Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the life of John Knox.

John was raised in Richmond, California, where he attended John F. Kennedy High School. He graduated from the University of California, Berkeley and went on to obtain a Juris Doctorate from Berkeley Law in 1987. After completing his education, John began working as an attorney at Orrick and dedicated himself to his career as a public finance lawyer.

After six years, John was promoted to partner. He mastered the technical aspects of being a lawyer, but also understood the importance of developing strong business relationships. John built a local government practice throughout the Bay Area, which he transitioned to a municipal restructuring practice. John and his law partner guided cities through bankruptcy with John handling the public financing and restructuring of debt. In 2012, John and his partner helped Stockton, CA file for bankruptcy protection, which was the largest U.S. city bankruptcy filing that year. This work with cities earned them recognition as ``Attorneys of the Year'' by California Lawyer magazine in 2013. John received this same recognition, known as the CLAY award, in 2005 and 2017. In addition to this work, it was also John's idea to use Social Impact Bonds to revitalize distressed properties in Richmond and transition them to those in need of affordable housing.

In his personal life, John met his future wife, Aracely, in high school when they were partnered for a class project. John and Aracely married in 1981 and had four children. John also had a love of music, especially jazz, which he developed during childhood when he started playing piano. As a teenager and young adult, John played music professionally as part of a band. His friends and family remember his piano playing as effortless and always drawing a crowd.

Sadly, John passed away in February at the age of 64. Please join me in honoring John for his many contributions to our community.

Madam Speaker, I rise today, along with Congresswoman Barbara Lee, to recognize the life of James ``Jim'' Matzorkis.

Born in Chicago in 1952, Jim moved with his parents to California as a child. He later graduated from the University of Maryland with a bachelor of Arts in Business Administration. After gaining experience in both the private and public sectors, Jim began working for the Port of Richmond in 1998 as a Marketing Manager and became the Executive Director in 2001. One of Jim's many accomplishments is completing the Honda Port of Entry, which brought significant profitability to the Port. As a testament to Jim's leadership, out of the 149 ports in the United States, the Port of Richmond is currently ranked 27th in total trade. The Port has generated millions of dollars in revenue for the City of Richmond and brought local and international business to our community.

Jim's professional knowledge and dedication led to him serving on the Bay Planning Coalition Board of Directors and the California Association of Port Authorities Executive Advisory Committee. He also participated in Richmond's sister cities program and helped facilitate a strong and lasting relationship with Zhoushan, China, one of Richmond's three sister cities.

In his personal life, Jim married his high school sweetheart, Beverly, and the couple had two daughters. He was known as the patriarch of his family, organizing family reunions and ensuring everyone stayed connected. He loved to travel, especially to Greece where his family would all come together. Jim also enjoyed regaling others with stories from his time working as a concert promoter and security in the rock and roll industry.

Sadly, at just 68 years old, Jim passed away at his home in Oakland, California in December 2020. Jim is remembered by his friends and colleagues as kind and enthusiastic, and someone who made sure everyone around him was happy. Please join me and Congresswoman Barbara Lee in honoring James Matzorkis for his many contributions to our community.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the service of long-time community member Robert Hoyer as he celebrates his 100th birthday.

Bob grew up in Oakland and attended the University of Nevada, Reno. During World War II, Bob took a leave from his studies and served in the United States Army in the Philippines. When he returned home, Bob graduated from the University of Nevada with a degree in mining engineering. It was also in Reno that Bob met his wife, Eldora, who had served in the United Stated Navy WAVES during WWII teaching aircraft navigation.

Following college, Bob worked for the Natomas Mining Company in Nevada. When the mining industry declined after the end of

the war, Bob and Eldora moved back to the Bay Area where Bob worked for Dow Chemical in Pittsburg. He then went on to work for the East Bay Regional Parks District as a construction inspector.

In 1956, Bob and Eldora settled in Clayton where they advocated, along with other residents, for its incorporation. When the City of Clayton was incorporated in 1964, Bob became the first mayor and served on the City Council until 1980. One of the City Council's early accomplishments was the establishment of walking trails and preserved open space, which remain a highlight for the city today.

Bob and Eldora also contributed to the creation of the Clayton Historical Society, which was chartered in 1976. Bob served as the President, helped raise money for city monuments, and participated in the establishment of the Clayton Historical Society Museum. In 1976, two historic homes were moved to Main Street and joined together to create the Museum, which stands today as a testament to Clayton's dedicated citizens. Throughout his many years in Clayton, Bob continued to be an active member of the community. He served on The Grove Park Blue Ribbon Task Force and the Keller Ranch Master Plan committee and donated the flagpoles at City Hall, the Grove Park, and the Museum.

Bob is a regular in downtown Clayton and is known for his laughter and insightfulness. Please join me in congratulating Bob on his 100th birthday and his lifetime of service and leadership.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the life and service of Billy Alexander, a dedicated public servant who worked tirelessly on behalf of childhood education in West Contra Costa County and throughout California.

Billy and his wife, Barbara, advocated for issues that affected children across our state. After Billy served in the Korean War as a member of the U.S. Army, Billy and Barbara returned to California and settled in Richmond to raise their family. Parents of eight children, the Alexanders took a direct role in the education process by first joining the Parent Teacher Association (PTA). This led to them participating in junior high and high school PTAs and School Advisory Councils, where they established themselves as a collective force for good in our community. Billy and Barbara would eventually become co- Chairs of the District Advisory Committee and spent 27 years in that role.

Billy and Barbara also displayed their knowledge of and passion for childhood education on the state and national levels. They participated in developing the California Strategic Plan for Parental Involvement in Education, and Billy served on the California Committee of Practitioners, which helped develop Title I plans for the state. He was appointed to the California Department of Education's Council of Black Affairs and to the Committee to Revise Title 5. Additionally, in 1977, the Alexanders won a California court case requiring school districts to ensure federal and state funds designated for Title I were actually used for that purpose. On a national level, Billy and Barbara served on the Board of Directors for the National Coalition of Title I/Chapter I Parents and on the National Council on Educating Black Children.

