Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, and still I rise; and I rise as a liberated Democrat, unbought, unbossed, and unafraid. I rise in the spirit of Shirley Chisholm, who coined the notion of being unbought, unbossed, and unafraid. I rise as a proud scion of the enslaved Africans whose lives were sacrificed for more than 240 years to make America great.

Their lives were sacrificed because America at that time desired to have a caste system, a system wherein persons were born into this caste, would live, die, and be buried as a part of the caste. Not a class. Caste is hereditary. A class is a socioeconomic circumstance.

There was this desire to have persons be a part of the caste, and persons of African ancestry were selected because they were identifiable, and they wanted an identifiable caste. They wanted this caste to be subservient, immediately agreeing to whatever the master said, and they wanted them to be powerless. They were exactly that: A powerless, subservient, identifiable caste for more than 240 years.

Mr. Speaker, I still love my country, notwithstanding its history. I love it because I believe in the ideals that have been expressed in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Pledge of Allegiance. Those ideals give me hope. I believe that America still has much to achieve, but I believe that America can still dream big and accomplish great things. It is my hope that we will at some point achieve the ideals extolled in the Pledge of Allegiance--liberty and justice for all; the ideal of government by the people for the people; the notion that we can have a country wherein all persons are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights. These are the things that I believe we can achieve.

I believe that we ought to honor the persons who were enslaved. I honor victims of great, horrific tragedies. I honor the victims of the Holocaust. There is nothing to be compared to the Holocaust. There is nothing to be compared to the enslavement of millions of people for 240 years. These are two horrific incidents in history, two circumstances.

I believe that we ought to respect and acknowledge that the Holocaust occurred and that it has had an impact not only on the people of that time but on the people of this time.

I also believe we ought to acknowledge that enslavement occurred. There are people who don't want to acknowledge slavery in this country. They want to say that it was involuntary relocation. This is a fact. Well, it wasn't. It was murder. It was rape. It was robbery. It was kidnapping. It was all of these horrific things, including lynching. It was an horrific, horrible circumstance that was imposed upon people.

I think we should honor both the Holocaust and what we call slavery, the enslavement of persons of African ancestry, because these persons of African ancestry built the Capitol. We know of the great things that they did: built the roads, the bridges, planted the crops, harvested the crops, fed the Nation.

They were the economic foundational mothers and fathers of the country. Why wouldn't we honor them, given the role that they played in making America great? For some reason, we can't find it in our hearts, it seems, to honor them; but we can find it within our hearts, as I have found it within my heart, to honor the victims of the Holocaust.

Some people would ask why. Here is the reason why. I am glad you asked. It is easy to look through the window of life into someone else's horrific circumstances and condemn what happened. However, it is very difficult to look into the mirror of life, into our own circumstances, and acknowledge what happened. It is difficult for people who have suffered to do it.

You would think that people who have suffered would be among the first to say we need to have a Slavery Remembrance Day, ought to be among the first to say, well, to give a Congressional Gold Medal to the enslaved persons, just as we have given a Congressional Gold Medal to the enslavers.

In 1956, this Congress of the United States of America that accorded a Congressional Gold Medal to Confederate soldiers won't do such a thing. This Congress will not honor the victims of slavery the same as we have honored Confederate soldiers who were the enslavers.

Mr. Speaker, it is difficult to look into the mirror of life, but that is why I am here. I am here to help you see what you choose not to see and to do what you choose not to do. You may not do it today, but it will happen. It is just a matter of time. There will be more like me to require you to see what you choose not to see. It is just a matter of time.

So, I am a proud scion. That means that I am a descendant of these people who had the injustice of enslavement perpetrated upon them and perpetuated for some 240 years. I am a descendant, but I like saying that I am a scion because it has more of a regal connotation. It says you are proud to be associated with your ancestors. It says you recognize what your ancestors have accomplished. It recognizes the greatness of your ancestors.

Yes, I am a scion, but I am also the progenitor of August 20 as Slavery Remembrance Day. August 20 is the date that the White Lion docked at a place that we now call Norfolk, Virginia, near there, in Point Comfort. It had 20 persons of African ancestry on board, who were traded to the Colonies.

This was the genesis of slavery in the Colonies. There had been slavery before that, but this was the genesis of slavery in the Colonies, which became a part of America.

So, I am the progenitor of making Slavery Remembrance Day a day that is commemorated to the same extent that we commemorate the Holocaust-- two separate incidents, two separate circumstances, and two separate horrific occurrences in history. One we commemorate, and I do so proudly. The other, we would like to forget. We would like to just set it aside and not give those enslaved persons the just treatment that we would accord others.

I want to see Slavery Remembrance Day commemorated across the length and breadth of this country, a day set aside to commemorate the more than 10 million lives that were forced into slavery, had it perpetrated upon them and perpetuated for some 240-plus years.

We ought to commemorate their lives; therefore, I contend, we have and must have Slavery Remembrance Day.

Now, President Biden has agreed with me and Senator Elizabeth Warren. The two of us have been working together. We had Slavery Remembrance Day pass in the House of Representatives. It hasn't passed in the Senate, but it passed in the House of Representatives.

I will always say thanks to Mr. Steny Hoyer, who was at that time in a position to make a difference, and he did. Many people are in a position to make a difference, and they don't. Mr. Hoyer made a difference. I imagine he has been criticized for it.

Mr. Hoyer, wherever you are, I assure you that posterity will see the kindness and the understanding that had to envelop you for you to do this, and I commend you for what you did. I know that history is going to be kind to you.

The President acknowledged Slavery Remembrance Day with a communique, a press statement, if you will, and I am proud to know that he would do so. This President is a President whom I have great respect for, and I commend him for many things that he has done.

Today, I want to commend him for his comments about the Palestinians and the suffering--the suffering--that is taking place in Palestine-- Gaza, if you will--but in Palestine to this very second as I am speaking now.

I commend the President for having the courage. It takes courage to do what he did. It takes courage in an environment where Palestinians are not appreciated, not celebrated.

In this House, we have passed resolutions, several of them, that have done things that I think should have been done related to what happened on October 7, what happened to persons who were living in Israel. I commend and appreciate the passage of those resolutions. I voted for resolutions to deal with the circumstances that occurred on October 7 when the dastardly deeds were perpetrated by Hamas.

Hamas is a terrorist organization. Hamas did things that we really don't care to talk about or discuss, but we have to acknowledge that there was murder, that there was rape, and that there were decapitations that took place. We have to acknowledge the truth. It happened by Hamas, so I have no kind things to say about Hamas. I have things to say about Israel, the Palestinians, and the President.

Mr. President, I thank you for what you said. You said you wanted to help with the humanitarian crisis. You said that there would be a pier constructed such that food could be brought in to the Palestinians.

I commend you for this, Mr. President. I think we should do this.

Mr. President and Mr. Speaker, I have introduced a resolution affirming the state of Palestine's right to exist. I filed this resolution because a resolution was filed, H. Res. 888, reaffirming the State of Israel's right to exist. Israel has a right to exist. This is where I stand. I also stand on the solid, firm conviction that the state of Palestine has a right to exist.

Yes, I said ``state.'' I know it is not a state currently by our traditional definition, but I believe that it has a right to exist as a state, and I have introduced a resolution affirming the state of Palestine's right to exist.

I did it because I believe there ought to be some balance in the House of Representatives. I believe that there ought to be some people with the courage to say, ``I support the Palestinians,'' with the courage to say, ``Killing babies, knowingly killing babies, knowingly killing hundreds and thousands of babies, is an injustice.''

You have to have the courage to say committing an injustice in the name of justice is still an injustice.

Sometimes, you have to stand alone, but I have been taught and believe that, on some questions, it is better to stand alone than not stand at all. Hence, we have H. Res. 902, affirming the state of Palestine's right to exist.

Mr. President, I believe a picture is worth a thousand words, and I want people to just see what we have as evidence of the suffering that is taking place in Palestine. This is a picture, an actual representation, of people in Palestine. You have two adults and two children. You see the babies.

If you only see Palestinian babies, I would beg that you would open your eyes a little wider, clear your vision, and assume that these babies are babies from your hometown. Assume that these babies are babies from your neighborhood. Assume that these are Israelis. How would you feel if you saw this circumstance existing for Israelis?

These circumstances are circumstances that are horrific. Babies and innocent people ought not be killed in the numbers that are being killed. It is an injustice. You cannot, in the name of justice, create an injustice. It still becomes and is an injustice.

Here is another example of the horrific circumstances of devastation and destruction that exist. I just don't know that you can see enough of it to completely comprehend what has been destroyed. There are many estimates as to how much of Gaza has been destroyed. The pictures speak louder than the numbers. I called the numbers to our attention before.

Here is a baby. This baby is a victim of the war in Gaza. This baby cannot be blamed for anything that Hamas has done. You can't allege that this baby is somehow associated with Hamas.

Killing innocent babies is unacceptable. I refuse to allow people to convince me that you can kill babies and somehow conclude that it is okay because the babies were in the way. I refuse to accept it. Those who do, I would hope that you would understand that there are some of us who can't.

Another picture is a depiction of Palestinians having to move out of harm's way and having to do so with what appears to be their belongings. There are children and a donkey-drawn, if you will, cart of some sort. There is no car, and they have to move from one end to another.

Those living conditions are horrible. We have to do something about it, and I will tell you why in just a moment.

Another picture, the final picture, is of a baby, another child. This child, hopefully, will grow up and, hopefully, will get the necessary help in terms of physical aid as well as mental aid. This child is going to need help, and I would hope that this child will get help.

I would hope that this child doesn't become the next generation of persons who will find themselves at odds with the State of Israel. My hope is that there can be peace and two countries living together. That is my hope, and that is my prayer.

To this end, I have written a letter to the President. It is a letter that I will share with you now that I sent to the President some time ago, on February 29.

This is a letter to the President of the United States. The reference in the letter is: ``Justice and Mercy for Palestinians.''

This letter is a letter that I put my thoughts into. I say this because I write my speeches. I write my letters of this magnitude. I don't want people blaming my staff for the things that I do. My staff are great people, and they assist, but these are my ideas and my thoughts.

This is the letter:

``Justice and Mercy for Palestinians.''

``Dear President Biden, I pen this communique driven by the dictates of conscience and with a heavy heart--saddened by the deaths in Palestine and Israel, compounded by Prime Minister Netanyahu's recent indications that Israel will continue to oppose the unilateral recognition of a Palestinian

state and continue maintaining control over stateless Palestinians in lands intended for a Palestinian state. He further indicated that the recognition of a Palestinian state will be reached only through direct negotiations between the parties.''

Mr. Netanyahu, Prime Minister--I rarely say Netanyahu--I respect the position that he holds. He is a Prime Minister, a person with great authority, and his position seems to be that there has to be a negotiated recognition of a Palestinian state, that Israel and the Palestinians will have to negotiate and, once they come to a conclusion that there should be a Palestinian state, then we can recognize it.

Then he goes on to say that the parties have to negotiate this, and it cannot be done unilaterally.

Well, here is what I say to the President:

``Mr. President, on May 14, 1948, President Harry Truman became the first world leader to recognize Israel as a state within Palestine. . . . `'

Some things bear repeating, phraseology that I use quite regularly because many things bear repeating:

``Mr. President, on May 14, 1948, President Harry Truman became the first world leader to recognize Israel as a state within Palestine, effectuating an imbalance of political influence for Israel.''

