Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, the Constitution recognizes that there are limits that can be placed on the long arm of the law. The long arm of the law has limitations when it comes to speech. The long arm of the law has limitations when it comes to religion. And the long arm of the law has limitations in terms of how far it can extend into a women's womb.

This bill checks the long arm of the law so that it does not extend too far into a women's womb.

Mr. Speaker, and still I rise, a proud, liberated Democrat unbought and unbossed in the spirit of Shirley Chisholm.

And I rise today with a very simple message: Black lives still matter. It doesn't matter who is in power, Black lives matter. The circumstances haven't changed. Black lives matter wherever they happen to be. They matter in Haiti, and they matter at the southern border.

Mr. Speaker, what you see here is despicable and reprehensible. This is what is happening at the southern border, persons on horses lashing out apparently at persons who are from Haiti. Black lives still matter, and it is important to note that these persons, when they are rounded up apparently and sent back to Haiti, are given $50, a phone card and some food. Many of these persons haven't been to Haiti in over a decade--over 10 years--and they are given $50, a phone card, and some food.

Black lives matter. This has got to change. This is why I have introduced H. Res. 670. It condemns the actions that we have seen at the border; it condemns the actions. It doesn't condemn the people; it condemns the actions. I have some personal thoughts about the behavior of the people and the people themselves, but this resolution condemns these actions. I believe all people of goodwill should find these actions abhorrent and deplorable.

I also believe that those who tolerate injustice--this is an injustice--those who tolerate injustice perpetuate injustice.

I am asking that H. Res. 670 be brought to the floor of this House so that this House can go on record as opposing what we have seen at the border that is inhumane. We ought to go on record opposing this.

We have gone on record opposing things that have been said by people who are within the House and without the House. This House has gone on record when we have had these seminal moments in time. This is another seminal moment in time that requires some time on the floor of this House to show the world that we stand for justice and that this injustice should not stand.

Finally, I indicated that when they are deported to Haiti they receive $50, some food, and a phone card. But here is something that I find appalling as well: Haitians have been given temporary protected status in this country. Mr. Speaker, if you were here at a certain time prior to a certain time, you were given temporary protected status. Well, we are sending people who are Haitians back to Haiti who haven't been there in 10 years, but there are others who will stay because we are saying that the conditions are not acceptable to send people back to Haiti. That contradiction has to be reconciled. We shouldn't be sending people to Haiti when we said that Haiti is not safe for us to send Haitians to.

Mr. Speaker, Black lives still matter. It doesn't matter who is in power, Mr. Speaker. Circumstances don't change, and until they change, a liberated Democrat is going to continue to say that we must be a part of that change.

I pray that we will have H. Res. 670 brought to the floor so that we can show the world that we believe Black lives matter.

Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 283.

Members Recorded Pursuant to House Resolution 8, 117th Congress

Babin (Nehls)

Boyle, Brendan F. (Jeffries)

Carter (TX) (Calvert)

DeFazio (Brown)

DeSaulnier (Thompson (CA))

Escobar (Garcia (TX))

Frankel, Lois (Clark (MA))

Fulcher (Johnson (OH))

Grijalva (Garcia (IL))

Higgins (NY) (Tonko)

Issa (Calvert)

Johnson (TX) (Jeffries)

Kim (NJ) (Underwood)

Kirkpatrick (Levin (CA))

Latta (Walberg)

Lawson (FL) (Evans)

McEachin (Wexton)

McHenry (Banks)

Meng (Jeffries)

Morelle (Tonko)

Napolitano (Correa)

Payne (Wasserman Schultz)

Porter (Wexton)

Reschenthaler (Meuser)

Rice (SC) (Timmons)

Rush (Underwood)

Ryan (Kildee)

Sewell (Cicilline)

Stanton (Levin (CA))

Stefanik (Miller-Meeks)

Strickland (Torres (NY))

Swalwell (Veasey)

Vela (Correa)

Wagner (Walorski)

Wilson (FL) (Hayes)

Amendment No. 40 Offered by Ms. Ocasio-Cortez

Mr. Speaker, and still I rise, Mr. Speaker, and I rise tonight to preview a resolution that I hope to present to the entirety of the Congress for a vote. It is H. Res. 670.

I rise tonight to present this resolution because of what I have seen, by way of television, at the southern border. What I have seen is more than deplorable, more than horrific. For me, it is inhumane. And here is the resolution that I hope to have my colleagues give consideration to.

Resolution condemning the inhumane treatment of Haitian migrants at the southern border of the United States.

Whereas, some U.S. Customs--might I pause to indicate that we should accentuate the word some, not all, not all U.S. customs agents are engaged in this abhorrent behavior, this inhumane behavior. Not all. I would never say all. I would never intend all.

I am in Congress today, I believe, because of an uncle who was a deputy sheriff, and he was a person that I had great respect for, great admiration for, and he proclaimed when I was a very young child that I would be a lawyer. I didn't know what a lawyer was but, because of the respect that I had for him and the belief that he was right, I wanted to be a lawyer. And from that moment forward, from being a young child, less than 10 years of age, I wanted to be a lawyer. Hence, I went to law school and, by fortuitous circumstance, I happened to have been associated with a professor at the law school who was running for public office, which caused me to find my way into politics.

So I owe a lot to just a sentence, a statement from someone who was engaged in law enforcement that I had great respect for.

So, whereas, some U.S. Customs Border Patrol agents, not all, have treated Haitian migrants inhumanely, charging them on horseback, while using reins as lashes; now, therefore, be it resolved that the House of Representatives condemns and denounces the actions of those Customs and Border Patrol agents.

Note that I said of ``those'' Customs and Border Patrol agents, only the ones who engaged in this despicable behavior.

Resolved that the House of Representatives condemns and denounces the actions of those Customs and Border Patrol agents who confronted some, not all of the Haitians, but some Haitian migrants on horseback, using their reins as lashes.

I believe that the same House that has condemned its Members for conduct thought to be unbecoming; the same House that has condemned the behavior of people who are not associated with this House; it has been done. I believe that this same House should condemn the conduct of these agents, the conduct, what they did. Their conduct should be condemned.

Now, why do I take such a strong position?

I take such a strong position, because I know what injustice looks like. I have had persons in my lifetime to do some very ugly things and require some ugly things of me.

I was required to sit in the back of the bus. I know what injustice looks like.

I know what it tastes like. I had to drink from filthy, colored water fountains. White water fountain; colored water fountain. White water fountain; pristine, clean. Colored water fountain; filthy. But that is what I was relegated to.

I know what it smells like. I had to go into necessary facilities. That is what we call it in the law, but a necessary facility is nothing more than a toilet. And I was forced to go into these filthy toilets. And this is where I would have to wash my hands in a filthy facility with water that sometimes was colored in its own being. It was brown.

So I know what it looks like; I know what it tastes like; I know what it smells like. But I also know what it hurts like.

I know what it is like to be required to leave a seat so that someone else could take a seat. I know what that feels like. I know what it feels like to have to step off the sidewalk to let other persons pass. This was the segregated south that I grew up in.

I am a son of the segregated south. The rights and privileges that the Constitution recognized for me, my neighbors in the segregated south denied me. So I know what injustice is like.

I also know what invidious discrimination is like, but tonight let's just talk about injustice. And because I know what it looks like, I also know how it behaves.

Injustice is not static, it is dynamic. It is like this pandemic. It is like the virus. It can metamorphose.

Do not assume that the injustice inflicted upon some today will not be inflicted upon others tomorrow. Do not assume that injustice will only find its way to those who look like me. Injustice has a way of metamorphosing into a hate that can consume all of us.

With this understanding, I want to just share some of what I see as I reflect on what happened at the border.

This is something that I believe to be relevant, in that this is a depiction of where Black people were at one time in this country. If you will look to the far end of this picture, it is actually a portrait, if you will. You will see a person on a horse, and he has a whip and he seems to be screaming, and he seems to be about to use this whip; he is about to lash this person who is between him and another person on a horse.