The Alexanders dedicated their lives to serving the needs of children in an effort to promote equitable educational opportunities. They touched the lives of countless families and created numerous programs benefiting the children and families of Richmond, including Vision of Hope--a weekend tutoring program that expanded to Summer of Hope, which operated as an alternative to summer school. They also created the Mother Hen/Chanticleer Awards to honor individuals who exceptionally served West Contra Costa Unified School District students. From helping parents become better advocates for their children to gifting books to students, the Alexanders worked diligently to create better and more equal opportunities for disadvantaged youth.

Billy and Barbara were married for 44 years until Barbara passed in 2001. Sadly, Billy passed away in November of 2020. Billy was a beloved resident of Richmond and a tremendous advocate for children and he will be missed. Please join me in honoring him for his many contributions to our community.

Mr. Speaker, I am a proud former member of Teamsters Local 170 in Worcester, Massachusetts, and a former member of AFL-CIO Local 2 in San Francisco. From that experience, I know personally the value of being a union member.

I am also a former small business person who knows the value of having good-paying jobs in a community represented by union members to small businesses.

Mr. Speaker, the wealthiest Americans continue to take home a larger and larger share of America's wealth. According to Fed data, the top 1 percent of Americans have a combined net worth of $34.2 trillion, which is 15 times more wealth than the bottom 50 percent of Americans. One percent has more wealth than 160 million Americans.

This is unparalleled in our existence and must be addressed if you really care about working people. This inequality has contributed to what is called diseases of despair by public health experts and has worsened the behavioral health crisis exponentially in this country.

At the same time, union coverage today is half of what it was 40 years ago, and research shows deunionization

accounts for up to one-third of the inequality of which I speak.

The Economic Policy Institute estimates that deunionization has led to working people losing $200 billion per year, and that money goes to make inequality greater and goes into the already exceedingly disproportionate wealth by those in the 1 percent. It hurts all of us, including them.

Strengthening access to unions and American workers being able to organize will help restore the balance of power between workers and employers, wages and capital. The research is clear that when workers collectively bargain and organize, their pay goes up. On average, a worker covered by a union contract earns 13 percent more than a peer in a nonunionized workplace.

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman for yielding me the time, and I ask my colleagues to enthusiastically support this initiative.

Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 188 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota, pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

General Leave

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Madam Speaker, today, the Committee on Rules met and reported House Resolution 188, providing structured rules for consideration of H.R. 842, H.R. 8, and H.R. 1446.

For H.R. 842, the rule self-executes a manager's amendment by Chairman Scott, makes in order 19 amendments, and provides for 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and the ranking member of the Committee on Education and Labor.

For H.R. 8 and H.R. 1446, the rule makes in order eight and four amendments, respectively, and provides 1 hour of debate for each bill equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on the Judiciary.

The rule further provides en bloc authority and a motion to recommit for each bill.

The rule also adds an additional minority member to the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis.

Finally, the rule provides for recess instructions, suspension authority, and same-day authority from March 13 through April 22, and activates the Consensus Calendar.

Madam Speaker, this is the first time I have been able to be on the floor and present in almost a year. A year ago, as some of you know, I had an accident and proceeded to spend 6 weeks in the George Washington University Hospital intensive care unit, 4 of those weeks on a ventilator.

My sons came from California to be told by the doctors in a windowless room at George Washington that I had about a 10 percent chance of survival. The next day, they got a phone call, expecting to hear that their dad had died. Instead, the doctor told them that I was doing better.

Madam Speaker, I know that you know how grateful we are to have the wonderful gift of life, to share it with our children, and to be here in this sanctum sanctorum of American democracy. I am grateful. I am grateful to my staff, to the providence of our creator, and to my family.

Madam Speaker, our Nation is struggling, and not only because of the coronavirus pandemic. Our Nation needs bold, meaningful changes to make a real difference for average Americans. That is what the three bills before us today do. Each addresses its own epidemic: gun violence; inequality; and, unfortunately, an ugly part of human nature, greed.

Madam Speaker, nearly 40,000 people died from firearm injuries in the United States in 2019. History would show that enacting smart, evidence-based policies based on public health premises reduces this sad phenomenon.

Madam Speaker, 22 percent of U.S. gun owners acquired their most recent firearm without a background check. That means that millions of Americans got millions of guns with no questions asked. Approximately 80 percent of all firearms acquired for criminal purposes are obtained through private party transfers, which currently do not require background checks.

Ninety-six percent of the inmates surveyed, who were prohibited from possessing a firearm at the time they committed their crime, had obtained their firearm from an unlicensed private seller, avoiding the background check altogether.

In California, where I am proud to live and serve, all private gun sales must be completed through a licensed firearms dealer, requiring a background check--a universal background check and a mandatory waiting period. Not coincidentally--and the public health experts will let us know through their evidence-based research--California has the ninth- lowest rate of gun violence across the United States. Gun killings in Connecticut, similarly, fell by 40 percent after it required a mandatory background check and a gun safety course before the purchase of a gun.

We know what we need to do to help protect millions of Americans. Universal background checks are supported by decades of evidence. The Bipartisan Background Checks Act, H.R. 8, institutes universal background checks.

Additionally, the Enhanced Background Checks Act, H.R. 1446, ends the arbitrary rule that if a background check hasn't been completed in 3 days, the gun can be sold regardless.

I proudly support these bills because the evidence is clear that they will make our communities safer and save lives.

Madam Speaker, next, the rule will allow us to consider the Protecting the Right to Organize Act, or the PRO Act. The rise in inequality in this country has coincided with a decline in union membership. By most estimates, declining unionization accounted for about one-third of the increase in inequality--one-third--from 1980 through the 1990s through today.

