Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 900, I call up

the bill (H.R. 4445) to amend title 9 of the United States Code with respect to arbitration of disputes involving sexual assault and sexual harassment, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material on H.R. 4445.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes.

Madam Speaker, H.R. 4445, the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act, would restore access to justice for survivors of sexual assault or sexual harassment who are forced to settle their disputes against their harassers and abusers in a private system of arbitration that is often stacked against them.

Arbitration was originally developed as an alternative to the court system for parties of relatively equal bargaining power to enter into voluntarily. In recent decades, however, forced arbitration clauses have become ubiquitous in our lives, largely in the form of take-it-or- leave-it contracts between very large companies and individual consumers. As a result, these clauses have rendered our court system, in which plaintiffs have far stronger protections, inaccessible to far too many.

Nowhere is that trend more apparent or problematic than in the workplace. It is projected that, by 2024, 80 percent of private-sector workers will be forced to sign an arbitration clause when accepting employment. And consider that, over the past 5 years, employers prevailed over their employees in 98 percent of these arbitration cases. But these numbers cannot capture the true human toll of forced arbitration.

Last November, the Judiciary Committee heard powerful testimony from four survivors of sexual assault and sexual harassment about their harrowing experiences and the deep wounds they continue to carry with them to this day. It was a hearing none of us will forget, and we appreciate these brave women coming forward and sharing their stories.

Each of these women was subject to horrific treatment by a person with power over their lives. Then, when they sought to hold their assailants accountable in court, they were forced to relive the trauma of their harassment and assault to find that their only recourse was a secretive arbitration process that was stacked against them.

Forced arbitration clauses, buried deep in the fine print of the paperwork required as a condition of employment, have bound workers to a system in which they are nearly guaranteed to fail, foreclosed the possibility of ever having their day in court, and in almost every case taken away their right even to discuss their experience.

The company gets to pick the judge and the jury, truncate the discovery process, choose the law applied, and

prevent all appeals. When the company wins, it can request that the victim pay its attorney's fees, and it can ensure that misconduct never sees the light of day.

H.R. 4445 removes these barriers to justice for survivors of sexual assault or sexual harassment by giving them a real choice of whether to go to court or to arbitrate their claim.

In doing so, this legislation ends this unjust and, frankly, repulsive system in which American companies are better off retaliating against victims of sexual assault than taking responsibility and holding perpetrators responsible for their horrific actions.

Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a letter to Members of Congress dated February 4, 2022, and a letter to House leadership dated February 7, 2022, both from organizations in support of H.R. 4445.

February 4, 2022.

Re Pass the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and

Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 (HR. 4445).

Dear Members of Congress: On behalf of the undersigned

organizations, we write in support of the Ending Forced

Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of

2021 (H.R. 4445), a bill that would provide important new

opportunities for individuals who experience sexual

harassment and assault to seek justice without being forced

into closed-door and secretive forced arbitration

proceedings, where the deck is too often stacked against

them.

Today, individuals are routinely forced to sign an

arbitration clause to resolve disputes as a condition of

obtaining a job or purchasing a good or service, often

through language buried in fine print. Many individuals who

sign such documents have no idea they have waived the ability

to enforce their rights in court. Arbitrators are often

chosen and paid by companies. There is no public record of

the proceedings or the outcome, and rarely an opportunity to

appeal the arbitrator's decision. Many who come forward with

reports of sexual harassment or sexual assault, cannot afford

legal counsel. The arbitration clause may force them to bear

some of the significant costs of the arbitration. The

resolution of their disputes may fail to make them whole for

the harm they have suffered.

The lack of public accountability enabled by forced

arbitration has played a harmful role in allowing sexual

harassment and assault to persist in the shadows. In the four

years since #MeToo went viral, thousands of individuals,

disproportionately women, have come forward to share their

experiences--many several years after the fact--and to demand

justice. When women and all those who have experienced

assault and harassment share their stories, it gives others

the courage to come forward as well. But when women who

report such conduct are forced into arbitration, that

secretive process with no public accountability further

silences survivors, and employers and companies can continue

to employ and protect serial sexual harassers.

The Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual

Harassment Act is an important step towards restoring power

to survivors of sexual assault and sexual harassment by

ensuring they will not be forced into arbitration. It is

admittedly a partial solution, as no individual should be

forced to waive their ability to fully enforce their rights

to be free from other forms of unlawful harassment,

discrimination, and exploitation, whether as workers, as

consumers, as patients, or as students. We are therefore

hopeful that as a complement to this bill, Congress will

quickly take up and pass the FAIR Act (H.R. 963) and

Restoring Justice for Workers Act (H.R. 4841), which would

ensure that companies can no longer circumvent the legal

system by forcing individuals into arbitration. But the

Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual

Harassment Act represents an important partial restoration of

individuals' rights to seek accountability and justice.

