Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt in my mind that the resistance to this President and his policies is growing in America's heartland. If the 1,200 people who came to my townhall meeting in Chicago on Monday night are any indication, there is a movement in the United States that is standing up to the fear, the racism, the lies, and the divisiveness that comes from the President, his people, and his Twitter account every single day.

The Logandale School auditorium and gym was packed. No, not like The National Mall on Inauguration Day with wide-open spaces and the President's imaginary crowd of 1.5 million people. No, my townhall was actually packed like The Mall on the day after the inauguration for the Women's March. It was a diverse crowd of people who care about America and defending their country. It was overwhelming.

We had Ahmed Rehab, the inspirational leader of CAIR-Chicago, talking about what was going on in Chicago to resist the President's new and unimproved ban on refugees and Muslims. He was joined by Equality Illinois, Planned Parenthood, and the Little Village Environmental Justice Organization, talking about how the people of Chicago are coming together to resist the President's attacks on women's health, on LGBTQ rights, on public schools and education, on women's rights, and on the environment.

It was the intersection of all of the communities and the issues that are under attack by President Trump and his co-President Bannon. This townhall was the mother of all intersectionality events--right there in Chicago, in America's heartland.

No, they were not paid activists. They were ordinary people trying to get answers and defend their community against an unprecedented threat coming from the White House and Republicans in Congress.

For more than an hour, I answered questions, and then I stayed in the parking lot for another hour and talked with people who still had questions--and some were heartbreaking.

A public school teacher I have known for years asked me how she can help her students. Her kids are being kept out of school or are losing sleep or are displaying signs of depression because of the fear that they have that they will be separated from their parents if they are deported. She wants to comfort them, but the reality is she cannot.

Individuals asked me how they can protect families who are terrified that they will get separated and destroyed.

Just this week, a mother I have known for years who has a stay of deportation and has been regularly reporting to ICE officials for years told me she is being deported in 6 weeks. She has a U.S. citizen husband and four U.S. citizen children, and she has complied with the law and she has complied and reported to authorities, only to be told that, under Trump, the rules have changed and she is now a top priority for deportation--not because she should be deported, but because she can be deported.

This fear is having an impact on families and children. But what came through to me at the townhall meeting is that families, vulnerable immigrants, and millions of children with a birthright to live as Americans are not alone. There are thousands and thousands of allies who are joining together to defend families in Chicago and everywhere else.

At the townhall on Monday, I appealed for help because this is the very same room that this coming Saturday, Mr. Speaker, my office will be holding a citizenship workshop. I asked those who are already citizens to come and help those who are applying for citizenship, and hundreds of hands went up in the air saying they are ready to help.

We scheduled the citizenship workshop because we are unable to satisfy my constituents' huge demand for citizenship information. Some days we have lines out the door at my office on Fullerton Avenue with people wanting to know: How can I become a citizen of the United States of America?

So all day Saturday, we will have a small army of family defenders trained in citizenship helping their neighbors pursue naturalization and the American Dream. Just as you see the school packed with voters and constituents, you will see the room packed this Saturday with people applying for citizenship to the United States of America and packed with Americans that are already citizens ready to help them.

That is what Chicago is all about, and that is what the heartland is all about, and that is what America is all about.

Women in hijabs and women in pink hats are standing together to fight attacks on Muslims and attacks on women's rights. Environmental activists are joining men and women who fly the

rainbow flag of the LGBTQ community to resist the President's agenda. The entire community will stand together as the mass deportation wave becomes a day-to-day reality in our communities. And the message is clear: if you come for one of us, you have to go through all of us.

My constituents demanded I be a wrench in Trump's cruel agenda, and I, Mr. Speaker, do not intend to disappoint them.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably absent in the House Chamber for roll call votes 127 and 128 on Tuesday, March 7, 2017. Had I been present, I would have voted ``Yea'' on roll call vote 127 and ``Nay'' on roll call vote 128.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably absent in the House chamber for roll call votes 116 and 121 on Wednesday, March 1, 2017. Had I been present, I would have voted Nay on roll call votes 116 and 121.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably absent in the House chamber for roll call votes 100, 101 and 102 on Monday, February 27, 2017. Had I been present, I would have voted Yea roll call votes 100 and 102, and Nay on roll call vote 101.