If you watch the data over the years, as States move as a group toward less union coverage, those same States have much worse income inequality. You cannot address inequality without increasing access for working people to representation. Unions do not only raise wages for the workers they represent, but they have also been shown to moderate the compensation of executives.

On top of the obvious benefits you think of that are associated with the labor unions, like higher wages, safer workplaces, some of the others that come along with union membership also help address the inequities in our society.

Union workers are more likely to receive paid leave, are up to 28 percent more likely to have employer-sponsored health insurance, and are up to 54 percent more likely to be enrolled in employer-sponsored pensions. Not only do workers have better access to pensions, but their employers contribute an average of 28 percent more toward those pensions, retirement security for Americans, than nonunion employers.

As the chairman of the subcommittee of jurisdiction, I know that the PRO Act simply updates labor law to ensure that workers in today's economy are able to create and join labor unions to receive the same kinds of protections they see in other sectors. Nothing more.

As President Eisenhower once said during the largest expansion of the American economy in history, when labor unions had one-third of the workforce: ``Only a fool would try to deprive working men and women of the right to join the union of their choice.''

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro), the distinguished chairwoman of the Committee on Appropriations.

Madam Speaker, I include in the Record an article published in the March 3 USA Today titled: ``Congress renews gun safety push with background check bills.''

[From USA TODAY, Mar. 3, 2021]

Congress Renews Gun Safety Push With Background Check Bills

(By Amanda Becker)

Congressional lawmakers this week revived an effort to

enact significant gun safety laws for the first time in more

than 25 years by introducing bills to establish a universal

background check system that has broad support from the

public.

The bills introduced Tuesday in the House and Senate would

extend current federal background check requirements to

transactions conducted by unlicensed and private sellers.

Legislation was reintroduced in Congress to extend

background checks to transactions conducted by private and

unlicensed gun sellers.

The gun safety group Giffords estimates that 22% of U.S.

gun owners purchased their last firearm without completing a

background check. Polling shows that more than 90% of

Americans support a universal background check system.

The measures are what gun safety advocates predicted would

be a first step in pursuing new gun laws now that Democrats

control the White House and both chambers of Congress. In

recent years, gun safety bills stalled even when they had

bipartisan public support, in part because Republican

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell did not bring them up for

votes when he led the Senate from 2015 to 2021.

Rep. Mike Thompson, a California Democrat who chairs a

congressional gun violence prevention task force, on Tuesday

reintroduced bipartisan House legislation that would require

background checks for all firearm sales. The House first

passed the bill in 2019, one year after a mass shooting at

Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida,

left 17 dead.

``Time and time again, we have seen that the American

people want universal background checks, in fact public

polling shows that the majority of people, Democrats,

Republicans and independents, support this,'' Thompson said

in a statement.

The Senate is evenly split between Democrats and

Republicans, and the measure would have to pick up bipartisan

support to pass that chamber given that most legislation must

clear a 60-vote threshold.

``This Congress we will finally bring common sense gun

reforms up for a vote in the House and the Senate, and the

single most popular and effective proposal we can consider is

universal background checks,'' Murphy said in a video about

the effort.

When the House passed background checks legislation in

2019, the bill ran aground in the then Republican-controlled

Senate, where McConnell, a Kentucky Republican, did not bring

it up for a vote.

``Now, with Senate Democrats in the Majority, we have the

opportunity to act on this overwhelmingly popular, lifesaving

legislation to protect American communities,'' Senate

Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a statement on the

bill's introduction.

Advocates for new gun safety laws have hoped that with

President Joe Biden in the White House and Democrats

controlling the House and Senate, there is an opportunity for

action. The NRA is also grappling with multiple crises: New

York's attorney general is investigating whether its leaders

misappropriated more than $60 million for personal use, and

the NRA filed for bankruptcy in January. Its remaining

officials insist the organization remains solvent, and it

plans to reincorporate in Texas.

``This is the moment,'' said Shannon Watts, the founder of

Moms Demand Action, a grassroots organization started in late

2012 that now has nearly 6 million supporters.

``We have a trifecta and they have a mandate to act on

this. We have a grassroots army to support them and the NRA

is weaker than they've ever been,'' she added.

Already this week, Rep. Jim Clyburn, a key Biden ally from

South Carolina, reintroduced a bill that would close the so-

called ``Charleston loophole'' that allows firearm purchases

to move forward after three business days, even if a

background check has not been completed. It is named for the

2015 mass shooting at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal

Church in Charleston, South Carolina, where nine died after

the gunman was able to purchase a firearm when the three-day

window expired.

Last month, to mark the third anniversary of the Parkland

shooting, Biden called for the passage of ``common sense''

gun safety laws. He cited a background checks bill among his

top priorities.

The last major law passed to curb gun violence was the

Federal Assault Weapons Ban enacted by Democratic President

Bill Clinton in 1994. But even that had a 10-year sunset

provision that has since expired. Several attempts to renew

it, including by President Barack Obama in 2013 after Sandy

Hook, all derailed in a Republican-controlled Senate.

Groups pushing for gun safety measures told The 19th

earlier this year that a background check bill would probably

be the starting point early in the Biden administration

because it has broader bipartisan support than other

measures. President Donald Trump acknowledged in 2019 that

there was a ``great appetite'' for such a proposal after mass

shootings in Ohio and Texas, as did McConnell, though he did

not go on to bring it up for a vote.

A ``red flag'' bill giving courts the power to temporarily

confiscate firearms from individuals deemed at risk or anti-

gun trafficking legislation could be taken up next, the

advocates said.

Biden advisers Susan Rice and Cedric Richmond met last

month with gun safety groups that included Everytown for Gun

Safety, Moms Demand Action, Giffords and Brady to discuss

background checks, the proliferation of so-called ``ghost''

guns (homemade firearms or those with serial numbers removed)

and violence intervention programs, the White House said.