Accordingly, we urge you to support this legislation. If you

have any questions, please contact Emily Martin

(emartin@nwlc.org) at the National Women's Law Center.

Sincerely,

National Women's Law Center, National Employment Law

Project, National Employment Lawyers Association.

I thank my colleagues, Representatives Bustos, Griffith, Jayapal, and Buck, for their leadership on this issue. I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Bustos), the sponsor of this bill.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Jayapal).

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Jeffries).

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Johnson).

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee), a distinguished member of the Judiciary Committee.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline), a distinguished member of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Scanlon), another distinguished member of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Raskin), another distinguished member of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Garcia), another distinguished member of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Ross), another distinguished member of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Madam Speaker, H.R. 4445, the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act, removes barriers to justice for survivors of sexual assault or sexual harassment by giving them a real choice of whether to go to court or to arbitrate their claim after the dispute has arisen.

Mr. Jordan is right. Many such victims, if given the choice, will choose to go to court. Why shouldn't they? In arbitration, they lose 98 percent of the cases. The employer wins 98 percent of the cases in arbitration. Why? Well, for one thing, the employer picks the arbitrator, and the arbitrator is paid. So, naturally, the arbitrator wants to rule in such a way that he or she is likely to get hired again.

But 98 percent of the cases brought by women who have been sexually harassed who are in forced arbitration are lost by them. That is why this bill is necessary.

If we want to give women who have been sexually harassed a fair chance at justice, we must pass this bill. If we want to give women who have been sexually harassed a fair chance at winning against their employer who did the sexual harassment or allowed the sexual harassment, we must pass this bill.

That is why this critical measure is supported by a broad coalition of public interest organizations, including the National Alliance to End Sexual Violence, the National Center on Domestic and Sexual Violence, the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, the National Partnership for Women and Families, RAINN, and many others.

Not one single group that deals with sexual violence opposes this bill. Only employer organizations oppose this bill because it stacks the deck in their favor.

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleagues, Representatives Bustos, Griffith, Jayapal, and Buck, for their leadership on this issue, and I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation.

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

Madam Speaker, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment, although I am not opposed.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself 45 seconds.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the amendment offered by the distinguished gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Buck), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial, and Administrative Law.

This amendment simply clarifies that H.R. 4445 does not amend current law outside of the Federal Arbitration Act. It reflects the bipartisan input of several of my colleagues in the House and Senate, including the bill's sponsor, Congresswoman Bustos.

Importantly, this amendment would protect the rights of survivors of sexual harassment by ensuring that they have a choice of litigating or arbitrating any case relating to the conduct that is alleged to constitute sexual harassment under applicable law. It does so by making clear that anything related to sexual harassment or assault as currently defined by law is covered by this bill.

This would include retaliation or any other misconduct that gives rise to the underlying claim alleging a violation of these laws and reflects an important compromise struck to protect these cases.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Bustos), the sponsor of the bill.

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

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from California (Ms. Speier).

Madam Speaker, in closing, I thank Mr. Buck for offering this helpful amendment.

I thank Ms. Speier, and I thank all the people who have been so helpful on this bill.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise to thank Joe Graupensperger for his many years of service to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Joe came to the Committee after working at the Office of Legislative Affairs at the U.S. Department of Justice, where he handled a range of issues related to federal criminal law. He had previously practiced law in Washington, DC, and got his J.D. from the University of Virginia School of Law.

Joe was already a veteran of the Office of Legislative Affairs at the U.S. Department of Justice when he came to the Hill in 2009. Our Chairman at the time, John Conyers, Jr., brought him onto the team to handle crime policy for the Committee. Chairman Conyers's faith in Joe was well placed. Joe is, today, the Chief Counsel of our Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security--and in his span of service, Joe has drafted dozens of laws, run hundreds of hearings, and, without question, helped to improve the lives of millions of Americans.

Joe's track record speaks for itself. He has played a role in every major criminal justice reform effort that has been signed into law in the past dozen years, including the Fair Sentencing Act and the First Step Act, as well as laws to improve the National Instant Background Check System, address the rape kit backlog, reform surveillance practices, and establish rights for survivors of sexual assault.

In fact, last Congress alone, under Joe's leadership, the Crime Subcommittee advanced more than a dozen bills that were ultimately signed into law--despite a divided Congress and a Republican President. He has ensured that several other measures were signed into law this Congress as well.