Mr. Speaker, I will speak in Spanish to the people of Puerto Rico. The translation is at the desk.

(English translation of the statement made in Spanish is as follows:)

Mr. Speaker: I am going to speak Spanish, the language of Puerto Ricans because democracy demands transparency and clarity.

The essence of the debate over Puerto Rico's future is the difference between assimilation, represented in the legislation proposed by Resident Commissioner Jenniffer Gonzalez (H.R. 260) and the legislation I have introduced (H.R. 900).

I have never excluded statehood. The assimilationists have excluded independence and free association from their proposals.

What my legislation does is simply add balance and corrects a disequilibrium.

From now on, the debate is between the assimilationist leaders and the people, the Puertoricanists. Assimilation is not the only option before the Congress of the United States.

My bill proposes free association and independence as options. This is what the Puertoricanists propose.

What motivates us? The love of Puerto Rico and defending our heritage; believing that we can be self-sufficient; believing that we can determine our own future without masters; believing in ourselves. The Puertoricanists are convinced that we can create jobs in a strong and vibrant economy with people who are innovative, creative and completely capable of determining their own future.

The assimilationist leaders think that we'll starve to death without the United States.

The Puertoricanists do not arrest students when they lift their voices in defense of democracy. That is what the assimilationist leaders do.

The Puertoricanists believe that first you pay the pensions of working people, while the assimilationists prefer to pay American bondholders on Wall Street.

The Puertoricanists love and protect the land. The assimilationists want to destroy it by constructing pipelines.

The Puertoricanists understand that democracy must flourish. The free expression of the people is sacred. Assimilationist leaders, when they don't like what they hear from the people, call in the riot squad.

Assimilationist leaders haven't attacked what my legislation would do, they have attacked its proponents.

Assimilationists want Members of Congress to only hear their version of the future. They are annoyed because this Member has brought before the Congress the other two options, which, in fact, are the options up for a plebiscite vote in Puerto Rico this year. In Puerto Rico, they want one reality and in the Congress they pretend there is another.

No, with my bill we have balance, truth and transparency. This is democracy. In this Puertoricanists believe: debate, discussion, freedom of ideas. Assimilationist leaders throughout history have chased and jailed Puertoricanists, and when they did not jail them, they took them to Cerro Maravilla.

Assimilationists say the Puertoricanists are anti-American. No, the Puertoricanists and anti-colonialists. They want for Puerto Rico the sovereignty enjoyed and celebrated in the United States. Yes, the Puertoricanists want the same thing the Americans have, to live in a free and sovereign nation where we determine our own destiny without masters.

Puertoricanists see the sun and see the energy we can harvest; see the land and the food we can eat.

Puertoricanists are motivated by love of country, love of our heritage and the understanding that we can be great, that we are intelligent and capable of innovation and creativity.

From my infancy in exile in the United States I listened to the song ``Preciosa'' and came to understand that the tyrant--the dark evil--is American colonialism. So said Rafael Hernandez, the singing conscience of my people.

Puertoricanists longingly recall the song ``En mi Viejo San Juan (In my Old San Juan)'' where it says ``this strange nation,'' just as Puerto Ricans in the U.S. say ``this is not my land''--when they confront abuse, discrimination and racism. ``Puerto Rico is.''

The Puerto Rican is his diaspora, from New York to Chicago, San Juan to Ponce, we are all Puerto Ricans. As our national poet, Juan Antonio Corretjer, wrote: ``I would be Puerto Rican even if I were born on the moon.'' To which I would add, with a great deal of respect, ``I would be Puerto Rican, even if I lived on the moon.''

Senor presidente: Voy a hablar en espanol, el vernaculo de los puertorriquenos porque la democracia exige transparencia y claridad.

La esencia del debate acerca del futuro de Puerto Rico es la diferencia entre el asimilismo, representado por el proyecto presentado por Jenniffer Gonzalez, y el que yo presente.

