Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, and still I rise, and I am always proud to have this preeminent privilege of standing here and addressing those who are within the Chamber as well as people who may be without.

I rise today still a liberated, unbought, unbossed, unafraid Democrat. I rise today to deliver a special message as it relates to slavery and the Holocaust.

Before I get to the message, I have a bit of housekeeping. I have had persons tell me that it appears that I am looking down and that my eyes are closed when I am speaking. I have no control over the camera angle. I am looking straight ahead now, and I will be looking straight ahead most of the time. So if there is some adjustment that the persons who operate the camera can make, I would greatly appreciate it, and I thank them very much.

I am very proud of some things that have happened. Just this week on Wednesday, this House passed S. 91--that would be a Senate bill--and I am proud to know that the House passed this bill because this bill was a special piece of legislation. This bill, S. 91, passed by voice vote at about 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday, and this bill, S. 91, was to award a Congressional Gold Medal collectively to 60 diplomats in recognition of their bravery and heroism during the Holocaust.

I am proud that this piece of legislation passed the House. There are many reasons to be proud. The people who were there to rescue persons and assist persons during the Holocaust, the victims, they ought to be recognized. The Holocaust occurred, and it was one of the worst crimes ever committed against humanity.

I am proud to also tell you that I supported the legislation. I have my signature on that legislation, and that means something to me. I want people to know that when it comes to stepping up and standing out and standing for the people who have suffered in this country and around the globe, I would like to let people know that I am among those who are always going to be there as best as I can. I can't take on every challenge, but I want to take on as many as I can, and this is one that I am proud to say that I am a cosponsor of.

In fact, I became a cosponsor on March 17 of 2023. The legislation itself was filed on January 26, 2023. A few months later I became a cosponsor of this legislation.

This legislation when it was filed had 13 original persons on it, an original sponsor and then original cosponsors, and it proceeded through the House. In the House it was H.R. 537. On June 11, 205 Members were on this legislation. I was one of them. I am proud to say it again. As one of them on June 11, this piece of legislation was passed in the House. It passed the House and then went to the Senate with 295 Members having signed on to it.

On December 4 it passed in the House by voice vote, and I was a Member that signed on to that bill. I was one of the persons that signed on to it.

Now, I mention this bill, and I am proud to be associated with it, but I am also proud to be associated with another piece of legislation, H.R. 1244. This piece of legislation would posthumously award a historic Congressional Gold Medal collectively to Africans and their descendants enslaved within our country from August 20 of 1619 to December 6 of 1865. I am proud to be the original sponsor of this legislation.

This legislation has 125 Members on it. Just as the legislation to recognize the heroes of the Holocaust had 290-plus Members, this legislation has to have 290 Members or more for it to pass the House. We have 125.

This legislation was filed on February 28 of 2023 about a month after the legislation was filed to honor the heroes associated with the Holocaust. I am proud to be on both pieces of legislation. The legislation that we have filed to honor the persons who were enslaved, whose lives were sacrificed has been in the House now for about the same length of time as the legislation to honor the heroes of the Holocaust.

So let's just take a moment and read some of what this legislation says that would honor those persons who were enslaved posthumously with a Congressional Gold Medal. I might add that the heroes of the Holocaust received this posthumous honor as we are trying to acquire the same for the persons who were enslaved.

I will read from a Dear Colleague that we sent out to our colleagues here in Congress:

Support the historic Congressional Gold Medal for America's

economic foundational fathers, mothers and children, the

enslaved.

It reads:

On July 18, 1956, Congress, the House and Senate, awarded a

Congressional Gold Medal to Confederate soldiers.

I might also add to soldiers who associated themselves with the Union.

However, to this day, Congress has never awarded a

Congressional Gold Medal to the over 10 million enslaved men,

women, and children who toiled for over 240 years to build

the economic and infrastructural foundation of the wealthiest

nation ever to exist on our planet.

These foundational mothers and fathers of our country

labored arduously constructing our cities, roads, bridges,

and wells. They laboriously planted as well as harvested the

food that fed our Nation. They were the de facto producers of

the cash crops that fueled our Nation's foundational wealth.

These enslaved human beings of African ancestry toiled as

slaves without remuneration or recompense. Their humble hands

were relied upon for the construction of some of our Nation's

most renowned edifices and monuments including the White

House, the Capitol building, and the Washington Monument.

In truth, their sacrificed lives provided the genesis of

our Nation's economic preeminence. These sacrificed human

beings, men, women, and children, were the greatest

contributors to the American foundational economy . . .

Why would I say they were the greatest contributors?

Because for more than 240 years--it has been estimated to be about 246--but for more than 240 years they sacrificed their lives. Their lives were sacrificed. They didn't do it willingly. They were forced into slavery. They were enslaved, and it was intended that this would go on ad infinitum. It was never intended at the genesis of slavery that it would be for just a few months or a few years, maybe a few decades, one century--no, it was to be forever. Their lives were sacrificed to make America great.

So if you are in this country today, regardless as to why you are here or how you arrived, know that you are standing on the sacrificed lives of more than 10 million people who were enslaved. And their enslavement is what has made this country what you see and what you experience today.

Let me continue:

Yet their contributions are almost universally forgotten,

under-recognized, ignored, overlooked, and/or undervalued.

For these and countless other justifications--this is what I said to my colleagues in the letter I sent to them asking for their support.

For these and countless other justifications, I am

beseeching Congress as a matter of conscience to award a

Congressional Gold Medal collectively to the human beings who

are the foundational mothers, fathers, and children that

toiled as slaves without recompense or recognition for their

unparalleled contribution to the infrastructural and economic

development of the nation we enjoy today.

We have awarded similar Congressional Gold Medals to others. My prayer is that we can do it for them. But we haven't.

That doesn't mean that what we did on Wednesday should not have occurred. I supported it. I believe that people of good will should have the courage to support the victims of the Holocaust and the heroes of the Holocaust.

Just as I believe it strongly, I believe equally as strongly that people of good will, the same people that signed on to the legislation so that we could have the vote on Wednesday, I believe people of good will such as these people can sign on to a bill to accord a Congressional Gold Medal to the enslaved persons, the economic foundational mothers and fathers of the country whose lives were sacrificed for more than 240 years to make America great.

Yes, I thank all who have signed on.

I have to be candid. I regret that we didn't get 290 signatures so that we could pass this legislation in this Congress. I regret it.

It is a painful thing to say we didn't get those 290 signatures. We made the appeals. It is a painful thing to say we didn't get 290 people to honor them just as we honored the victims of the Holocaust, just as we honored the persons who were heroes of the Holocaust. Some 60 of them have been honored as of Wednesday. I believe that we can do a similar thing for the persons of African ancestry who suffered here in this country.

Mr. Speaker, I want you to know that notwithstanding the fact that it didn't pass, hasn't passed in this Congress, and I don't think it will, I would love to think that we could push it through now. I don't think we will. However, I plan to file it in the next Congress. If it is God's will, I plan to do it and ask my colleagues to sign on to it again, and maybe we will get the 290.

Nevertheless, it is a painful thing to know that we could not get the 290 in this country in this Congress, which means we have to start all over again with the bill to honor the persons who are the economic foundation, the mothers and fathers, of the country. We have to start again in a new Congress next year, a new House, a new Senate, and a new President and push forward.

I just hope and pray that the 290 persons plus who signed on to the legislation to accord the Congressional Gold Medal to the heroes of the Holocaust posthumously, I just hope and pray that they will sign on to this legislation to honor persons who were the foundational mothers and fathers.

They never received any recompense, they never received any remuneration, and they never received any kind of thank you for your sacrifice.

The country has not been fair to them. The Congress has not been fair to them, but I still have hope. I will still come back and present the bill again. As long as I am breathing and I am in this Congress, I will be pushing for this legislation to pass.

I just want to know that people treat all crimes against humanity similarly, maybe not exactly same, but similarly. I just hope that we will treat this crime against humanity the same way we have treated the crime against humanity that we respect as the Holocaust.

Two crimes have been committed against humanity. One has been treated fairly in terms of what we are doing here in the House, the other has not. However, I believe in second chances and third chances.

So I close with these words, Mr. Speaker: I think it is difficult for people in this country to embrace what happened to the enslaved because it happened here. It is easy to look through the window of life and take a principled, conscience, and laudable position. It is difficult to look into the mirror of life and be equally as principled and conscience and laudable.

It is difficult because when you look through the window of life, you are looking at someone else and what they have done and you can see the horrors and you can speak with fervor about those horrors. However, when you look into the mirror of life, you are looking at yourself, and I believe that it is difficult for a good many people in this country and in this House, the House of Representatives, and in the Senate to look into the mirror of life and speak truth to yourselves about what happened and what we ought to do to show respect for some 246 years of suffering and sacrifice that made America great.

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

Madam Speaker, and still I rise. I rise proud to be a Member of this august body, always honored to have the preeminent privilege of standing here or in the well and making statements, hopefully, that can have an impact on society in a very positive way.

I rise today, Madam Speaker, because I am concerned about the rights of others. I stand for the rights of others notwithstanding who I am. I am not Asian, but I stand for the rights of Asians. I am not Palestinian, but I will stand up for Palestinians. I am not a Muslim, nor am I a person who is from some country that I may not be aware of. I will still stand up for their rights.

I believe that the rights of persons who are Jewish have to be focused on. We have to stand up for them, especially given what is happening with anti-Semitism today.

I am not a member of the LGBTQ+ community, but I stand up for their rights. Today, I am going to take a stand for those persons who are among the trans community, the transgender community.

I am not a member of the LGBTQ+ community, as I have indicated, but I still stand up for the rights of people, doesn't matter what community you are in. If you are being wronged, someone should stand up to make that wrong right.

Today, I want to talk about the bathroom issue, but before going there, let me just share this: I am a son of the segregated South. I know what invidious discrimination looks like, what it smells like, what it sounds like, what it hurts like. I know because I suffered invidious discrimination.