This is Joe's last month as Chief Counsel for our Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. Although we congratulate him on his engagement and wish him well on his move to Texas, we will miss his leadership, his friendship, and his steadfast dedication to justice for all. Simply put, our country is better off because of Joe's work as a public servant.

I thank Joe for his service to the Committee, and wish him the best of luck with this exciting next chapter.

Madam Speaker, I rise to pay tribute and to honor the life and legacy of Marilyn Bergman, who passed away on January 8, 2022. Marilyn was an accomplished songwriter and a longtime President of the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP). I offer my most sincere condolences to her family and friends on her loss.

A native New Yorker, Marilyn broke barriers as one of a relatively few women in the then-male-dominated songwriting business in her early career and as the first woman to serve as President of ASCAP, a position she held for a decade and a half.

Over the course of her long and impressive career, Marilyn wrote the lyrics for many iconic songs as part of a songwriting duo with her husband Alan, including the Academy-Award winning ``The Way We Were'' and ``The Windmills of Your Mind,'' as well as songs for the film Yentl and the theme songs to a number of popular television shows. During the course of her illustrious career, she was nominated for sixteen Academy Awards, winning three times, as well as earning four Emmy Awards and two Grammy Awards. Among her many accolades, in 1980 she was inducted into the Songwriters Hall of Fame.

In addition to her work as a lyricist, Marilyn was a tireless advocate to protect the rights of songwriters. In 1985, she became the first woman elected to the Board of Directors of ASCAP. She later served as President and Chairman of the Board and presided over unprecedented growth in the organization. Through her leadership of ASCAP, she was a strong partner to Congress, and particularly to the Judiciary Committee, in its work to support the music industry and to protect the rights of creators. Among her accomplishments, she worked to help pass the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, a landmark piece of legislation governing copyright and the internet. This is but one example of her diligent efforts to ensure that songwriters and music creators can sustain a living through their creativity notwithstanding the dramatic changes in technology that occurred during her leadership in the industry.

Marilyn is survived by her husband, Alan, her daughter, Julie, and her granddaughter, Emily.

Marilyn will be remembered by many Americans for her artistic talents, as her lyrics graced our lives in so many ways. She will also be remembered by many songwriters for her strong advocacy on their behalf. May her memory be a blessing.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to thank Melissa Connolly for over eight years of service to the constituents of New York's 10th Congressional District.

Melissa's career in the House began in 2009 as a Legislative Assistant to former Representative Jerry Costello following her graduation from Duke University's School of Public Policy and the University of Pennsylvania. After working with former Representative Shelley Berkley, Melissa joined my office in 2013, rising from Legislative Assistant to become my Legislative Director.

As Legislative Director, Melissa has been a trusted and valued advisor who helped set and manage my policy agenda. She also played a significant leadership role in my Washington DC office, serving as a mentor and a resource for junior staff, and I appreciate and have relied on her skill and experience in managing our team. Melissa also helped staff me in my role as Dean of the New York Delegation, which included coordinating meetings with the New York Delegation and other elected officials from the City and State.

Throughout her tenure in my office, Melissa established herself as an expert on issues relating to women and families and as a critical resource for other staff on Capitol Hill working on those issues. She worked tirelessly with the Education and Labor Committee, women's and labor rights organizations, and businesses to help pass the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act on the House floor with a strong bipartisan vote. Her countless hours of work building support for this legislation should pave the way for it to become law soon and to improve the lives of millions of Americans.

Melissa also worked closely with my Judiciary Committee staff on several important initiatives, including legislation extending the deadline to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment, which passed the House twice. She also helped lead the Judiciary Committee's work to protect women's fundamental right to abortion, springing into action after Texas enacted its abortion ban to help plan a hearing to spotlight the devastating impact of the law. She approaches the topic of reproductive freedom and health with the knowledge, passion, and energy that makes her an extremely effective policymaker.

In addition to these issues, Melissa has managed a broad portfolio over the course of her 13 years on the Hill. She worked to help pass and ensure effective implementation of the Affordable Care Act and helped fend off numerous Republican attacks designed to repeal it. She has worked diligently with stakeholders to build support for the Living Donor Protection Act, which would protect living organ donors from high insurance premiums and remove barriers to organ donation. She has also long led my office's effort to increase funding for both Section 8 housing and Housing Opportunities for People with AIDS in the annual appropriations bills. Her efforts to build support for these programs has translated into millions of dollars of additional funding for people in dire need of support. They may never know her name, but she has, nevertheless, improved countless lives through her efforts.