Again, some things bear repeating:

`` . . . effectuating an imbalance of political influence for Israel. This was done unilaterally. . . . `' That is what is in my letter. ``This was done unilaterally without the consent of defiantly disapproving Palestinians. . . . `'

The Palestinians did not approve of Israel becoming a state. It was done over their disapproval, many of whom were forcefully relocated.

I go on to say:

``Mr. President, just as the Palestinians of 1948 were not allowed to thwart Israeli statehood, in the name of justice we should not allow Israel to thwart Palestinian statehood.''

Sometimes silence can help us to collect our thoughts.

Just as Palestinians of 1948 were not allowed to thwart

Israeli statehood, in the name of justice, Mr. President, we

should not allow Israel to thwart Palestinian statehood.

Now we get to some very substantive commentary:

This is particularly salient given that Prime Minister

Netanyahu obliquely opposed a two-state solution long before

October 7, 2023, long before the killing of innocent Israeli

men, women, and especially children.

It is not in the letter, but as an aside, which was a horrific event, a day that will live in infamy along with other days that live in infamy.

I go on to say:

``For years, Prime Minister Netanyahu has condoned Hamas' control of Gaza to maintain a foil for a lack of a negotiating partner. . . . `'

By the way, this is no--this is not news. It has been reported on major networks that this occurred.

``For years, Prime Minister Netanyahu has condoned Hamas' control of Gaza to maintain a foil for a lack of a negotiating partner who recognized Israel's right to exist.''

Mr. Netanyahu, Prime Minister Netanyahu, is a person that I respect in the sense that he is the leader of a nation. Prime Minister Netanyahu benefited from having Hamas in control of Gaza because he didn't have to negotiate a two-state solution. It was a means by which he could say the words two-state solution, but he didn't mean it. He didn't.

The evidence is there for those who would see. However, there is a notion that there are some who are so blind, not because they cannot see, but because they choose not to see.

Therefore, if you choose not to see, no one can make you see. You can remain in your state of darkness, but this is the truth. It has been widely reported.

``With Hamas,'' I go on to say, ``as a foil, Prime Minister Netanyahu feigned support for a two-state solution while enabling Israeli settlers to lay claim to land intended for a Palestinian state.''

My God.

Feigning, pretending to want to support a two-state solution while all along the way allowing, enabling settlers to lay claim to land intended for a Palestinian state.

``Mr. President, what President Truman did for Israel unilaterally in 1948--'' I emphasize unilaterally because, remember, President Netanyahu says it can't be unilateral. Israel has to agree for the Palestinians to have a state. Israel has a state and has had a state since 1948. Palestinians are stateless.

``Mr. President, what President Truman--'' that first Mr. President is President Biden, if I may just substitute.

President Biden, what President Truman did for Israel

unilaterally in 1948, we can do unilaterally for

Palestinians.

Now, I am an avant-garde personality. I am usually out ahead of the rest of the pack. This is going to come to fruition. It is just a matter of time.

When it does, the memory of this message will be clouded because there will be people chosen to bring the message when it is thought to be safe to bring the message. They will wait to see how safe it is for us to say these words and to come forth publicly and proclaim that there can be unilateral recognition.

They have to wait, so I am the canary in the coal mine, and they will be waiting to see how I am reacted to, and that is being kind.

I continue by saying:

``We should not allow a party feigning,'' pretending--that is parenthetically said.

``We should not allow a party feigning to negotiate in good faith to prevent our good faith, unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state.''

If we are acting in good faith, if we know that the Palestinians deserve a state, yes, there will be an interregnum. While we are in that interregnum, there ought to be negotiations between people of good will who believe that there ought to be a Palestinian state, that the genesis of it is, to a certain extent, now, but that, when the full- blown interregnum occurs, then we ought to make sure that we are on the right side, not just of history.

It is a wonderful thing to be on the right side of history, but it is a better thing to be on the right side of righteousness, on the right side of saying: You don't kill babies in the tens of thousands and think you are doing the right thing.

The right side of righteousness, you don't just decimate the homes and schools and churches, synagogues, and/or properties of people, mosques, if you will. You don't just decimate those things and say: We did it because it was a just thing to do.

An injustice in the name of justice is still an injustice, so be on the right side of righteousness. Act in good faith, and let's develop a Palestinian state.

Additionally, we don't have to do it with the consent of Prime Minister Netanyahu. We don't have to do it with his consent. President Truman didn't have anybody's consent. He was the President of the United States of America.

Mr. President, I don't have to remind you who you are. You know. However, as the President of the United States of America, you don't need anybody's permission to recognize a Palestinian state, and you sure should not rely on the permission of Prime Minister Netanyahu, who has been feigning, pretending to want a two-state solution while enabling Hamas. There is a lot more to be said about that, and I will get to that in another message.

I indicate in my letter to the President, lastly, in the name of mercy--mercy--I believe we must send tens of billions, not millions, of dollars in humanitarian aid to Palestine, to Gaza, to the West Bank. I believe we ought to send tens of billions, and I believe we have to be proud to say we are sending the money in humanitarian aid to people who need tens of billions in humanitarian aid.

Now, pay particular attention to the words I am about to say--to people who need tens of billions of dollars in humanitarian aid because our fingerprints are all over what you have seen in these pictures. Our fingerprints are all over this. Our money has made this possible.

We have a debt to righteousness. We ought to pay our debt to righteousness. Send tens of billions and be proud. It doesn't have to be hidden in some bill. You don't have to announce: Well, we are going to send money to Ukraine, which I supported; we are going to send money to Taiwan and the people in that area, Pacific Islanders, which I supported, but never say: We are going to send money to the Palestinians. We are going to send money to Israel, which I have supported.

As a matter of fact, the number exceeds $50 billion that I have supported to Israel.

Therefore, if we are going to say: We are going to send money to Ukraine and to Taiwan and to Israel, why can't we say: We want to send money to the people who are suffering this injustice, perpetrated by the Prime Minister of Israel, with dollars, tax dollars--tax dollars from American citizens and other persons in this country who pay taxes--sales taxes, gasoline taxes.

These tax dollars--these tax dollars--I know it makes you uncomfortable, and you ought to be uncomfortable. These tax dollars have created this circumstance.

Someone will say: Well, no, those tax dollars weren't used for that. They were used for other purposes. However, as my colleagues across the aisle like to remind me, there is something called fungibility.

These dollars are fungible. They make it possible if you have these dollars for one thing, then you can use your own dollars for other things.

Hamas was wrong. They shouldn't have done what they did. They ought to be punished for what they did. They are being punished for what they did, but it is wrong for Mr. Netanyahu to kill tens of thousands-- babies, innocent men, women, and children, an injustice of horrific proportions.

Some would say: Well, why wouldn't you expect Israel to do what it is doing? After all, Hamas did a dastardly thing.

Well, I am one of those people who believes that Israel is special. I don't expect people who have suffered the Holocaust to impose this. I don't expect it. I expect them to understand that you don't do this. That is my expectation.

I believe that we have a duty to ourselves to speak truth not only to power but about power. It is easy to speak truth to power.

You say: Power, there is a problem. We need to solve it. It is difficult to say to power when you are speaking truth about it: Power, there is a problem, and you are it.

Mr. Netanyahu, Prime Minister, there is a problem, and you are it. You have got to stop killing these babies. Silence can help you collect your thoughts. Stop it. Now.

Lastly, I say in the name of mercy, I believe we must send tens of billions--not millions--of dollars in humanitarian aid to Palestine as our largesse to Israel has enabled the decimation of Gaza, as well as the estimated deaths of tens of thousands of innocent Palestinian men, women, and especially children.

Now, if you can live with yourself and the knowledge that tens of thousands of innocent people are being killed, allow me to live with myself believing that it is an injustice. It is an injustice to do what is being done in the name of justice.

I go on to close by saying in closing, I respectfully and kindly make this appeal in the name of justice and mercy for the thousands of innocent Palestinian men, women, and especially children who have been injured, killed, or had their homes destroyed with munitions bearing our fingerprints.

This is my letter that I have sent to the President of the United States. I signed it as a Member of Congress, as the progenitor of August 20 as Slavery Remembrance Day, as a scion of the enslaved Africans sacrificed to make America great.

I believe that the greatness of America will not be measured by the number of battleships that we have, the number of bombers, high-flying stealth technology.

It won't be measured by the number of billionaires we produce. The greatness of America won't be measured by how we treat people who live in the suites of life and places where all is well.

Dr. King mentioned to us--and I am paraphrasing--the truest measure of a person, and I would now add truest measure of a country, Dr. King, but he said: The truest measure of a person is not where you stand in times of comfort and convenience.

He didn't say what I am about to say now. When all is well with you, when you are the leading country in the world, when you have billionaires and persons of great opulence doing well, it won't be measured by where you stand in times of comfort.

The question that Dr. King mentions in his statement is: Where do you stand in times of challenge and controversy?

His statement was: The truest measure of a person is not where do you stand in times of comfort and convenience, but where do you stand in times of challenge and controversy?

In these times of challenge and controversy, the United States of America ought to stand for justice for all. That would include this baby.

The United States of America ought to stand for liberty for all-- liberty and justice for all. That would include the Palestinian people.

The truest measure of a Nation is not about the height of our buildings, not about the billionaires, but about where we stand when we have the opportunity to stand for righteousness--not just justice by righteousness.

Here is our righteous call to the United States of America. This is it. Do not, do not, do not allow yourselves to succumb to the notion that the killing of these babies is a form of justice.

It was my honor to be present last night when the President delivered his State of the Union Address. He said many things, but I have spoken to you about the thing that was important today.

It doesn't mean that all of the other things that he said were not important. It does mean that I singled out something to talk about today, and I thank the President for what he said and for his belief that a two-state solution is the means by which we can achieve the ultimate peace that we seek in the area that we call Palestine wherein Israel now exists. By the way, I have said Israel has the right to exist.

Mr. Speaker, I thank you for the time. I want to do what I customarily do when finish this, for those who are new to hearing Al Green speak and noticing.

I always go over and shake the Speaker's hand. There is something to be said when you express your appreciation. I shall do so.

I thank all of you for allowing me to share my thoughts with you. An injustice in the name of justice is still an injustice.

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

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to remove the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Manning) as a cosponsor of H. Res. 902.

Mr. Speaker, and still I rise.

I am grateful to my colleague for yielding the floor, but I am very grateful for the opportunity to stand here in the Congress of the United States of America. It means something to me every time I have this opportunity to speak.

I love my country. I love what it stands for. Yes, it is not perfect. Yes, my ancestors were treated in a horrific way, but still we have some ideals that can help us to make a difference.

I believe in liberty and justice for all. I believe in the words of the Declaration of Independence: All persons created equal, endowed by the creator with certain inalienable Rights, among them life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

I believe that notwithstanding our imperfections, we still have an opportunity to have that more perfect union.

I rise today, Mr. Speaker. I rise today in the name of mercy. Justice, yes. Always justice, but also mercy because justice has to do with the law and fairness, but mercy has to do with compassion and grace.

And still I rise. And still I rise, a proud son of the segregated South. I know what it is like to be discriminated against.

I know what it is like to drink from colored water fountains. I know what it is like to sit in the back of the bus because you are required to. I know what it is like to sit in the balcony of the movie theater because you are required to.

I know what segregation is all about, and I know what apartheid is all about. For those of us who lived segregation, the difference between apartheid and segregation is just the spelling of the words. I understand it.