Yo nunca he excluido la estadidad. Los asimilistas han excluido la independencia y la libre asociacion.

Lo que hace mi proyecto es sencillamente traer balance, corregir un desequilibrio.

De aqui en adelante, el debate es entre los lideres asimilistas y el pueblo, los puertorriquenistas. La asimilacion ya no es la unica opcion ante el Congreso.

Mi proyecto propone la libre asociacion y la independencia. Eso es lo que proponen los puertorriquenistas.

qQue nos motiva a los puertorriquenistas? El amor a Puerto Rico; defender su herencia; creen que podemos ser autosuficientes; creen que podemos determinar nuestro futuro sin tener amos; creen en si mismos. Estan convencidos que podemos crear empleos, con una economia fuerte y vibrante de un pueblo innovador, creativo, y totalmente capaz de determinar su propio futuro.

Los lideres asimilistas piensan que nos morimos de hambre sin los Estados Unidos.

Los puertorriquenistas no macanean a los estudiantes cuando levantan su voz en defensa de la democracia--eso lo hacen los lideres asimilistas.

Los puertorriquenistas creen que primero hay que pagar las pensiones al pueblo mientras los asimilistas prefieren pagar los bonistas norteamericanos de Wall Street.

Los puertorriquenistas aman y protegen su tierra. Los asimilistas quieren destruirla construyendo un gasoducto.

Los puertorriquenistas entienden que la democracia debe florecer. La libre expresion del pueblo es sagrada. Los lideres asimilistas, cuando no les gusta lo que escuchan del pueblo, llaman a la fuerza de choque.

Los lideres asimilistas no han atacado lo que propone mi proyecto. Ellos atacan al proponente.

Los asimilistas quieren que los congresistas solamente escucharan su version del futuro. Estan molestos porque este congresista ha traido antes el Congreso las otras dos alternativas, que de hecho, se van a votar en el plebiscito de Puerto Rico. En Puerto Rico quieren una realidad, y los asimilistas en el Congreso quieren pretender que hay otra.

No, con mi proyecto, aqui va a haber balance, verdad y transparencia: esa es la democracia, en eso creemos los puertorriquenistas--el debate, la discusion y la libertad de ideas. Los lideres asimilistas, a traves de la historia han perseguido y metido a los puertorriquenistas en la carcel, y si no en la carcel, los llevan hasta Cerro Maravilla.

Los asimilistas dicen que los puertorriquenistas son antiamericanos. No y no. Los puertorriquenistas son

anticoloniales. Quieren para Puerto Rico la soberania que tienen y disfrutan los norteamericanos. eSi, asi es! Los puertorriquenistas quieren lo mismo que tienen los norteamericanos: vivir en una nacion libre y soberana donde ellos mismos dictan su futuro y no tienen amo.

Los puertorriquenistas ven el sol y ven energia que podemos cosechar. Ven la tierra y ven alimentos que nos daran de comer.

Los puertorriquenistas estan motivados por el amor a la patria y su herencia, y el conocimiento de que podemos ser grandes, que tenemos la inteligencia y la capacidad de innovar y crear.

Desde mi infancia en el destierro en Estados Unidos escuche la cancion ``Preciosa'' y vine a entender que el tirano, la negra maldad es el colonialismo norteamericano. Lo dijo Rafael Hernandez, la conciencia cantada de mi pueblo.

Los puertorriquenistas recuerdan con anoranza su patria ``En mi Viejo San Juan'' la cancion que dice ``. . . esa extrana nacion'', como decian los boricuas en Estado Unidos, ``esta no es mi tierra,'' cuando confrontaban el abuso, discriminacion y racismo. Puerto Rico lo es.