Twenty years later, my office continues to work on issues stemming from the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Melissa was essential to our efforts to extend and expand the 9/11 health and victim compensation programs that have distributed more than $9 billion to the families of first responders and survivors of these attacks. The health care program has helped care for tens of thousands of Americans with 9/ 11 related health conditions and Melissa helped organize the most recent Judiciary Committee hearings on the programs that led to their long-term extension.

In response to the COVID-19 outbreak, Melissa not only smoothly managed her legislative team's transition to a remote work environment, but she also worked tirelessly to advocate for the needs of New Yorkers and keep my constituents informed of our efforts. She effectively advocated for specific legislative provisions to assist New York's hospitals, mass transit, small businesses, arts institutions and museums, and tenants, and she worked doggedly to see that these provisions were included in the comprehensive bills that were passed to address the pandemic and economic collapse that followed. She also planned and implemented our COVID-19 communication strategy with our communications and community liaison staff, including drafting issue- specific, weekly e-newsletters, setting up web pages explaining the CARES Act and Heroes Act benefits, and creating toolkits for constituents seeking assistance.

I would be remiss if I did not mention Melissa's husband, Mike Connolly, and her children, Maisie and Robert. Both of her children were born during her tenure in the office, and for me and the rest of our team it has been a pleasure watching them grow up, hearing their stories, and occasionally receiving their artwork, many of which are displayed throughout the D.C. office.

Finally, Melissa has a great attitude, a good sense of humor, and is a joy to work with. She has sound judgment, excellent people skills, and a deep understanding of how Congress works. My staff and I are lucky to have worked with her for all these years, and we will surely miss her as she moves on to new endeavors in the private sector.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the one hundredth anniversary of SAJ: Judaism that Stands for All. Originally named the Society for the Advancement of Judaism, the synagogue's founding in 1922 was a historic moment in the growth of Judaism in America. One hundred years later it remains a cornerstone of Jewish life in New York City.

SAJ was founded by Rabbi Mordecai M. Kaplan, one of the most influential Jewish thinkers of the 20th Century. Rabbi Kaplan developed an understanding of Judaism as an evolving civilization, later becoming known as Reconstructionist Judaism. For decades, SAJ served as Kaplan's experimentation field. There, Americans Jews could take pride in drawing from their Jewishness to support their Americanness, and their Americanness to support their Jewishness.

SAJ joined the rapidly growing synagogue community on New York's Upper West Side, a neighborhood rich with Jewish life.

SAJ has long stood for social justice, equality, and progress. It is a place where all are welcome, including LGBTQ+ and interfaith families. In 1922, it hosted the first bat mitzvah in the United States. Today, it is led by all-female clergy and staff. Rabbi Alan Miller, who served as rabbi of SAJ from 1961 to 1992, introduced to the sermon the idea of ``the open microphone,'' where congregants can share their reactions as part of a dialogue. Originated at SAJ, the open microphone is now utilized by rabbis across Jewish denominations.

Today, we celebrate SAJ's commitment to advancing justice in the Upper West Side, in New York City, and in the world beyond. We celebrate its one hundred years of bold, intellectual curiosity and one hundred years of enriching Jewish life.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Protecting Our Democracy Act.

Transparency and accountability are the bedrock of our democratic system. They are the essential guardrails that protect against unchecked executive power. Unfortunately, the Trump administration exposed certain vulnerabilities in the fabric of our democracy by engaging in conduct that was once unthinkable, and like the reforms enacted post-Watergate, we must now act to prevent similar abuses from a future President.

Although many of these provisions were informed by our experience with the prior administration, they are pointedly not anti-Trump measures. Rather, they are forward looking, and they protect against the abuses by future Presidents of any party. Importantly, many of them are also based on proposals that have bipartisan support.

I am especially proud of the provisions in this bill that fall within the Judiciary Committee's jurisdiction.

These include requiring an expedited, streamlined process for enforcing Congressional subpoenas in court. This would prevent an administration from stonewalling Congressional oversight and then evading accountability for years while the courts resolve the issue.

To address abuses of the clemency power, the bill requires additional transparency, and it reaffirms that abuses of the clemency power can form the basis of a bribery scheme and that self-pardons are prohibited.

It pauses the statute of limitations on Federal offenses during a President and Vice President's term in office to ensure that they can be held accountable for criminal conduct just like any other American.

And it addresses improper communications between the White House and the Department of Justice, an all too common occurrence under the last administration.

Madam Speaker, when the Nation's Founders wrote the Constitution, after having just fought a war against a tyrant, they stood fast to a key principle, that the executive must not be a king and must instead be accountable to Congress, to the people, and ultimately, to the rule of law. It is vital that we reassert this important principle.