A lot of what I say here on the floor has much to do with the history that I have lived. I care about those who are downtrodden, perhaps because I have walked in their shoes.

I care about those who are being denied their human rights--their rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. For many years, I lived in the segregated South where those rights were not afforded me. The rights that the Constitution of the United States of America codified for me, my friends, and neighbors--took them away.

Mr. Speaker, I want you to know a little bit more about me because today I rise with an appeal for innocent victims. Just before coming to the floor, I saw a preview, if you will, a showing of what happened in Israel on October 7.

Mr. Speaker, there is no way to justify that level of inhumanity to human beings. It cannot be justified. We can never tolerate that level of inhumanity. We have to speak up. We have to say something and we have to do something. I understand. For those who didn't see what I saw, let me share just a few aspects of what I saw with you.

I saw people who would shoot human beings and then decide to decapitate them. I saw an actual decapitation take place. I saw persons being pulled along and brutalized. I would not have you see it, but I would have you know that it happened as I saw it. This is human beings demonstrating an inhumanity to other humans.

I just left this showing. I am here today to appeal to this Congress, and all who can view what I am saying, for mercy and prayers, if you will, and aid to the Israelis. I am also here to ask for mercy and aid for the Palestinians.

Our signature has been placed on, by virtue of our largesse to Israel, our signature was on those bombs. I believe

that we have a duty, a responsibility, and an obligation to do something about the conditions that were created when those bombs were dropped in Gaza.

According to the statistical information that has been afforded me by my capable, competent, and qualified staff, the death toll has risen to more than 27,000 in Gaza.

Here is a statistic that ought to touch your heart. I don't care where you are from, it ought to touch your heart to hear this statistic: 10,000 of them were children. You can blame adults, but you can't blame those children. There were 10,000 babies. Those babies are innocent victims.

Those persons in Israel on October 7 were innocent victims. There are innocent victims in Gaza who are women and men. We ought to care about innocent victims, regardless as to where they are from. Mr. Speaker, 10,000 children lost their lives.

Reports show that more than 67,000 individuals have been injured. More than 67,000. Those 67,000 people are going to hopefully have a life. I don't want them to have a life wherein their future, as they see it, has vengeance and revenge. The parents of those 10,000 children, I don't want them to see only vengeance and revenge in their future.

Vengeance and revenge doesn't end in one cycle. It is a continuous cycle that you are into. At some point we have to get out of the killing. I am asking for mercy. I understand justice, but I know this: An injustice in the name of justice is still an injustice.

We cannot, as the United States of America, the country that believes in liberty and justice for all, we cannot sit and watch what is happening in Gaza and not have some sense of a desire to help them.

According to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, over 300,000 people are at risk of famine. There are 300,000 people that are hungry. There are 300,000 people cramped into a very small space.

I have been to Gaza, it is the most densely populated area in the world, and that was when all of Gaza was available to the Palestinians who live there. Now that you have them confined in a much smaller area, imagine what it is like for 300,000 people to be at risk of famine.

A quarter of Gaza's population--and that is around a half million people--are believed to be at phase five, the catastrophic level. That is the level where you have a risk for mass starvation and death. I don't wish this kind of thing to happen to anyone.

We are a country known for our mercy in war. In this country, if we are at war with you, engaged in mortal combat, if we should injure you in mortal combat, we give you aid and comfort.

In this country, we understand that there is a difference between war and a person who is wounded. Yes, you can be at war, but the wounded ought to be treated. By the way, those persons on October 7 who took the lives of those innocent persons in Israel, they were not giving aid and comfort.

We have an opportunity to do something about this. We cannot allow Gaza to go on suffering with famine in this catastrophic way. We are the United States of America. When we show up, we bring liberty and justice with us. We bring mercy with us. We are not like the other guys. We are different.

It is time for us to show up. It is time for us to make it clear that we plan to be of assistance to the Palestinians. We have already made it clear that we are going to be of assistance to Israel. Now we have to make it clear that we are going to be of assistance to the Palestinians--the innocent victims.

Mr. Netanyahu himself has said that the Palestinians are victims. It is Hamas that has created the catastrophe. We must show up. We have a duty because our fingerprints are on those bombs, those munitions. We are the United States of America and we have to act like it.

As of the end of November, more than 1,000 children have undergone one or double-leg amputations. This is according to UNICEF. We don't want those 1,000 children to grow up with revenge as the hallmark of their history. We are the United States of America and when we show up things change.

An analysis of satellite photos suggest that between 50 to 61 percent of all structures in Gaza--this is the Gaza Strip--have been damaged as of January 29. Mr. Speaker, 50 to 61 percent includes, but is not limited to schools, homes, hospitals, and the things that make life livable.

In rebuilding Gaza, it is estimated--and estimates vary--but it is estimated that the economic cost to rebuild it after this war, depending on who is making the estimate and when the estimate was released--according to estimates, one in a January Reuters article, a Palestinian official has indicated that it could be $15 billion that is needed to rebuild Gaza housing units.

We can't talk about sending millions to Gaza when we are sending scores of millions to other places. Our fingerprints were on those bombs. We are going to have to do more than send a few hundred million dollars. I know that I will have people who will say, well, we can't afford it.

We can't afford not to do it because there is a future that we all have to encounter. That future ought not have in it another cycle of revenge. Our fingerprints were on those bombs that fell in Gaza.

The official estimate is that 350,000 housing units have been damaged and 150,000 of them would need to be rebuilt at a cost of about $100,000 per unit. These people are without homes. Many of them were living in circumstances less than desirable before this war, and they are even less desirable now.

According to a December analysis by DW News, a German-based state- owned news station, rebuilding Gaza after the war would cost up to $50 billion. I am not suggesting that we send $50 billion, but I am suggesting this: any bill that we pass have money in it for Gaza. I would hope that we would have the courage to have a line item for Gaza, just as we would have a line item for Ukraine, a line item for Israel, a line item for Taiwan and the Pacific Rim. We ought to have a line item for Gaza. Our prints are on the bombs that fell on Gaza.

I have said I am interested in justice always, but today the appeal is for mercy. As I indicated, justice has to do with the law and fairness, but today I am asking for mercy for these babies in Gaza that are now fatherless and motherless, and for these parents in Gaza who have lost their children.

I want to show just a few pictures to help better understand what we are dealing with.

This first picture that I will show is just to give an indication or some depiction of what you have already seen if you have been attune to the news. This is much of what these statistical pieces of information reveal. We can see the destruction.

This is not habitable. It is uninhabitable. Our fingerprints are on this. Those bombs had our fingerprints. We have to do something about this.

Here is a picture of two adults and two children. I don't know whether that is their home in the background, but I know that those conditions are not suitable for human habitation. Look at these beautiful babies. Babies are innocent victims of this war. We have to do something about this. Our fingerprints are on the bombs.

Here is a depiction of a child, a young person.

By the way, I did not bring some of the photos that would give a more horrific representation.

As you look at this, I want you to see the Israeli children in this child. There were some Israeli children who were harmed to a greater extent than you see here, and there were some children in Gaza who were harmed to a greater extent than you see here.

As we look at the child, don't look for someone that looks like you. Look at a human being. Our fingerprints were on the bombs that created these conditions.

The people in Gaza have been forced to relocate and relocate. Can you imagine what it would be like to be told that you have to move out of your home, told to do it on short notice? You don't have a vehicle, all the luxuries that we enjoy, so you take your cart and your donkey and load up. You and your family are off to look for a safe place to live, not necessarily a comfortable place. This has happened to the Palestinians in Gaza. We have to do something about this.

Finally, my appeal to you: Don't see a Palestinian, please. See a human

being. Think of the Israelis that were harmed. Realize that there are children in Gaza who have been harmed.

``Harmed'' is a very kind, polite word for all of these innocent victims. It is a very polite way to say that children have lost their lives. It is a very polite way to speak of the inhumanity that the Israelis suffered. It is a polite way to talk about decapitations.

We are the United States of America. We hold within our hands the power to show the world that these kinds of circumstances can be addressed and that we plan to be a party to the effort to make right these injustices. Yes, injustices--injustice in Israel, injustice in Gaza.

Now, when it comes time for us to do what we can monetarily, there has to be aid for Gaza and aid for Palestinians. We cannot decide that our aid can only benefit some when we know that we have a duty to benefit others.

This is our duty and our responsibility. We must do what we can to ensure that the persons in Gaza receive aid and comfort. They are innocent victims, and all innocent victims have to be accorded the opportunity to have a brighter future.

I am always fond of quoting Dr. King. The quote that everybody knows is most applicable here: Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

It may not happen today, but if we leave these injustices unchecked, if we don't do what we can to provide aid and comfort to Palestinians, the injustice that we see in these distant places can haunt us because our fingerprints are on the bombs that created these circumstances.

I will go back to my district. On Saturday, I will continue this. I will continue this process on Saturday because I have scheduled a meeting with constituents at The Fountain of Praise. Those from Houston and my district know the location I speak of. It will be at 10 a.m. This is an indication of what I will talk about, but it is not a complete story of what I will reveal.

I ask persons who come to bring their video equipment. We will do it live, and they can video it so that the world may see there is nothing to hide.

Mr. Speaker, I believe that we can make the difference necessary to end the cycle of vengeance.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to make clear why I voted in opposition to H.R. 3202--The Assad Regime Anti-Normalization Act of 2023. By way of background, I have in my district the family of journalist Austin Tice, a former Marine Corps Captain who was captured in Syria in 2012. Since that time this family has been working with me, other members of Congress, multiple presidential administrations, and the Assad regime to secure the release of their son from captivity. Mr. Tice was abducted in Syria by an unknown group while reporting on the conflict as a freelance journalist. While the Assad regime has not claimed responsibility, the State Department has indicated that they believe Tice is being held by the regime or its allies.

My opposition to this legislation stems from the appeal of Austin's family. It is their understanding that saving the life of their son requires engagement with the Assad regime, exactly the kind of engagement that this legislation would prohibit. Let me be absolutely clear, Bashar al-Assad is an illegitimate war criminal who has brutalized the citizens of Syria and caused immeasurable harm. I believe our Nation should take all reasonable steps to stymie the goals of this regime, saving steps that will harm captives like Marine Corps Captain Austin Tice and other U.S. nationals held in Syria.

Mr. Speaker, I was unable to attend the first portion of the vote series on Tuesday, February 6, 2024, and the vote series on Wednesday, February 7, 2024, due to an unexpected medical emergency and corresponding recovery time in the hospital. Had I been present, I would have voted: YEA on Roll Call No. 36, YEA on Roll Call No. 39. and NAY on Roll Call No. 40.

Mr. Speaker, I was unable to attend the vote series on Monday, February 5, 2024, and the first vote series on Tuesday, February 6, 2024, due to an unexpected medical emergency and corresponding recovery time in the hospital.

Had I been present, I would have voted: YEA on Roll Call No. 32; YEA on Roll Call No. 33; NAY on Roll Call No. 34; and NAY on Roll Call No. 35.

Mr. Speaker, and still I rise. Let me be absolutely clear, I vehemently oppose the ideology and actions of Hamas as demonstrated by my vote in favor of H. Res. 793, which, among other things, condemned Hamas for attacking Israel, taking hostages, and for threatening hostages. Moreover, I have voted in favor of over $50 billion in funding for Israel. The Israeli people have suffered a grave injustice. However, committing an injustice in the name of justice is still an injustice. We must take care not to fall into the belief that any action taken in war is justified, especially the mass killing of innocent Palestinian babies when war has been declared on Hamas.

