Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 111, the Providing Accountability Through Transparency Act.

S. 111 would require each agency, in providing notice of a rulemaking, to include a link to a 100-word plain language summary of the proposed rule, to be made available on the website regulations.gov.

Our job here is public service--not for our benefit, but the enrichment of our communities, state, and Nation.

The bills we pass here directly affect the lives of everyday Americans.

Therefore, the public must be able to access and provide their input regarding rules.

For those who may not be experts in the subject matter of the rule, S. 111 provides that a plain-language summary of 100 words or less be made available by agencies at regulations.gov.

Having this clear and simplistic summary will give members of the public the opportunity to provide specific and useful comments to those of us who serve them.

Plain language makes it easier for the public to read, understand, and use government communications.

As a result, Americans understand documents more quickly, call less often for explanations, and make fewer errors filling out forms.

All in all, Americans comply more accurately and quickly with requirements when written in plain language.

Ultimately, this helps improve government transparency and empower greater participation in the democratic process.

Through plain language, Americans are broadly better able to understand their options and the policies their government is pursuing.

Simply put, Americans are better able to participate in the debate once they understand their choices.

In addition, the Congressional Budget Office expects that preparing this short summary of proposed rules would not significantly increase agencies' administrative costs.

Further, this remains true when the costs of implementation are assessed over a five year period, with the Congressional Budget Office estimating no significant costs accruing through implementation of this policy from 2023 through 2028.

In fact, such a measure is likely to save federal government dollars in the long run.

Because Americans understand more immediately, file documents with greater accuracy, and have less need to seek explanations from bureaucrats, plain language saves government employees time and allows them to work more effectively and efficiently.

Multiple studies have shown that plain language improves bottom lines by saving time, personnel resources, and money, all while providing better service to Americans.

I urge my colleagues to support this common-sense measure that improves transparency, accessibility of information, and the ability of Americans to thoughtfully participate in the democratic process.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1418, the ``Animal Drug and Animal Generic Drug User Fee Amendments of 2023'', or ADUFA and AGDUFA, which will enable the U.S. to lead the world in innovation and drug development for animal pharmaceuticals.

The Animal Drug and Animal Generic Drug User Fee Amendment or AGDUFA was designed to enhance the performance of the generic new animal drug review process and enable the FDA to more efficiently ensure that generic new animal drug products are safe and effective.

AGDUFA was originally signed into law in 2008 and reauthorized in 2013 and 2018.

This bill reauthorizes the FDA to collect user fees for certain abbreviated applications for generic new animal drugs, generic new animal drug products and from certain sponsors of abbreviated applications for generic new animal drugs and investigational submissions for generic new animal drugs.

Specifically, this bill ensures that the Center for Veterinary Medicine can continue to meet the needs of the animal drug industry as it evolves.

This bipartisan bill will lead to increased transparency, additional pathways for animal drug approvals, and reduced review times for pioneer and generic drug applications while maintaining high standards for safety and efficacy.

Veterinarians have far fewer FDA-approved animal drugs compared to the number of FDA-approved human drugs.

My district in Houston is home to hundreds of veterinarians working hard to improve the health of animals.

In fact, Houston ranks fourth among metro areas for dog ownership and was named the ``Dog Capital of the World'' in a 2022 study conducted by Protect Our Paws.

Protect Our Paws found that Houston had the highest dog-toperson ratio in the world with 52.1 dogs per 100 humans.

More broadly, with Texas being No. 4 in pet ownership and over 58 percent of households owning at least one pet, we have thousands ot pets and animals to protect.

I have a vested interest in moving these reauthorizations forward because they are critical to animal and human health and well-being.

FDA continues to make progress to mitigate the growth of antimicrobial resistance in food-producing animals, including ending over-the-counter access to medically important antibiotics which are used in both humans and animals, but more needs to be done.

I remain fully committed to moving the Animal Drug and Animal Generic Drug User Fee Amendments of 2023 through a swift reauthorization before the programs expire on September 30th.

I urge all my colleagues to join me in voting in favor of H.R. 1418, the Animal Drug and Animal Generic Drug User Fee Amendments of 2023.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 813, the Global Investment in American Jobs Act of 2023.

This bill will direct the Secretary of Commerce to conduct an interagency review of and report to Congress on ways to increase the global competitiveness of the United States in attracting foreign direct investment.

The report will look at the economic impact of foreign direct investments in the United States, focusing on manufacturing, services, trade, and jobs in the United States.

This will allow Congress to better understand trends and challenges in global cross-border investments, as well as collaborate with other trusted partner countries.

Specifically, this bill will attract foreign direct investment from responsible private-sector entities, which is directly linked to the long-term economic prosperity, global competitiveness, and security of the United States.