The Protecting Our Democracy Act would restore these and other checks and balances that are so fundamental to our democracy.

I urge all Members to support this vital legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this en bloc amendment, and particularly to the Burgess amendment.

The Burgess amendment would strike one of the most important provisions in the bill, one that ensures that a sitting President or Vice President can be held accountable for their actions, just like every other American.

This provision is necessary in order to close a dangerous loophole in the law created by DOJ policy, most recently embodied in the legal opinion by the Office of Legal Counsel, which holds that a President cannot be criminally prosecuted during his or her term in office.

Under current law, throughout the entire period that a President is presumed by some to be immune from prosecution, the statute of limitations continues to run on any offenses he or she may have committed. Since most Federal criminal offenses carry a 5-year statute of limitations, a President who is not prosecuted while in office for a crime he or she may have committed could end up evading justice altogether if the statute of limitations runs out before their term is over, particularly if they are elected to a second term.

Allowing complete immunity from criminal prosecution merely because of the office a person holds would make a mockery of the rule of law. It is a maxim of our system of justice that no man is immune from the law, that no man can be a judge in his own case.

Statutes of limitations are an important element of criminal law. As a general matter, they provide a necessary balance between protecting defendants from delay and allowing prosecutors adequate time to investigate and charge cases. But the law has also long recognized that certain limited exceptions to this general rule are necessary. The case of a sitting President, whose prosecution is barred under Justice Department policy, fits comfortably among such exceptions.

It is necessary, therefore, to simply pause the statute of limitations to ensure that the Presidency is not a get-out-of-jail-free card. We must not strike this essential provision, because every person, no matter his or her title or office, must be held accountable under our laws.

I urge strong opposition to this amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I want to mention one other thing. We have heard our friends across the aisle talk about Donald Trump, and they say that former President Trump did nothing wrong. Democrats, by and large, say he did a lot of things wrong. But that is irrelevant to this debate.

This bill has nothing to do with President Trump any more than the post-Watergate reforms had to do with Richard Nixon. Richard Nixon's conduct taught us certain lessons, and Donald Trump's conduct taught us certain lessons. The legislation before us is the result of those lessons.

Mr. Speaker, those lessons are for us to use to protect the future. That is what this legislation is about, to protect the future from a President, of any party, who may violate the law, who may aggrandize power. That is what this is about: the future, not the past.

So when I hear our Republican friends talk about Donald Trump and talk about how he wasn't convicted, et cetera, it is irrelevant. We are talking about the future, not the past. For the future, it is necessary to pass this bill, and for the future, it is necessary to defeat this en bloc amendment.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5720) to amend the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 to provide for a periodic transaction reporting requirement for Federal judicial officers and the online publication of financial disclosure reports of Federal judicial officers, and for other purposes, as amended.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

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

Madam Speaker, H.R. 5720, the Courthouse Ethics and Transparency Act of 2021, embodies an important bipartisan effort to address an alarming lack of transparency in the personal financial holdings of Federal judges and the conflicts--or appearance of conflicts--those holdings can create in the cases those judges are asked to decide.

This legislation makes incremental but necessary progress toward accountability by building on Federal statutes that already prohibit judges from deciding cases in which they have a personal financial stake in the outcome.

It has been the law in this country since the 1970s that judges must recuse themselves from any case in which they hold a legal or equitable interest of any size in any property or party under consideration. To help ensure that recusals occur as required, Federal law also requires judges to file annual reports disclosing their personal financial interests so that litigants, the press, and the general public can check their work.

Unfortunately, recent reporting by prominent media outlets and a hearing by the Courts Subcommitee, have shown that the law is not working as intended. The infrequency of judges' financial disclosures and the inaccessibilty of the reports themselves have made actual transparency practically impossible.

The result is recent investigative reporting revealing that over 130 Federal judges have decided cases in which they are part owners of the parties before them; over 60 judges have actively traded shares in the parties in their courtrooms while cases are still going on, in some cases profiting on those trades.

The consequences of these actions are both acute and widespread. Failures to recuse can cause real harm to the parties whose cases are impacted and can leave a cloud of doubt over any law created from these cases once the conflicts are uncovered. Perhaps even more concerning, when the public sees members of their judiciary behaving in such a manner, their faith in their system of justice can be withered by cynicism and suspicion.

H.R. 5720 addresses these problems by requiring Federal judges to abide by the same periodic transaction reporting laws already applicable to Members of Congress and senior executive branch officials.

Further, the bill requires the Administrative Office of the United States Courts to create an online database of judicial financial disclosure reports and to timely update that database in searchable, sortable, and downloadable copies of disclosure reports as they become available so that litigants, the press, and the public can access and analyze that information in close to real time.