In the segregated South, I was not allowed to go into certain places because of the complexion of my skin. In the segregated South, even if I went into certain places, there were areas that I could not go into because of the color of my skin.

In the segregated South, there were signs on the doors of the necessary facilities, the toilets, that would indicate that they were for Whites or they were for colored. I understood, because my parents made it very clear to me, that you should never go into the area for Whites because people would harm me. It was their belief that I would be harmed, in fact, that I might even lose my life for simply going into the wrong toilet.

So I learned early in life what invidious discrimination was like. I had no differences with the people who were going into the Whites-only facility. I didn't dislike them. I didn't say bad things about them. I didn't try to hurt them in any way, but they chose to keep me out of a certain facility because of who I was, the color of my skin.

Now, this is an interesting phenomenon: But for the color of my skin, we had the same characteristics. We had the same number of arms and legs and eyes, same characteristics generally speaking.

Our physicality was quite similar, but the color of my skin was something that would not allow me to go into a Whites-only necessary facility, a Whites-only toilet.

That color of my skin made all the difference in the world. When I was within the facility, I used it the same way they would. There was no difference in the way I approached the use of it as it relates to the facility. We did it the same way. We went in the same door. We would come out the same door. While there, we would use the facilities in the same way. Nothing different other than the color of my skin that kept me out of a Whites-only restroom.

This is a remarkable circumstance. If you haven't lived it, you don't have the same understanding of how it impacts a person to know that you are now somehow a second-class citizen given that you cannot go into the first-class restroom.

By the way, it was a first-class facility because it was always clean. I know. I worked in a restaurant where my job was to clean facilities. It was always clean. It always had the fine fixtures. It always had the most room for persons to negotiate their way through the facility.

The other restroom for the coloreds was usually one that might have a broken fixture that wouldn't be repaired. It had floors that were not always the same in terms of how they were structured and how they were covered with various types of flooring. They were just different.

That was intentional. There was no desire to improve and have both of them the same. It was separate but equal then, but separate but equal simply meant there is a place for you and there was a place for Whites.

I mention this, Madam Speaker, because of this circumstance and the way I had been treated in life. Having celebrated my 25th birthday for the third time and now 2 years into my fourth 25th, I cannot in good conscience support the segregation of people based

upon gender. I cannot support it because I believe that people who are transgender have a right to go to the facility that they have now transformed themselves into by virtue of the transformation process that assigns them their gender. I just believe that I cannot in good conscience decide that I am going to force them to go to now a facility that does not align with the transformed gender that they now have.

I believe that the science is correct. I believe that persons who have this transformation have every right to go into a facility that now aligns with their transformed gender.

This is something that I absolutely believe. Because I believe it, it is going to be very difficult for me--in fact, it would be impossible, in my opinion--for me to support a rule or a mandate that would require persons who are of the trans community to go into a facility simply because it is the gender at birth that determines the place that you would now use as your necessary facility.

Your gender at birth is a wonderful thing. I accept my gender at birth. I am heterosexual. I live that life. However, there are some people who are born with a physicality that does not match their mentality, and science has demonstrated that they can be transformed such that their mental belief and definition of themselves can conform to their physical by virtue of having a transformation operation.

I am all for having people have necessary facilities. I support it. However, I support the notion that we would treat the trans community with the dignity and respect that they deserve simply because they are human beings just like the rest of us. We should not make them second- class citizens. We ought not decide that they can't go into certain facilities that are aligned with the gender that they now have simply because of their birth gender. The birth gender is not necessarily controlling if you within are of a different gender. It just cannot control, and I cannot impose this upon people.

Having gone now to segregated facilities myself, I see this as a step backward. I see this as taking us back to a time when we could segregate people. I don't support any form of segregation.

I understand that there are efforts afoot to resegregate society. Vouchers are a step in that direction. Vouchers can lead to the resegregation of society. It was Milton Friedman, Nobel laureate, who proposed keeping segregation, maintaining segregation after Brown v. Board of Education in 1954.

Proposed vouchers for the school systems to privatize the school systems, to make sure that people attended the school that they chose to based upon race, based upon color. This was proposed by Milton Friedman, the Nobel laureate.

From the moment he proposed it to this moment, there have been efforts to voucherize and privatize the public school system. We see it happening in Louisiana. It is happening in Texas. Our Governor went out of his way to defeat persons at the polls who would not support vouchers. Now, he is prepared to pass a bill in the Texas House of Representatives and the Texas Senate, that he will sign, that will allow schools to have private dollars, personal dollars, to go to private schools--personal dollars going to private schools is fine--but to take public funds from public schools and take these public dollars and put them into private schools.

If you want to pay for a private school, I support that. However, if you want your child to go to public schools, I also support having a public school available. If we privatize the school systems and if we find ourselves with Blacks going to certain schools, Whites going to other schools, Latinos perhaps in other schools, Asians in other schools, we will find ourselves revisiting a time that I lived through in the segregated South, a time when I was relegated to certain schools because of my color.

It won't be said to be because of color, but it can take place because of color and because of finance. Black people, generally speaking, are not as well financed as White people and as a result will not be able to afford to send their children to the same schools that Whites can send theirs. Some will say that is just going to be class. It is class that ends up being race-oriented because if you can't go in because of your money and you happen to be of a certain color, that is going to lead to the resegregation of society.

I refuse to stand by and allow this resegregation to take place without voicing my concerns. I want people to understand that I see these vouchers and I see these bathroom movements as nothing more than steps toward the resegregation of society.

I contend this: There are very few laws that prevent us from having a segregated society. There are many that we can name but very few. At the very heart of these few would be Brown v. Board of Education.

Brown v. Board of Education outlawed discrimination in public schools. It was a form of racism that we lived through that was called segregation, but it was racism. That racism caused segregation, forced me to go to one school where there were only people of my color and forced Whites to go to schools where there were only people who were of the White complexion. I don't like the term. I am using the term to communicate. They were forced to use these public schools, and I was forced to public schools where they were segregated.

If we allow Brown to be eroded by virtue of using vouchers, we are taking a step back to a time prior to 1954 when the Brown decision was rendered. If we go back beyond 1954, we will find ourselves slowly chipping away at other aspects of society such that I may again find myself having to go to a back door or I may find myself having to go to a colored-only restroom or I may find myself having to go to the balcony of the movie or the back of the bus. These are the things that I lived through, and I never believed--now that I have seen the change that has taken place in our country, I do not believe that we can conclude that we can't go back.

If you believe that we can't go back, ask women who believe that they should have the right to have choice in their lives as it relates to abortion. Ask them about what happened to the law that was but 50 years of age. Fifty years had passed, and we find ourselves with the Supreme Court overturning the law that gave women the constitutional right to have an abortion. Now this law has been challenged at the Supreme Court level, passed back down to the States to do with as they choose, and many States choose to literally do all they can to ban abortion in the United States of America.

Don't assume that what you have today you will have tomorrow. If you don't fight for it today, you can lose it tomorrow. If you don't fight for the rights of others, you could lose your rights. The rights of others are the rights that protect us. All of us are protected because we protect the rights of others and others protect our rights. If we don't protect each other, we can lose precious rights that we have.

This is a society that desires to have people sometimes subservient, as has been indicated by virtue of the fact that many people were enslaved. This subserviency is something that still exists in the hearts of many in this society, this desire to have people succumb. The need for some to have supremacy is something that we have to be alert for, and we have got to fight against.

I am going to stand up against it, which means I have to stand against any mandate that would require a trans person to go to a facility that is aligned with their birth gender as opposed to the gender that they currently have by virtue of having gone through the transformation.

I stand with them. I stand for the rights of all people to not suffer invidious discrimination. If you are going to stand for all people, you have got to stand with the trans community. This is my opinion.

Let others do what they may. I have taken my position. I don't know when there will be a vote on it or if ever there will be a vote. The judicious thing, they tell me, is if there is something that you may never have to vote on, never comment on it. However, there are some things that are so precious, some things that are so near and dear to the heart that you have to comment on them when you see a mistake about to be made.

I believe it would be a mistake for this House to conclude that trans people cannot go to the necessary facility

that aligns with their current sex, their current transformed sex. I believe it would be a mistake for the House to do this. I trust that it will be reconsidered and that it won't happen. The Senate has not done it. I pray that they will not, and I pray that the House will not.

Again, I stand for the rights of others. People not born into their lives--in the sense that I am not an Asian, I am not Latino, I am not Muslim, I am not Jewish, but I stand for the rights of all of these people. I also stand for the rights of Palestinians. I never want to leave them out, because Palestinian rights are being trampled upon every day now.

For me, standing up for the rights of others is a way of protecting my very own rights. I am here to do that. I am here to let the world know that trans people have the same rights to a facility as anybody else when it aligns with the gender that they currently have.

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

Madam Speaker, and still I rise, and I am proud to stand before you tonight to speak about a historic event that took place here in the Nation's Capitol on August 10, 2024.

This event took place in the Capitol Visitor Center Auditorium, and it was an event that featured the Prince Hall Freemasons. I am going to present a proclamation commemorating the historic Prince Hall Slavery Remembrance Day program with the theme: We are the dream and hope of the enslaved.

Before going through the proclamation, I would like to say just a few words about Prince Hall. I think that he is probably one of the most underrepresented, in the sense of being noted in history, most underrepresented persons who fought for freedom for the Africans who are in America and enslaved at the time. This is from PBS.

Prince Hall was a prominent African-American abolitionist and teacher in Boston's Free Black community during the American Revolution, most notably known for founding Prince Hall Freemasonry by establishing the first African Lodge of Masons in the United States, which allowed Black men to join the Masonic fraternity at a time when they were excluded from White lodges.

He actively advocated for civil rights and education for African Americans through his lodge and petitions to the government. The founder of Black Freemasonry, Hall is considered the founder of Prince Hall Freemasonry, a branch of Freemasonry specifically for African- American men, which stemmed from his efforts to establish the African Lodge No. 1 in Boston.

