

It includes the wave of violence, rioting, and property destruction that swept across the country last summer.

The commission should have specific flexibility to examine these events in their appropriate context.

I am also concerned about current language in the bill related to the ongoing work of law enforcement to bring the perpetrators of January 6 to justice. There are multiple investigations already underway. Several committees in both the House and the Senate have held, and will continue to hold, hearings on the topic.

The Architect of the Capitol is reviewing security vulnerabilities in the Capitol complex. As of yesterday, more than 450 people have been arrested in connection with the events of January 6, with at least 100 more arrests to come. All of these individuals will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, as well they should.

Given each of these ongoing investigations and proceedings, I fear that adding yet another investigation from this proposed commission would only muddy the waters and make achieving due process and reaching justice all that much harder.

For that reason, I supported an amendment offered in the Rules Committee that would ensure that the ongoing and critically important work of law enforcement would continue unimpeded by this commission. For reasons I do not fully understand, this amendment was blocked.

Moreover, in my personal opinion, the commission would benefit from any revelations emerging from the investigations currently underway.

In addition, I note that it was 14 months between the events of 9/11 and the creation of the 9/11 commission. During that time, many facts emerged that informed the investigation of the commission. The same could be true here. As such, it makes sense to take more time prior to commencing an undertaking like this commission.

Though I have reservations about the bill, I have no reservations at all about the job Ranking Member Katko and Chairman Thompson have done. I am hopeful that this bill will be improved further as it proceeds through the legislative process.

Madam Speaker, I urge opposition to this rule, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Madam Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up House Resolution 153, a resolution condemning the recent hate crimes committed against Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include the text of my amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Steel), my good friend, the author of the resolution, to further explain the amendment.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

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

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my good friend, the distinguished chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, for his excellent work on this bill; and I want to thank his ranking member and negotiating partner. I think they, frankly, moved us in the right direction toward agreement.

We continue to have concerns. It is a long, legislative process. Obviously, we will have to pass something through the Senate as well. So it is my hope we can build upon their work and continue to move forward.

We are not prepared at this time to provide huge support for this bill. We think it can continue to improve. But that doesn't take anything away from my appreciation and admiration for the gentleman from Mississippi for his good work. We will continue to try and work with him and others and get to a place we can all come to agree.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

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

Madam Speaker, I oppose the rule. The majority is proposing two significant pieces of legislation today. Unfortunately, concerns remain with both of them.

H.R. 3237, the supplemental appropriations package intended to provide funds for the security of the Capitol complex is, unfortunately and unnecessarily, a partisan bill.

It was the subject of bipartisan negotiations, and there is no reason we could not have gotten to a bipartisan result had the majority wanted to do so. Instead, we are left with a partisan package that does not meet the needs of the institution and, frankly, has no chance of becoming law in its current form.

I would urge my friends particularly to look at the section relating to the rapid response force. That is something where I think, honestly, with a little bit more reflection, we could find some common ground.

I think it is a mistake to put a force like that under the control of either the District of Columbia or the executive branch. I think we need direct control of that ourselves. I know some of my colleagues on the other side feel strongly that way, too. It simply

makes sense that if we are having a crisis here, we ought to make the decision if we need an extra force.

I think if we keep working at it, we are going to find some common ground there, and I hope that we do.

H.R. 3233 establishes a commission to investigate the January 6 attack on the Capitol complex. Here, too, I want to acknowledge that real progress was made in the course of negotiations, and I want to commend particularly Chairman Thompson and Ranking Member Katko for having brought us closer to agreement.

However, on our side, many of us continue to have reservations about this bill and the parameters of the commission itself. After all, the events of January 6 did not occur in a vacuum. If we truly hope to find answers for the American people, then we must take into account everything, all the other political violence that has taken place in recent years.

I would just ask my friends to go back--and I know they have--and look at the 9/11 Commission, which did exactly that. It didn't just look at 9/11. It looked at the attack on the USS Cole. It went back to the attack on the African Embassies that we experienced.

There is room here, I think, for context and additional discussion. We also have concerns structurally with some of the staffing provisions and other items that I have mentioned that we hopefully would look at. We would like to continue to work on that.

I think we could have made good progress had any of the amendments that were offered in the Rules Committee been made in order. My friends chose not to do that. That is their privilege to do so, but I think it probably obstructed what could have been a larger bipartisan vote for this particular piece of legislation.

But, again, we will see going forward. What we do here isn't the final arbiter. This is one stage in the process. The United States Senate is the next stop. Hopefully, there will be some changes made there. Then, it will have to come back here. We should look at both of these matters as stops in a journey, or parts of a journey, not as the final decision on any of them.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question and ``no'' on the rule, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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