Now, what is to be noticed about this is that the person who is on foot, this person seems to have his hands in a position of surrender; doesn't have a weapon; doesn't seem to be a threat to men on horses.

And if you will note, there is a rope that has him tethered to the horse or the man in front of it.

And if you will note, look at his eyes, if you can see his eyes. He has a look of regret and sorrow. He has a look of a person who wishes that he could somehow express something that would cause his condition to subside. He seems to be pleading with the person in front of him, possibly realizing what is about to happen as a result of what the person behind him will do.

This is a sad commentary on our country. It is a sad commentary on what the United States of America was. It is a sad commentary. It is something we don't like to discuss. We don't want to acknowledge, we don't want it taught in our schools that this is the truth about a bygone era in this country.

But you can't escape the truth. Truth crushed to Earth will rise again. This is a sad commentary.

Let's move forward.

By the way, the prior depiction was from 1817.

This depiction occurred at the Edmund Pettus Bridge. All in Congress are aware of the Edmund Pettus Bridge because the Honorable John Lewis was here, and we all know his story of what happened at the Edmund Pettus Bridge.

John Lewis and I were friends. The Honorable John Lewis and I were friends. We went to jail together several times. We talked to each other while we were in jail. John Lewis was in jail the same as he was with us. He was a wonderful, marvelous person, and I miss him. I believe we do, all of us.

But I remember him explaining how you cannot tolerate injustice. You can't. Those who tolerate injustice perpetuate injustice. Some things bear repeating. Those who tolerate injustice perpetuate injustice.

This gathering at the Edmund Pettus Bridge was about people who were no longer going to tolerate injustice. They made their minds up.

If you have ever been to the Edmund Pettus Bridge, and if you haven't been there, you should go. The Edmund Pettus Bridge has a crest such that when you initially approach it, you can't readily see what lies on the other side. You don't know what your fate is, if there is something that would harm you on the other side.

When you march across the Edmund Pettus Bridge and you reach that crest, you can see what your fate is, if there are persons of ill will waiting for you.

These marchers, on what is known now as Bloody Sunday, were marching up the Edmund Pettus Bridge from Selma to Montgomery. They had no weapons. They had no means of defending themselves against persons who had clubs. But their fate, they saw. Yet, they marched on. As they were confronted by the constabulary, they marched on.

I have often thought, if they had resisted and put up a fight, would Bloody Sunday have the same representation, the same meaning that it has now because when these images were shown around the world, it gave a President the opportunity to take some affirmative action to bring about significant change.

But this is what was happening on Bloody Sunday. You see, there are men on horses. These men on horses are moving toward the Edmund Pettus Bridge, which you can see in the distance, and you can see that there are other men moving this way. In here, you have peaceful protesters, just marching.

This is a representation that a good many persons of African ancestry have indelibly printed within their memory. Bloody Sunday changed our lives because there were people who were willing to make great sacrifices so that we could confront injustice, not tolerate it. They didn't tolerate it.

Now, let's fast-forward. This is a depiction, a true and accurate depiction, I believe, of what I have seen televised and of what happened at our southern border.

If you didn't have to sit in the back of the bus, if you didn't have to step off the sidewalk to let others pass, if you have never had a cross burned--I say ``in my honor''--but burned in your yard, you may not see what I see. You may see agents doing their job, trying to make sure that people who are invading our country are prevented from invading our country. This is what you may see.

But I believe people of goodwill, regardless of who, when people of goodwill see this, people of goodwill are of the opinion that this is an injustice. I don't believe that people of goodwill who never have experienced what I have experienced and seen these other representations, I don't believe that people of goodwill can see a means by which we can justify this kind of behavior.

This is behavior that we cannot tolerate in a country that pledges allegiance to liberty and justice for all. You can't tolerate this in a country that requires in some places respect for the flag. I believe that you can respect the flag if you choose to. But there are some places in the country where people want to require--maybe I should say ``want to require'' you to respect the flag. I believe you respect the flag because you respect what it stands for.

I say the Pledge of Allegiance. You cannot tag me as a flag burner, but I respect those who want to burn it. You have every right to do so, and I will respect your right to burn it. But I am not a flag burner. I believe in the country and what it stands for, the ideals of this country.

If you believe in the ideals of liberty and justice for all--not all who were born here, by the way, but all, regardless of your race, creed, color, or your place of origin. This is what this country stands for. If you stand for this, there is no way you can tolerate this.

If you stand for we the people, if you stand for a more perfect Union, you can't tolerate this. It can't just be another thing that happened and let's go on with our lives.

I am not a person who believes that we should simply live and let live. I am not a live-and-let-liver. Live and let live, to me, means I live my life; you live your life; I am not going to get in your way and don't you get in my way. That is not my philosophy.

I believe in live and help live. If I see someone in harm's way, I believe I have a duty, a moral obligation, a moral imperative, to do what I can to help that person in harm's way.

These persons are in harm's way. We have a moral imperative to help these persons. That is why I am presenting this resolution. It is a part of a moral imperative.

To be very honest with you, I hope every Member will vote for it. I hope the leadership will allow it to come to the floor. To be very honest, to be totally, completely, and absolutely honest, if no one votes for it, I am going to present it.

I have a responsibility, and I am going to live up to my responsibility. I didn't come here to just get along so that I could move along.

We have a moral imperative to be helpful. Let me expound upon this imperative for just a second or two.

There is something called TPS, temporary protective status. TPS has been accorded to Haitians who are residents in the country prior to a certain date. TPS means that we won't send them back to Haiti because we have concluded that it would not be safe for them to go back to Haiti. So, we are not sending them back.

That is TPS, except if you are at the southern border, except if you are at the southern border and you are trying to get into this country. Then we send you back, and we do so under another section of the law.

But I have to ask myself: How can we rationalize saying that it is okay to send them back, these persons, when we already have said that other persons from the same country deserve temporary protection, the temporary protective status?

Then you have to ask yourself about these people. Where are they from? Where did they come from just before getting here? Where did they come from? My guess is they didn't swim across the Gulf of Mexico a week or two before. No, the facts are that they didn't and that many of them have been living in places south of the border for years, some more than 10 years.

So, we decide that persons who are protected with TPS, not these persons, but who are going to go to a country where persons are not going to be sent because it is not safe to send them there, we decide that is where we are going to send these people who haven't been there in 10 years--not these specific people, but Haitians who are out there among the throngs of people, out there among the throngs under the bridge at the southern border. We decided we are going to send them to Haiti.

I was in a hearing just recently with the experts, the people who know. My question was: When we send people to Haiti who haven't been there in a decade, what do we give them? What kind of help do we give them?

Well, here is what we give them: a cell phone and some money, not a lot of money. At the time, there was no real answer as to how much. My guess is not a lot.

By the way, this doesn't just happen to Haitians, this sending back. Mr. Jose Escobar, who lives in my district, went to report to the authorities with his wife and child. They took him from his wife and his child, with $20 in his pocket, and sent him to El Salvador. He hadn't been to El Salvador in 15 years.

He came here by virtue of a desire to escape harm's way. His mother received TPS, brought him here as a child, about 15 years of age, but he didn't get TPS--some mixup in the paperwork. So they had been trying for years to right the wrong in terms of the mixup in paperwork.

It took 2 years to bring Mr. Escobar home. But my staff and I worked for 2 years, and I went to El Salvador myself multiple times. We brought Mr. Escobar home.

I am not giving up on the Escobars of the world, and I am not giving up on these persons. I don't know them, but I have a moral obligation to make sure that an injustice is not tolerated.

Now, let's talk about one additional thing.

I suppose I could leave this up. Maybe this person had done something wrong. I can't see why we would have this, what appears to be the reins of the horse moving in his direction.

But here is what is interesting. In all the shots that I saw, the reins were always on the side where the people were. The reins weren't off on this side. They were on the side where the people were. If you want to make the argument that they were not using reins as lashes, you can. But I find it highly coincidental--too much of a coincidence to be a coincidence--that the reins are always on the side with the people.