As an abolitionist, he was a vocal advocate for the abolition of slavery and used his platform within the Masonic lodge to promote social change for the Black community. He petitioned for rights. Hall was one of the first to use the language of the Declaration of Independence to petition the Massachusetts legislature for the emancipation of enslaved people.

There is limited information about his early life. While his exact date of birth and place are uncertain it is believed that he was born around 1735 and gained his freedom in Boston.

Let me step aside from the article just to note that he was not born a free person. He became a free person, and he used his freedom to do all that he could to liberate others.

Prince Hall is recognized as a significant figure in African-American history for his efforts to create a space for Black men to organize and advocate for their rights within a predominantly White society. Hence, Prince Hall is mentioned on this day because he was the founder of the organization that cooperated and collaborated with me to have this Slavery Remembrance Day program with the theme: ``We Are the Dream and Hope of the Enslaved.''

The theme was chosen because we believed that on the day that we were there it should have been something very special not just to us but to all Americans because the very facility that we were in, some portions of it, this complex as it were, some portions of it were actually built by enslaved people. As a result we thought that at some point in their lives some of them dreamed and hoped that as free people, their ancestors, their descendants, their descendants would walk into the places that we have an opportunity now to walk in freely, and they hoped and dreamed that one day there would be enough freedom for us to advocate for the respect due them that they never received in life.

The dream and hope of the enslaved. I am a part of that dream, and I am proud to say I am also a Prince Hall Mason. This occurred, as I indicated, in the United States Capitol, Washington, D.C., on August 10, 2024.

This is the declaration that is a part of the proclamation commemorating the historic Prince Hall Slavery Remembrance Day program.

``Declared: August 20th annually marks the observance of Slavery Remembrance Day, dedicated to the memory of those who suffered under the transatlantic slave trade and to acknowledge the enduring impact of slavery on our Nation;

``Declared: August 20th serves as a solemn reminder of the historical injustices of slavery and its lasting effects on the social, economic, and cultural fabric of the United States and aims to foster reflection, dialogue, and education to promote healing and reconciliation.

``Declared: The United States Congress, in recognizing the significance of Slavery Remembrance Day, resolved that it supports the designation of a `Slavery Remembrance Day' to serve as a reminder of the evils of slavery, condemns slavery and its evil progenies and encourages all to acknowledge the importance of slavery remembrance.

``Declared: The Conference of Grand Masters Prince Hall Masons, Inc. (COGM), under the leadership of president Eugene Anderson, Jr., Vice President Jeffrey G. Jones, Executive Secretary Emanuel J. Stanley, and Executive Treasurer Kevin L. Bell, alongside the Sovereign Grand Commander Southern Jurisdiction Dr. Corey D. Hawkins, Sr., and Sovereign Grand Commander Northern Jurisdiction, Dr. Melvin J. Bazemore, the host Grand Master Glenn N. Ruffin and each of the 46 member jurisdictions of the Conference of Grand Masters Prince Hall Masons, Inc., namely''--and I shall now for the record have each jurisdiction mentioned--``MWPHGL-Alabama; MWPHGL-Alaska; MWPHGL- Alberta, Canada; MWPHGL-Arkansas; MWPHGL-Bahamas; MWPHGL-California; MWPHGL-Caribbean; MWPHGL-Colorado; MWPHGL-Connecticut; MWPHGL-Cote d'Ivoire; MWPHGL-Delaware; MWPHGL-D.C.; MWUGL-Florida; MWPHGL-Georgia; MWPHGL-Hawaii; MWPHGL; MWPHGL-Indiana; MWPHGL-Iowa; MWPHGL-Kansas; MWPHGL-Kentucky; MWPHGL-Liberia; MWPHGL-Maryland; MWPHGL-Massachusetts; MWPHGL-Michigan; MWPHGL-Minnesota; MWSGL-Mississippi; MWPHGL-Missouri; MWPHGL-Nebraska; MWPHGL-New Jersey; MWPHGL-New Mexico; MWPHGL-New York; MWPHGL-Nevada; MWPHGL-North Carolina; MWPHGL-Ohio; MWPHGL-Oklahoma; MWPHGL-Ontario, Canada; MWPHGL-Oregon; MWPHGL-Pennsylvania; MWPHGL- Rhode Island; MWPHGL-South Carolina; MWPHGL-Tennessee; MWPHGL-Texas; MWPHGL-Virginia; MWPHGL-Washington; MWPHGL-West Virginia; MWPHGL- Wisconsin. . . . `'

These are the jurisdictions referenced in this commemoration document.

``Declared: The collaboration between the Conference of Grand Masters Prince Hall Masons, Inc., the United States Supreme Councils, Ancient & Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry Southern and Northern Jurisdictions Prince Hall Affiliation (PHA), and Texas Prince Hall Mason and the progenitor of Slavery Remembrance Day, Congressman Al Green, in organizing the Historic Prince Hall Slavery Remembrance Day program underscores the importance of partnership in addressing historical wrongs and fostering communal unity;

Proclamations Of Commemoration

``Proclaimed: That the United States House of Representatives, having recognized August 20th as Slavery Remembrance Day--we the Conference of Grand Masters Prince Hall Masons, Inc., the United Supreme Councils, Ancient & Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry Southern and Northern Jurisdictions Prince Hall Affiliation (PHA), and Progenitor/Congressman Al Green hereby commemorate the Historic Prince Hall Slavery Remembrance Day program on this day, August 10, 2024, and reaffirm our dedication to commemorating the memory of those who suffered under slavery by; educating future generations, as well as promoting social justice and equity;

``Faithfully Proclaimed: That this be entered into the Congressional Record, the archives of the Conference of Grand Masters Prince Hall Masons, Inc., the United Supreme Council Southern Jurisdiction PHA, the United Supreme Council Northern Jurisdiction PHA, and each of the 46 member jurisdictions that comprise the Conference of Grand Masters Prince Hall Masons, Inc., as a testament to the enduring significance of Slavery Remembrance Day and as a pledge to continue Slavery Remembrance Day programs annually on or near August 20th in the pursuit of truth, reconciliation, and equality for all.''

This document is also a part of the archives for my office. I have concluded that it is important for us to maintain records, something that has not been done, generally speaking, for African Americans, and as a result, much of our history has been either lost, ignored, or simply discounted.

This is important to people of African ancestry. This date, August 20th, is the date that the White Lion docked in the area known as Norfolk, Virginia, now in 1619 and the White Lion had the first 20 persons of African ancestry that were enslaved in the colonies.

This was a seminal moment in history in the life of this country because that moment has impacted all of the time since that time up to this very second in time. But we have not acknowledged properly the persons who were enslaved. We have not acknowledged them some more than 10 million. Estimates reached as high as 12 million. We have not acknowledged them for what they did to help develop and build this country.

They were the persons who planted the seeds and harvested the crops; they fed the Nation. They built the roads and bridges, and they helped to construct the Capitol and the White House. They literally were sacrificed for some 246 years, but they have not been given the recognition that many others who have been recognized and not sacrificed for nearly as long and who have suffered much less but were still honored.

There will be a day, hopefully within my lifetime, when I will stand here and say that these economic foundational mothers and fathers of the country, I say economic foundational mothers and fathers because literally they gave our country that I love, our country, the United States of America now, a head start in that it had 246 years of free labor, saving what it cost to manage and care for the people who were sacrificed.

I hope that one day in my lifetime I will be able to stand here and say that our country now recognizes the sacrifices that were made.

In 1956 we recognized the Confederate soldiers with a Congressional Gold Medal. It just seems to me that if we can recognize Confederate soldiers with a Congressional Gold Medal, then surely we can recognize the enslaved. However, not so.

Unfortunately, there are people who prefer not to recall slavery. They prefer to give it a new title. There are some who would call it involuntary relocation. It was more than involuntary relocation, Madam Speaker. It was 246 years of sacrifice.

My desire is to see the day, in fact, I live today to live to see the day, that my ancestors, who were sacrificed to make America great, receive a Congressional Gold Medal.

I would hope that we would, by and through the President, present them with a Presidential Medal of Freedom. It is something that has been accorded a good many people. I am not suggesting that we deny anybody anything that they have received, but I am saying that there are people who are deserving who have not received similar recognition. I live today to live to see the day that this will occur.

Finally, I thank the members of the Masonic order for joining with me to have this first Historic Prince Hall Slavery Remembrance Day program here in the Nation's Capitol. Next year, we will have the second historic program, and we hope to continue to do this each year until we have accomplished the recognition that our ancestors deserve, and then beyond it, to make sure that future generations will know that the greatness of America includes people whose lives were sacrificed these 246 years.

I am grateful to the men of the Prince Hall Masonic order. They have made a pledge to be here next year in the month of August. I have made a pledge to be with them, and next year we hope to have the auditorium with standing room only. We believe that we will have at least enough to fill all the seats and then have the overflow areas consumed as well.

Our goal in terms of producing this annual event is to eventually have it in Emancipation Hall. What a wonderful thing, to have Slavery Remembrance Day in Emancipation Hall. We are not there yet, but the appeal is being made to have it happen.

So I thank all of the persons who have made this program possible. I have mentioned the men of the Masonic order, but there were others. The leadership in the House and the leadership in the Senate have granted permission for us to have use of the facility. I thank the leadership. There were persons associated with the technology necessary to produce the program, I thank them. We had persons there to take photographs so that we can have within our archives actual representations of who the people were and how they were dressed in their regalia. The men of the Masonic order had on their regalia, and then the Eastern Stars were there as well.

I thank the people who helped us promote the program to get the word out. It is not easy to get the word out about Slavery Remembrance Day. It is more difficult than one might think, but there were people who helped us, and we did have a good representation.