El puertorriqueno es su diaspora de Nueva York a Chicago, de San Juan a Ponce, todos somos puertorriquenos. Como escribio nuestro poeta nacional, Juan Antonio Corretjer, ``Yo seria boricua aunque naciera en la luna''. Y, anado con todo el respeto, ``seria boricua aun si viviese en la luna''.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably absent in the House Chamber for roll call votes 86 and 87 on Monday, February 13, 2017. Had I been present, I would have voted ``Yea'' on roll call votes 86 and 87.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably absent in the House chamber for roll call vote 85 Tuesday, February 7, 2017. Had I been present, I would have voted ``Nay'' on roll call vote 85.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably absent in the House Chamber for roll call votes 79 and 80 on Monday, February 6, 2017. Had I been present, I would have voted ``Yea'' on roll call votes 79 and 80.

Mr. Speaker, as we all learned on Sunday, Adolphus Busch came to America from Germany to make the king of beers. He didn't have a visa. He had a boat ticket and, of course, our country welcomed him. Well, not exactly.

In the Super Bowl ad that aired, Mr. Busch was told: ``You are not welcome here. Go back home.''

But then the young man eventually reaches St. Louis, meets Mr. Anheuser, and Budweiser--one of the most unmistakably American brands around the world--is born.

All of us assumed that the President was watching the ad because it was, after all, the Super Bowl and it was broadcast by FOX network, his favorite. But I wonder if the message sank in.

Mr. Speaker, to borrow a line from a different advertiser: I don't always drink beer, but when I do, I think the next time it will be a Bud.

But then there was the little girl and her mom who walked to America from Latin America in the 84 Lumber ad. They didn't have a visa either because, well, we don't generally allow visas to people from Latin America who are seeking a better way of life here. If they did qualify for a visa, that little girl would be a grown-up adult by the time the visa was processed, given our broken immigration system. We learned that FOX television told the advertiser to edit out a border wall scene in the original version of the ad. I guess even FOX was worried about being attacked by the twitter in chief.

I am not sure what 84 Lumber sells, but I think I am going to go out and buy some. Mr. Speaker, I haven't had a cup of coffee in 30 years. I don't drink the stuff. You can bet, however, I am going to go find my way into a Starbucks sometime soon because they just announced--in the midst of all of this political turmoil--that they will hire an additional 10,000 refugees.

The CEO of Starbucks said in a letter recently: ``There are more than 65 million citizens of the world recognized as refugees by the United Nations, and we are developing plans to hire 10,000 of them over five years in the 75 countries around the world where Starbucks does business.''

Apple and Netflix were among the companies to strongly oppose the President's ban of travel from certain Muslim countries and the halt to the refugee program. I know this because I googled it--and Google is another company that has stepped up as a corporate citizen to say that restricting legal immigration by visa holders is bad for their bottom line, bad for a nation built by immigrants, and bad for a nation that is a leader of and dependent on the world economy.

Mr. Speaker, there is no more iconic world brand--no commercial symbol more associated with America and Americans around the world than Coca-Cola. Unlike coffee, Mr. Speaker, I enjoy a Coke and a smile several times a day. The company issued a statement recently that said: ``Coca-Cola Co. is resolute in its commitment to diversity, fairness and inclusion, and we do not support this travel ban or any policy that is contrary to our core values and beliefs.''

Mr. Speaker, I am not here to advertise products or to tell anybody what to shop for or who to buy from, but it is a pretty important moment in our history when America's largest companies are going out of their way to say that this President's anti-immigration agenda runs contrary to core values of their corporation and core values of the United States of America.

When the CEO of Uber has to resign from a corporate advisory council because the President's policies are so toxic, you know there is some bad policy there. You see, the reality TV host in the White House who is all about burnishing his own brand, has damaged, Mr. Speaker, the most important brand in world history: the American brand, the Statue of Liberty, and the bald eagle.

Mr. Speaker, American consumers who drive our economy, the men and women who open up businesses that feed our economy, and those who wake up every day to make the products, at this moment they are being asked to get involved and to make their choices be known.

As the Starbucks CEO said recently: ``If there is any lesson to be learned over the last year, it's that your voice and your vote matter more than ever. We are all obligated to ensure our elected officials hear from us individually and collectively.''

Here is my message: I am not handing over my money to people or companies that take that money and invest in hate, invest in bigotry, invest in discrimination; that destroy the image and the reputation of the United States of America. I am not putting one dollar into those companies. I am not going to use my money to support that.