I think I will leave it.

Friends, these are similar moments in time, moments in time that can impact the rest of time. Tolerate this and you are not seeing the last of it. That is why I believe that we in this House should take up a resolution that condemns the actions.

I am not condemning the person. I am condemning what the person is doing. He is entitled to due process. But in the court of public opinion, and based on what my eyes see, this behavior should not be tolerated.

Someone has said, well, you need to hear his side of the story. I don't mind hearing his side of the story. But I also understand what I see.

You can explain anything away in today's culture and today's time with the mindsets that we have in this country. You can explain anything away. But I believe my eyes. You don't have to believe yours. I believe my eyes. This is wrong. This is an injustice, not something that this House should tolerate.

I have already sent the letter, I believe--as I was leaving my office, I asked my staff to send it--to leadership, asking that the resolution be heard.

It is not a privileged resolution. For those who don't know, a privileged resolution is one that does not require the consent of leadership to be brought to the floor for a vote. This is not a privileged resolution, so we have to have the consent.

It is no secret that I am making the request. I have great respect for all of the leadership in this Congress, on both sides of the aisle, but I want to let people know that I am going to ask that the resolution be voted on. It is very simple. It is not difficult to comprehend. There is nothing enigmatic about it. It is very pragmatic, in my mind's eye.

But I want it to be brought to the floor. And I want people to know that we who represent the people of this country--we who represent the people of this country will not tolerate this kind of behavior.

I believe that if we do so, we will prevent many other persons from having to suffer the same kind of injustice. I think we have a moral imperative to bring this to the floor.

I will close with this. C. A. Tindley shared these words that I will paraphrase. He reminds us that:

``Harder yet may be the fight;

right may often yield to might;

wickedness a while may reign;

Satan's cause may seem to gain.

There is a God that rules above,

with hand of power and heart of love;''

And when I am right, that God will help me fight.

Harder yet may be the fight.

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

Madam Speaker, and still I rise, as a liberated Democrat, unbought, unbossed, in the spirit of Shirley Chisholm. And I rise, not as a part-time freedom fighter, but a full-time freedom fighter. I don't do it just because it is convenient, just because it is the issue du jour. I do it because I was born into the struggle. I didn't enlist at a later time in life.

As a full-time freedom fighter, I rise today, Madam Speaker, because Black lives still matter; and they matter, Madam Speaker, wherever they happen to be. They matter, not because they happen to be in the United States. They matter if they are in Haiti. Black lives matter.

I have been to Haiti. I have seen the conditions there. We need to do something about our friends in this hemisphere. And if they matter in Haiti to me, surely they matter at the southern border.

Black lives matter wherever they are. Black lives matter regardless as to who is in power. They still matter. Changes in the power structure don't change the circumstances. And as long as the circumstances exist, Black lives still matter.

And as a 74-year old Black man, when I see men in uniforms, acting under the color of law, on horses, using the reins of the horses to do what was comparable to that which was done when you were trying to capture a runaway slave, or you were herding slaves in a given direction, Black lives matter. When I see that, I find it more than appalling. It is sinful. It is something that we cannot tolerate.

And you just can't say, well, the circumstances are so bad that we have to use horses now to run down Black people. Black lives matter. That kind of behavior is intolerable. And when I see it, I am going to speak up and speak out.

So here is what I am going to do about it. I am not just going to say Black lives matter. I want justice for the Haitians.

I remember when we had a policy to help the Cubans come into this country. By the way, I never opposed it. But the policy was wet foot, dry foot. You get one foot on dry land, your other foot could be in the Gulf of Mexico, and you had the right to take that other foot out of water, go on into Miami and start a life in this country and eventually become a citizen. I never opposed that policy. We didn't have a similar policy for the Haitians.

And I remember when Castro opened up the jails and let the criminals come down to Florida, we didn't send them back.

Black lives matter. It is not just a slogan for me. So here is what I am going to do. I am going to draft a resolution condemning what we saw.

We need to know whether Black lives matter to this Congress. We need to know. I am going to draft a resolution.

And for those who don't understand the rules, these kinds of resolutions are not privileged, so I can't just bring it to the floor and demand a vote. So I am going to ask that it be allowed to come to the floor because Black lives matter.

And we need to vote. We need to know where people stand on the great issues of our time. This is an issue of all time; it is not just today. We need to know where people stand. We need to vote.

There are a lot of things that we need to vote on. We need to know where people stand when it comes to Black lives, and all lives, I might add, but this is the Haitian issue that we are dealing with now.

I have fought for the other persons who have come to the border. I spoke up when little girls were being ripped away from their mothers' arms, so I am not new to this fight.

And I want to assure you that I am going to bring the resolution to my colleagues, and we will find out whether Black lives matter to this Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me the time. I also am most appreciative to the members of the Rules Committee, who have devoted an inordinate amount of time to bringing this legislation to the floor.

I am also appreciative for the consideration of three amendments that we will have in the NDAA.

Our first amendment, Homes for Heroes, requires the Department of Housing and Urban Development, as well as public housing agencies, to improve consideration of and reporting on the status of veterans.

Friends, outside of my office in Houston, there is an overpass. There are persons living under that overpass, some of whom claim to be veterans.

We need to know what is happening to our veterans in this country. We want to make sure everybody is given equal opportunities and equal access to the opportunities that we have in this country. But I especially am concerned about the veterans because, quite frankly, it hurts my heart to hear someone say, ``I served my country, risked my life,'' and we find them sleeping under bridges. This will give us an opportunity to get more information on what is happening to them.

The second amendment is the Universal Residential Loan Application. This amendment will require housing enterprises to include a military service question on the Universal Residential Loan Application in a prominent position on the form.

This is done because many of our veterans are not aware of the VA loans that are available to them, and we want to make sure that before they sign that loan application, they understand that there are other opportunities available to them.

We also have an amendment that will deal with our merchant mariners. This amendment requires the Department of Veterans Affairs to distribute a payment to the U.S. merchant marines who engaged in qualified service during World War II and who have not received their just desserts, in the sense of something positive, for something that they did for this country.

Mr. Speaker, finally, the private student loan borrowers amendment, I am a cosponsor of this amendment with Representative Alma Adams. This would extend the private student loan forbearance period to January 31, 2022, citing the COVID-19 pandemic as the rationale.

I think these amendments are exceedingly important. They are in this NDAA, and I will be supporting it in large part because these amendments are there, as well as for other reasons that I have not been able to discuss today.

Madam Speaker, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Speaker, and still I rise. Tonight, I rise to express my gratitude to many persons who have caused us to have this opportunity. I thank Chairman Smith for his service and what he has done and Ranking Member Rogers, the members of the Committee on Rules, and the members of the Committee on Veterans Affairs.

Madam Speaker, I rise to say that I do support the NDAA. I understand the need for a strong military, but I also rise tonight with an appeal for some compassion, compassion and, to a certain extent, mercy for our veteran merchant marines. I ask for this compassion because they didn't get some of the benefits that others did.

Let me just read the words, if I may, of President Roosevelt. On June 22, 1944, these are his words when signing the GI Bill: ``I trust Congress will soon provide similar opportunities to members of the Merchant Marine who have risked their lives time and time again during war for the welfare of our country.''

Congress did not provide similar benefits for the merchant marines. As a result of Congress not doing so, most people don't know that the merchant marines were denied benefits within the GI Bill, denied the stipend for the cost of living, books, and supplies as it relates to education, denied tuition-free education, denied unemployment benefits, denied medical benefits, denied low-cost guaranteed loans, denied opportunities.

Madam Speaker, I appeal tonight for those who are still surviving, all of whom are in their nineties. I had the privilege of being with Mr. Charles Mills, 101 years young and still making the appeal for help for these veterans, who literally won a lawsuit to have themselves declared as such.