These simple solutions are long overdue and are the product of bipartisan, bicameral collaboration. I want to thank Congresswoman Ross and Congressman Issa for their leadership on this issue and for introducing this legislation. I also appreciate Ranking Member Jordan for working with us on this bill, and I want to thank Hank Johnson, chairman of the Subcommittee on the Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet for holding a hearing exposing the issues this bill addresses.

Madam Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support this legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman North Carolina (Ms. Ross).

Mr. Speaker, we have additional speakers. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline), a member of the Judiciary Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Johnson), chairman of the subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5720 would make a meaningful difference in the accessibility and transparency of an entire branch of our Federal Government. It would strengthen trust in our courts and, in doing so, would strengthen our courts.

H.R. 5720 would establish a level playing field for access to critical government documents, allowing litigants, the public, and the press to enforce and ensure accountability.

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5677) to make technical amendments to update statutory references to certain provisions classified to title 2, United States Code, title 50, United States Code, and title 52, United States Code.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 5677.

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

Mr. Speaker, one of the important responsibilities the House gives the Judiciary Committee is to oversee the revision and codification of the statutes of the United States. Keeping track of the new laws Congress passes every session is a formidable challenge, but it is an essential part of maintaining the rule of law in our country, and it is a duty we take seriously on the committee.

The body of Federal law is so large and complex at this point that it would be almost completely unmanageable without the United States Code. Currently consisting of 54 titles, the code compiles the general and permanent laws of the United States into coherent subject areas.

The code makes our Federal laws accessible both to the government officials who work to fairly administer them and to the private citizens who seek the benefits or relief the law provides them.

The code did not appear magically out of thin air. Congress created it in 1926 and, since that time, it has been painstakingly constructed and updated by expert lawyers working under the supervision of the House.

We all owe a great debt to the Office of the Law Revision Counsel, or OLRC, whose attorneys ably carry out their statutory mandate ``to develop and keep current an official and positive codification of the laws of the United States'' while maintaining strict impartiality as to legislative policy.

Today, I am pleased to bring to the floor six bills developed by the Office of the Law Revision Counsel to further this mission. The first four bills are considered editorial reclassification bills because they make conforming changes to statutes that have been impacted by OLRC's reorganization efforts.

For example, in 2014, OLRC reorganized the voting and elections statutes into a single title, title 52 of the Code. The first bill we are considering, H.R. 5677, updates references to these laws in other titles of the Code to reflect their new location in title 52. I thank Congresswoman Madeleine Dean for introducing this legislation.

I want to make it very clear that the statutory changes made by this bill and the others we are considering today are purely technical in nature. They do not change the meaning or effect of any existing laws. They are part of an ongoing effort to maintain the Code as an authoritative, accurate, and accessible source of Federal law.

I would like to thank our colleagues who have introduced these bills, and I am glad we can fulfill our responsibility to keep the Code updated in a bipartisan manner.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to support this legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Dean), the sponsor of this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate Congresswoman Dean for her leadership in introducing this legislation. I urge everyone to support this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5679) to make technical amendments to update statutory references to certain provisions classified to title 7, title 20, and title 43, United States Code.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on H.R. 5679.

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

Mr. Speaker, as I explained during consideration of H.R. 5677, this bill has been prepared by the Office of the Law Revision Counsel and makes a number of conforming changes to statutes that

have been impacted by OLRC's editorial reclassification of titles 7, 20, and 43 of the United States Code.

As I described previously, the statutory changes made by this bill are purely technical in nature and they do not change the meaning or effect of any existing laws.

I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Jones) for introducing this legislation, I urge all Members to support it, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, as important as this legislation is, my brief remarks were enough to explain the bill for the record.

Therefore, with the time remaining, I would like to take this opportunity to thank Perry Apelbaum for more than 30 years of tireless service to the House Judiciary Committee.

As you know, Mr. Speaker, the Judiciary Committee is entrusted with a wide and diverse set of issues, ranging from constitutional law and the Federal criminal code to immigration and intellectual property.

In his three decades with the committee, as a trusted counsel and staff director, Perry has left his mark on nearly every area of law within that broad jurisdiction: protecting the right to vote, securing our basic civil liberties, and holding the powerful to account where necessary.

All of official Washington knows Perry as a brilliant attorney, a selfless friend, and a voice of calm in a crisis. He earned that reputation leading the country through some of the toughest moments in our recent history.

He has worked as senior staff on three impeachments. He coauthored three books with his longtime boss, Chairman John Conyers, Jr.: ``What Went Wrong in Ohio,'' ``The Constitution in Crisis,'' and ``Reining in the Imperial Presidency.''