Biden has also pledged to work with Congress to reauthorize

the Violence Against Women Act, which he worked on as a

senator in the 1990s. In 2019, the House approved a VAWA

provision to close the so-called ``boyfriend loophole'' that

allows current and former unmarried partners convicted of

abuse and stalking to continue to purchase firearms. That

effort also stalled in the Senate. Democratic House leaders

said this week they will be taking up VAWA reauthorization

later this month.

Madam Speaker, more than 90 percent of Americans support a universal background check system. Passing this legislation is simply common sense, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Madam Speaker, I agree with my colleague and friend on the Rules Committee that we should enforce existing laws. In States like California where we have universal background checks, we have seen that gun violence has gone down, as I said in my earlier remarks. We have also seen that 30 percent of the guns used in criminal activity are actually imported into the State from other States.

To the previous comments that we need a national standard, that is why we need a national standard. It doesn't mean that States like California, Connecticut, and Massachusetts can't do these things, and it is a good laboratory, as Justice Brandeis said, that States should be the laboratory for innovation. We know these things work. So I would agree that we should enforce and get the revenue, the existing law.

But clearly, eliminating the background checks loophole would help make Americans safe.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Madam Speaker, I have one comment. The idea of opinions in the interpretation of the Second Amendment, there are 13 States, as I understand it, right now, who have universal background checks. All of them are working consistent with upholding the Second Amendment. Californians who have a universal background check can go out and legally buy a gun. It just decreases the number of deaths and injuries when you have this kind of law, Madam Speaker.

So I agree with the gentleman who spoke and said it shouldn't be about opinion. Neither of us decides what is constitutional in this instance. The courts do, and the courts have allowed local and State governments to implement these commonsense laws.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, a correction. The bill doesn't say indefinitely for the background checks. It says 10 days with the availability of an additional 10 days for a maximum of 20 days. So it is not indefinite.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would just like to point out that having a gun in your home actually makes you more likely to be a victim of gun violence.

Of the over 40,000 Americans who lost their lives from gun violence in 2018--the last year we have up-to-date statistics--two-thirds of those were by suicide. This is one of the big contributing factors to what are the so-called diseases of despair which happen everywhere in this country right now in these difficult times, and it has gotten worse under COVID. But the proximity to the guns actually leads to more of an opportunity for people to be the victim of gun violence.

Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a February 18 Washington Post editorial titled: ``Maryland just closed a gun loophole. The state is safer for it.''

[From The Washington Post, Feb. 18, 2021]

Maryland Just Closed a Gun Loophole. The State is Safer for it.

(By Editorial Board)

Given America's lurid history of gun violence, it is

confounding that buyers can purchase firearms in some places

without background checks. It's even more astonishing that it

remains the case in a liberal stronghold such as Maryland,

which suffered its own recent trauma owing to a deranged

gunman bent on mass murder.

Lawmakers in Annapolis last week finally closed a loophole

in state law that waived background checks for buyers who

make private purchases of shotguns and rifles. Sales of

handguns as well as shotguns and rifles from licensed dealers

in Maryland have long been subject to mandatory checks

through a federal database, but long guns were exempted when

the transaction took place through private dealers, including

those at gun shows.

The Democratic-controlled legislature pushed through the

change this month by overriding a gratuitous veto cast last

year by Gov. Larry Hogan, a Republican, who made no public

argument to defend the loophole beyond the fact that he had

not proposed closing it. The change takes effect next month.

Gun rights advocates and their Republican allies in the

legislature characterized the legislation as an assault on

rural Maryland's way of life and a burden for hunters. In

fact, whatever (probably slight) inconvenience some sportsmen

might undergo because of the new law is outweighed by the

obstacle it may pose for buyers who have no business owning

firearms.

It does not take a feat of imagination to foresee an act of

gun violence carried out by someone who, stymied by a

background check conducted by a licensed dealer, turns to a

private seller instead. Less than three years ago, a gunman

nursing a grievance massacred five people and injured two

others on a rampage through the newsroom of the Capital

Gazette newspaper, in Annapolis. He used a shotgun. As it

happens, he passed a background check when he purchased it; a

previous conviction, in 2011, for criminal harassment, was a

misdemeanor, not serious enough to forbid the sale. Yet even

if he had been convicted of a felony, he might still have

obtained a weapon easily by seeking out a private dealer--

through an online inquiry, for instance. The chances that

such a gunman would now succeed are diminished in Maryland.

No legislative measure is foolproof, and none will reliably

defeat a determined gunman. The idea of gun control, rather,

is to build a matrix of laws that deter and detect

individuals who, were they to obtain a firearm, would pose a

threat to themselves or others. Maryland's new law advances

that cause.

Madam Speaker, this isn't about taking away the rights of law-abiding Americans. Those claims are nonsense. This is about protecting the lives of all Americans.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I would like to point out to my friends and colleagues that, again, even Justice Scalia, in the Heller majority decision, said that local and State governments could enact reasonable gun violence protection laws.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Just a brief comment. In that same decision of Justice Scalia that I mentioned earlier, he said that Second Amendment protections are not unlimited, and that is the point of this bill. They have been done. They have been done constitutionally, as I said, by 13 States. And they statistically work.

I, too, have been robbed at gunpoint, but I didn't have to have a gun to survive. That was providence and the San Francisco Police Department.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

On the last point, I would just say that in California, in particular, in my district, having had multiple conversations with teachers, their labor representatives, and superintendents, we are getting schools back open, but we are doing it in a way to make sure that it is done efficiently and safely for everyone, the students, most particularly, their families, and their teachers.

We have come so far in this country, those of us who have listened to the science and the Centers for Disease

Control. We just want to make sure it is done right, in the most efficient, effective way for the kids.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague. Nicely done.

First, on the gun bills, of course, we are all respectful of the Speaker pro tempore's courage and the experience that she has had. For those of us who have had family members who have lost their lives because of gun violence--my dad is buried over at Arlington. He is a combat veteran from World War II who, a little over 30 years ago, took his own life.