I make the appeal for compassion for our merchant marines, who had a very high casualty count during World War II.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, may I inquire how much time is remaining.

Madam Speaker, tuition benefits in today's dollars would be about $8,000. The stipend for the cost of living, books, and supplies would be about $1,200. The unemployment benefits-- and I am low-balling--would be about $16,000.

The medical benefits we can't measure. The loss of opportunities because of the loans that they could have received we cannot measure.

But we can do this: We can do what General Eisenhower asked us to do. We can do what President Roosevelt asked us to do and President Truman asked us to do.

This is our opportunity, a unique moment in time to correct an injustice. And I appeal to you to do so.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?

Madam Speaker, to take this through regular order at this time would mean that we would call on witnesses who have long since gone to glory. It would mean that many of those who live today would not live to see the day that the justice would be served that they richly deserve.

So I make an appeal on behalf of the those who have earned this compassion, they risked their lives for their country, and many of them died. This is our final opportunity for many of them, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, and still I rise to announce that I will not only vote for H.R. 4 but I will also vote for those who are making it possible and who have made it possible for me to vote for

Madam Speaker, I rise today to present a prayer for Haiti on behalf of Pastor Neylon Samuel at World Harvest Seventh Day Adventist Church in the Ninth Congressional District of Texas. Pastor Samuel presented this prayer at a candlelight vigil held on Sunday, July 18, 2021 in remembrance of Haitian President Jovenel Moise.

Gracious God, Creator of heaven and earth, God of all

goodness and love, we bring before you today, our brothers

and sisters of Haiti. As we lift this nation before you, we

recognize that it is you, O God, who made her people in your

very image and place within them a hunger and thirst for

righteousness and liberty.

They led the Americas in the struggle against slavery, and

though they were the first to win lasting freedom, their

struggle has never ceased. As you heard the cry of your

suffering people in Egypt, today, we pray that you will hear

the cry of your people in Haiti calling out for justice.

You--the God--who sees, frees, and redeems people, we ask

that you raise up your people in Haiti from the ash heap of

despair and give them strong hearts and strong hands. Lift

their minds and their spirits and help them to bear this new

burden.

As details about the assassination of president Jovenel

Moise continue to unravel, we keep the Moise family and the

nation of Haiti before you. Grant them your wisdom, strength,

and hope in the face of all that is happening in their

beautiful homeland. And because you are both a God of mercy

and a God of justice. We ask that you exercise your judgment

on these horrific acts that have taken place. Heinous acts

such as these can shake the strongest of us to our core and

make us fearful. But we ask that you will be with those who

are hurting and afraid.

We pray that this nation, which is so often noted as the

poorest country in the Western Hemisphere. This nation that

is today, marked by political instability, corruption, civil

unrest, crime, and extreme poverty, will once again be known

as the ``Pearl of the Antilles''. We pray for the removal of

systemic evils holding back this nation. We Pray for schools,

trying to educate children amid violence. We pray for light

to shine in corrupt areas in the country. Pray for godly

leaders in government and business.

God, we ask that you bring healing and prosperity to Haiti.

Protect her from those who would abuse her. We pray that her

may sorrow cease and her joy abound. Let her generosity be

known in all the lands, and her glad songs of freedom be

heard to the ends of the earth. Bless her children of that

they may know a better world and a brighter future.

As for us, O God, we who are far away from the chaos and

the confusion, from the sobbing and moans, but who yet hold

the people of Haiti close in our hearts. Imbue us with the

strength of Simon of Cyrene, that we may carry the cross of

the Haitian people. Show us how to bear their burdens and

lighten their yoke with our prayers, our aid, our resources.

In our own country, teach us to do justice, love mercy, and

walk humbly with you, O God, that we may stand before you

unashamed and with integrity, as we walk hand in hand with

our brothers and sisters of Haiti. We ask this in the name of

our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Amen.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

And still I rise, Mr. Speaker, and I rise today to recognize the more than 50 Texas Democrats, State representatives, who have taken a stand for liberty and justice for all and who have traversed thousands of miles in the name of government of the people, by the people, and for the people.

I rise to commend and defend those who are making great sacrifices to protect free and fair elections. They have left their homes, they have left Texas, and they have come all the way to Washington, D.C. They have left their families.

Can you imagine having to leave your home and your family on short notice?

This is not something that they planned. This is not something that they had time to think through and to give all of the deliberations and considerations that one might give to leaving home for some extended period of time, and to be quite candid, not to know exactly how long they will be gone from home, some unknown extended period of time. They have left their homes, and they have left their families. They have left their children.

Can you imagine, Mr. Speaker, simply saying to your child that you have a duty to perform, an unexpected duty, not something that you wanted to do, but something that you know that you must do in the name of government of the people, by the people, and for the people and in the name of liberty and justice for all?

Leaving their children and coming to Washington, D.C., some of them had to leave jobs. The Texas legislature doesn't pay a huge sum of money to go to serve, some $600 per month.

So they have left their homes, their families, and their jobs to come to Washington, D.C., not to have a vacation and not to have time to simply socialize and enjoy themselves, they have come to Washington, D.C., because they want to have those of us who have the ability to impact free and fair elections with H.R. 1, the For the People Act, to impact the ability to make sure that elections are properly protected and that the persons who are going to vote have equal access to the polls. They want us to pass H.R. 4, once we file it again, the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, one that would advance voting rights, I might add.

So they have come here to appeal to us to protect liberty and justice for all when it comes to voting, to protect government of the people, by the people, and for the people because it is the vote that accords us this opportunity to govern in a fashion that Lincoln called to our attention in the Gettysburg Address.

They have come to Washington, D.C., to the citadel of democracy in the United States of America, and they are prepared to stay as long as it takes so that they may do what many people would admire them for doing but not everyone would do.

They are here to break the quorum so that the Texas Statehouse cannot pass laws that are invidiously discriminating. Invidious discrimination is a term that I like very much because it means harmful discrimination. Not all discrimination is harmful. But they are here to fight against invidious discrimination, and they come here asking us to take a stand with them. They are breaking a quorum.

Now, there are those who contend that what they are doing is what we are contending that the Senate should not do. Not true. That is not true. They are breaking a quorum. They are preventing the Statehouse in Texas from going forward, and they are doing it with a rule that requires at least two-thirds to be present for business to be lawfully conducted. Well, here in Washington, D.C., we have a filibuster rule.

A filibuster means very simply this: one Member can decide that he or she would not have legislation go forward. Once that decision has been made by one Member, Mr. Speaker, you can only break that filibuster with something called cloture, meaning you now have to get 60 votes before you can pass legislation with 51 votes assuming all Senators are present and voting.

This rule, the filibuster rule, is something that is not necessary. It is something that has been employed by segregationists. It is a favorite tool of

those who have discriminated against us when it comes to civil rights and human dignity in this country.

As an example, Southern segregationist Democrats--that is right, I said Democrats--unified in opposition to civil rights regularly employed the filibuster and prevented cloture. They successfully employed the filibuster to thwart all nearly 200 anti-lynching measures. They prevented a vote on several substantial civil rights bills.

Senator Strom Thurmond in 1957 took on a civil rights bill for 24 hours to filibuster. Former Senator Richard Russell was a leading filibuster. Senator Russell was an outspoken opponent of civil rights legislation. In 1935 he and his colleagues in the Senate stopped an anti-lynching bill with 6 days of nonstop talking. In 1964, he filibustered for 60 working days in the Senate opposing civil rights legislation. Later, in 1964, Russell and more than a dozen other Senators boycotted the Democratic National Convention simply because President Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act into law.

So this filibuster rule is a rule that I find no favor with. It is a rule that has haunted those of us who seek equality and justice in this country for everyone. The filibuster rule is not something that is necessary, but that is what the Senate can employ. So if there is an equivalent of the filibuster rule in the Senate as it relates to the Texas house, then I might not have a problem with it.