Today, I am compelled to vote against the Israel Supplemental Legislation that Speaker Johnson brought to the floor. I take this stance because of the humanitarian disaster that now exists in Gaza. This bill's narrow focus on only providing military aid to Israel, with no accompanying humanitarian aid for the innocent civilians of Gaza, is unconscionable. I cannot ignore the men, women, and especially children in Gaza who are suffering through catastrophic conditions resulting from Israel's war on Hamas. Babies have lost their parents and parents have lost their children to artillery and bombs that were paid for in whole or in part because of U.S. funds provided to Israel. I will not be complicit in the slaughter of innocent babies. Furthermore, the mass destruction in Gaza has resulted in the decimation of homes and infrastructure and has made Gaza unlivable.

The lack of meaningful humanitarian aid from this legislation at a time when Gazan civilians are at risk of starvation, disease, and death is unconscionable. For these and other reasons, I oppose this legislation.

I thank the gentlewoman.

And still I rise, Mr. Speaker. And still I rise to pay tribute to the Honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson, the first lady of Texas politics.

Yes, she has given new meaning to the name first lady, as the gentlewoman from Texas was the first Black woman ever elected to public office from Dallas.

She was the first woman in Texas history to chair a major Texas House committee, the Labor Committee.

Yes, she was the first African-American woman to hold the position of regional director for the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.

She was the first registered nurse elected to the United States Congress.

She was the first Black person from Dallas to serve in Congress.

Yes, she was a first. She was the first woman to chair the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, Mr. Speaker.

She was a history-making, glass-ceiling-breaking first lady who blazed huge trails in the sands of time, such that those who may traverse later will know that, where she was the first, she will not be the last.

Still I rise, Mr. Speaker, always proud to have this preeminent privilege of standing here in the House of Representatives, honored to have the opportunity to serve the people of the Ninth Congressional District who elected me, but also the people of this country, this entire country, because when they elected me, they elected me to become a United States Representative. As such, when I vote, I am voting for them, but I am also voting for the country.

Today I rise to be grateful and to express my gratitude and my appreciation to the people of the Ninth Congressional District for allowing me this opportunity, this singular opportunity of serving in the Congress of the United States of America. I have been blessed.

I thank the people who happen to live in Brazoria County for allowing me to serve them. It has been an honor, and it continues to be my honor. I, in no way, am indicating that I am about to leave the Congress. I think that this is an opportunity to express my gratitude. I plan to be here next year and until the people of the Ninth Congressional District decide otherwise.

I thank the people who live in Brazoria County. I thank the people who live in Fort Bend County--these counties adjoin each other--and Harris County.

I didn't get here because I was so smart. I am here because there were people who thought that I might make a difference in their lives, and I have tried my best to do so, so I thank them for affording me this opportunity.

I thank my staff. Members of Congress get things done only when they have a good staff. I have an excellent staff, and I thank them for what they do to make it possible for me to do things that I ordinarily would not be able to do.

I had a friend, Mickey Leland, who served in this Congress, and he reminded me on many occasions that a great person will always rise to the occasion, but the greater people make the occasion, so I thank these occasion makers, the people who make it possible for me to come here and stand and speak in the House of Representatives in this Capitol Building.

I thank my chief of staff here in Washington, D.C., who does an outstanding job. I won't go through his credentials in the entirety, but he is a lawyer, Scott Bell. I thank Scott for the fine job he has done to lead the D.C. team.

That team consists of Aaron, who is my legislative director; Raphael, who is a senior in the office; Jalaina, who is a legislative assistant in the office; Madison, who is my office administrator; and then there are other persons who are coming on board. I believe that Izzah will be on board with me. I have extended an offer to her. We will see if she accepts.

My D.C. team has done an outstanding job. I am very proud of the job that all of the members of this team have afforded the people of the Ninth Congressional District of Texas.

However, I do want to mention one standout, and that is Claudia. Claudia and I happened to bump into each other when she was working in another capacity here on the Hill. I take great pride in selecting people who don't apply for the job, people that I just happen to bump into along life's way. Such was the case with Claudia. I just bumped into her. We had some casual conversation, and something said to me, this is the person who can represent you when people first enter your office. I thank Claudia very much for the job that she does.

Jalaina and I met when I was at a speaking engagement. She didn't apply for the job. I spoke to her for some small length of time, found out that she was looking for a job on the Hill. She applied, and Jalaina now works in the office. I mentioned her earlier. She is a legislative assistant in the office.

I am proud of this D.C. team, but in Houston I have a team that has been with me for a very long time, and I am proud of them, as well. I am proud of Rachael Rodriguez, who came to me from labor. She is a labor-oriented person, as am I. I am a dues-checkoff member of a local labor union, 1550 AFSCME. As such, I am proud to say that Rachael Rodriguez has done an outstanding job leading the Houston team. She is more than capable, competent, and qualified. She has a great personality. She is the kind of person who respects others with her smiles. Rachael Rodriguez.

Then, of course, there is Crystal Webster. Crystal is the deputy district director, and she does a little bit of everything. In that office we all take pride in getting the job done. Everybody will pitch in to do whatever has to be done. Crystal Webster has done an outstanding job. I am grateful that she has been with me for many years.

The persons that I have just spoken of, Crystal and Rachael, have both been with me for more than a decade.

Of course, I am honored to have in that office Clarence Holliday. We call him Doc. He has done outstanding work in the outreach area, also as a caseworker. He is just a fine man, former NAACP president out in Fort Bend County. He does outstanding work. I am proud to have him.

I am also proud to have Catherine. Catherine is polyglot. She speaks four different languages; quite well, I might add. She connects me to communities that but for her I wouldn't connect with. These people are making a difference in the lives of the people in the Ninth Congressional District.

I also am honored to have with me Sam, Sam Merchant. Sam Merchant is a person of Indian heritage; not Native American, Indian heritage. He has been with me for a number of years as an outreach person. I regret to say to you that Sam will be leaving the office. He has served us well. He is moving on to a sunset of retirement. I greatly appreciate the work that Sam has done for the people of the Ninth Congressional District.

Of course, we have Robertine, Robertine Jefferson. Her father was my pastor. He passed away some time ago. I never intended to hire Robertine. I just happened to be at an event and found out that she was interested in work, and she came on board with me. She helps us with our events. She is an event coordinator; par excellence, I might add. She does an outstanding job. I could not but for her do the many different things that we do in the district.

Of course, there is Teque'lia. Teque'lia is the coms director in the office. She came on board not so very long ago and has been very talented. She picks up on things very quickly, and she produces a great work product, so I am proud to claim Teque'lia as a member of the team in Houston, Texas.

There are other persons who are not on the team by virtue of working in the office. I want to make sure that I acknowledge them as well because they

are in and out of the office, so thank you. Of course, there is Colbe who works in the office, Colbe is a receptionist out front. She drives when necessary, does a little bit of everything, as well. I am proud to have this team of workers in the Houston office, all of whom serve us well.

Today, I will do two additional things, and I will depart. The first thing I would like to do is to thank the people that I work with here, people that I disagree with, people that I agree with. I think this is a time to put aside differences, as I heard Mr. Hoyer so eloquently express earlier in a presentation; put aside differences and just be grateful, just be grateful that you have the opportunity to serve and be grateful for the people that you serve with regardless of their political persuasions. Just be grateful. So I am grateful to all of the people that I serve with here, and I thank them for the work that we do together.

In closing with this work, I am going to say a prayer for all of us, if I may, after which I will present someone else who will take the microphone and continue for the rest of the time that remains.

Today, this is my prayer that I have written. I say this prayer before I consume any food. It is accidental if I consume food and I don't say this prayer because I am grateful to have the gift of life.

I tell people that I am better than I deserve because I have been blessed to have the most unique gift in all of the universe, the gift of life. I don't know why I have it. I didn't earn it, so I have to be grateful for it. I try to use it in the most efficacious and the most beneficial way possible. I make mistakes. I am not a perfect person. I am a sinner, but I do try my best to treat people right. I ask for forgiveness; and I do ask for forgiveness more often than I probably should, but I do ask.

This is my prayer, and I don't ask anybody to join me in my prayer, you do whatever you would ordinarily do. This is my prayer for my country and for the people that I serve with:

Most gracious Creator, we know You by many names, but we also know that by any name, You are the Creator of all that was, is, and ever shall be; and I, as one of Your creations, want to take the time to now thank You, and I do so on behalf of the many others who may believe as I do.

I thank You for Your love, Your grace, and the gift of life. I thank You for Your mercy and Your forgiveness throughout life. I thank You for Your angels to protect life. I thank You for Your creation to sustain life: Your air, the breath of life; Your water, the elixir of life; Your star that we know as Sun, the light and warmth of life; Your terra firma that we call Earth, the foundation and home of life.

I today ask that You would recognize our weaknesses, our strengths, and give us the opportunity to serve You and Your creation so that it may continue as You would will it.

I ask all of these things in the name of the Creator of all of creation, and I thank You.

At this time, I am honored to introduce someone I have the utmost respect for. Elected from Maryland's Fifth Congressional District, he is one of Maryland's finest and a Georgetown University lawyer. He served as majority leader twice, from 2007 to 2011 and then again from 2019 to 2023. He is a person who has made a difference in my life and, in so doing, has made a difference in the lives of the people of the Ninth Congressional District, which I represent.

I am so honored to have this opportunity to yield to the honorable gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), a lawyer, a former State senator, and still a Member of Congress. I respect and love my dear brother.

God bless you. Merry Christmas and happy holidays.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the former majority leader for the outstanding presentation. I think it is an appropriate way to bring this to closure today. May God continue to bless him and keep him.

Mr. Speaker, as I shake Mr. Hoyer's hand as he passes me by, I am blessed to know that sometimes fortuitous circumstances can benefit you.

Mr. Speaker, I would be remiss not to mention the newest staff member on my team, Eric Goodwine.

Eric does an outstanding job for us in Houston. He not only assists me in the office, but he also is the principal person that gets me from point A to point B. Eric does an outstanding job of ensuring that things are arranged when I arrive at various venues, and I am proud to have him on the team.

Eric, thank you again. Please forgive me for not mentioning you initially. All of this was from memory so charge it to being 25 three times and now working on my fourth 25th birthday, but there is a God that rules above and a fortuitous circumstance has made a difference.

Mr. Speaker, may God bless this House, and may God bless the United States of America.

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

Mr. Speaker, and still I rise to oppose antisemitism as well as all forms of hate on college campuses and wherever else it may exist.

Today I address the Congress to associate myself with the comments made during debate on H. Res. 927 by the Honorable Jamie Raskin and the Honorable Kathy Manning. Both of these esteemed leaders highlight the nuance necessary when discussing issues of campus speech and antisemitism. Representative Raskin's and Representative Manning's remarks are insightful, and I, generally speaking, endorse their sentiments as sufficient explanations for my vote against the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, and still I rise, and still I rise.

I rise today, as always, when I address persons in this most sacred place in my heart. I rise as a proud American. I am proud to say that I am an American. I am proud to say that I am American because my foreparents made it what it is. Its greatness can be traced back to 240 years of free labor, free sacrifice, and I am proud.

I wear this tie indicating that I am proud. I salute the flag. I say the Pledge of Allegiance. I sing the national anthem.