Finally, I am wanting to just say thank you for giving me the strength to continue with this effort. I thank the creator of all of creation for the strength I have been given. I plan to use this strength to my very last breath to bring justice to the some 12 million people who suffered for 246 years to make America great.

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

Mr. Speaker, and still I rise.

And still I rise today, and I stand alone. I stand alone, Mr. Speaker, because sometimes it is better to stand alone than not stand at all.

I stand today, mindful of the words of the great Voltaire, the great intellectual who reminds us that it is dangerous, Mr. Speaker, to be right in affairs where established men are wrong.

I rise today to take a stand and call to the attention of the Nation that I love, I love this country. I salute the flag. I stand for the national anthem. I sing the national anthem.

I remind everyone that the greatness of America will not be measured by whether the Al Greens of the world will stand and sing and salute.

The greatness of America will be measured by whether the Al Greens of the world will defend those who choose not to stand, sing, and salute, and I do. I defend them.

I believe that the greatness of the country resides in our ability to have people that we disagree with stand before us, look us in the eye, announce their disagreement, and yet, we take that understanding that in this country, we can disagree and still have a great country.

I stand today to call to the attention of the Nation and the many who may not know, but a good many may know what I am about to share, and I have with me evidence of what I speak.

This, my dear friends, is from CNN by Andrew Carey, July 18, 2024, which would be a little more than 2 months, as I calculate things.

And it reads: ``Israeli Lawmakers Vote Overwhelmingly Against Palestinian Statehood''--remember, July 18, 2024. It goes on to say: ``Challenging U.S. Policy.'' This is the style of this article published by CNN.

These are the words. ``The Biden administration received another rebuff from Israel Wednesday night--this time from the country's parliament.'' The parliament would be the Knesset. That would be similar to--not the same as but similar to our Congress.

This is a rebuff, per CNN, from the parliament of Israel ``over the United States' longstanding support for the eventual establishment of a Palestinian state.''

Now, this is important to me because since I have been in Congress, and I arrived in 2005, there has been a policy of a two-state solution, a state for Palestinians and a state for Israelis--longstanding.

In fact, I have voted for it. I have voted to send money to Israel because I thought the two-state solution was the goal that we were all working toward. I have voted for more than $50 billion, thinking that we were moving toward a two-state solution.

Well, this article goes on to say: ``A two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been U.S. policy for decades''--I agree with that, it has--``but absent negotiations between the two sides, and a lack of sustained effort by the U.S.''--I shall repeat-- ``a lack of sustained effort by the U.S. to make it happen.''

Now, the contention in this article is that the United States has not made a sustained effort to make it happen.

I believe that the Biden administration has. I have witnessed much of what the Biden administration is trying to do and has done.

It goes on to read: ``On Wednesday evening, the Israeli Parliament made clear its position, voting by 68-9 to reject any creation of a Palestinian state.''

Mr. Speaker, 68-9, the Israeli Parliament has voted to reject any creation of a Palestinian state. Many people don't know this. I am grateful that CNN has published it.

It goes on. ``The Knesset of Israel firmly opposes the establishment of a Palestinian state west of the Jordan [River].''

Actually, it says west of the Jordan, but we know that that is the Jordan River. The Jordan River is at the West Bank, and it is the West Bank of Jordan, not the West Bank of Israel. It is a part of what should be a Palestinian state. We have the West Bank.

I will read this again because this is exceedingly important. ``The Knesset of Israel firmly opposes the establishment of a Palestinian state west of the Jordan [River].''

Now, if you do that west of the Jordan River, that is another way of saying from the river to the sea, from the river to the sea, no Palestinian state from the river to the sea.

Now, in this country, if you say from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free, well, that would be anti-Semitic.

Well, what is it if the Knesset of Israel, the governing body, the Knesset of Israel--and this is not just some person on the street.

``The Knesset of Israel firmly opposes the establishment of a Palestinian state west of the Jordan [River].''

From the river to the sea. That would include all of what at one time was known as Palestine. All of what at one time was known as Palestine.

I challenge anyone within the sound of my voice or anyone who is seeing this to look for a map with Palestine on it, a map depicting the area today.

It is not on the map. You may find it on some, but most maps will not have a place called Palestine on them today.

Now, remember, in 1948, the place that we are now calling Israel, as you will see later on in this article, was called Palestine.

The mandate was to have two states; one for Palestinians, one for Israelis. Somehow, this has metamorphosed into Israel in the minds of many people, but not in my mind.

I am still on the two-state solution program that I voted for and sent more than $50 billion to help accomplish.

From the river to the sea, the Knesset of Israel firmly opposes a Palestinian state. This is the Knesset of Israel.

It goes on to indicate: ``The establishment of a Palestinian state in the heart of the land of Israel''--``a Palestinian state in the heart of the land of Israel.''

Remember, 1948, all of this land was called Palestine--well, I should say 1947, 1948. Then there was a mandate. Pursuant to the mandate, there were to be two states, a State of Israel and a state of Palestine.

However, we find here that the Knesset of Israel has concluded that the establishment of a Palestinian state in the heart of the land of Israel--what happened to Palestine? What happened to the land that was to become a Palestinian state?

``The establishment of a Palestinian state in the heart of the land of Israel would pose an existential danger to the State of Israel and its citizens, perpetuate the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. . . .''

What will happen if there is no state for the Palestinians? Will that be perpetual peace if there is no state for the Palestinians? What are you saying when you say that there will be no state for the Palestinians? What will there be? Will there be a one-state solution in a state called Israel?

If that is the case, what will the Palestinians become? Will they have full citizenship in a state called Israel? Will they become a part of an apartheid state? What will happen to the Palestinians?

It is a fair question to ask when you have the Israeli Knesset indicating that there will be no Palestinian state from the river to the sea, which is all of what used to be called Palestine.

It goes on to indicate: ``perpetuate the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and destabilize the region,'' the declaration read.

Well, there are many questions to be asked. I don't know that the answers are going to be readily available, but it seems to me that this is perspicuously clear, and there will be no Palestinian state if the current Israeli Government has its way.

Let's go on. Same news article. It reads: ``Among those who backed it,'' meaning this resolution, ``was Benny Gantz, an opponent of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Gantz' vote serves as a blow to those in Washington''--that would be us--``who see him as someone more inclined to seek a negotiated peace with Palestinians if he ever became Israel's leader.''

Now we have the current Prime Minister, who is supportive of this resolution, and we have a potential Prime Minister, Mr. Benny Gantz, who has voted in favor of the resolution, as well.

It reads: ``Instead, the resolution was `a signal to the international community that pressure to impose a Palestinian state on Israel is futile.' '' That is what this is supposed to signal, Mr. Speaker, futile.

We are trying to negotiate a two-state solution when the Government of Israel has already passed a resolution that says we are not going to do that, there will be no two-state solution from the river to the sea.

Can you imagine if someone in this country said there will be no Israel from the river to the sea, what our response would be?

Do we not care about the Palestinians? Are they not human beings? Did they not have a place in the land that was called Palestine prior to 1947, 1948? Do the Palestinians not matter to anybody? They ought to have a place in the land that was called Palestine.

``Instead, the resolution was `a signal to the international community that pressure to impose a Palestinian state on Israel is futile.' ''

Why are we imposing a Palestinian state on Israel? We are imposing a Palestinian state pursuant to the mandate in a place called Palestine. We talk about these things as though Israel owns all of the land, and the Palestinians are foreigners who have somehow encroached upon the land of Israel.

Futile. ``Instead, the resolution was `a signal to the international community that pressure to impose a Palestinian state on Israel is futile,' leader of the right-wing opposition `New Hope' Party, Gideon Saar, said, according to the Haaretz newspaper.''

Now we have the Knesset saying no. From the river to the sea, there will be no Palestinian state.

Let's get another opinion. This article has been published in many publications, including the Times of Israel. This one was taken from the Economic Times, but the essence of what is here has been published many times.

Now, this reads: `` `We are not another star in American flag': Israel minister dismisses U.S. criticism over emigration of Gazan civilians.'' This is from January 3, 2024, not that long ago.

Then this Israeli Prime Minister says: ``I really admire the United States of America, but with all due respect''--by the way, I am not angry with him for what I am about to read. I respect him. I am not upset. He says: ``I really admire the United States of America, but with all due respect, we are not another star in the American flag.''

I agree with that. You are not another star in the American flag. No quarrel with that. Then he goes on to say--this is Ben Gvir--I want to make sure I get it right. No disrespect to you, sir. He heads the ultranationalist Otzma Yehudit party. This is what he said in the statement, ``not another star in the American flag.'' I agree, you are not.

Then he adds: ``The United States is our best friend''--no disagreement there--``but before everything else, we will do what is good for the State of Israel.'' Now, that is a minister, part of the Israeli Government, said he is going to do what is in the best interests of Israel. Who can be upset with him for saying he is going to do what is in the best interests of his country? I think he probably loves his country like I love my country, so he is doing what is in the best interests of his country.

Well, let's see what he thinks is in the best interests of his country. He goes on to say: ``Do what is good for the State of Israel.'' Then he adds: ``The emigration of hundreds of thousands from Gaza will allow residents''--this is being said parenthetically, but I will read it to you--``[of the border area] to return home and live in security and protect IDF soldiers.''

We need to focus on the word ``emigration.'' Emigration is thought by some to mean you will leave and you may return, but here is what Webster said emigration is ``departure from a place of abode, natural home, or country for life or residence elsewhere.'' You are not coming back. He has no problem with emigration of hundreds of thousands from Gaza.

Now, remember, Gaza and the West Bank are about all that the Palestinians can hope for at this point. Gaza and the West Bank, it is about all.

Well, if they leave and they can't return, then that becomes more land for Israel, which then means that all that the Palestinians may hope for would be the West Bank, which, of course, is being encroached upon by the settlers.

We find ourselves now with this minister indicating that he sees nothing wrong, it would be good for the State of Israel.