But, Mr. Speaker, here is the problem: in the Senate, to avoid having the necessary number to pass legislation, constitutionally, you have to have 51 votes. You have to ``break'' the ability to pass votes with 51. So if the Senate in this United States Capitol would do what those who have come here from Texas would do, then we would have to have them bring 51 people away from the floor to prevent the number necessary to have a quorum. They would have to break a quorum. They don't have to break a quorum now. They but only have to indicate they would like to filibuster, and, in so doing, we would have to in the Senate here in Washington, D.C., get 60 votes before we can vote to pass something with 51 votes.

I believe that we ought to eliminate the filibuster. I think then if the Senate would want to do what these brave Texas Democrats have done, then they would have to break the quorum by having 51 people stay away from the Senate floor. Right now, they don't have to have anyone stay away from the Senate floor. It is easy to do what they have done. The Texas Democrats have done something courageous because they have come all the way to Washington, D.C. More than 50 people have aligned themselves so that they can provide a means by which we will have the opportunity to pass civil rights legislation here--H.R. 1, the For the People Act; and H.R. 4 once it is filed again, the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.

My hope is that we can pass both of these pieces of legislation. My hope is that at some point we will eliminate the filibuster. There are those who would say: If you eliminate the filibuster, at some point it will come back to haunt you because the laws that you pass to eliminate it, others can pass laws to reinstate whatever you have eliminated.

I believe, Mr. Speaker, that if you pass good laws, it would be very difficult to turn them over simply on a whim. I believe that a good example of this is the law that we passed to accord healthcare to people who didn't have it in this country, ObamaCare as it is called, but more technically speaking, it is the Affordable Care Act. The Affordable Care Act has afforded people the opportunity to have good insurance.

Prior to the Affordable Care Act there were people who thought they had good insurance. They paid their premiums timely. They thought they had good insurance until they had to use it, and it was at this point that they found out just how good their insurance was or how poorly they had decided to buy policies that were what were called junk insurance. They didn't know because they didn't need it, and they were paying something that they thought was reasonable for what they thought was coverage that did not exist.

When we passed the law that allowed for persons to have good insurance, the Affordable Care Act, also known as ObamaCare, when we passed this law, we then put ourselves in a position such that it could be challenged, and for years it has been challenged. For years there have been efforts to overturn it. For years persons have said: We will repeal and replace.

They never ever considered what the replacement would be going forward with the repeal. To this day the Affordable Care Act still stands.

Mr. Speaker, if you pass good legislation, then you don't have to concern yourself with the ability of others on a whim to simply overturn it because they don't like it, because it somehow has given people opportunities that perhaps they didn't foresee or believe were appropriate. The Affordable Care Act is good legislation, and as a result many people have had the opportunity to have healthcare that they ordinarily would not have.

Mr. Speaker, I believe we should eliminate the filibuster as we have it here. I believe we should resort to what the State of Texas has, which is a requirement that you have X number of senators present to make a quorum. It is the quorum that the representatives from Texas have challenged. In Washington, D.C., it is a filibuster that one person can call to the attention of the Senate and use to thwart legislation.

If we go to a quorum here in Washington, D.C., then let the Senators come up with 51 people who will not show up so that they can prevent legislation from going forward. That would be the equivalent of what is happening in the State of Texas. A quorum is being challenged. There is no filibuster that is being challenged. It is a quorum.

I congratulate them and salute them and commend them for challenging this quorum, to prevent laws from being passed that will thwart the efforts of people to vote who sometimes don't have the opportunity to vote that I might have, that many of us would have here.

I see nothing wrong with having the ability to vote 24 hours a day. Apparently, some in the State of Texas do. I remember when we had that opportunity in Texas. In this legislation, as being proposed, it would be eliminated. I went out to the polls at midnight, and I greeted people who were coming to vote. I saw people who were leaving work; people who found it beneficial to have the opportunity to come to the polling place at midnight and cast their votes because they are hardworking people, and they sleep during hours that others of us are awake.

I thought it was a wonderful thing to see this voting for 24 hours a day. It is a wonderful thing to know that people can have the opportunity to do this and go right home after work. Not everybody gets off from work at 5 o'clock. Many people don't get off from work until 11 or 12 o'clock. So this opportunity to vote for 24 hours a day was something very beneficial to a good many of my constituents in the State of Texas.

Unfortunately, it was not something that others approved of and said that they disapprove of it because it wasn't something that was being done prior to COVID. There are people who said it was never done at any place in the country before. Since when do we decide that we will not do things because they have never been done before? If we decide that we will only do things that have been done before, where will we have the opportunity to make progress? How can you move forward if you decide that you are going to stagnate yourself?

We haven't always had electronic ballots. We can still vote with paper ballots if we choose, but we have chosen to move forward. We haven't always had Sunday voting, but we now vote on Sundays. We haven't always had 24-hour voting, and I contend we ought to have the opportunity to do this now.

Mr. Speaker, I contend to my dear friends that it is our duty and responsibility to make it easier for people to vote. This is what the State of Texas says that it is doing, it is making it easier for people to vote. How are you making it easier if you are going to limit the times that people can vote? How are you making it easier if you make it harder for people to vote by mail? How are you making it easier if

you don't have the boxes so that people can simply drop--safe and secure, by the way--safely and securely drop their ballots off in various places around the county? You are not making it easier. You are making it more difficult under the guise of making it easier.

So I contend that these Democrats who have traversed this great distance, who have come to Washington, D.C. as a means of showing the world that there are still people who will take a stand for liberty and justice for all, for government of the people, by the people, for the people, and protect the right to vote. They are defenders of the democracy when they do this, because the very seat of democracy, the very thing that democracy resides upon is the notion of having a free and fair election. You can't have a free and fair election if you don't have equal access to the polls.

You can't have a free and fair election if you don't have the opportunity to register and vote without certain impediments to your registering to vote. That would create a poll tax. Let me explain.

I went to the polls in Texas to test the system that was in place. I tried to vote with my congressional ID card, the card that I can use to vote on issues related to the budget of the United States of America; the card that I can use to vote on issues related to war and peace. I could not vote with it. I tested the system. I did have the proper credentials, but I wanted to test the system.

The system required me, if I am going to acquire the ID in Texas to vote, it required me to get my birth certificate. If you live in Texas, you can get this ID at no cost. But I was born in Louisiana. I live there, but I was born in Louisiana. Persons who were born in Texas, you can get the ID at no cost. I applied for my ID in Louisiana.

There were some complications with my birth certificate. To this day, I have not received the ID that I applied for; and that was years ago. The point is this: If we are going to have an ID card and contend that it is free to persons who cannot afford the cost of an ID card, we have to make sure that it is free for persons who are not born in Texas who don't have access to birth certificates, who will have to send out of State.

In this country, we don't conclude that you should pay a fee to vote, even if that fee is to get a birth certificate. I contend that this is a way of having a new form of a poll tax. Knowing that college students in the State of Texas who want to vote in the State of Texas to get a proper ID to vote, if it is going to be a State ID or an ID that they don't have for Texas purposes, they will have to get some form of birth certificate or proof of birth in the State of Texas or in this country. They have to present this.

They know that college students can't present it if they were from California and they are in Texas and they have a California identification that does not necessarily require the birth certificate, then they don't accept this. There is a list of the things that can be accepted, and college student IDs have been excluded from the list.

Mr. Speaker, I stand here today saluting them for what they have done, understanding that they are doing all that they can to make a difference, and understanding that they are appealing to us, the Members of this House, to help them, to be a part of their effort to get H.R. 1 and H.R. 4 passed here so as to prevent those in Texas who would thwart the rights of persons to vote from being able to do so if we can pass some of our legislation.

One piece of legislation, H.R. 4, is exceedingly important, because H.R. 4 will bring back the opportunity for people in the State of Texas to challenge changes in laws without a preclearance by the Justice Department or a Federal court that might be here in Washington, D.C.