I guess I am going to find myself a Starbucks and buy whatever they have there that is not coffee, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, for the last 2 weeks, we have lurched from one fiasco to another, played out on a national and international stage. There were press briefings and Presidential statements filled with official lies. We have witnessed tragedies, late night firings, policy changes, and clarifications, also known as backtracking, and then we have come back for another round of fiascos.

We are told we will not have a National Security Council as we always have had, one with the top minds of the intelligence community and the head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. No, instead, we will have a nationalist security council, with Breitbart's Steve Bannon and his personal experience as a former Navy officer right there in the situation room. I am not feeling safer already.

The President has acted to criminalize immigrants and to make every immigrant an equal priority for deportation. Trump actually buried a requirement in his executive order to count, every week, the number of crimes committed by immigrants and to have the government officially tally every single week the number of Mexican rapists, criminals, and drug dealers--the ones Donald Trump has been talking about since he launched his campaign.

But interestingly, by law, the Federal Government and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention cannot conduct research into how many people are killed by guns--that is outlawed--and how we can prevent gun violence--that is outlawed. No, the NRA and its wholly owned subsidiary, the Republican Party, has outlawed that. But the new immigrant rape report is ripped from the headlines of Breitbart and other rightwing websites, except that now it is the basis of government policy. We are really getting a lesson in who is and who is not a criminal in this post-``1984'' world of newspeak.

We all know that there are millions of undocumented immigrants from all over the world, but this administration keeps whipping out that Mexican thing. Let's face it, the people thinking up these policies think all Latinos are Mexicans and all Mexicans are immigrants. So if you are an immigrant from Mexico, except for a few good ones, you are a criminal, a rapist, or a murderer.

Millions and millions of people who the President wants to deport are people with traffic violations. They drove without a license in many States because the State in which they live and pay taxes does not issue driver's licenses to them. They are moms and dads who came back after they were deported because that is what moms and dads tend to want to do: to be with their children, watch them grow up, nurture and love them. And Trump's targets include young people and teenagers who are listed on a ``gang registry'' because a local cop thought they dressed or acted like they might be in a gang.

But if you hire maids or nannies and do not pay the proper amount of Social Security and FICA taxes, or if they are undocumented immigrants and you don't pay the taxes, you are not called a criminal. No, you are called a Cabinet Secretary. In fact, we will put you in charge of the budget, including Social Security, the one you failed to pay.

Or you can run the Department of Commerce, yes. If your business engages in the shady business of foreclosing on grandmas and widows, you get to be the Secretary of the Treasury.

If you close down the Department of Energy, that is what you want to do, close down the Department of Energy, guess what you get to do. You get to run it.

If you oppose public schools, you get to be Secretary of Education.

And if you have opposed every inch of progress for civil and human rights in this country with every fiber of your being--immigrant rights, gay rights, basic civil rights for people of color, basic protections to make sure that everyone's vote counts equally--well, in that case, guess what you get to do, you get to run the Department of Justice, the agency ultimately charged with making sure everyone gets equal protection under the law.

Up is down, down is up, and it is only his second week.

I feel our new President has some learning to do, and a lot of that learning has to do with the three branches of government, like what the executive branch should do when a Federal judge tells them to stop doing something they shouldn't be doing in the first place.

I think the new President has a lot to learn about the freedom of religion, the separation of church and State, and how our refugee policies work. I think the people of Chicago could teach him a lot about the Fourth Amendment and its ban on unreasonable search and seizure and the illegality of holding immigrants in jail without a warrant.

So I am offering to give the President my copy of the Constitution, autographed by Khizr Khan, the father of a U.S. Army captain killed in Iraq in 2004, who asked a question I don't think any one of us knows the answer to. That question is: Has the President ever read the Constitution? I am proud I will be standing with Mr. Khan and other leaders of different faiths later today at a press conference on the actions taken by our new dear leader.