I am proud to be an American, and why wouldn't I be proud, given that my foreparents made it great. The greatness of America resides today on the economic foundations laid by persons of African ancestry. They are the economic foundational mothers and fathers of this country.

Now, there are some who say to me, literally: How can you be proud, Al Green, when your foreparents were put into chains, when they were beaten, when women were raped, when they were born into slavery and lived their lives as slaves? How can you be proud?

I can be proud because I have the power to forgive, the power to forgive for all of these transgressions. God has given me this power. I would hope that others could acquire the power to forgive. The power to forgive is the power that will allow you to go on to do other things.

God did not give me, however, the power to forget. Forgive and forget is not a sensible statement of where the heart and mind should be, in my opinion. It is forgive and remember. Forgive all the transgressions, but remember that they occurred. This is why we can say ``never again'' as it relates to certain transgressions.

So, I forgive, and I love the country, but I don't forget.

Today, I want to talk about my foreparents. This is a depiction of when they may have arrived, on August 20, 1619. I want to talk about them, and I want to talk about the racism in America today.

As we discuss racism in America today, we have to first identify the reasons why Africans were enslaved, the reasons why America enslaved Africans, to be more specific.

Remember, I am the guy who is forgiving. I am the guy who loves the country, sings the national anthem, but he doesn't forget.

Why did America enslave Africans? Here is why: To be a permanent--I think 240 years of enslavement is a pretty good representation of the fact that there was an intentionality that it be permanent--to be a permanent, identifiable--``identifiable,'' easily recognized among the population; ``permanent,'' 240 years of enslavement; ``identifiable,'' the complexion of skin as a methodology by which one could be immediately identified and put in his proper place or her proper place, their proper place.

Permanent, identifiable, powerless.

There was never the desire to have persons of African ancestry become powerful in this country. It was not there. I am talking about at the genesis of this on August 20, 1619, when they were first introduced into the Colonies. There was slavery in the country prior to this, but we are talking about when it was introduced into the Colonies.

Africans were brought here to be a permanent, identifiable, powerless--no power. The courts in this country actually recognized the fact that we were powerless. In Dred Scott, the Chief Justice indicated that persons of African ancestry had no rights that a White person had to respect. It was not said in those exact words, but that is the exact meaning. They had no rights.

Permanent, identifiable, powerless, subservient.

They were brought here to be servants--not just servants in the sense of people who were to do the bidding of others but to do so with a degree and a demeanor of servility. They had to be servile--servile.

Africans were brought here to be a permanent, identifiable, powerless, subservient caste--not class; there is a distinction. Class has to do with a socioeconomic identification. Caste has to do with a hereditary identification, meaning if you were born into this caste, this group, you were to be a slave. You were enslaved by birth.

By definition, at birth, you were enslaved. You were permanently enslaved. You were identifiably enslaved. You were powerless as a slave. You were subservient as a slave and forever a slave as long as you lived.

These are the reasons why America enslaved Africans to be a permanent, identifiable, powerless, subservient caste of people.

To this day, much of this still exists. To this day, there are still people who treat persons of African ancestry as though they are still powerless and should be subservient and belong to this caste.

When Dr. King went to India on his pilgrimage, he was introduced at a certain venue. When he was introduced, it was said to him that he was part of a caste. Initially, he didn't really, in my opinion, know exactly how to respond to this because he had not been told that he was a part of a caste. After giving some thought to it, he realized that, to a certain extent, there was this caste system.

To this day, there is still evidence of people who believe that we should be powerless. Let's examine that. Obviously, we are still identifiable, but that we should still be powerless.

We still have problems accessing the capital that allows one to succeed in society. We have evidence, empirical evidence, indicating, evidencing, the fact that persons of African ancestry, who are imminently qualified, can apply for a loan and they will pay higher points for that loan, they will receive less sometimes than what they need, and they will pay a higher interest rate than an Anglo who is less qualified.

Empirical evidence. I sit on the Financial Services Committee. We have looked into these things. The empirical evidence exists. Still a desire, but powerless.

Now, some people will say, are you saying that there is a conspiracy? I don't think anybody had a grand meeting and decided we will just continue this caste system by making sure they remain powerless in society. I don't think that happened. I think it has been inculcated into the culture. The 240 years of slavery, thereafter followed with Black codes, convict leasing, Jim Crow laws, thereafter followed with lawful and legal segregation.

There was lawful and legal segregation until 1954, the Brown case. It hasn't been that long ago. In my lifetime, I suffered lawful, legal segregation. Thank God I have the power to forgive.

Powerless, intentionality, powerless, in the culture. It is not going to be eradicated overnight. One court decision will not eliminate 240 years of slavery plus an additional great number of years of lawful segregation. It doesn't eliminate it.

Many of the people who suffer from this affliction, they don't know it in the sense that they purposefully do these things, but they happen. There was 240 years of slavery, thereafter followed with lawful segregation, and now we still suffer as powerless people.

I am going to say more about powerless, but I want to just remind persons that we still are born Black in America, still have the identifiable complexion. There are still people who expect us to be subservient, to be more respectful than others.

I have seen it myself wherein an Anglo person can say to a police officer that he or she or they happen to think is doing something inappropriate: ``Who do you think you are? Give me your badge number. I am going to report you.'' The officer accepts it. If an African American says: ``Who are you? Who do you think you are?'' It is unacceptable. There is a belief that you cannot challenge the system to the same extent as Anglos, all emanating from the permanent, identifiable, powerless, subservient caste.

Now, let's give a supreme, superb example of being powerless. I think this example will speak in ways that many of us have not given consideration to. I regret to have to bring this example to the attention of the House of Representatives, to the attention of the country, to the attention of the Senate, but here is the example.

This building is the Russell Senate Office Building. This building is a symbol of national shame, the Russell Senate Office Building. Taxpayer dollars built it. Taxpayer dollars maintain it. Every taxpayer in this country has a stake in the Russell Senate Office Building, and it is a symbol of national shame.

I am talking about racism in America now, how we learn to tolerate it. Remember this: Those who tolerate racism perpetuate racism.

Let's talk about the Russell Senate Office Building, named in honor of a self-proclaimed white supremacist. This is brother Richard Russell, Senator. I refer to every man as my brother. If not my brother, according to the notable anthropologist, paleontologist, L.S.B. Leakey, we are probably cousins. We are probably related in some way.

This is Mr. Richard Russell. Mr. Richard Russell is prominently displayed in this building. When you enter this building, you enter into a rotunda. This is where Mr. Richard Russell is prominently displayed in the Russell Senate Office Building.

You will note at the top, we have styled this, we have captioned it, ``self-proclaimed white supremacist.'' This is Mr. Richard Russell, self-proclaimed white supremacist.

This building is named in honor of Mr. Richard Russell, this man, the self-proclaimed white supremacist. He stands there today in the rotunda of the Richard Russell Office Building.

Now, why would I make an issue of this for you in talking about racism and enslavement? Well, here is why. Powerless. Remember, powerless. This is the building.

Powerless. We, the people of African ancestry, are powerless to remove this man's statue and to remove his name from a building we support. We are powerless. We can't get it done.

The Senate knows that Richard Russell was a bigot and a racist. They probably see him more as a racist than as a bigot, but he was the person who fought antilynching legislation. He is the person who fought civil rights legislation. He is the person who coauthored the ``Southern Manifesto,'' and he is the person who stands in the rotunda all to himself in the Russell Senate Office Building.

Yes, we have asked that his name be removed from the building and that his statue be removed. Just as the Senate has removed names from military bases, the Congress has, the House and Senate, the Senate can remove that name of Richard Russell. This is Richard Russell standing in his place of grandeur.

There is more to be said about this. I would now like you to see a different view of the Russell statue. Your perch can sometimes influence what you see. I have shown you Mr. Russell up close. Now let's step back and take a look.

Here is Mr. Russell. He is standing here. By the way, I respect and I say ``Mr. Russell.'' There are people who would demean me for saying ``Mr. Russell.'' He was a former United States Senator. He was a bigot and a racist, but I still give him respect

Here is Mr. Russell. Now, let's put this here for just a moment. There is Mr. Russell. He is here. I hope the camera can pick him up.

Here is what you cannot identify that I have to identify for you. Above Mr. Russell, in the Russell Senate Office Building, above Mr. Russell, in these various spaces along this area in the Russell Senate Office Building, are news outlets, major news outlets. CNN is there. MSNBC is there. Major news outlets occupy the space above Mr. Richard Russell.

Who can deny that they are aware that they are sharing space with a self-proclaimed white supremacist? Have they no shame? CNN, have you no shame? You fight against hate, and you house yourself above Richard Russell. Have you no shame, MSNBC? Have you no shame?

The man's name shouldn't be on the building. His statue shouldn't be on the building, and you ought not be housed above it. The Richard Russell Office Building, with Senator Russell in all of his glory, above his head, notable news sources reporting the news, not reporting that Richard Russell is right beneath them, the racist.

Remember now, those who tolerate racism perpetuate racism. All of these news sources I just mentioned--FOX is there, too. All of them, they are there. If one of them that I have called is not there, let me know. I don't go over there. I haven't been over there. I am a one- person protest. I don't go in the building. I respect myself too much to go there. I have dignity. I have respect for myself. I am a sinner, but I am not that much of a sinner.

Those who tolerate this perpetuate it. Those who tolerate this statue being there perpetuate it. I am saying it. CNN is perpetuating racism. MSNBC, you are perpetuating racism. FOX, you are perpetuating racism. I am saying it. I know that I am powerless to do anything to you about it. You can stay there as long as you desire, never report it, and it becomes a nonissue. You can stay there, and the world will remain as it is. There will just be one Member of Congress who came to the floor of the House of Representatives and had the courage to call you out.

I know you won't get any airtime on CNN or MSNBC or FOX. You can't challenge the news media and tell them where they are wrong and expect them to allow you to be heard. It doesn't work that way in this country and probably in very few countries in the world. You can't do it. I understand that.

I understand that I am powerless, but I also understand that I can take a stand. I also understand that I can point out to people that yes, you can challenge power. Yes, you can be that person who speaks truth to power. Yes, you can do it. Here is what is even more important than to speaking truth to power; that is speaking truth about power.

You see, to speak truth to power, you simply say: Power, we have a problem, and we need to solve it.

When you speak truth about power, you say: Power, CNN, MSNBC, FOX, we have a problem, and you are part of it. They are part of the problem. There are others up there with them, but they are part of the problem.

Richard Russell, a self-proclaimed white supremacist, in a rotunda all to himself. I know of no other rotunda that has a single person in it--if there may be one. There you are housing yourselves above him.

If I am wrong, let me know I am wrong and I will come back to this very podium and I will extend an apology. I will do it. When you are wrong, that is what you do. I will come back and I will extend an apology.

I ask you, CNN, I ask you, MSNBC, I ask you, FOX, tell me I am wrong that you are not reporting from above Richard Russell.

I am talking about racism in America. I am talking about those who tolerate it and perpetuate it. I am now going to talk about solutions. There are many solutions. Please don't take this as all inclusive, but this is a necessary solution. A necessary solution to, as a matter of necessity, deal with how this has been inculcated into society such that these prominent news sources would tolerate this.

There are some things that have to be done. They could be very beneficial in getting it done. If they are tolerating this, I don't know to what extent we can count on them. Here is what we have to do. One of the things we have to do is acknowledge the conscience agenda.

Let me remove Mr. Russell for a moment. He still maintains his place of honor in the Senate, but not here while I am talking. Now, we have to acknowledge this conscience agenda.