H.R. 4 would restore the Voting Rights Act that was eviscerated when section 4 of the Voting Rights Act was found unconstitutional. When it was eliminated, eviscerated, if you will, it emasculated section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Section 4 was the coverage area, so that section 5 could then require these other things that would help persons who are trying to prevent States like Texas from doing things that were egregious as it relates to the right to vote.

Section 4 would be restored, and as a result, we would again have coverage for States like Texas, States like Texas in Harris County where I live, that had White primaries. The State of Texas had these White primaries and a man named Lonnie Smith took the State of Texas all the way to the Supreme Court to challenge White primaries. The White primaries were set aside. The Supreme Court said: You can't do that.

Well, in an adjoining county, there were White pre-primaries. The State of Texas has been a bad actor for a long time. These persons who have come here, these noble freedom fighters have come here to solicit our support and our help. And I hope that the United States Senate will at some point eliminate the filibuster. But if not, I trust that there will be 60 persons who will help us get to cloture so that we can take up H.R. 1 and H.R. 4, laws that will help us restore the right to vote for all of Americans without these impediments that are being imposed in States across the country.

To honor them, we have a resolution that we are filing. This resolution is going to honor them for what they have done in coming to Washington, D.C. It will honor them for the stand that they have taken. This resolution will be signed by the members of the Texas Democratic delegation and filed with the House of Representatives.

We also are sending a letter to the President of the United States, a second letter, asking the President to please meet with them, not in person, but meet with them virtually. Meet with them and hear their hue and their cry, their appeal for help. I am sure the President understands the issue, so it is not about convincing the President. It is about letting them have the opportunity to speak and letting the President know that they stand firm on the grounds of providing liberty and justice for all, government of the people, by the people, for the people.

Finally, I am here this afternoon, because I believe that we all have to be accountable for what we do. I believe that we all have to, at some point, answer for the positions that we have or have not taken. I am here representing not only myself but other Democrats who could not be here. They are persons who support what we are doing. They are persons who are members of the Texas Democratic delegation.

They have demonstrated that they are standing in solidarity with the members from Texas who are here representing those in Texas who believe that there should not be these laws passed to thwart the efforts to vote. But the members of the Texas Democratic delegation are standing absolutely, totally, and completely in solidarity with the Texas State representatives who are here. And my hope is, that as we stand in solidarity with them, we will at some point achieve our goal. Our goal is simply this: to make sure that in Texas we have free and fair elections.

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

Madam Speaker, and still I rise. I rise as a person who is proud to live in a country where we celebrate the ideal of liberty and justice for all; government of the people, by the people, for the people.

I rise today with grateful thoughts on my mind and in my heart. I rise with gratitude. I am thankful to those persons, the many, who have signed on to H. Res. 517.

H. Res. 517, Madam Speaker, is a resolution that would allow us to remember slavery, Slavery Remembrance Day.

Slavery Remembrance Day would be a day that we would set aside, not for celebration, but for commemoration, for memorialization, to remember the atrocities that were imposed upon people, human beings, how they were made chattel. Slavery Remembrance Day.

And for those who may not be aware, we have a 9/11 Remembrance Day. We have a Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day. We have a Holocaust Remembrance Day. But we don't have a Slavery Remembrance Day.

Hence, on August 20 of this year, we will commemorate the first Slavery Remembrance Day, because it was on that day in 1619 that the White Lion landed in this country with some 20 persons who were held in captivity as slaves. Slavery Remembrance Day.

So I am rising today to thank the many persons who have already signed on to the resolution. And I want you to know that we will be sending you something very special, something comparable to this. It will have the resolution cited on one side of the page. Each of your names will be highlighted on the other side of the page. And each of you will have a special place for your name that will be highlighted.

This is historic, and we have to treat it as such. This is something that those who will look back on this time through the vista of time, they will look, and they will conclude that we did not forget, that we made it a point to remember that those who, unfortunately, don't learn the lessons of history sometimes repeat history.

We never want to repeat slavery. Hence, we will have a Slavery Remembrance Day resolution.

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak on this issue. And still I rise.

And I rise today because, as a Member of Congress, I believe we have a duty, a responsibility, and an obligation to act when industry is not acting, and the health of the American people is at risk.

It is time for Congress to do what it should have done, what EPA has not done, what we can do. I believe that there is no option but to vote ``yes.'' No is not an option when it comes to the health and safety of the American people.

I will vote ``yes.'' I will vote for the American people and their safety.

Mr. Speaker, and still I rise. I rise today as I always do, with great respect for all and love of country at heart.

I rise today for a very special reason. Today is one of the days that I will cherish for the rest of my life. What I will do today is something that I believe will help us to commemorate an unfortunate circumstance that our country has been a part of.

This is the day that I will have the opportunity to bring to the attention of the Congress of the United States of America a very special resolution. This is a resolution that is supporting the designation of Slavery Remembrance Day.

The resolution proposes that August 20, 2021, serve as the first Slavery Remembrance Day. And this is done to remind us of the evils of slavery.

Mr. Speaker, I have noticed that as time has passed during my lifetime, there have been those who have sought to whitewash, to sanitize, the evils associated with slavery. This is a necessary resolution because this resolution will forever allow us to remember the horrors of slavery, the events that have shaped our current circumstances.

Slavery was our seminal sin. It was the sin that has, for too long-- centuries, for too long--had an impact on the politics, the economics, the social standing of people in our country.

This resolution reads as follows. I shall not read it in its entirety today, but there are some portions of it that are exceedingly important.

Whereas this resolution may be cited as the ``Original

Slavery Remembrance Day Resolution of 2021.''

For those who keep records, it is H. Res. 517. It has been filed, and it has more than 75 original cosponsors. I am saying original and more than 75 simply because, right up to the last minute, we were adding people, so more than 75 original cosponsors.

I shall do all that I can to memorialize the persons who are original cosponsors, and I shall seek additional cosponsors of this resolution.

Whereas the House of Representatives recognizes August 20,

2021, as ``Slavery Remembrance Day'' and commemorates the

lives of all enslaved people while also condemning the act

and perpetuation of slavery in the United States of America

and across the world.

Whereas we posthumously recognize the following Members of

Congress, who served during and after the Reconstruction era,

as honorary cosponsors of this resolution.

Their names are listed. I will not read them today. I want to do something very special when these names are mentioned, and they shall be mentioned in the near future. But their names are all here, persons who actually served in the Congress of the United States of America. These are persons who merit a special place in history because of all that they had to endure to serve our country.

Whereas, on August 20, 1619, the first 20 enslaved Africans

were brought to what is now Fort Monroe, then Point Comfort.

At that time, the time that they arrived, August 20, 1619, it was Point Comfort. History has a way of reminding us of things. ``Point Comfort,'' the place where 20 enslaved Africans arrived. Point Comfort.

Whereas the House of Representatives recognizes August 20,

2021, as ``Slavery Remembrance Day'' and commemorates the

lives of all enslaved people while also condemning the act

and perpetuation of slavery in the United States of

America and across the world.

Whereas African tribal chiefs captured, enslaved, and sold

their captives to transatlantic slave traders.

You can't tell the story without telling the whole story. You have to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. If there is a scintilla of a mistake in what I say, I would beg that people would contact me and let me know, because the truth about slavery must be told. And the truth is that African people sold other Africans into slavery.

Whereas over the period of the Atlantic slave trade, from

approximately 1526 to 1867, millions of humans were abducted

and shipped from Africa, and 10,700,000 arrived in the

Americas as personal property.

Whereas the majority of enslaved Africans brought to

British North America arrived between 1720 and 1780.

I do want to emphasize the fact that they were personal property, chattels. They could be bought; they could be sold. I do understand that this is a part of the history that we don't cherish. It is a part of the history that we don't care to recall, but it is a part of the history that we must remember.

We cannot allow ourselves to think, for any amount of time, that history will never repeat itself, and we have to be ever vigilant as to prevent history

from repeating itself. This is why we must have a remembrance day.