After the attacks of September 11, 2001, Perry worked across the aisle to keep us safe in a manner that would be consistent with our civil liberties.

After the attacks of January 6, 2021, he spent many sleepless nights ensuring that our democratic institutions would endure.

What strikes me, Mr. Speaker, is that Perry's most important and lasting contributions to the committee have gone to secure a better life for the Americans who need our help most. These accomplishments include the Innocence Protection Act, the Matthew Shepherd-James Byrd, Jr., Hate Crimes Prevention Act, the Emmett Till Unsolved Civil Rights Crime Act, the Second Chance Act, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act, and the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act.

All told, these accomplishments have benefited countless citizens. They have made our social contract more just and our justice system more fair. Mr. Speaker, the Talmud teaches us that whosoever saves one life has saved an entire world. By this measure, worlds upon worlds owe a debt of gratitude to Perry Apelbaum.

Perry is, of course, far from finished in his work for the American people. He has told us repeatedly that he intends ``to run all the way through the tape'' on his last days on Capitol Hill.

He leaves us with a clear sense of mission. He has laid the groundwork for our most important prerogatives, including but not limited to comprehensive police reform, commonsense checks on the scourge of gun violence, and the reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act.

Perry will continue his public service in the Department of Justice as a senior counsel in the Antitrust Division. He has already proven himself a committed advocate for American consumers. His sense of fairness in matters of antitrust law is unwavering, and our loss will be the Department's gain.

Of course, we owe our thanks to Perry's beloved wife, Laura Apelbaum, and his two children, Benjamin and Sarah. There is no question that they have sustained Perry, in good times and bad, through these many years.

But most of all, Mr. Speaker, we owe our thanks to Perry Apelbaum. His departure marks the end of an era on Capitol Hill. Our parting is bittersweet, but we are so grateful for his leadership, and we wish Perry nothing but the best as he takes on this new challenge on behalf of the American people. Please join me in thanking Perry for his service.

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5695) to make technical amendments to update statutory references to certain provisions which were formerly classified to chapters 14 and 19 of title 25, United States Code.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on H.R. 5695.

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

Mr. Speaker, as I explained during consideration of H.R. 5677, this bill has been prepared by the Office of the Law Revision Counsel and makes a number of conforming changes to statutes that have been impacted by OLRC's editorial reclassification of title 25 of the United States Code.

As I described previously, the statutory changes made by this bill are purely technical in nature, and they do not change the meaning or effect of any existing laws.

I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Issa) for introducing this

legislation, I urge all Members to support it, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate Congressman Issa for his leadership in introducing this legislation, I urge everyone to support it, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5705) to make technical amendments to update statutory references to provisions reclassified to title 34, United States Code.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to

revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 5705.

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

Mr. Speaker, as I explained during consideration of H.R. 5677, this bill has been prepared by the Office of the Law Revision Counsel and makes a number of conforming changes to statutes that have been impacted by OLRC's editorial reclassification of title 34 of the United States Code.

As I described previously, the statutory changes made by this bill are purely technical in nature, and they do not change the meaning or effect of any existing laws.

I thank the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Bentz) for introducing this legislation. I urge all Members to support it, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Bentz) for his leadership in introducing this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5961) to make revisions in title 5, United States Code, as necessary to keep the title current, and to make technical amendments to improve the United States Code.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 5961.

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

Mr. Speaker, to date, 27 of the U.S. Code's 54 titles have been enacted into positive law, which means that the text of these titles is itself the law, while the remaining titles are nonpositive, meaning that they organize Federal statutes for users' convenience but do not themselves have the force of law.

This legislation and the next bill we will consider represent recent efforts by the Office of the Law Revision Counsel to keep positive-law titles in the Code up to date. Because positive-law titles are the law itself, they must be amended by law when Congress passes new statutes that belong within the titles because of their subject matter.

H.R. 5961 would make revisions to title 5 of the Code, which relates to government organization and employees, to account for three important

government accountability laws that were adopted in the 1970s: The Federal Advisory Committee Act, the Inspector General Act, and the Ethics in Government Act.

Since these laws were adopted after title 5 became positive law, OLRC had placed them in an appendix to title 5, which made citation to them awkward and confusing. H.R. 5961 eliminates this appendix by creating three new chapters for these three laws within the body of title 5 itself.

Like the other codification bills we have considered, the statutory changes made by this bill are purely technical in nature, and they do not change the meaning or effect of any existing laws.