As we know, the tragedies of homicide, as the Speaker pro tempore knows personally, and losing a loved one, as I know from losing a loved one to suicide--suicide is two-thirds of the total of people who die-- both are awful.

All we are trying to do, at least in my mind, is listen to the research, listen to the examples of other developed countries and other States, and implement public health policy. It informs us that if we do it, we will save lives and injuries, and we will save billions of dollars that all of us pay for.

All of us respect the Constitution. We took an oath to it. All of us respect the Second Amendment. We might not have all agreed if we were there, but it is the law. The courts have allowed us to implement these laws, and they work.

I really don't understand, and maybe it is because of my own personal belief and also from my experience as a city council member, a mayor, a member of the California Legislature, and now in Congress, why we don't follow the research and the evidence that it saves lives, out of respect for all those people who have lost their lives to gun violence.

Then, on the PRO Act, as a former member of a Teamsters union, that job helped me to get through college when my dad had lost his job. I loaded trucks. It was that union that provided me protection and enough for myself and my coworkers.

When I moved to San Francisco, I didn't have any money. I got a job in a hotel restaurant business, and I was in that local. Then, I was able to save enough money to go open my own businesses.

There have been some comments that somehow this bill would hurt small businesses. The reality is that people organize in environments where their employer is not treating their employees appropriately.

We know the inequality that Ms. DeLauro talked about, this historic inequality that is strangling our country and hurting so many working Americans, destroying the middle income that we have all benefited from, that opportunity to move up and to give to our kids something better than we had. That is the legacy of this country, and labor unions are a big part of that, and entrepreneurs and individual business owners are a big part of that. But it is the balance between these two.

As John Kenneth Galbraith said a long time ago, and he wrote a boring book about this, but it is interesting: Wages and capital have to have countervailing institutions. They have to balance each other.

As my friend from Minnesota said, it is a balance. Right now, after 50 years of attacks, starting with President Reagan, the working people in this country don't have the voice they once had. That not only hurts them and their kids; it hurts all of us.

When you have a robust middle class, and you have workers represented appropriately and proportionately, the country grows; there is more money to spend in businesses like mine; and there is a camaraderie, having teamwork. A good employer knows that, whether they have a unionized workforce or a nonunionized workforce.

Your employees are what make your business work. That is what gives you goodwill. That is what Americans took so much pride in, in the 1950s and 1960s, after World War II, after we had come to the great country we were after World War II, with a middle class that no one has ever seen on this planet. Since then, we have eroded that middle class.

The one most important thing to improve our economy is to give working Americans a voice. Let them join together. Let it be fair. A good employer will respect that and work with that.

As Eisenhower said, as I quoted in my opening, only a fool would try to keep a working American from organizing into a union.

Madam Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and the previous question.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Madam Speaker, I rise today with Congressman Mike Thompson, Congressman Jerry McNerney, Congressman Eric Swalwell, Congresswoman Barbara Lee, and Congressman Ro Khanna to recognize the service of an esteemed leader in Contra Costa County, Robert Doyle.

Robert began his career with the East Bay Regional Park District in 1973 as a Park Ranger. Through decades of hard work and devotion to the betterment of our community, Robert rose through the ranks of the Park District until being appointed as General Manager in 2010. His numerous professional accomplishments include increasing the Park District's public lands and trails by more than 61,000 acres and obtaining over $100 million in local, state, and federal grant funding for trail and land projects. Robert also established the Resources Enhancement Mitigation Program that funded millions of dollars in restoration projects for parks and open space.

Robert's work, however, went beyond the logistics of land acquisition and was focused around the idea that parks should be a haven for everyone in the community. As General Manager, Robert led efforts to diversify the Park District's user base to better embrace disadvantaged youth and other underserved populations. Civic engagement was supported by a Multicultural Advisory Committee and included programs such as the Adventure Crew/Richmond Rangers, Wellness Walks, and the school-based Kids Healthy Outdoor Challenge. Additionally, the Healthy Parks Health People initiative sought to connect the health benefits of being outdoors with individuals at high risk for chronic illness. The inclusivity of the community outreach that Robert oversaw has created new links between our natural environment and community members. This increased engagement ensures that our parks

and open spaces will be taken care of and enjoyed by future generations. As a testament to his remarkable career, in March 2018, Robert received the President's Award for Advocacy and Advancing the Park Profession from the California Park and Recreation Society.

In addition to his work with the Park District, Robert was a founding board member of Save Mt. Diablo, Inc. and negotiated the acquisitions of 5,000 acres for Mt. Diablo State Park. He was also a founding member of Bay Area Open Space, which advocates for environmental conservation through legislation.

Robert is known by his colleagues as a dedicated and visionary leader who inspires others to also work for the betterment of our community. We have enjoyed working with Robert and the East Bay Regional Park District on many projects, including the former Concord Naval Weapons Station and Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan. We thank Robert for his service with the East Bay Regional Park District and wish him great joy in retirement. Please join me, Congressman Mike Thompson, Congressman Jerry McNerney, Congressman Eric Swalwell, Congresswoman Barbara Lee, and Congressman Ro Khanna in honoring Robert for his many contributions to our community.

Madam Speaker, I rise today with Congressman Mike Thompson, Congressman Jerry McNerney, and Congressman Eric Swalwell to recognize the service of an esteemed leader in Contra Costa County, David Twa.

David began his career as a public servant in Minnesota where he served as a county manager and county attorney. With significant experience under his belt, David moved to California and was appointed as the Contra Costa County Administrator in 2008. In this role, David has managed 24 departments, agencies, and special districts; over 10,000 employees; and a multibillion-dollar budget.

During his tenure as County Administrator, David worked to implement the County's goals and improve the lives of its residents. One of David's many accomplishments is helping the County achieve a AAA bond rating from Standard and Poor's in 2013. David's legacy extends beyond his job description. He was dedicated to career development for County staff and worked to create leadership opportunities for employees, including helping establish the Contra Costa Local Government Leadership Academy in 2014. Throughout his many years with Contra Costa County, David has inspired his colleagues and peers to continue working to improve our community. In 2018, David won the Distinguished Service Award from the California Association of County Executives, a testament to his career and service.