Now, dear friends, friends, if this official can say that he will do what is good for the State of Israel, is it wrong for me to stand in the well of the Congress of the United States of America, born here in the United States of America, born in Louisiana, lived my life here in the United States of America, no desire to live anywhere else or move to any other place, is it wrong for me to say that I think I should do what is in the best interests of my country?

He does what is in the best interests of his country; I do what is in the best interests of my country. I don't believe it is in the best interests of my country for us to continue to send billions of dollars to Israel when Israel's Knesset has voted from the river to the sea there will be no Palestinian state. From the river to the sea.

My God, can you imagine what would happen if someone stood here in the well of the House of Representatives and said, from the river to the sea there will be no State of Israel? I don't have to imagine it. I have seen what happens. They get punished. They become an anti-Semite.

What do we call the people who say, from the river to the sea, there will be no Palestinian state? Is there a double standard? Is there a double standard? I believe that there has to be a Palestinian state, so I am out of step with a good many people. Remember, however, I believe it is better to stand alone than to not stand at all.

I don't think that it is good for the United States to continue to fund wars that a good many people in this country do not support. I am one of them. I think it is time to bring this war to an end. It is time for us to move toward a two-state solution, but also more importantly or equally as important, it is time to bring home the hostages. Negotiate so that the hostages can be released. It is time for them to be released. Let them go home.

It is time for us to negotiate a serious two-state solution, but unfortunately the Knesset has said that it will not happen. This government says that it won't.

Well, I contend that if this government says that it won't, that it is okay. The government in Israel has every right to make these comments, but I also think that the government of the United States has every right to say: No more money, no more bombs, no more planes. You can do what you choose, you are a sovereign nation, but so is the United States of America.

We are a sovereign Nation, Mr. Speaker. We have every right to say: That if you can't agree on the two-state solution that was mandated in 1948, 1947, then okay.

We don't have to support eternal conflict. We don't have to support the war where thousands of babies have been killed. We don't have to support the taking of the land from the Palestinians in the West Bank by the settlers. We don't have to support this.

But I don't speak for us. I speak for myself and everybody who agrees with me, and a good many people do, by the way.

I believe that our alternative to continuing to support the erosion of Palestinian land, the taking of Palestinian land, the declaring that there will be no Palestinian state, I think we should acknowledge that you are a sovereign nation, but so are we and that we will stand for what we have stood for for decades and that is a two-state solution.

I compliment President Biden for making this a significant issue as we go through this time of great turmoil. I compliment him, but I think that we have reached a point now where there has to be a change in our policy. If Israel changed its policy, we can change ours. It is time for a change in the American policy.

We can still be friends. The government of Israel, the country of Israel, will be our friend, but we don't have to support this war. We can ask for peace, and peace is the solution. There is not going to be a solution other than a peaceful two-state solution if you want peace.

Now, if you want eternal conflict or if you want calm, if you want things to calm down, then you can have a one-state solution. Remember this: There is a calm in a dungeon where people are suffering. You can have calm in a dungeon, but that is not peace.

If we want peace where neighbors can work together, you have to work toward it. You don't make peace with friends. They are already in a peaceful relationship. You have to make peace with people who have been antithetical to your views.

It is time to say you don't have to make peace, but we don't have to support what you are doing.

We have got an aircraft carrier with Americans out there at risk, nuclear powered. It is like a floating military base. When we send out these nuclear-powered aircraft carriers, I am told they can be fueled such that, if need be, they can stay for 25 years, and it has other ships and other aircraft there with it, some 90 aircraft.

Our people are at risk because we have a state, by and through its government, who is saying there will be no two-state solution, and we have now what appears to be a conflict that is expanding and may eventually become a conflagration. It is expanding.

I am for everybody having the right to defend themselves, and that has to include the State of Israel.

I am also for peace, and peace is not going to be gained by continuing the process of making war. At some point, either someone is going to trigger something that will take this to a different place, or we will back off and try to have arrangements first and then peace to follow. All of the hostages should be brought home, all of them.

Now, I close with this, Mr. Speaker. I have said that I don't think that our government should continue to support the war, but I don't speak for the government, so I am going to speak for myself now. I didn't speak for the government before. Everything that I have said, I speak for myself and all of those who agree with me.

Here is what I say. If you bring a standalone bill to this floor, I am going to vote against it. If it is a standalone bill, just as the last one was--I believe it was the last--to send more funds to Israel, it is no secret, don't count me as a yea. Count me as a nay if you bring a standalone bill.

Now, someone would say: Why wouldn't you just say that you are going to vote against any bill?

Well, because I have been here long enough to have the good sense to know that these things can be packaged such that you have to hold your nose and your breath and close your eyes and turn your back and just vote for it. You may not want to, but the way it is packaged can push you into a corner, a place that you dare not go and don't want to be, but you do.

If you bring a standalone bill, I am voting against it and probably will vote against others that are not standalone, depending on how they have been packaged. It is time for us to take a stand.

There is a song, a spiritual song, that has the words ``just stand,'' ``just stand.'' ``After you've done all you can''--and I am doing all that I can.

After you have done all that you can, knowing that it is dangerous to be right in affairs where established men are wrong, after you have done all that you can, just stand. Just stand. Stand for liberty and justice for all as represented by that flag behind the Speaker.

Stand with Carlyle: ``No lie can live forever.''

Stand with William Cullen Bryant: ``Truth, crushed to earth, shall rise again.''

Stand with Dr. King: ``The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.''

Stand knowing that the words of C.A. Tindley are powerful and right:

Harder yet may be the fight;

Right may often yield to might;

Wickedness high may seem to reign;

And Satan's cause may seem to gain.

But there is a God that rules above,

With a hand of power and a heart of love;

And when I am right, I just believe that God will help me

fight.

Harder yet may be the fight, Mr. Speaker.

Harder may be the fight.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.

Still I rise, and I rise today in strong opposition to this legislation. On the subject of climate change, acknowledging the dangers posed by climate change benefits corporate America, as climate change is a threat to our financial system, as well as the global economy.

If insurance companies and their investors do not account for climate risk, they will either have to go bankrupt or exit certain markets, exacerbating the recent trend wherein some of the largest insurance companies are choosing to withdraw coverage from certain States.

Further, a 2023 study conducted by asset manager Nuveen found that more than 73 percent of U.S. investors said they were more likely to invest in a company that communicates its plans for effectively managing ESG-related risk.

Now on the question of diversity. When it comes to diversity, diversity is a benefit, not a detriment. Diversity benefits corporate shareholders by improving a company's performance.

A 2023 McKinsey report found that companies in the top 25 percent for both gender and ethnic diversity in their executive teams are, on average, 9 percent more likely to outperform their peers.

On the other hand, McKinsey found that companies in the bottom 25 percent for both gender and ethnic diversity are 66 percent less likely to outperform their peers.

In truth, this isn't about minorities and women not being qualified. In truth, it is about the fact that they are minorities and women in a society that has historically discriminated against them. Minorities and women are good for business.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I speak with a heavy heart because on occasions such as this, we are all reminded of the realistic possibility of losing a loved one without notice. It was without notice that a wife has lost her husband, that children have lost their father, and America has lost a hero.

While Members of Congress do not always agree, today we stand shoulder to shoulder in our desire to see tragedies such as this cease within our Nation.

We want the family of this hero to know that we are forever grateful to them for sharing him with us. They are not only in our thoughts and prayers, they are also in our hearts.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this discriminatory and unnecessary legislation.

The Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S. (CFIUS) is currently empowered to examine foreign investments related to agriculture.

This legislation would continue to exacerbate anti-Asian hate and xenophobia. This legislation mirrors the discriminatory real-estate laws proposed in many States, including my home State of Texas.

As a staunch opponent of invidious discrimination, I have introduced legislation, H.R. 3697--Preemption of Real Property Discrimination Act, which would preempt these unacceptable State laws that seek to deny foreign citizens the opportunity to acquire real property in the United States.

Congress must reject all attempts to exacerbate the already intolerable levels of xenophobia in our Nation.

Diversity is a benefit, not a detriment.

Mr. Speaker, and still I rise. I rise today to remind us of the words of Dr. Martin Luther King: The truest measure of the person is not where you stand in times of comfort and convenience but where you stand in times of great challenge and controversy.

Where do you stand when children in Gaza are being killed by the thousands?

Where do you stand when the infrastructure of Gaza is being destroyed--schools, hospitals, homes?

Where do you stand?

I cannot in good conscience stand with Mr. Netanyahu. I will not be in this facility today when he speaks. I will not, if it is a standalone bill, vote to send another dime to Mr. Netanyahu's administration.

It is not just Hamas that he wants to destroy. He is destroying Gaza, and he would, if he could, take all of Palestine.

Mr. Speaker, I cannot in good conscience stand in this House today and say that I will attend the Netanyahu address to Congress for the same rationale that caused me to vote against the Israel Security Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2024. I include in the Record the entirety of my rationale, which was published in a Houston Chronicle full-page ad on April 25, 2024.

Re Why I voted no on The Israel Security Supplemental

Appropriations Act of 2024

Israel suffered a tragic loss on October 7, 2023. The

people of Israel are in mourning. The lives of innocent

civilian Israeli men, women, and especially children matter.

They must be protected. This includes the hostages, all of

whom must be immediately returned in tandem with a lasting

ceasefire as the genesis of a two-state solution.

After the horrific human rights violations committed by

Hamas on October 7, 2023, the Netanyahu administration had

just cause catalyzing a de jure right to pursue justice as it

did by declaring war on Hamas, not hundreds of thousands of

innocent civilian Palestinian men, women, and especially

children.

To the contrary, and shamefully, Prime Minister Netanyahu

has engaged in an unjust, revengeful, might-makes-right

offense, creating more enemies than have been killed. He has

engaged in lethal atrocities wherein the ends of destroying

Hamas justifies:

Killing thousands of innocent civilian Palestinian

children;

Collectively harming thousands upon thousands of innocent

civilian Palestinian men, women, and especially children;

Failing to properly aid hundreds of thousands of food-

deprived Palestinians; and

Committing domicide by destroying approximately 62 percent

of Palestinian homes in Gaza, as well as damaging at least 84

percent of Gaza's health facilities, together with over 275

schools.