Conscience agenda, our moral imperative. Here is what we have to do. We have to acknowledge slavery and the horrors of it, but also set aside a day. By the way, I am not asking for a holiday with people being paid and off from work. I don't want that. I don't think that we should have that for something as important as this.

I don't want it to become something where people are going to have a mattress sale and talk about how you can get a great discount. Slavery Remembrance Day discount, come on in and get your mattress. I don't want that.

I want people to understand that August 20, annually, ought to be Slavery Remembrance Day. I thank God that at least one prominent person has acknowledged it, and there are others that I will mention briefly. Perhaps I will reverse the order and do it this way.

Mr. Steny Hoyer helped me to get legislation through the House recognizing Slavery Remembrance Day. I thank Mr. Hoyer and I will never let history write him out. I thank him for what he did. Slavery Remembrance Day is important.

We have Juneteenth. Yes, Juneteenth is about celebrating freedom, when General Gordon Granger came into Galveston, Texas, and read ``General

Order No. 3.'' That is worthy of celebrating; this is about commemoration, not celebration. This is about commemorating those lives that suffered for some 240 years to make America great. There were 240 years of suffering. They were born into it, into a caste system.

They were born into it. Babies were slaves. Enslaved people is a more appropriate way to say it. Babies were enslaved human beings that grew up to become enslaved adolescents. They went on to become enslaved adults and thereafter died as enslaved human beings. Lives devoted to making America great.

No emolument has been accorded them. No recompense has been accorded them. No consideration other than they had the necessities to remain alive so that they could continue to be enslaved persons who could produce a work product. We should honor this day.

I am proud of Senator Elizabeth Warren who has helped to get this done, and she is working on the Senate to get the resolution through the Senate. The same Senate, by the way, that won't remove Richard Russell's name from the Russell Senate Office Building. That is the same Senate that won't remove his statue from the rotunda that he happens to enjoy all to himself.

We have to have Slavery Remembrance Day. We should honor these economic foundational mothers and fathers on whose sacrifice America has become the great Nation that it is. They built the Capitol. Yes, these folks, their hands helped to construct the very Capitol that we have here. They helped to construct the White House. They built the roads and the bridges. They planted the seeds and harvested the crops to feed the Nation. Yet, they are not properly recognized.

In fact, this Congress did something that demeaned them. Here is what the Congress did in 1956. The Congress of the United States of America, the country I love, land of the free and home of the brave, the Congress of the United States of America awarded Congressional Gold Medals to the enslavers. They awarded Congressional Gold Medals to Confederate soldiers. They awarded nothing to the people whose hands helped build the Capitol. Nothing to them. But awarded the enslavers, the persons who fought to maintain slavery.

Remember, we had to go to war. Thank God for Abraham Lincoln. We had to go to war to deal with slavery. People died. What a tragedy it was. But that is what it took to eliminate slavery in this country. We gave a Congressional Gold Medal to the Confederates, and nothing to the persons who were enslaved.

Well, we can remedy that. Remember now, I am talking about things we need to do to change the mindset that we have. We need, and I think this Congress should, award a Congressional Gold Medal to the enslaved. That seems so easy to comprehend, but yet so hard for this Congress to do.

They just need to acknowledge that these folks who suffered for 240 years, they ought to be acknowledged for what they did too. They ought to be acknowledged for what they did here, for what they did with the White House, and for what they did for this country--a Congressional Gold Medal for the enslaved.

There is a resolution pending for such a thing to be done. Remember, powerless. Powerless. We are shown to be powerless when something as simple as this can't be done. Something as simple as having a Slavery Remembrance Day where the Congress, meaning the House and the Senate and the President, acknowledges it.

We have a Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day. We have a 9/11 Remembrance. We have a Holocaust Remembrance Day, meaning the President, the House, and the Senate recognizes Holocaust Remembrance Day. We don't have such a thing for the people who are the economic foundational mothers and fathers of this country. No slavery remembrance. Don't have it. That is because we are still powerless.

We have some power. Yes, we are Senators and we are in Congress and we have a President and there is a Vice President, but we are still shown that we cannot demand justice and get justice. There are people who would say: You are not asking for it properly. You have to be subservient. Be servile and maybe you can get it then.

We can't demand it and get it. I demand it. We ought to have Slavery Remembrance Day acknowledged by the House, the Senate, and the President, as well as a Congressional Gold Medal accorded the enslaved.

I have talked about it; we need to remove Richard Russell's name from the Russell Senate Office Building. I won't go into any great details in explaining that, I have gone through it clearly. There is legislation for atonement that is pending, and I won't go through that.

I do want to go to the last item on my agenda, which is number five.

Mr. Speaker, so I may govern myself accordingly, can you please tell me how much time I have remaining?

Mr. Speaker, I want to talk now about the thing that I think will help not only with slavery remembrance, but also will help us with other issues that have not been resolved. That is the establishment of a department of reconciliation.

Mr. Speaker, we have not reconciled. We have not. There are chasms that we cannot see but that we can experience. We need to span the chasms that divide us. To do so, we need to have a methodology by which it can be accomplished. To have that methodology, we have to have a means in place. This would be the means by which the methodology could be enforced and put into motion so that we can get reconciliation.

Reconciliation. There ought to be in this country what we could not do after the war because President Johnson was more interested in the antebellum aspect of the war. He would have gone back if he could have, but he could only go so far. He did limit forward movement, so we didn't get reconciliation.

We need a department of reconciliation with a secretary of reconciliation. A person that wakes up every morning with the mission of helping us to reconcile the differences in a very positive way, I might add--the differences that separate us, the chasms that we failed to span over the centuries.

Remember, slavery lasted for more than two centuries, it wasn't a 20- year event. That is why some of the aspects of the powerlessness are still inculcated into our society. We need this department of reconciliation with a secretary and under secretaries of reconciliation to deal with all of the invidious discrimination that has not been resolved. There are issues related to other persons that have not been resolved.

One example would be the indigenous Americans. They are the first Americans. Their issues have not been resolved. These are the folk who suffered the Trail of Tears. These are the folk who suffered wars against them, and they were made the villains. They were defending their land, and they are the villains.

We need to resolve this. The department of reconciliation would help us do this. It won't be done in a month, a week, a year or 2, or a decade. It is going to take time. Nevertheless, it is not going to be done without some structure. It is not going to be done with just the passage of time. It won't happen.

Dr. King reminded us that it is not the passage of time that makes change--these are not his exact words--but rather what you do with time as it passes.

What do you do with the time? If you don't make good use of it, then the change won't take place.

So, we need this department of reconciliation; we need a secretary of reconciliation; we need under secretaries of reconciliation; and we need a budget. I have proposed that the budget for this department be indexed and tied to, if you will, indexed and tied to the Defense Department's budget.

Why the Defense Department's budget? It is because we will always fund the Defense Department. I think that we should have a budget that is indexed and tied to it. The money would not come out of the Defense Department's budget.

There would be money that would be the equivalent of some percentage, say 10 percent, of what is in the Defense

Department for the department of reconciliation so that we can at some point, at some point, span the chasms that divide, separate, and prevent us from having the level of unity within our country that we richly deserve given the great documents, the great founding documents, of the country, that all persons are created equal, endowed by the creator with certain inalienable rights, among them life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. These certain documents include the pledge of liberty and justice for all.

We need to do these things. I am committed to Slavery Remembrance Day. I am committed. I stand alone sometimes with this commitment. It is an idea that I brought to this Congress, and I am going to stay with it.

Yes, I am the progenitor, the progenitor, of Slavery Remembrance Day. I am going to stay with it. I am not letting it go.

The Congressional Gold Medal for the enslaved, I will not let it go.

Removing Mr. Russell's name, I will not let it go.

Establishing a department of reconciliation, I won't let it go.

The question is: Will others find it within their hearts and their spirits to take a similar stance? I pray that they will.

I close with this, Mr. Speaker: We persons of African ancestry have suffered, our ancestors have and are still suffering, from the indignation and humiliation associated with slavery and segregation. We are still suffering from it. We are still suffering from racism.

There are people who would say: Forget the racism.

I am not going to forget it, just like I would not want my Jewish brothers and sisters to forget the Holocaust. Don't forget the Holocaust, and I won't forget slavery.

We are still suffering, and we are suffering because of what I indicated initially.

Why were we brought to this country? When I say ``we,'' I am talking about my foreparents. Why were they brought to this country? They were brought here to be: permanent, remember, 240 years of slavery is evidence of it, centuries; identifiable, they wanted people of color because they could spot them easily; powerless, no power, not recognized, the law recognizes no rights for you as they relate to persons who are Anglo; subservient, always servile, always humble, always ready to serve, pleading with the master, ``Give me something that I may do for you, master''; and caste, the difference between caste and class, remember, class is a socioeconomic condition. Caste is usually hereditary. You are born into it, you live it, and you die.

We are still suffering from this original reason that enslaved persons were brought to this country. Nevertheless, I believe that we can bend the arc of the moral universe toward justice for African Americans and all other persons who suffer from invidious discrimination.

I believe it. I believe we can achieve it. I just know that we have to work hard to get it done.

Mr. Speaker, I am grateful for the time. I am proud to have stood here, and I proudly move forward with the conscience agenda that I have called to the attention of our country. God bless you, Mr. Speaker, and God bless the United States of America.

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

And still I rise, Mr. Speaker, proud to be an American. Why shouldn't I? My foreparents suffered 240-plus years of slavery to make it great. I am proud to stand in the House of Representatives today as a liberated Democrat, unbought, unbossed, and unafraid.

Today, as a liberated Democrat, I will address two issues. Both relate to votes that I have taken. The first issue that I will address deals with affirming the state of Palestine's right to exist. The second issue that I will address will deal with my having voted ``present'' in the case of the expulsion of Mr. Santos.

With reference to the state of Palestine's right to exist, I am proud to tell you that on Tuesday of this week, we took a vote. Mr. Speaker, that vote on Tuesday of this week related to the State of Israel's right to exist. I believe that Israel has a right to exist. I believe in and support Israel's right to exist. I support Israel. I have done so since I have been in this Congress. Since I have been here, we have voted on more than $50 billion in support to Israel. You will find that I have voted for all the help to Israel.

I have spoken on the floor in support of Israel, and I think that my record is very clear on where I stand when it comes to the State of Israel and its right to exist. I voted for the resolution. It was reaffirming Israel's right to exist. I voted for it. I, in voting for it, realized that it did not have something that I thought we ought to have, and that is a statement indicating that Palestine has a right to exist.

Palestine has been there, the inhabitants. In 1948, when the U.N. decided that it would, by way of resolution, recognize two states in the area, the area referred to was Palestine. I believe that Palestine, with Palestinians, has a right to exist, as well.

Today, I will file the resolution that I shall read. This resolution is one that affirms the state of Palestine's right to exist.

Now, I understand that Palestine is not a state currently, and I address that in the resolution. This is not calling for an immediate styling or having Palestine become a state. That is not what the resolution is about. It is recognizing the right to become a state.

In this Congress, we have said that there should be a solution to the concerns related to Israel and Palestine, and it is a two-state solution that we have talked about.

The President of the United States has said that there should be a two-state solution. I believe that there should be a two-state solution. If there is going to be a two-state solution, and if we are going to fund Palestine and Israel as we have--we have sent many dollars in humanitarian aid to Palestine--and if we are going to continue

to do this, and if I am going to continue to vote for these funds, I want Congress to be on record saying that there ought to be a State of Israel and that we can have a state for Palestinians, as well.