David is known by his colleagues as a dedicated and respected leader. Please join me and Congressman Mike Thompson, Congressman Jerry McNerney, and Congressman Eric Swalwell in thanking David for his service to our County and wishing him the best in his retirement.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Port Chicago 50.

In 1944, a cargo vessel exploded at the Port Chicago Naval Magazine, located in my district, resulting in the deadliest home front disaster of World War II. The men loading ammunition at the site were African American. When the surviving African American 258 sailors understandably refused to return to those unsafe conditions, 50 were discriminately charged with and convicted of mutiny.

Congress and the Administration have repeatedly recognized the injustice the Port Chicago 50 suffered. Congress directed the creation of a memorial, the Executive branch pardoned one of the 50, and then- Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus recognized the ``well-documented challenges associated with uniformed service by African Americans during that era'' and said he ``strongly support[s] executive action in favor of'' the Port Chicago 50.

An amendment I filed to the National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 2500) calls for the Navy to exonerate them, a process used in prior NDAAs for wrongfully convicted service members.

As we near the 75th anniversary of the explosion, let us follow President Obama's Port Chicago tribute: ``may we carry forward their legacy by renewing our resolve to tackle injustice in our time.''

I would like to particularly thank the Friends of Port Chicago, including Reverend Diana McDaniel, Professor John Lawrence at the University of California Washington Center, former Congressman George Miller, and Congresswoman Barbara Lee for all of their work and support for this cause.

I am grateful to my colleagues for their support of this amendment and look forward to working with our colleagues in the Senate to ensure this important provision remains in the bill that is ultimately signed into law.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the service of long-time educator and community leader, Dr. Nellie Meyer.

Dr. Meyer has dedicated her career to improving education on various levels, ranging from working as a middle school and high school teacher to holding an array of leadership positions, most recently as the Mount Diablo Unified School District Superintendent. Throughout her career, Dr. Meyer has advocated for supporting at-risk youth, improving student achievement, and giving students the best education possible.

As the Mount Diablo Unified School District Superintendent for the past six years, Dr. Meyer focused on innovation and problem solving. She was a leader in the California City School Superintendents organization and has written multiple articles in professional education publications. Dr. Meyer has also presented at numerous national conferences on school turnaround, dropout prevention, and best practices for school systems.

Dr. Meyer's colleagues admire her sharp mind, empathetic nature, ability to think outside the box, and her insistence that a district has the responsibility to provide high quality education to every student.

On June 24th, Dr. Meyer is transferring her skills to the Los Altos/ Mountain View Union High School District to carry on her passion for improving education for young people. Please join me in wishing Dr. Meyer good luck in her transition and thanking her for continuing her commitment to the youth of our community.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the service of social justice advocate and student, Jocelyn Villalobos.

Jocelyn is a first-generation student at Los Medanos College and plans to pursue a Master's Degree in public health or nursing. In addition to her work on student government on issues such as education equity and improving graduation rates for minority students, Jocelyn also works with groups to prevent sexual violence and to promote safe educational environments for undocumented youth.

Jocelyn is involved in many clubs and organizations including La Raza Unida, Outreach Ambassador, Puente, Interfaith Space Committee, and Public Safety Committee. She recently completed her one-year term as the Student Trustee on the Contra Costa Community College Board, which allowed her to weigh in on important decisions for the District.

She has served on the Associated Students at Los Medanos College for two years and just completed her term as Commissioner of Campus Events. In 2017, Jocelyn's commitment to the community and advocacy for underrepresented students were recognized when she received the Jefferson Award twice for her public service as well as the Antioch Youth of the Year award alongside her twin sister, Jacqueline.

Please join me in wishing Jocelyn Villalobos good luck with her endeavors in college and beyond, and thanking her for her commitment to the students of our district.

Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chair, our economy and our Nation's workforce are at a critical juncture. The introduction of new technology and easier flow of people and information from one location to another have transformed our economy and our workforce in ways that were unpredictable and have created both benefits and risks. We need to be careful, however, that we are not leaving Americans behind.

Several years ago, I worked with a number of colleagues to go across the country to ask researchers and have townhalls in communities, from California to New Jersey, what the effect on technology, in particular, and what the future of work wages in the labor movement would be as our work transforms.

One common theme that we heard over and over again across the country--whether it was California, Wisconsin, Michigan, New Jersey, or Massachusetts--was the impact that technology is having on jobs, both good and bad, and potentially having both enormous benefit and risk.

Technology can be a huge benefit to workers and communities alike, but it also has the potential to displace or eliminate jobs. California labor unions have an impressive past of partnering with industry to ensure that any disruption to the workforce, like technology, is done in coordination with and in consultation with workers.

One major problem we face when trying to assess whether automation will be good or bad for our workforce is a lack of data. This amendment simply encourages the Bureau of Labor Statistics to start collecting this important data on the impact that technology is having on our workforce. We can use this data to inform policymaking to fight for workers and the U.S. economy and create programs and policies that will support job creation, retention, and the continued growth to our economy, but for everyone to benefit.

Similarly, this amendment would allow for data collection on mass layoffs. We often hear arguments that blame major job losses on regulations, trade decisions, and other unsubstantiated claims.

With this data that we are asking for, we will be able to collect and be able to clearly and honestly evaluate the effects of mass layoffs and how we can avoid them, or at least how we can help the workers who are affected.

The common theme for this amendment is workforce protection. It is something we agree about on both sides, I believe. We want to create and promote good-paying jobs for Americans and protect those jobs that can be and should be protected.

U.S. workers deserve our best efforts to create policy that is in their best interest. This amendment would help give us the data to do just that, and at no extra cost.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee), my friend and colleague.