It has become intuitively and painfully obvious to me that

Prime Minister Netanyahu's definition of ``the right to

defend'' embraces an invidious ends-justifies-the-means

strategy. This imprudent and unjust strategy of domicide,

collective harm, and failure to feed the hungry, in tandem

with the killing of thousands of innocent Palestinian

children, cannot in good conscience receive a blind eye.

No one, no political entity, no country can commit such

atrocious injustices in the name of justice and expect the

blessings of people of good will. Injustice in the name of

justice is still an injustice. Israel's de jure right (in the

hands of Prime Minister Netanyahu) to defend itself in the

name of justice has metamorphosed into unconscionable de

facto human rights violations that offend the conscience and

grievously tarnishes Israel's global image. In truth, Prime

Minister Netanyahu's might makes right, by any means

necessary--war--is making Israel an existential threat to

Palestinians living in Gaza.

I cannot in good conscience oppose the above-cited

atrocious transgressions and contemporaneously provide the

munitions which can beget more of these God-awful

inhumanities. Sadly, but righteously, I cannot vote to send

the pending billions of supplemental funds to the opprobrious

administration of Prime Minister Netanyahu. To do so would

allow those funds, or free up other funds in their treasury,

to purchase the lethality to kill more innocent civilian

Palestinian men, women, and especially children, which I

oppose.

Palestinians (like Israelis) are in mourning, and the lives

of innocent civilian Palestinian men, women, and especially

children matter. They too must be protected.

For the reasons enumerated above, I voted no on The Israel

Security Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2024.

Sincerely,

Al Green,

Member of Congress.

Mr. Speaker, and still I rise, very proud to be a Member of the House of Representatives and very proud to be a citizen of the United States of America.

I love my country. I love it because of what it stands for. I love the words in the Pledge of Allegiance: liberty and justice for all. I love the words in the Declaration of Independence: all persons created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among them life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

I love my country notwithstanding the fact that my country has not always loved me. I am a son of the segregated South. There were times in my lifetime when I had to go to back doors to enter facilities, when I had to drink from colored water fountains, and when I literally had to step off the sidewalk so that others could pass.

Notwithstanding all of this, I love my country. Today, I rise to call to the attention of my country and all who are assembled the fact that August 20 is Slavery Remembrance Day because it was on August 20 of 1619 that the White Lion docked in a place called Point Comfort, near where we now call Norfolk, Virginia.

On the White Lion, there were 20 persons of African ancestry. These were the first 20 persons introduced into slavery by way of the colonies in what would become the United States of America.

Notwithstanding August 20 of 1619, which was a seminal moment in time that has impacted the rest of time in this country, I still rise and say: I love my country.

Mr. Speaker, it is appropriate for me at this time to pause. The minority leader has arrived, and I have a duty,

responsibility, and an obligation to accord him time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Jeffries).

Mr. Speaker, still I rise to commemorate August 20 as Slavery Remembrance Day because, as I have indicated many times on this floor and done so today, it is the date that the White Lion, a ship with 20 persons of African ancestry, docked at a place called Point Comfort near where we now call Norfolk, Virginia.

It was a moment in time that has an impact on the rest of time in this country because for 246 years more than 10 million persons of African ancestry were brought to this country to sacrifice. They sacrificed such that this very building was a product of their hands. They sacrificed to build roads and bridges. They were the persons who sacrificed to plant the crops and harvest and feed the Nation. For 246 years, they sacrificed. Yet, to this day, they have not been properly acknowledged for the sacrifice that they suffered. They have not been acknowledged.

We have acknowledged others. We have acknowledged the Confederate soldiers who fought to maintain slavery. We did so in 1956. We have acknowledged others. I think it is time to acknowledge them because, truth be told, they were the economic foundational mothers and fathers of the country. This country's economic success was built on 246 years of sacrifice made by persons who were enslaved in our great country.

Why not honor them for their sacrifice? Why not allow them to have, at last, the honor that they have earned by virtue of their sacrifice?

This is what we will attempt to do on August 20. We have been doing so now for a number of years. On August 20, Slavery Remembrance Day, we plan to have a major event right here in the Capitol, right here in the facility, just off these grounds in the Capitol Visitor Center.

We plan to honor them with a day of remembrance. I am honored to say that there are many persons who will be in attendance, including the men of the Masonic Order. They will come and pay tribute, as I will.

It is about more than tribute. It is about legislation that we have that we will present to do what we did not do. That is not only pay tribute to them, but also to have those who participated in this enslavement by way of their predecessor institutions--I am talking about banks and insurance companies--we have legislation to seek atonement for this behavior of their predecessor institutions.

More importantly, we will have a final opportunity on that day, as we will on August 20 and all future days, to ask and remind people that we have legislation pending to accord a Congressional Gold Medal to the enslaved. We are asking the President of the United States to present them with a Presidential Medal of Freedom. Give them in death what they never had in life, some semblance of freedom.

We plan to acknowledge people who have been helpful with this journey. Mr. Steny Hoyer, who at the time was the majority leader, was helpful in getting legislation through the House to acknowledge Slavery Remembrance Day.

Today, I rise as a progenitor of August 20 as Slavery Remembrance Day. I rise today as a scion of the enslaved Africans, whose lives were sacrificed for 246 years to make America great. Thereafter, many of their lives were sacrificed in something called convict leasing to continue slavery under another name. Thereafter, they were treated as second-class citizens, my ancestors, with something called lawful segregation.

Lawful segregation, which was a form of invidious discrimination, which was a form of racism, all of these things happened. We can't deny them. The truth is being told, but I am saying to you: Notwithstanding all of these things, I still love my country. I am saying to you: Notwithstanding all of these things, my country still hasn't done enough to acknowledge the history and acknowledge the suffering of those whose lives were sacrificed to make America great.

August 20, we plan to continue the process of acknowledgement. We plan to continue the process of honoring and causing people to understand that, in this country, notwithstanding our history, we can atone.

There is time to atone, which brings me to the last piece of legislation that we will call to the attention of persons assembled. This piece of legislation calls for a department of reconciliation.

We have not reconciled. We have not. There are many things that we need to reconcile. Slavery is one of them. The things that happened to the indigenous Americans, the aboriginal Americans, who we call Indians, were unconscionable. They suffered injustices that no one else has suffered in this country.

We ought to atone. We ought to have a department of reconciliation with a secretary of reconciliation, who reports directly to the President of the United States of America, with the sole mission of bringing about atonement and reconciliation for our many transgressions.

If America is to be America for all Americans, we have to do this. We have to have the atonement.

It has to also include the many persons of Asian ancestry, whose ancestors came here and built the railroads, whose ancestors were interned simply because there was a war going on and they happened to be of a certain ancestry, that their ancestors were related to the war, but they were not. Many of them were Americans, and they were interned unjustly and unlawfully, in my opinion. We have to atone for this.

We also have to atone for what happened with Texas. I am a Representative from the State of Texas. I proudly wear a Texas tie when I am on the floor, if not a tie celebrating the United States of America in some way. This is my way of showing my patriotism. I also sing the national anthem. I stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.

We have to atone for what happened in Texas. Texas is the only State in the Union to secede twice because of slavery. Texas left Mexico because Mexico said: No more slavery, Texas.

Texas said: Well, if we can't have slavery, we will leave Mexico, and they did. Texas did, and then became a part of the United States.

Texas then left the United States because of slavery.

We have to atone for these things. We have to acknowledge that they occurred.

On August 20, we have to bring to the attention of our country the fact that we will honor those whose lives have been sacrificed, and we should have a department of reconciliation in addition to Slavery Remembrance Day to honor those persons whose lives were sacrificed.

Mr. Speaker, it is always an honor to stand here in the well of the House. I do love my country, but my country has not always loved me.

It is difficult sometimes to love that which does not love you, but I do, and I have, and I will, because, the truth be told, notwithstanding all of the things that have happened and many that have happened to me personally--I have celebrated my 25th birthday for the third time. I am now into my fourth 25th--all of these things, it is my belief that, if something bad has to happen to you now, let it happen to you in the United States of America.

If you have to go through a divorce, if your spouse is going to leave you, let it happen in the United States of America.

If you have to suffer the alienation of affection from your pet, your dog bites you, let your dog bite you in the United States of America.

Mr. Speaker, notwithstanding all of the things that have happened, I still believe that the best place to make change and to bring about liberty and justice for all is the United States of America.

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

Mr. Speaker, I was unable to attend the vote series today, due to an unexpected absence. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 336 and YEA on Roll Call No. 337.

Madam Speaker, and still I rise. Still I rise, proud to be a person who is blessed with the preeminent privilege of standing here and speaking in this most sacred Chamber, proud to be a person who is in service to his country, proud to acknowledge that we, in Houston, Texas, just celebrated Juneteenth, the day that General Gordon Granger read General Order No. 3 in Galveston, Texas.

General Order No. 3 was read at Galveston, Texas, to call to the attention of the people of the State of Texas that the Emancipation Proclamation had some 2\1/2\ years earlier freed the slaves in the Confederate States. Of course, the people in Texas did not honor the Emancipation Proclamation. Hence, people were maintained in slavery for some 2\1/2\ additional years.

General Gordon Granger didn't come to Galveston, Texas, alone. General Gordon Granger came with the 25th Army Corps. The 25th Army Corps liberated Galveston, Texas.

It was the 25th Army Corps that came to Galveston and ran the confederates out of town, as it were. It is said that they were chased to the border of Mexico, which allowed General Gordon Granger to read General Order No. 3. But for the 25th Army Corps, General Gordon Granger may not have been in a position to read General Order No. 3 on June 19, because the 25th Army Corps came in about a week earlier.