I shall file the resolution, and I shall file it immediately after I finish this statement about Palestine as well as about my vote of ``present'' on Mr. Santos for his expulsion.

First, let's talk about Palestine. Here is a resolution. It reads:

Affirming the state of Palestine's right to exist. In the House of Representatives, Mr. Green of Texas submitted the following resolution, which was referred to a proper committee.

The resolution itself reads:

Affirming the state of Palestine's right to exist.

Whereas, this resolution may be cited as the original resolution affirming the state of Palestine's right to exist;

Whereas, the people, the Palestinian people, are inhabitants of the land of Palestine;

Whereas, in 1947, the United Nations General Assembly passed Resolution 181, which called for the partition of Palestine into Arab and Jewish states.

I may have said 1948 earlier. This corrects my earlier statement.

Whereas, on May 14, 1948, President Harry Truman issued a statement recognizing Israel as an independent state; and

Whereas, on November 28, 2023, the House of Representatives agreed to H. Res. 888 reaffirming the State of Israel's right to exist by a vote of 412 ``yeas,'' 1 ``nay,'' and 1 ``present.''

I voted for the resolution. I believe Israel has a right to exist. I believe that the House of Representatives should be on record indicating that Israel has a right to exist.

Continuing: Now, therefore, be it resolved that the House of Representatives affirms Palestine's right to exist and at a future time--important words, ``and at a future time''--to become a nation- state.

Some things bear repeating: Resolved that the House of Representatives affirms Palestine's right to exist and at a future time to become a nation-state.

If we believe in a two-state solution, then we want to have this resolution approved by the House of Representatives. We believe that Israel has a right to exist as a nation-state. We say we want a two- state solution. This but only codifies what we say.

The President of the United States has said there should be a two- state solution. You can't have a two-state solution without at some point recognizing the fact that Palestine has to be one of the two states.

Again: Resolved that the House of Representatives affirms Palestine's right to exist and at a future time to become a nation-state.

That was number one.

Number two: Recognizes the two-state solution as the only solution that will secure a lasting peace in the region.

Number three: Rejects calls for Palestine's destruction.

Just as we reject calls to have Israel destroyed, we should reject calls to have Palestine destroyed or the notion of a Palestinian state to become a nonexistent notion.

I believe this resolution is going to make a difference. I am going to file this resolution. I believe that the resolution ought to go to the proper committee. I will ask the chairperson of the proper committee to bring the resolution to a vote within the committee or to process it out of the committee. I will leave it to the chair and the ranking member to make the decisions as to how this will work.

I want it to come to the floor for a vote. I would like to see it have the opportunity to come to the floor for a vote with the same level of expediency that the resolution supporting Israel's right to exist had in coming to the floor to a vote. There was expediency exerted. There was expediency that allowed that resolution to get to the floor not within months, not within weeks, but within days. I ask that this resolution receive the same level of respect.

We have to respect Israel's right to exist, and we have to respect Palestine's right to exist. Both have the right to exist. The resolution makes it possible for the Congress to go on record.

I also believe this. Aside from filing the resolution, I believe that there are three things that have to happen for Palestine to become a state. The first thing that has to happen is there has to be a recognition that Palestine is a state, obviously, but by the House of Representatives, that it should become a state by the House of Representatives. Number one, Palestine has to become a state, and the House of Representatives has to recognize this right for Palestine to become a state.

Number two, I think that the Israelis should recognize Palestine's right to become a state, but I don't think that we have to allow them to determine whether Palestine should become a state. I think that Palestinians have the right to have statehood without having the Israelis determine that they should become a state.

Number three, just as in 1948 when President Truman recognized Israel as a state without the consent of the Palestinians, I believe that a President of the United States can recognize Palestine as a state without the consent of Israel. I don't think Israel has to give its consent for Palestine to become a state. Just as we recognized Israel without Palestinians giving their consent, we can do the same thing for Palestine without Israel giving its consent. I believe that Palestine has a right to become a state, and I don't believe that Israel has the right to veto the Palestinian's right to become a state.

I will file this resolution, which will put the House on record. If the House goes on record, I will continue my efforts to push for a two- state solution as a resolution to the concerns between the Palestinians and the Israelis.

On the Matter of the Expulsion of George Santos

Mr. Speaker, now, to my second point, the issue related to Mr. Santos.

I voted ``present'' today. Let's look at what the vote count was. The vote count was 311 ``yeas,'' 114 ``nays,'' 2 ``present,'' and 8 persons not voting.

I am proud of my vote. I am proud to say that I voted ``present.''

It is not unusual for me to stand alone. I know that it takes a certain type of courage to stand alone. I pray that I will continue to have that type of courage because I believe that the House has made a mistake today in going on record and expelling Mr. Santos from Congress.

I believe it was a mistake because I believe that the process itself will now lend itself to whatever 290 persons believe to be a reason to expel a person, that becomes a reason for a person to be expelled. Whatever 290 persons can agree on, you can now expel a person. I don't think that that process is a fair and just process.

Let me continue by saying this. Yes, the House had every right to do what it did. Yes, constitutionally, the House had the right to do what it did. Constitutionally, it did, yes.

Yes. So it is not about whether I differ with the Constitution or differ with whether the House had a right to do this. I believe that we have the right to do things, but I believe also that there are better ways to do things, and there are some ways that we should not do things.

Prior to today, it has been said many times, that five persons have been expelled--two for having committed crimes and three for having been associated with the Confederacy and its rebellion against the Union, the United States.

I think that what we have done today opens ourselves up to having persons expelled for things that a good many people are not going to agree with. Let me explain.

To expel a person without a bifurcated system, in my opinion, is a mistake. Impeachment has a bifurcated system. The House indicts by way of impeaching, and then after impeaching, the Senate has the trial to convict or not. Impeachment itself is not bifurcated, the process to remove the President from office is bifurcated. Impeachment is one part of that process. That is the function of the House.

The process then provides that if you want to continue and remove, you have to get the consent of the Senate. That is the bifurcated process to remove a President from office.

I think we ought to have a bifurcated process--notwithstanding our right not to. I think we ought to have a bifurcated process to remove a person from Congress.

There is only one way for a person to get to the Congress of the United States of America, unlike the Senate, where you can get appointed. With the Congress, you have to be voted in by the people. That is why this is the people's House. This House belongs to the people of the United States of America, and membership herein belongs to the people of the United States of America.

In the infinite wisdom of those who were the codifiers and the writers of the Constitution, they have given us the authority to remove people. We can do it. I just happen to disagree with the way we are doing it. By doing it this way, without having the actual House of Representatives give some deference to the judicial system, we no longer have another party in the process.

We, in fact, now have become the investigators, the judges, the jury, and the prosecutors. We have every right to do that. I don't quarrel with anyone who would say to me, as a retort, well, we have the right to do it. We have every right to do it.

The question is: should we do this?

I don't think so. I think it was a mistake. I think that at some point in the future we are going to see the error of our ways. This decision is going to haunt us. You cannot appeal a decision of the House of Representatives, which is why we ought to have the judicial system involved.

If a person commits a crime, it is brought to our attention, there is a conviction, it comes from the judiciary, and we then act on that conviction. We have now a second party involved in the process such that that party can deliberate and make a decision without the House of Representatives having influenced that decision. I think that is a fair way to remove people from the House of Representatives.

I don't think that we should do it with the House being the investigators, the judge, the jury, and the prosecutor. I believe that justice itself would be better served if we used the system that we have been using. Utilizing the system that we have put into place today I think is going to create some serious concerns for us in the future.

What can we do?

We can impose sanctions. We can remove persons from their committee assignments. We can publish our findings. We can allow the citizens-- which every 2 years they have the opportunity to determine who will serve them--allow them to have the vote and let them determine whether or not they want a person--that I might deem unfit to serve--give them the opportunity to do so.

I think that a bifurcated system works better than the system that we have now installed in the House of Representatives.

I believe, given the history of my country that I love--again, I love it because my foreparents suffered for 240 years as enslaved persons. We built it. We made it great with the economic foundation of mothers and fathers. Yes, I love my country.

I also understand that my country is not always fair to people of color. It hasn't been. To this day there are times when it still is not. I think people of color are going to regret having cast that vote because we are the most vulnerable--we are the most vulnerable in this country.

Let me say this: we are among the most vulnerable because I recognize that there are other persons who are vulnerable, as well. We are among the most vulnerable in this country. Among the most vulnerable. There are others who are vulnerable, as well. I don't want to disrespect the truth.

I know that we suffer because I understand how we got here and why we were brought here. We were brought here to be permanent--240 years of slavery is evidence of the desire to have permanency. We were brought here to be permanent subservient--with no power. Subservient. Having the mindset of a person who wants to serve and wants to please.

A permanent subservient. Powerless. There was a desire that we never have the power that we have today. I am grateful for the way the country has metamorphosed to this point. I am sorry it took so long. I regret that there was ever an institution of slavery. A permanent, subservient, powerless cast of people.

I would also add this: identifiable. Identifiable, permanent, subservient, powerless cast of people. Identifiable. There is your evidence. Identifiable. Subservient--240 years, plus, of slavery. A powerless, subservient cast.

Born into slavery. Died as a slave. That 240 years has not been erased. No, we don't have slavery in the country today, but we still have some minds that have not metamorphosed into the future. We have some people who still disrespect people of African ancestry.

They disrespect people of African ancestry as evidenced by certain things they do or choose not to do. Disrespect. Disrespect because they will respect people who rebelled against the country, who fought to maintain slavery, who were in the Confederacy, they respect them.

In 1956, this Congress gave them a Congressional Gold Medal, the enslavers, the Confederate soldiers. To this day, the Congress doesn't have the respect that it should have for the enslaved. No Congressional Gold Medal for the enslaved. The Congressional Gold Medal is for the enslavers.

The Russell Senate Office Building is Disrespectful to People of Color

Mr. Speaker, persons of color suffer greatly in this country. Disrespect. Disrespect because right across the street there is a building, the Russell Senate Office Building, that disrespects people of color.

Richard Russell was a self-proclaimed white supremacist. He was a Senator who fought the Voting Rights Act and voting rights in general. He was a Senator who was a coauthor of the Southern Manifesto. He was a racist and a bigot.

His name is on the building. We have been asking now for a long time that his name be removed from the building. We find that the Senate, in its wisdom, has not done so. That is disrespecting people of color. Yes, we are among the most disrespected in this country.

There is evidence and the Senate could remove Russell's name from that building tomorrow if they wanted to. It is not a question of whether there is a way, it is a question of whether they have the will. I marvel at how Senators' offices are in a building named after a racist and a bigot. I don't go into the Russell Senate Office Building. I respect myself enough to stay out of the Russell Senate Office Building.

Those Senators, they decide the timeline. Until they decide that it should be removed, it won't be removed. It will be removed. When it is removed, I am going to acknowledge it and be grateful for it. I will tell them that it took too long. It is just taking too long. Why?

They claim they can't remove a racist's name from a building paid for by taxpayer dollars because they can't agree on a new name. We have solved that problem. Simply call it what it was before it became the Russell Senate Office Building, and that was the Old Senate Office Building.

Let it become the Old Senate Office Building. Then take as much time as you like to conclude that it should have some worthy person's name. I have no name to offer. I only want that you do justice by Black people the same way you do justice by other people.