We can all see through the emperor's new clothes and his Chinese-made tie, and the view isn't pretty, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably absent in the House Chamber for roll call votes 66 and 67 on Monday, January 30, 2017. Had I been present, I would have voted ``Yea'' on roll call votes 66 and 67.

Mr. Speaker, I am an American man, born in Chicago, to parents who were born citizens of the United States.

The ban on legal immigration from seven countries does not impact me or my family directly, but, as an American, I am speaking up today. I am an immigrant.

The proposed roundup of millions of immigrants will not hit my house directly, but, as an American, I am standing up today to say I, too, am undocumented.

I have not fled systematic persecution, but, today, like a lot of Americans, I am speaking out and saying clearly that I, too, am a refugee.

Today, I am an 81-year-old man who was originally from Iran who traveled with a heart problem to the United States--with my American family and a green card in my hand--and was detained at O'Hare International Airport in Chicago.

Today, I am a Fulbright scholar who was put on a plane back to Iran because our government did not understand what the new President was doing, how he was doing it, or what people already traveling should do.

Today, I am a citizen of the United Kingdom--I am English--with a green card, who was blocked entering at O'Hare with my U.S. citizen wife and my U.S. citizen child. That is who I am today.

Today, I am a student who is in the middle of my academic career at the University of Chicago who does not know whether I can come back to school and continue my education.

Today, I am one of more than 67,000 refugees who is already approved for travel and certified by both the United States and the U.N. in a painstaking process that took me years to complete, but I am stranded overseas.

Today, I am gay or Jewish, Christian, Hindu, Shia, Sunni, am from a tribe or ethnic group that is systematically targeted for persecution, or am living in a country anywhere in the world that cannot protect my basic safety, and the United States is closed to me.

Today, I am an immigrant who has a green card and who has followed all of the rules to the letter, but I cannot renew my green card or lawfully apply for citizenship here in the U.S. because I am from one of seven mostly Muslim countries on Trump's list where, incidentally, there are no Trump hotels, buildings, or golf courses.

By now, the entire world knows that the President of the United States screwed up bigly last week and caused an international and domestic crisis and that his staff is lying when they say it was a ``huge success.''

When the German Chancellor has to lecture your President about the Geneva Convention, you have made one hell of a bad decision.

When the Prime Minister of England is saying on one day that the U.S. and Britain have a special relationship but that, on the very next day, you are keeping her citizens out of your country when they are green card holders, your country has made a mistake.

When Rudy Giuliani--of all people--makes it clear that the President requested a Muslim ban and that they dressed up the policy to make it look better but still carved out exceptions to help Christians, you are probably acting in an unconstitutional manner.

That is not what one but two Federal judges thought: that there are significant enough constitutional issues that have been raised by recent executive actions to stop the President's order from being implemented.

Honestly, even at this hour, I am not sure they are fully complying with the orders or will reverse the actions of government officers at airports who coerced--intimidated--green card holders into signing away their rights and being deported.

On Sunday, the glaring bald spot of the President's executive order was combed over by the Secretary of Homeland Security, who said that keeping out travelers who already live in the U.S. and have green cards is not in the interests of the United States, to which the entire world said, sarcastically: Ya' think?

Today, I am an American, and I am standing up. Today, I am one of the millions of Americans who went to airports, Trump hotels, or town squares and who is marching peacefully, praying privately, and preparing personally to act as an advocate for immigrants and other families in our communities--women, Jews, gentiles, LGBT, and every one of every color and shape.

Today, they did not come for us, but we could not be quiet. We joined arms and worked together as Americans. We pledged to stand up for those who are being targeted so that we can protect each other and stem the next wave of targeted attacks.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that we bring up H.R. 724, which would rescind President Trump's immigration ban so that students like Maryim can return to classes at the University of Chicago and other students can continue their studies at U.S. colleges and universities.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably absent in the House chamber for roll call votes 60 and 61 on Monday, January 23, 2017. Had I been present, I would have voted ``Yea'' on roll call votes 60 and 61.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably absent in the House Chamber for roll call votes 27 and 30 on Tuesday, January 10, 2017. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on roll call vote 27 and I would have voted ``yea'' on roll call vote 30.