The 25th Army Corps was more than 1,000 persons strong and consisted primarily of persons who were of African ancestry. It was African people who fought to liberate Galveston, Texas. Hence, we have Juneteenth.

There is much more that I could say about Juneteenth and General Order No. 3 as well as the 25th Army Corps. We have presented a resolution to honor the 25th Army Corps for their bravery and for their valor. Much more is to be said about them.

Today, I want to move forward from Juneteenth. I would like to acknowledge it as a celebration of liberation, persons being liberated after having suffered the inhumanity associated with slavery.

I mention this Juneteenth date, because we will soon commemorate August 20. August 20 is Slavery Remembrance Day. Remember, Juneteenth was the celebration of liberation. August 20 is the commemoration of the millions who were enslaved.

I mention it now, because as we move toward this date, I want persons to take note of it. It is an important date in American history. It is important because it was on August 20, 1619, that the White Lion, a ship with, it is said, 20 enslaved persons of African ancestry aboard, were introduced to the Colonies which would go on to become the United States of America, or part of the United States of America.

These 20 persons represent the genesis of slavery in the United States of America. This date should not be forgotten. This date should be commemorated. It was a seminal moment in time that has impacted every scintilla of time since that day, August 20, 1619.

We should remember this day. We should commemorate it because of the lives that were lost and the suffering that was endured by the many persons who traversed the waters and the many who did not make it.

We should remember it because of the persons who did make it and what they contributed to this country. They were the persons who made America the great country it is because they were the economic foundational mothers and fathers of the country. As such, they deserve to be honored and they deserve to have their lives respected.

They were not just throwaways. They were not people who came here to do harm. They were brought here forcefully to help, and they did for some 246 years.

We should commemorate this date, August 20, and we should do so annually. The President of the United States of America has acknowledged August 20. I am proud to say that the Honorable Elizabeth Warren has joined me in this effort to spread the word and assure the commemoration of August 20 as Slavery Remembrance Day. The President acknowledged it. This House of Representatives has acknowledged August 20, 1619, as Slavery Remembrance Day. I want to make sure that we are mindful of this day as it approaches and as we approach it.

I want us to be mindful of it because I want us to set aside time to have a commemoration event. This is important. I liken this commemoration event to Holocaust remembrance. I am one of those persons who has great reverence for Holocaust remembrance.

When last we had an event here in the Capitol for Holocaust remembrance, I was there, and I was there the time before. I pray that I will be there next year and the many years after. I believe that the Holocaust was an event unlike any other in history, and we have to commemorate it with a degree of solemnity the lives that were lost so as to not only appreciate what happened during the Holocaust but also to assure ourselves that it will never happen again. It was a crime against humanity unlike any other.

I liken slavery remembrance to the Holocaust because it, too, was a crime against humanity unlike any other, and it too should be commemorated in a similar fashion. We should have solemnity for slavery remembrance, and we should also have slavery remembrance events. People should take the time to commemorate the lives that were lost just as we do for the Holocaust. We do this, and we should do it for both events.

I stand here today to say to my country: Let us give slavery remembrance the same respect that we accord Holocaust remembrance. Both of them were crimes against humanity unlike each other. Each was unlike any other crime.

They are events that ought to be commemorated.

My desire, coupled with many others, I might add, who are joining me, is to have an event to commemorate the lives that were lost.

We want to at that event acknowledge certain things, acknowledge that we believe this should be a holy day, not a holiday. Not a holiday. We are not asking the Federal Government to allow people to be off from work. We are not asking the Federal Government to pay anyone a special salary and allow them to be away from work.

We are just asking that the people who respect the day to respect the day, and if you have African ancestry, then respect yourself enough to commemorate August 20. It is not a holiday; it is a holy day. The distinction is we are not asking the government to recognize it as a holiday with some emolument to be accorded to people who work for the government. We just want

people to respect the more than 10 million lives who were sacrificed to make America great.

Madam Speaker, respect them and give them the same respect we give others who have made sacrifice for this country. Others have sacrificed, and they should be respected, as well. We respect the military for the sacrifices made. I respect the military for the sacrifices made. I honor those who are willing to sacrifice and join the military.

Those who were part of the American enslaved didn't join. They weren't recruited, they were forced. They ought to be respected just as we respect the lives lost in the wars. We should respect the lives lost to slavery in this great country made great because of those persons who were enslaved for some 246 years.

Let's respect them. Do this on August 20, and let's respect them to the same extent that we have respected persons who were members of the Confederacy. I say that because in the year 1956, the Congress of the United States of America presented a Congressional Gold Medal to the Confederate soldiers. A Congressional Gold Medal. I believe that we should accord a Congressional Gold Medal to the enslaved. To the enslaved a Congressional Gold Medal should be presented.

If we can present a Congressional Gold Medal to the Confederate soldiers who were fighting to maintain slavery, then surely we can present a Congressional Gold Medal to those who were enslaved. I think we should do it.

On August 20 we will talk about this Congressional Gold Medal and what we are doing to make this Congressional Gold Medal a reality for those who were enslaved, but we shouldn't stop there. The Congressional Gold Medal is something that they have earned by their labor. Their unpaid labor hasn't been properly addressed, but because of their labor and because of the sacrifice of being born into slavery and having lived in slavery and died as a slave, then that kind of sacrifice ought to be honored.

I believe that we will do this at some point across the length and breadth of the country, but that is not enough. I also believe that the President of the United States should award a Presidential Medal of Freedom to the enslaved. We have given Presidential Medals of Freedom to many persons, and I am not in any way contending that we should not have given them their Presidential Medals of Freedom.

What I am saying is that we have neglected the 10 million-plus persons whose lives were sacrificed to make America great. We ought to give them a Presidential Medal of Freedom, as well.

On August 20 we will commemorate their lives with dignity and solemnity. We will explain what we have done in moving toward the Congressional Gold Medal, as well as the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

Finally, I believe that we who have suffered ought to be of assistance to each other in helping to commemorate the suffering. When I say we who have suffered, I am talking about our ancestors having suffered. We ought to stand together. We ought to work together.

When there is Holocaust remembrance, I believe people who have suffered as the descendants, the scions, if you will, of those who were enslaved, I think we ought to do all that we can to be a party to Holocaust remembrance. Moreover, likewise, I believe that my Jewish brothers and sisters ought to be a party to slavery remembrance.

We have suffered. The suffering ought not be something that is simply another day as far as the day of recognition and then we go off. I believe that there is a certain amount of unity that suffering requires of people who have suffered. That is because suffering can teach you what you can learn no other way. It really teaches you why it is so important to respect the lives of those who suffered.

You suffer as a descendant. I don't mean suffer in the same sense as your ancestors or our ancestors, but we still suffer, and we are going to suffer, but we ought to commemorate the lives lost. That helps greatly.

I am inviting my friends of all hues to be a party to the Slavery Remembrance Day event. We will say more about it later as far as time and location, inviting everyone, with a special invitation to my friends who are descendants of the persons who suffered the Holocaust.

I extend a special invitation to those persons who are descendants of those who suffered the Trail of Tears and a special invitation to those who were interned. There are American citizens whose Asian ancestors were interned because they were suspected, but never proven, to be antithetical to the best interests of the country.

I extend a special invitation to the Latinos who have suffered in that there is land that was removed from Mexico that became a part of the United States. Many people lost their lives in battles associated with that conflict.

I extend a special invitation to anyone and everyone who, which probably would mean every person alive, has some degree of ancestors who have suffered in a similar sense. They are all separate and they are all different, but I respect all of the suffering. I invite persons to come to the Slavery Remembrance Day.

Let us now start the process of not only remembrance but also making it special by awarding this Congressional Gold Medal and this Presidential Medal of Freedom.

I am a scion of the enslaved persons--a scion, by the way, is a descendant--a scion of the enslaved persons whose lives were sacrificed to make America great. As a scion, I respect all who have suffered the indignity and injustice of having their ancestors suffer. I invite scions of all hues, of all stripes, to come together on Slavery Remembrance Day, August 20.

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

Mr. Speaker, the vote closed before 92 members voted. Had I been present, I would have voted NAY on Roll Call No. 283.

Mr. Speaker, and still I rise.

Today, I rise to remind us that as we celebrate Juneteenth, let us not forget the men of the 25th Army Corps.

General Gordon Granger came into Galveston, Texas, to read General Order No. 3, announcing that the enslaved persons had been freed, but it was the 25th Army Corps that came in before General Gordon Granger and liberated Galveston, Texas.

They were 1,000 persons who had been enslaved but were now free. The 25th Army Corps deserves recommendation, and they deserve commemoration. Let us remember them, as well.

God bless you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank the United States of America.

Mr. Chair, and still I rise. I thank the gentleman for yielding 1 minute and I thank those members of the Rules Committee who made this moment possible.

Mr. Chair, today, I rise to call attention to a 159-year-old injustice. Milton Holland was given a battlefield promotion. When he received that promotion, it was not validated later on when it was discovered that he was a person of African ancestry.

The battlefield promotion he was given was denied because of who he was. He was a member of the Union Army, by the way. He received the Medal of Honor but could not maintain the promotion that he received for the valor he displayed in battle.

This injustice will be corrected today. Every person who votes will be bending the arc of the moral universe toward justice for Milton Holland.

Mr. Speaker, and still I rise. And still I rise today to address a topic of concern to a good many Americans. In my opinion, it should be of concern to all Americans, and that is the right to peacefully protest, the right to protest.

I am a person who has engaged in peaceful protests. I look forward to engaging in peaceful protests in the future, but I would like to just talk about what this really means when we talk about peaceful protests.

We have reached a point where it is not enough just to say peaceful protest. You have to add some additional verbiage. Today I will talk about nonviolent, peaceful protests; nonviolent, hate-free, peaceful protests.