I thank the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Neguse) for introducing this legislation. I urge all Members to support it, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Neguse) for his leadership in introducing this legislation. I urge everyone to support it, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5982) to make revisions in title 51, United States Code, as necessary to keep the title current, and to make technical amendments to improve the United States Code.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 5982.

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

Mr. Speaker, as I explained during consideration of H.R. 5961, this bill is part of the Office of Law Revision Counsel's ongoing effort to keep positive-law titles of the U.S. Code up to date.

H.R. 5982 would make revisions in title 51 of the Code, which covers national and commercial space programs. Since it was created as a positive-law title in 2010, Congress has adopted several important reforms to the subject matter of title 51. Some of these new laws were placed into the nonpositive title 42, covering public health and welfare, while OLRC located others in notes to title 51. H.R. 5982 incorporates these recent statutes into the body of title 51 itself.

I thank the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Mrs. Fischbach) for introducing this legislation. I urge all Members to support it, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Mrs. Fischbach) for her leadership in introducing this legislation. I also appreciate the comments of the gentleman from California (Mr. Issa) on bipartisanship.

In this era, when the press portrays us as constantly at each other's throats, when the public gets the impression that we never work together, that Congress is totally broken, the fact of the matter is, we often work together and we often pass bipartisan legislation. It doesn't get the publicity. It is not as exciting as when we fight amongst ourselves. The press doesn't report it, but it is vital to the success of the United States.

I congratulate all involved with this legislation, and in particular Mr. Issa and the others on the Judiciary Committee who have worked so hard on these bills. I urge everyone to support them, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I rise--along with Hank Johnson, Chair of the Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet--to thank Rosalind Jackson for her decades of service to the Committee on the Judiciary. The House of Representatives has been fortunate to benefit from Rosalind's service during two separate stints.

When the public watches a congressional hearing or markup, they often do not know all of the work that goes into making those events come to fruition. For our Committee, we have been fortunate to have Rosalind working behind the scenes to ensure they go smoothly. From sending out notices and witness invites to compiling witness bios, working the timer, and getting committee reports and transcripts printed, Rosalind has played a key role from start to finish on more than a hundred hearings and markups during her time here. She has also performed an invaluable service in helping the Committee to save and archive its records each Congress.

While Rosalind has supported numerous Subcommittees, as well as the full Committee, over the years, she has worked especially closely with the Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet. In this role, she played a critical role in supporting the Subcommittee staff as they worked on complex legislation, such as, among other things, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, the PRO-IP Act, the Innovation Act and the America Invents Act--indeed every major copyright and patent law enacted over the last 15 years and earlier. Her active involvement has continued through the Committee's consideration several months ago of the SHOP SAFE Act as well.

Rosalind's dedication to public service, institutional memory, and work ethic have been a tremendous gift to the Committee over the years. Her warmth and kindness have not only served her well in developing good relationships across the Capitol but have created a welcoming environment for every staff member, Member of Congress, witness, intern, and visitor who has had the benefit of interacting with her.

Rosalind is a team player who is always willing to help out however is needed. We will miss her deeply on the Committee, but we are excited for her as she enjoys retirement after a career in public service. Our country is fortunate to have had Rosalind working in Congress these past decades.

We thank Rosalind for her service to the Committee and wish her the best of luck with this new chapter.

Madam Speaker, I rise--along with Hank Johnson, Chair of the Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet--to thank Mary Beth Walker for her service to the Committee as a counsel detailed from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to the Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet.

Over the past two-and-a-half years, Mary Beth has helped the Committee achieve a great deal. This includes the passage last Congress of the Trademark Modernization Act, which, among other things, responded to the growing number of fraudulent trademark applications as well as the documented large number of unused marks on the register by creating two new ex parte proceedings to remove registered trademarks that were not in use when the application was made, or had never been used. This will help those seeking new registrations, like small businesses, have a better chance at obtaining a strong trademark of their initial preference.

Mary Beth was also instrumental in advancing the SHOP SAFE Act in this Congress. This bill seeks to address the scourge of counterfeits being sold by third parties on online e-commerce platforms by reforming a decade-old liability structure established by case law rather than Congress. Mary Beth worked tirelessly with stakeholders and other Congressional staff to try to ensure that the bill strikes the right balance to make a meaningful difference in reducing the number of counterfeits being sold to unsuspecting consumers.

Mary Beth has shown herself to be a dedicated public servant and a true team player, willing to help out on other hearings and intellectual property issues that came before the Committee. We will miss her greatly, but we are glad that her expertise will remain in service to the public with her return to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office as an Associate Solicitor.

We thank Mary Beth for her service to the Committee and wish her the best of luck with the next chapter in her career.