The same way you make an issue of an injustice against others. Make the same about television time available to criticize the Richard Russell Office Building and the name being on it. It is a symbol of national shame.

Why is it that CNN, MSNBC, FOX, all of them, why have they not made a big to-do of it?

One of the reasons may be because they report the news from the Russell Senate Office Building. Yes, they are all located right there near the rotunda where Richard Russell has a statue in his honor.

The Richard Russell Office Building is a symbol of national shame, and the news outlets ought to be ashamed of themselves to tolerate it and then participate in it--to participate in the perpetuation of the maintenance of the name on the building. They ought to be ashamed of themselves.

Yes, people of color are among the most disrespected. Yes, we are.

That is why I am concerned about this vote that we have taken today. It is because we are among the most disrespected that I am not sure our transgressions are going to be judged the same as the transgression of a person of a different hue. I believe that a

person of a different hue can get a better decision than a person of color in this country.

We see it all the time in the courts of the country. I was a judge of a small claims court for one-quarter of a century. I was a litigator. I saw the injustices as they took place that I could do nothing about. This is an injustice that is in its infancy.

Nevertheless, Mr. Speaker, I warn you that you are going to see the injustice take place. You will see it. Maybe what I am saying today will help to prevent it. I doubt it. I doubt it.

There are some Members that I am very much concerned about now that this vote has been taken. I am very much concerned about them because there are people here who would want to remove them from office if they could without having committed a crime because of positions that they have taken, policy positions. That would be an injustice.

So, I am proud of my vote. I voted the way I voted for reasons that I have called to your attention, Mr. Speaker, but a review does not hurt.

One, Mr. Speaker, the only way you get here is if the people elect you. You can't be appointed to the House of Representatives. It is the people's House. The people send us, and the people ought to remove us unless we have committed a crime and been adjudicated as such by a proper court.

Two, the decisions are not appealable. There is no appeal from our decision.

Three, the process itself is not bifurcated any longer when it comes to removal from the House of Representatives. Prior to today, it was bifurcated, and the judicial system would have the opportunity to judge a person and determine whether the person was guilty of a crime. Finding such, that could then be used by the House of Representatives to expel the person.

We have taken the judicial system completely out of the process. We have become judge, jury, prosecutors, and investigators.

The truth is, whatever 290 of us can agree on, then that is a reason to expel a person. If 290 of us can agree on a reason, then that is it. Given the way we have entrenched ourselves now into teams, I don't favor the consequences that I can foresee.

We have allowed ourselves now to become, unfortunately, a House of Representatives where this discord is no longer just a difference of opinion about policy. It has become a means by which we can come to the floor to remove a person from office, a person who was sent here by people who voted. I am much afraid for what we are going to have to regret because of what we will do as time progresses.

So, I shall now move to the well of the House and file my resolution affirming the state of Palestine's right to exist. I have read it to you, Mr. Speaker. Some Members may be tuning in late, so I will read it again. This is the resolution.

I voted for Israel's right to exist on Tuesday of this week. I think we ought to vote similarly for Palestine to have a right to exist, as well.

It reads:

Affirming the state of Palestine's right to exist.

Whereas, this resolution may be cited as the Original Resolution Affirming the State of Palestine's Right to Exist;

Whereas, Palestinian people are inhabitants of the land of Palestine;

Whereas, in 1947, the United Nations General Assembly passed Resolution 181, which called for the partition of Palestine into Arab and Jewish states;

Whereas, on May 14, 1948, President Harry Truman issued a statement recognizing Israel as an independent state.

Mr. Speaker, I support Israel as an independent state. That is not here. I support Israel as an independent state. This is a sidebar comment. I have supported it. I will continue to support it.

I supported Israel by voting for more than $50 billion in funds, but I did it because I thought we were moving toward a two-state solution. I did it because I thought a two-state solution was the will and the desire of the House of Representatives.

I have reached a point now where I have to know. That is what I thought. Passage of the resolution will give me the certainty I need. The absence of the passage of the resolution will cause me to have a great deal of consternation about how I am going to approach votes in the future.

To continue:

Whereas, on November 28, 2023, the House of Representatives agreed to H. Res. 888, reaffirming the State of Israel's right to exist--I voted for it, and I would vote for it again and again and again if given the opportunity--by a vote of 412 ``yeas,'' 1 ``nay,'' and 1 ``present.''

Now, therefore, be it resolved, that the House of Representatives, one, affirms Palestine's right to exist and at a future time to become a state.

Mr. Speaker, I accentuated at a future time because I am making it clear to those who would make the argument that this is about saying that Palestine should become a state today. That is not what I am saying. ``At a future time''--I don't know when in the future, but I do believe that we ought to have that as our goal since we have stated that we want a two-state solution.

Number two, recognizes the two-state solution as the only solution that will secure a lasting peace in the region.

Mr. Speaker, I believe this. There are some people who want a one- state solution. They mouth ``two state,'' but in their hearts, they want one state. I am not one of them. What I say is what I mean.

Those Members who say they want a two-state solution and really want a one-state solution, well, this is not for them. This is for people who want a two-state solution.

Number three, rejects calls for Palestine's destruction.

Mr. Speaker, there will be people who will say that nobody is calling for Palestine's destruction. They are wrong. I was on C-SPAN just this week, and there was a caller who called in and who literally, by virtue of the way he presented his argument, wanted to see the destruction of Palestine, the destruction of Palestine. I am not for that. I am not for that. I am not for what is happening with the destruction of Palestine currently. For us to conclude that it is okay to destroy Palestine is an absurdity.

How could we possibly approve of the destruction that we see and the lives that are being taken? How could we approve of that? I don't approve of it. If others can approve of it, the killing of babies, I don't approve of it.

Yes, you have a right to defend yourself, but you have to do it in a just fashion. To perform, if you will, an unjust act in the name of justice is still an injustice. You cannot clean it up by saying it is a just act. Your actions themselves speak for you.

Killing babies is not a just act, especially when you have declared war on Hamas and you end up killing Palestinian babies. It was wrong to kill Israeli babies. What Hamas did was dastardly. The way they did it, it is impossible to even imagine a human being doing it, but you can't complain about killing innocent Israeli babies and then decide: Well, it is okay. The Palestinian babies are just collateral damage. They just happened to be in the wrong place.

What is wrong with us? I will not support the killing of these Palestinian babies. I will not support the destruction of Gaza. I pray that this country will come to its senses.

How long can this go on?

Mr. Speaker, I am always honored to have this opportunity. I don't know how much longer I will have it. There are a lot of people who don't like what I say who have the power to change rules.

As you have seen today, Mr. Speaker, they can change the rules. So, I never know when I will be giving my last speech from this podium, but as long as I have the opportunity to give a speech, I am going to speak truth to power, but more than that, I am going to speak truth about power.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise supportive of the general sense of this resolution, affirming the position of the United States that a nuclear Islamic Republic of Iran poses an unacceptable threat to international peace. The evidence provided by the International Atomic Energy Agency and our own national assessments have consistently indicated that Iran's nuclear aspirations are of grave concern.

However, while supporting some of the goals of this resolution, I believe that it is imperative to make clear that my commitment to ``using all means necessary'' and allowing the ``freedom of action'' referenced in this resolution does not alter the constitutional responsibility and power of Congress alone to declare war. Further, as it relates to me, the resolution does not translate to a carte blanche for actions that violate long-standing principles of international law. Lastly, my vote for the resolution is not a vote to authorize the executive branch to take any military action.

No nation or entity should conclude that my vote for the resolution evidences my support of any actions in which they may engage.

In advancing this resolution, let us not only signal our unwavering commitment to preventing a nuclear Iran, but also our steadfast dedication to upholding the rules of constitutional and international law. These principles, which regulate behavior between nations during peace and war, are the bedrock of global diplomacy and security. It is in this adherence to law that our strength and a peaceful future truly lies.

Mr. Speaker, and still I rise, cognizant of the urgency of the situation in the Middle East and the spirit in which this resolution has been put forth.

As we conscientiously denounce the horrific crimes against humanity committed by Hamas, let us remember our ultimate goal of peace, the need for diplomacy, as well as our commitment to a two-state solution. I regret that the vision of peace between Israel and Palestine by way of a two-state solution is not referenced in the resolution. I sincerely believe that this non-inclusion risks conveying an incomplete representation of our nation's long-standing position on this pressing matter at a critical time in our history. The situation in Israel and Palestine is highly sensitive, and our response should denounce the violation of human rights, while supporting Israeli and Palestinian victims. Omitting such judicious principled concepts from our resolution could inadvertently give the erroneous impression that we have abandoned the Palestinians as well as the two-state solution to peace. I called these issues to the attention of the Foreign Affairs Committee in a letter delivered to the committee on October 12, 2023.

To this end and because I had no hand in drafting the resolution, I propose that we amend the resolution under consideration to include the following: ``Whereas the U.S. House of Representatives desires lasting peace between Israel and Palestine.'', ``Whereas the two-state solution has and continues to be the best path to lasting peace.'', ``Whereas we mourn the deaths and suffering of babies as well as innocent Palestinian and Israeli people of all ages.'', ``Whereas our support for humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian babies and innocent civilian Palestinian people is a necessity.'', and ``Resolved that the House of Representatives desires a two-state solution that leads to peace between Israel and Palestine.''

The resolution without these principle points will lead me, as a matter of conscience, to not vote ``yea.'' I realize that on this vote I may stand alone. However, on votes of conscience I believe it is better to stand alone than not stand at all.

As we witness the calls for war, let us remember our moral imperative to stand for peace at the genesis of war. Doing so will make clear our unwavering commitment to not only Israel's defense but also to the ultimate vision of peace that we all wish to see materialize in the region.

Madam Speaker, and still I rise, a proud, liberated Democrat in the spirit of Shirley Chisholm, unbought, unbossed, and unafraid--unafraid to say that the Senate of the United States of America cares more about what they wear to work than the building they work in.

There was a recent kerfuffle about the dress code in the Senate. As a result, some 40 Senators--in fact, about 46--signed a letter addressing this newly installed dress code. I won't read it in its entirety because time doesn't permit, but here is what it says in one paragraph: ``Allowing casual clothing on the Senate floor disrespects the institution we serve and the American families we represent.''

No disrespect, Senators, but I believe allowing Richard Russell's name to stay on the Russell Senate Office Building disrespects the people you serve and disrespects this country. The Richard Russell Senate Office Building is a symbol of racism. It is a symbol of disrespect for the American people, and it certainly disrespects people of African ancestry because Richard Russell was a racist and a bigot.

Richard Russell was the coauthor of the ``Southern Manifesto.'' Richard Russell fought antilynching legislation. Richard Russell's name should not be on a building paid for with taxpayer dollars.

It is time for you to take the same amount of time that you took to reform your dress code and reform the name that is on the Richard Russell

Senate Office Building. It is easy to do. Just let it revert back to the name it had before it became the Russell Senate Office Building. Let it become the Old Senate Office Building.

If you need more time, take ad infinitum and decide the name that you most prefer. I have no name to recommend. I only recommend that you take Russell's name off. It took less than 2 weeks to revert back to the old dress code. It has been more than 50 years that Richard Russell's name has been on this building.

Have you no shame, Senators? Do you not respect the people of African ancestry who go in and out of this building? I refuse to enter the Richard Russell Senate Office Building. I am a one-person protest. I refuse to disrespect myself by entering a building named after a bigot and racist who authored the ``Southern Manifesto'' and fought antilynching legislation.