I would not engage in peaceful protests where hate is a part of the verbiage that is being utilized. I believe in peaceful protests, but I don't believe in bringing hate to the protest movement. I believe in nonviolent, peaceful, hate-free protests.

I am going to share one example of protest that I absolutely disagree with because it is not nonviolent, peaceful, hate-free protest. I am amazed at what I saw and what I have read as it relates to this. I first saw it on television, and I was stunned, shocked, thunderstruck. I have since read a news story about it which I shall share excerpts with you that relate to this protest that was taking place.

Remember, I am the guy who believes in protests. I have been to jail for protesting, which means I broke the law. When you break the law and you are protesting, you have to be prepared to suffer the consequences. I and John Lewis on multiple occasions protested, and we broke the law. We went to jail, and we suffered the consequences. If you are going to protest, be prepared to suffer the consequences. Be prepared, if you are going to jail, to bail yourself out of jail.

Some protest movements have gone too far. I hope that this will help some of us to better understand what peaceful protest is all about. I have an article in my hands. This article is from ABC News dated June 13, 2024. June 13, 2024, recent news. The style of it is: ``Gaza War Protests Denounced by NYC''--that would be New York City--``leaders as `anti-Semitic' after subway car threat chant, vandalism.''

I am not reading it in toto. In part, it reads: ``The New York Police Department said Thursday that they are working to identify the masked leader of a call-and-response chant by protesters on a crowded Manhattan subway car on Monday. The chant asked Zionists to identify themselves.

``Video surfaced Wednesday of the incident on a Brooklyn-bound subway train that was halted with its doors open at the Union Square station in Manhattan.

`` `Repeat after me: Raise your hands if you are a Zionist.' ''

I would not want someone to say raise your hand if you are an African American, raise your hand if you are a female, raise your hand if you are a part of the LGBTQ+ community, raise your hand if you are a Muslim or if you are an Asian. I would not want a person to say that on a subway car and then continue with what I am about to read.

`` `Repeat after me:' '' it says. `` `Raise your hands if you are a Zionist,' the leader, wearing sunglasses and a traditional Palestinian keffiyeh scarf . . . ''

I have one of these scarves, by the way. There is nothing wrong with having such a scarf. The leader had this scarf, which has become a symbol of pro-Palestinian resistance. He is heard repeatedly saying in the video, adding: `` `This is your chance to get out.' ''

I wouldn't want someone to say, raise your hand if you are an African American, and then go on to say, this is your chance to get out, to get off the car.

It goes on to read, and this is a quote: `` `Okay, no Zionists, we are good,' the leader is then heard saying.'' This is anti-Semitic.

If he had said raise your hand if you are a Black person, it would be racist.

If he had said Raise your hand if you are a Muslim, it would be anti- Islam, which can be said to be Islamophobia.

Raise your hand if you are Asian; that is anti-Asian if you go on to say these other things.

This is not the kind of nonviolent, peaceful, hate-free protests that I would engage in and that I would ever support. I denounce this. This is hate.

We cannot have legitimate, nonviolent protest movements if we inject hate into the movement. We have to do it void of hate and void of violence.

I am absolutely opposed to what was done, and I want those persons to know that they are hurting the protest movement by doing what they are doing.

You can protest your disdain for what is happening in Palestine without injecting hate into it.

You have every right to protest what is happening in Palestine. I have protested what is happening there, but you don't do it with hate, and you don't do it with violence. You do it peacefully.

If you decide that you are going to do what John Lewis called ``get in the way,'' you get in the way, but you know that there are consequences if you get in the way, and you are arrested.

We got in the way by getting in the street, and we were told that if you don't move, you are going to be arrested. You are impeding traffic. We didn't move. We were arrested. We went to a place of incarceration. We eventually posted our bond. We were released. We paid a fine. I was prepared to suffer the consequences.

You cannot engage in violence in a protest movement and expect to receive positive coverage. The coverage is going to be negative if you engage in violence, and the coverage is going to be negative if you engage in hate speech.

You are hurting the movement. You are hurting those who are peacefully protesting in a nonviolent fashion without hate speech. Protest if you will, but do it in such a way as not to hurt the protest movement itself, which I support.

I support the protest movement. I don't support hate within the movement.

I support saying to the world that you don't think what is happening in terms of the killing of the babies in Gaza to be something that is acceptable. Now, that is my language, and there is other language that is acceptable. But you cannot do it, in my opinion, and expect a positive response if you do it with violence or hate speech.

We in this country understand that the country was founded, to a certain extent, on protests. The pilgrims were protesting, and they came to this country and brought their movement with them.

When the farmers came to Washington, D.C., protesting with their tractors, it was a perfectly legitimate protest--perfectly acceptable.

Nonviolent, peaceful, hate-free protest is acceptable.

I would ask the news media, all of those various outlets that cover these protests, to cover some of the protests that are positive. Present them. Let the world know that not everybody is engaging in hate speech. Not everybody is anti-Semitic who is protesting. Not everybody is violent who is protesting. Let the world know that there is peaceful, nonviolent, hate-free protest taking place in this country.

I am asking you to do this, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, and FOX. Cover some of the positive protest movement, positive in the sense that there is no violence and no hate speech.

When you don't do that, when you fail to cover those protest movements, in covering the protest movements that are filled with violence and hate speech, you are then showing the world what might appear to be only that type of protest taking place in this country, and that is not the case.

There are many protest movements that have taken place that were nonviolent, hate-free protests. We ought not allow ourselves to believe that only hateful protest movements are taking place.

There are many protests with one or two people and some outsiders will intrude. They are interlopers. These interlopers intrude, and they then engage in hateful messaging or engage in some sort of violence. That shouldn't taint all the other persons, perhaps the hundreds of persons, who are protesting without violence and hate speech.

Cover them fairly. Say that there was a handful or this number, whatever it is, but be fair to the many people who are there and are protesting without hate and without violence.

I am asking the news media to please do this. Let other people in the world see that we protest in this country, and we do it without violence and without hate speech.

I think that I can give evidence of what I speak. We had in Houston, Texas, an event to have, if you will, a candlelight ceremony to memorialize the lives of persons who lost their lives in Gaza. We had a packed house. We had some debate. There was no hate speech, and there was no violence--and there was no coverage. No coverage.

Now, I have seen multiple protests concerning what happened on October 7, and that merits being protested. I support protesting it. What happened was horrific. We ought to protest that. When that is protested, I have seen it covered with positive news coverage.

Well, there are two sides to this when you get to the things that have happened since October 7 and all that has happened in Gaza with the destruction of schools, the destruction of hospitals, of roads, of bridges, of homes. With all of this destruction, it is not unreasonable for some people to conclude that this ought to be something worthy of protestation.

So, when this occurs and there is no violence, no hate speech, I challenge the news media to cover it, too, just as you cover those who protest what happened on October 7.

I am among those who would do so. October 7 was a horrific day in infamy.

Let us be fair in the coverage, and let those who are protesting understand that if there is a person among your protest movement who is out of line, who is being hateful, if there is a person who is being violent--in the sixties when we were protesting, we would meet before the protest would start, and we would agree on certain things. One, we wouldn't be violent.

If someone should do something to indicate some degree of violence, we would turn to that person and point and say: ``Not with us.'' We would remove that person from the protest, ``Not with us, not with us,'' and let the police take them away, and we continued with our peaceful protest.

It is important to have free speech, freedom of assembly, and freedom to protest. That is what this country was founded on, to a great extent, and we want to maintain it.

To do it, I think the news media has a role, and that is to present fair coverage of these protest movements. I think that the people who are protesting have a role. Their role is to say to the world that they are there to have a peaceful, nonviolent, hate-free protest.

I think you should be able to simply peacefully protest, and it should incorporate these other things, but you can say it all and that those who act in a violent way are not with us. Say it before you start the protest: They are not with us.

Anybody who says something that is racist, anti-Semitic, sexist, utilizing Islamophobia, behaving in an Islamophobic way, anti-Islamic, anti-Asian, announce they are not with us. We don't want them to be a part of this. If you have a sign that says it, take your sign someplace else. That is not for this movement.

That is your job if you are part of a protest movement and you are a leader.

Finally, be prepared. Be prepared to suffer the consequences. Be prepared.

We would, if arrested, not resist. That is another charge. If you get arrested, don't resist.

Remember this: Those who tolerate hate perpetuate hate. If you are going to tolerate hate, you are going to perpetuate it. The persons who are actually behaving in a hateful fashion are perpetrating it, and if you tolerate it, you are perpetuating it. We cannot tolerate hate.

Now, do I expect people to denounce everything hateful that is said? That is impossible to do. There are things that you can select in your own way that you want to denounce, as I am today. Do that. You can be selective.

It is impossible to denounce all of the hate in the world. I wish we could except for saying I denounce all hate in the world. I have said that. When you get to the specificity, it is impossible to denounce every specific act of hate.

I am denouncing today what happened in New York on that subway when people were singled out. You don't do that, not in this America. You shouldn't. If you do it, then you are going to be labeled as anti- Semitic.

There is nothing unfair about that label being placed on you if you behave in the fashion that I articulated earlier. Those who tolerate hate perpetuate hate. Those who tolerate hate perpetuate hate.

There were other incidents that occurred, and there are persons from the New York delegation who spoke up and indicated that there was anti- Semitic activity taking place. I am very proud of them. Majority Leader Schumer spoke up on the floor, denouncing the hate. Representative Ocasio-Cortez spoke up, denouncing the hate. Our minority leader here in the House, Hakeem Jeffries, spoke up, denouncing the hate.

I don't expect them to speak up every time something happens. I appreciate what they have done this time, but I don't expect them to speak up every time.

I do hope that as we move forward, we will not allow one side of the protest movement, which is obviously distasteful, to be continually publicized to the extent that it gives the image to those who don't know better that all the protest movements are about hate and violence because this is not the case.

I support peaceful, nonviolent, hate-free protest, and I yield back the balance of my time.