Mr. Chairman, I ask for the House's support. I think it has been said over and over again that information is power. In this instance, this gives us the power to protect and anticipate challenges to the American workforce.

Mr. Chairman, I respectfully ask for support for this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, the bill before us today goes a long way to improving the health of our country. I thank the chairwoman for her leadership and dedication to the health and well-being of all Americans.

I am particularly pleased to see over $6 billion in funding for the National Cancer Institute. As we all know, probably too well, cancer affects all of us in some way. All of us have a family member, a friend, or a neighbor who has had to go through the challenge of being told they have cancer.

Nearly 1.8 million Americans will be diagnosed with cancer in 2019. With recent advancements, however, there has never been a better time in history to go through treatment if one has to be diagnosed with cancer.

New treatments with ever-greater outcomes are being developed constantly, many of them at NCI. The research done at NCI contributes to saving countless lives each year and helps keep millions more healthy, including myself as a cancer survivor of a form of leukemia that, while not curable, is manageable.

Because of the groundbreaking research done at and funded by NCI, by 2016 there were over 15.5 million cancer survivors in the United States alone. By 2026, this number will go over 20 million survivors. However, despite the high quality of care, many patients lack the information they need to understand their treatment and be full participants in their care.

As a cancer survivor, I am all too familiar with the uncertainty that follows the words, ``you have cancer.'' Doctors and health professionals start talking at you, using terms you have never heard, all of which matter, but little of which you understand. Research tells us that when someone is told, and family members are told that a family member has cancer, they only retain one in four words.

While more than two-thirds of patients surveyed are satisfied with the care they receive, the vast majority lack knowledge about treatment, options, and details. In fact, a recent study by NIH states that only 45 percent of patients reported being adequately informed about their diagnoses when told they have cancer by their physicians.

In a study in 2016, the Journal of Clinical Oncology stated that 38 percent of patients could never even remember talking with their doctor about life expectancy.

Cancer treatment is complicated, and I can tell you it is emotional for the people who are being treated, for their family, and for their loved ones. Yet 73 percent of patients do not search for additional information about their diagnoses. That is why it is so important that cancer care providers communicate clearly and often with patients and survivors.

This amendment will set aside $1 million for NCI to perform a study on how to use best practices to improve communications between cancer care providers and patients and survivors. When people have the information they need, they can more successfully navigate treatment and life as a survivor.

A cancer diagnosis will always come with uncertainty, but providers can and must do more to communicate clearly to help patients, their families and friends, and survivors to fully understand their diagnosis, their treatment, and their lifelong care expectations. It will allow patients to do what patients should do: fight cancer.

I thank the cosponsors of my amendment, Congressman Buddy Carter from Georgia, who is also the co-chair of the Cancer Survivors Caucus with myself, and Congressman Jamie Raskin, who is a member, for coauthoring this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee), my friend and my neighbor.

Mr. Chairman, I urge the passage of this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, I am grateful for the support in this bill for the Statewide Family Engagement Center Program, and I also thank the chair of this subcommittee for supporting the program.

This is an extremely valuable program that facilitates meaningful family engagement for States, school districts, schools, and parents to foster positive school environments and improved academic achievement.

Specifically, grantees are nonprofits that carry out parent education and provide comprehensive training and technical assistance to schools to support family-school partnerships.

Research is clear that the more involved families are in a student's education, the better the student performs. If a parent understands the value of the curriculum, develops relationships with teachers and administrators at their child's school, and feels involved in the local community as a result, the student reaps the benefits.

I was proud that a bipartisan provision I authored with Congressman G.T. Thompson led to the creation of Statewide Family Engagement Centers.

Unfortunately, due to an administrative oversight at the Department of Education, a $1 million shortfall for financial year 2019 has been created in this program. If it is not fixed, current grantees will have to cut their budgets by 9 percent.

This shortfall will mean the 11 centers will have to cut staff or reduce services. This will reduce the number of families, States, schools, and school districts that these centers can serve in the 12 States across the country that have grantees.

My amendment would make these deserving grantees whole and ensure that students and their families continue to receive the services they deserve to help students thrive in and out of school.

This amendment truly is an easy fix to an unintended problem created by a simple oversight. It is a commonsense amendment.

I thank my friend, Mr. Thompson, for working with us on this, and for his support for this amendment and the program.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support the amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).

Mr. Chair, I just want to thank my colleague from northern California, and I want to thank my colleague from Pennsylvania. It has been a pleasure working with them when I was in the minority, and it is a pleasure working with them in the majority.

This really should be nonpartisan, bipartisan. It creates a real vehicle to improve the quality of life for children and families and schools, and I would urge support for the amendment.

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

Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chair, the bill before us today goes a long way toward improving the health of our country. I commend the distinguished chairwoman, once again, for her tireless leadership for the health and well-being of all Americans.

One particular area where increased investments have been made in this bill is mental health. I could not agree more on the importance of addressing this vital component to a person's well-being.

Mr. Chairman, at a time in our history where we are having transformative interventions and innovation in discoveries when it comes to mental health, we have a challenge to provide more infrastructure and more resources. I have been told that we have 75 percent more requests for services in behavioral health since the ACA was passed with parity in it, but a 25 percent decrease in the number of young people going into professions.

So we clearly need to do more when it comes to mental health, and there is no place better to do more than with young people, to get them involved in understanding that there isn't a stigma, that, like cancer, behavioral health and mental health should be addressed with evidence- based research, and if people seek that kind of treatment, they will be able to live full and successful lives and will get away from generations of stigma against people who have legitimate behavioral health issues that can be treated just as medical treatments can.

According to the National Alliance on Mental Illness, approximately one in five adults in the United States--almost 50 million Americans-- experience mental illness in a given year. Millions of children also suffer every year from traumatic experience and mental illness.

Mr. Chair, approximately one in five young people age 13 to 18--more than 21 percent--experience a severe mental disorder; 13 percent of children age 8 to 15 experience a severe mental disorder at some point in that timeframe; yet only about 50 percent of children with mental health conditions receive the services they need.