This is not the only remembrance day, my dear friends. We remember 9/ 11, and it is commemorated for the lives that were lost. We remember Pearl Harbor. We remember January 6, the date of the insurrection. And my prognostication is that there will be a January 6 remembrance day.

Days such as these, days that are infamous, should always be remembered in the annals of history, and they should forever live in infamy. But we have to remember these days.

Whereas 6 percent of African captives were sent directly to

British North America.

Whereas by 1825, the population of the United States

included about one-quarter of the people of African descent

in what has been called the New World.

Whereas the Middle Passage from West Africa to the West

Indies was dangerous and horrific for enslaved people.

Whereas the Middle Passage carried mothers, fathers,

children, sisters, brothers, aunts, uncles, cousins, and

individuals from all walks of life to slavery in the

Americas.

Whereas although the sexes were separated, men, women and

children were kept naked, packed--and even stacked, I might

add--but packed close together, and the men were chained for

long periods.

Whereas according to some historians, about 12 percent of

those who embarked did not survive the voyage.

Whereas sharks followed the slave ships to feed on the

bodies of slaves thrown overboard.

Whereas enslaved people suffered a variety of miserable and

often fatal maladies due to the Atlantic slave trade and the

inhumane living and working conditions.

Whereas infant and child mortality rates were twice as high

among slave children as among Southern White children.

Whereas enslaved people often worked from sunup to after

sundown, 6 to 7 days a week often without food for long

periods of time.

Whereas enslaved Black families lived with the perpetual

possibility of separation caused by the sale of one or more

family members.

Stepping aside from the text for a moment, it has to be painful to hear this, to know that on the auction block a mother could be separated from her children and to know that on that auction block families would be separated and could be sent in different directions.

Human beings were treated as property. The suffering that they endured is unthinkable and unimaginable. It was suffering that not even the mind of Dante could imagine. They were persons treated, to a certain extent, like animals. The enslaved Black families were human beings.

Continuing with the text:

Whereas it is estimated that approximately one-third of

enslaved children in the upper South States of Maryland and

Virginia experienced family separation in one of three

possible scenarios: sale away from parents, sale with mother

away from father, or sale of mother or father away from

children.

These are the horrors of slavery and the evils of slavery that we can never ever forget. Just as we never forget other horrors and just as we have remembrance days for them, we should have this remembrance day for slavery.

Continuing with the text:

Whereas Nat Turner was born into slavery in Southampton

County, Virginia, in 1800.

Whereas Southampton County was home to many plantations,

and enslaved people outnumbered free Whites.

Whereas Turner learned to read and write at an early age, a

young age, becoming deeply religious.

Whereas Turner was sold to several different masters over

the course of his life, the last time in 1830.

Whereas Turner preached to his fellow enslaved people

developing a loyal following.

Whereas Turner began planning a revolt with a few trusted

fellow enslaved men from neighboring plantations.

Generally speaking, we honor people who fight being held in captivity. Generally speaking, they are held in high esteem, and they are celebrated for their desire to be free and their willingness to fight for their freedom--generally speaking.

But one has to ask: Where are all of the statues for Nat Turner?

Where are all of the resolutions that have been written extolling the virtues of Nat Turner?

The question must be posed: How can we honor those who enslaved to a greater extent than we honor those who suffered the horrors of slavery?

Continuing with the text:

Whereas Turner began planning a revolt with a few trusted

fellow enslaved men from neighboring plantations.

Whereas Turner's rebellion began in August 1831, quickly

growing from a small handful of enslaved individuals to more

than 70 enslaved and free Blacks.

Whereas the rebels went from house to house in Southampton

County, freeing enslaved people.

Whereas the rebels were ultimately defeated by a State

militia that had over twice the manpower of the rebels, with

three artillery companies reinforcing it.

Whereas Turner was captured 6 weeks after the rebellion was

put down, whereupon he was quickly convicted and sentenced to

death.

Whereas in retaliation for the uprising, Virginia

officially executed 56 Black people with at least 100 more

killed by militias through extrajudicial violence.

We are now talking about people who were killed because other people fought for their freedom.

Stepping aside from the text, we can never allow ourselves to sanitize the horrors of slavery. This resolution is important. There has to be a day of remembrance.

Whereas the rebellion caused widespread panic among

slaveholders throughout the South, resulting in widespread

violence against enslaved people.

Please, Mr. Speaker, understand, I take no great pride in reading this and presenting this. There is no great pride in this. There is pain. This is sinful and shameful, and we can never forget the horrors of slavery.

Whereas in the wake of the rebellion, the Virginia General

Assembly passed legislation making it illegal to teach

enslaved free Blacks to read and write.

I take no pleasure.

Whereas the Underground Railroad was a network of

individuals who helped around 100,000 slaves escape to the

North.

Whereas the railroad began when a conductor often posing as

a slave would enter a plantation and attempt to guide

runaways.

(1200)

Whereas the escapees would travel 10 to 20 miles each night

between safe houses or ``stations'' to avoid detection,

waiting in safe houses for the next along the line to be

alerted to their presence.

Whereas Ms. Harriet Tubman escaped from slavery along the

Underground Railroad, a network of abolitionists who guided

escaped slaves to the North, traveling primarily at night to

avoid bounty hunters.

My dear friends, my dear brothers and sisters, many of these persons were not of African ancestry. We didn't get here by ourselves. There were people of goodwill, of many stripes who made it possible for us to have these opportunities that we have today. I thank them all. My prayer is that there will always be such people of goodwill to assist those who find themselves in harm's way, due to injustice.

Continuing with the text:

Whereas Ms. Tubman returned to the South no less than 13

times to free 70 enslaved persons, including much of her

family, for which she would be given the name, Moses.

Whereas Ms. Tubman deftly led those she saved North during

the fall and winter, when there would-be captors stayed

inside to avoid the cold.

Some things bear repeating. Whereas Ms. Tubman deftly led those she saved North during the fall and winter, when their would-be captors stayed inside to avoid the cold.

Whereas in Ms. Tubman's own words: ``I never ran my train

off the track, and I never lost a passenger.''

Whereas during the Civil War, Ms. Tubman served as a nurse,

scout, spy in the Union Army, becoming the first woman to

plan and lead a military operation in the United States,

liberating 700 enslaved people in South Carolina.

Whereas the life of Ms. Tubman continued working to

improving the lives of oppressed people, raising funds and

building schools, as well as a hospital, in the name of

formerly enslaved people, while participating in the women's

suffrage movement.

Whereas John Brown, an abolitionist who ran an important

stop on the Underground Railroad, dedicated his life to

slavery.

Whereas John Brown led a militia in guerilla attacks on

pro-slavery towns in Kansas, losing one of his sons in the

struggle.

Whereas John Brown, with the help of Harriet Tubman,

planned and organized an invasion of the South to free all

slaves.

One has to ask: Where are the statues of John Brown?

One has to ask: How is it that we have statues within a short distance of where I stand now honoring those who would enslave, but not honoring those who would set the slaves free?

One has to ask: How do these things happen?

But one has to also be appreciative of the fact that their removal is almost a certainty now.

One has to be appreciative of the fact that there are those among us who

have taken up the fight for freedom, and they have brought it to the very floor of this House of Representatives.

I am grateful to those who have concluded that we must remove the statues of those who would enslave, and my prayer is we will replace them with some statues of those who fought to free the slaves. This is my prayer.

Continuing with the text:

Whereas John Brown began his invasion at Harpers Ferry,

West Virginia, but was surrounded and captured by Federal

troops led by Robert E. Lee, losing two more sons in the

fight.

There are still people alive today who don't want John Brown to be celebrated. They don't want the people who gave their very last breath, the very last ounce of their existence to the cause of freedom. Celebrate those who would enslave, but not those who would free the slaves.

I am grateful to those people of goodwill who stand today to continue the struggle for liberty and justice for all, as extolled in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Whereas the 13th Amendment was passed by Congress on

January 31, 1865, and ratified on December 6, 1865, and

provides that ``Neither slavery or involuntary servitude,

except as a condition of punishment, except as punishment for

a crime whereof the parties shall have been duly convicted,

shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to

their jurisdiction.''