Children who get the treatment and support they need can learn to successfully control their symptoms, perform better in school, and have better social and emotional outcomes throughout their lives.

When children go without treatment and support, their symptoms can become harder to control as they grow older. In fact, adults who do not get proper treatment as children face an increased risk of having other chronic conditions and die, on average, 25 years earlier than others from preventable causes--25 years because they are not getting the treatment they need.

That is why it is so important that we address mental illness at a young age. Children and their families must know that it is okay to ask for help and should be taught where to look.

My amendment would improve access to mental health support for children in a school-based environment to meet students' needs onsite. This funding will help children who might not otherwise get mental healthcare get the support they need in a setting they know and trust.

NIH research shows that children promoted to the next grade increases by almost 13 percent and the average number of days children are suspended decreases significantly as children participate in mental health services offered at their schools.

Our teachers are already underpaid and overworked, and many teachers report that they are the first and only support children receive for their mental and behavioral health problems. By increasing services to students directly in schools, we can help reduce the mental healthcare crisis and decrease the stigma at the same time.

I urge passage of this amendment.

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee), my friend and colleague.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the service of a long-time community leader, Dr. Irene Huston.

In her early years, Irene and her family moved from Mississippi to the Bay Area in the ``Second Great Migration'' to escape racist labor and housing practices. Irene attended Contra Costa College before earning a Bachelor's Degree from International Seminary in Plymouth, Florida. Today, Dr. Huston holds graduate degrees from Phoenix University, Antioch Christian University, and Elbon-Solutions College of Ministry, as well as an honorary degree from the National Theological Seminary of the Commonwealth University.

Although her interests and successes cast a wide net--she has served as a lecturer at San Jose State University, opened her own clothing boutique, and authored several books and a play--her focus has always been the church.

Dr. Huston has been in the ministry for 50 years, and has devoted the majority of this time to supporting women and families. She is internationally ordained and has ministered around the world, including in India, Nigeria, England, and Israel. Additionally, at home in California, she worked with the West Contra Costa Unified School District's adult education program.

Irene has founded a number of faith-based service organizations, including Irene's Women's Faith Foundation, and she continues her efforts today to motivate and empower young women and serve her community.

Please join me in wishing Dr. Irene Huston a happy 81st birthday, and in thanking her for a life of service and dedication.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the life and service of longtime Walnut Creek resident, Mr. Frank Bryant.

Frank was born on April 24, 1936 in Elko, Nevada to parents Howard and Charlotte Bryant. After his family moved to California, Frank attended San Jose State University before settling in Walnut Creek with his wife Susan. Frank and Susan resided in Walnut Creek for over 50 years. Throughout this time, Frank was deeply committed to serving the East Bay community.

An architect by trade, Frank designed several commercial and residential buildings throughout Walnut Creek. A strong partner with the City of Walnut Creek, Frank designed a community theater and renovated an East Bay landmark, the Borges Ranch House.

Frank also used his architectural expertise in his positions on the Walnut Creek Design Review Commission, the Civic Arts Association, and the Walnut Creek Planning Commission. As a further testament to his commitment to the community, Frank was a founding member and the first president of the Kennedy-King Memorial College Scholarship Fund, an organization that pays tribute to two American heroes while helping provide students access to educational opportunities.

Please join me in honoring Frank Bryant, whose devotion to public service had a profound impact on his community.

Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chair, first of all, let me recognize the chair of the committee, my friend from California, for her steadfast work to defend American consumers.

Madam Chair, students are in a difficult situation nowadays in the knowledge-based economy, where we are told over and over again that America, to be competitive, has to have an educated workforce, and we need more and more young people to go into college and then to graduate school; not to say that we don't have needs for people to get out of high school and go into career tech.

But these generations are burdened with unbelievable student loans, and they are also burdened with, in urban areas, high housing costs and also lower wage expectations. We have to fix this; and one way to fix it is to have more oversight and performance standards for those companies, those for-profit companies, in particular, that control 93 percent of the market of Federal student loans.

Madam Chair, 44 million Americans hold an estimated $1.5 trillion in student debt. Over 1 million borrowers defaulted on their student loans last year.

Default is a financially devastating event that affects the individuals many times for the rest of their lives, as it affects their credit standing and also their ability to get a house, and to get a good job. Default is a financially-devastating event, as I said.

In the past decade, the Federal Government created several repayment plans designed to assist borrowers in financial distress, but the default rate remains stubbornly high.

One major reason is the student loan servicing industry. These for- profit companies operate with little oversight nor accountability.

Evidence shows that servicers often provide inaccurate information and inadequate customer service, making the already complicated process of enrolling in the correct repayment plan close to impossible.

My amendment would simply require the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to collect and publish data from student loan servicers, providing a first-ever look at how these companies perform at serving American consumers. That is important.

These are basic performance standards that I would think all of my colleagues across the aisle would want in any business practice-- particularly for-profit companies--they would want performance standards for them, if they are publicly-traded they would want them for the shareholders and, most importantly, for American consumers and students.

For example, this amendment would show if student loan servicers are making it easy for their customers to recertify their incomes for their repayment plans. We know that this is a common roadblock to successful repayment.

This amendment would simply require the CFPB to fulfill their statutory duty and provide needed oversight and transparency of this important industry. Everybody should agree that more information, in this instance in particular, is in everyone's interest and everyone's interest in the future of this country and future generations.

Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, just briefly, while I respect some of the issues brought up by my colleague, I do think, if the data is already there and they are supplying it for the Department of Education, we should make it relatively easy for the Consumer Protection Bureau to get that same information and, if needed, get more.

As a former business owner, these are the kind of performance standards I would not be afraid to show to my clients; and I would think that Congress and the American people, considering the importance of this investment, at a minimum, would require these kind of performance standards.

So I would hope that Members on both sides of the aisle would support the effort in a spirit of transparency, and performance standards for privately-held companies.

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