There is much more that can be said about the 13th Amendment. Because I do not say it at this time, I beg that you not charge me for not knowing some of the things that can be said about the 13th Amendment.

Continuing with the text:

Whereas beginning in the 20th century, African Americans

began to relocate from Southern farms to Southern cities,

from the South to the Northeast, Midwest, and West, in a

movement known as the Great Migration.

Whereas the relocation of formerly enslaved individuals and

their descendants also included unfavorable and, at times,

unjust interactions with law enforcement that often resulted

in imprisonment and convict leasing.

Stepping aside from the text, in Sugar Land, Texas, bodies were unearthed. In Sugar Land, Texas, 95 bodies unearthed. Those who study these things have concluded that they were likely the victims of convict leasing.

Convict leasing was a means by which slavery was continued by another name. Convict leasing allowed laws to be used to have persons who committed petty offenses held in jail. They were detained. Couldn't pay a fine. These Black Codes, as they were called, allowed for convict leasing to continue.

Persons were arrested for just standing around, not having a job, put into the convict leasing program. And 95 such bodies were found of persons who are thought to have been victims of convict leasing in Sugar Land, Texas. Just outside of my congressional district, I might add.

Continuing with the text:

Whereas convict leasing, also known as slavery by another

name, was a system that allowed persons to lease imprisoned

individuals to private entities, often corporations and

plantations.

Whereas the remains of 95 persons thought to be of African

ancestry, who were subjected to the State of Texas convict

leasing system, were discovered in 2018, at the construction

site of Fort Bend Independent School District's James Reese

Career and Technical Center in Sugar Land, Texas.

There is much more to be said about this. In the days and weeks to come, I shall say more about this and what has happened to these 95 persons, human beings, buried, to a certain extent, in a common grave area.

Whereas while slavery was abolished, descendants of the

enslaved continue to live with the effects of slavery's

progenies: Jim Crow, mass lynchings, segregation, police

brutality, mass incarceration, and institutionalized racism.

Stepping aside from the text, I am a son of the segregated South. I have experienced these progenies, some of them. Not all of them, of course. I am 73 years of age. I have been blessed to live longer than many thought I would, not because of some illness, but because I was born Black.

The prognosticators never projected or prognosticated that I would be standing here. There was nothing at my birth that would have given anyone reason to believe that I would stand here. And probably there was nothing that would give persons reason to believe that I would stand here and read this resolution.

For many, this is a resolution that is not supposed to be filed; it is not supposed to be heard.

I am a liberated Democrat. I am not going to allow my agenda, the agenda of those who have suffered, to go unnoticed. It won't happen on my watch. As long as I am in this House, I am going to remind us that we have a duty and a responsibility, as well as an obligation, to understand the evils of slavery and understand how they have not evaporated. They have not simply faded away. To this day, the progenies of the evils still haunt us. They haunt us in this very House.

For those who are offended, I beg that you would forgive me, but I don't have any recourse. Those who sent me here, they didn't send me here to do all that I can to get along and go along. They sent me here to try to make a difference. I guess I have a case of the ``can't help its.''

I do what I can do, because I know my history, and I have suffered the pain from a progeny of slavery.

Continuing with the text:

Whereas despite the horrors of slavery and against all

odds, enslaved people became thought leaders and

revolutionaries and changed the course of American history.

Too often they are forgotten, pushed aside.

Too often, the history that they made is stolen.

Too often the status quo will wait until they can find a proper person to attribute the history to.

The status quo too often selects the persons that ought to be celebrated in history, and too often those persons are not the persons who suffered to bring the history to a better place.

The status quo has many ways to defend itself. The status quo can do it with the power of appointment.

The status quo can do it by acknowledging people and ignoring others.

The status quo has many ways to defend itself.

I am reminded of the words of Voltaire. He reminds us that--and I am paraphrasing--it is dangerous to be right in matters where the established powers are wrong.

So the status quo defends itself, and the true history is not always known. There will come a time, however, when the truth about some of the history I am aware of will be made known.

Mr. Chairman, the House is not in order. Someone appears to be on the phone in the House. I ask that we kindly investigate. This is a matter of serious concern, and a person ought not be on the phone in the House. It is contrary to the rules of the House. A person ought not do this when a serious matter is being discussed on the floor of the House of Representatives.

Doesn't matter who that person is, by the way. And if the person doesn't stop, I will put the person's name in the Record, because I know who it is. I am not going to suffer that kind of disrespect.

Resolved, this resolution may be cited as the ``Original

Slavery Remembrance Day Resolution of 2021.'' That is section

1 in the short title.

Section 2, Slavery Remembrance Day.

That the House of Representatives:

One, supports the designation of a ``Slavery Remembrance

Day'' to serve as a reminder of the evils of slavery.

Two, condemns slavery and its evil progenies; and

encourages all to acknowledge the importance of slavery

remembrance.

I am grateful to the Speaker for allowing the time. I am grateful to the majority leader. I am grateful to the whip. I am grateful to all of the chairs. I am grateful to the many persons who are cosponsors of this resolution.

As I indicated, it was coming to me as I was moving to the floor, and I have found a note from my staff. I am eternally grateful to my staff.

Seventy-seven cosponsors. These are the persons who are part of what I believe to be a historic resolution.

Those who are not should not be condemned. We simply but only ask that they would become cosponsors, and this can be accomplished quite easily. Contact my office and let us know that you would like to be a cosponsor. The love we have for you is not diminished one scintilla because you are not an original; it is not. I am not that kind of guy. I am interested in having persons of goodwill become a part of this resolution. And there is much more that will be said and done as we move forward with the resolution.

I thank all of the persons who are here today. I appreciate the fact that

this House functions as efficaciously as it does.

I am going to remember who was standing with the gavel at hand. I am going to remember the faces. This is a special moment in time. I will remember those who were to speak after me.

I will remember this wonderful lady who is seated over to my left, who has always been so kind and so generous and gentle.

I will remember the person who has prevented someone else from talking on the phone and who doesn't allow it to happen in this House when there is business before this House. She is evenhanded; she treats all of us the same.

I will remember the Parliamentarian, who has allowed his COVID beard to continue. That is just a joke, friends. I want to bring a bit of levity. But the Parliamentarian has been very helpful, and all of those who are associated with the office, have been very helpful.

I pray that on the August 20 or before, this resolution will receive a vote in this House so that this House can go on record, as it has gone on record for many other things, as supporting Slavery Remembrance Day.

Mr. Speaker, it is my honor now to yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Chairperson DeFazio for his leadership on this issue of importance to all Americans. I especially want to thank the staff for being people with great integrity. They are honorable people. With them, we can do great things. Without them, we can do very little.

Mr. Speaker, there is no national drinking water standard for chromium-6. The American Cancer Society lists chromium-6 as a known and probable human carcinogen.

Mr. Speaker, there are an estimated 200 million Americans exposed to drinking water with unsafe levels of chromium-6. This amendment, if passed, will require the EPA to establish national standards for chromium-6. Lives will be saved, and the American people will be in a better place.

Mr. Speaker, I thank, again, Mr. DeFazio for his efforts. I also would like to thank Debbie Strauss at KPRC Channel 2 for calling this issue to my attention.

Madam Speaker, I thank the chairwoman for yielding.

Madam Speaker, the great Thurgood Marshall won 29 of 32 cases before the Supreme Court of the United States of America. He was eminently qualified then and he is now, and this is a proper thing for us to do.

I want to close with this: If Judge Taney and his cohorts had their way, there would be no person of color in this building today.

Madam Speaker, if they had their way, you would not be at that podium.

Madam Speaker, I stand with Mr. Hoyer. I am grateful for what he has done, and I will vote for this legislation. Its time has long since come, and we are doing the right thing. Dr. King reminded us, ``the time is always right to do that which is right.''