It will promote polices to ensure that United States remains the global leader in developing and deploying cutting-edge technologies, such as self-driving vehicle technology and artificial intelligence.

As digital information becomes increasingly important to the United States economy and the development of new technologies and services that will be crucial to the country's competitiveness in the 21st century global economy, barriers including data localization and infringement of intellectual property rights must be further addressed.

This study will focus on the economic impact of foreign direct investment, challenges associated with foreign direct investment by state-owned enterprises, and the influence of protectionist policies enacted by other countries on the advanced technology economy.

Further, this bill will allow us to reduce our supply-chain dependence on China.

For the success of our larger economy, national security, and global relationships, it is vital that we pass H.R. 813.

Mr. Speaker, I thank both the gentleman from Illinois and the gentlewoman from Florida for their consistent and determined presence to bring to the American people truth and, of course, inspiration. I thank them both for their great leadership. I also thank Mr. Horsford, chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, for his leadership.

I think we are noted around the Nation and around the world for this outstanding presentation of great information every single week that enlightens people's minds and hearts.

Let me take just a moment to honor the Reverend Dr. Jesse Jackson, who this past weekend made a stupendous effort, as he always does, with Rainbow PUSH Coalition for its outstanding national convention, the many people who have come over the years.

This will not be a moment that I will take to completely pay tribute to Reverend Jackson, but I could not come to the floor without expressing my deep and abiding admiration for him. I have always said that Reverend Jackson, when no one else would be there to comfort those who are deprived, depressed, and simply outraged because of discrimination in this Nation, it would be the Reverend Dr. Jesse Louis Jackson who would be present and would be in the most difficult of situations. It is amazing that for decades he has consistently been doing this, over 50 years, being the first African American to run for President.

Frankly, I will say that I am in public service because of Reverend Jesse Louis Jackson. My first run was in 1984. I would not have won way down in Houston, Texas, had it not been for the unbelievable, positive uprising of voters who were moved and energized, rushing to the polls, excited.

For those of us who happened to be on the ballot for the first time, a young African-American woman seeking to be a judge in the county of Harris, I could not have made those steps without the unbelievable leadership and courage of not only Reverend Jackson but his wife and his family because they were doing it together.

Let me again express my appreciation. I know it was a stupendous conference, and I know that he has selected and given the anchor to a great leader. It is a great leader who can make choices of greatness, and he has done so.

I will very quickly touch on gun violence prevention and public safety. Excuse my raspy voice, and I will not take long, but I will just say that--do we need to say it?--every day, 120 Americans are killed with guns, and more than 32,000 people die from gun violence annually, including 2,677 children under 18 years of age.

In our respective communities, we see toddlers being shot, 10-year- olds being shot, senior citizens being shot.

Let me, in particular, give credit to the Houston Police Department, as they have worked very hard to bring down homicides, investigate homicides, and the numbers have gone down. However, it is very clear that they are desperately in need of Federal action. They desperately need the universal background check, which we have not been able to do. They desperately need, in many instances, the ban on assault weapons. They desperately need requirements for gun storage.

My bill, H.R. 52, the Kimberly Vaughan Firearm Safe Storage Act, named in honor of Kimberly Vaughan, a student at Santa Fe High School, who was just 17 years of age when a student entered her art class with a stolen gun and killed 10 people--stolen from the home. These guns were laid out and were owned by a family member. Firearm injury is the leading cause of death, as I said, of children.

Is it difficult to require the manufacturer to say to store guns and provide storage devices? Is it difficult for the retailer to provide storage devices? Is it difficult to be able to say as a nation that we believe in the Second Amendment, but life is so much more important?

When children as young as 9 and 10 are the victims of drive-by shootings intended for someone else, but it doesn't matter--I am reminded of children from Chicago to Houston who have been shot innocently, shot in their beds, or a woman who was shot in her house as the bullet whizzed close to her.

I am rising today to say that not only must we stop the gun violence, but we must also draw together, as the Congressional Black Caucus has done, to support funding for gun violence intervention. That is an important piece. We must expand responsibility to ensure that we give tools to the community to stop violence.

Workforce programs, as well, are very important. We must do it with our cities and do it with our law enforcement. Now is the time to stop gun violence in America and save lives.

Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the Congressional Black Caucus, I must shed light on the growing public safety concern regarding gun violence.

Every day, 120 Americans are killed with guns.

More than 32,000 people die from gun violence annually, including 2,677 children under 18 years of age.

And each year, hundreds of law enforcement officers lose their lives to gun violence, having been shot to death while protecting their communities.

Gun violence affects us all, but our government's continued lack of proactivity towards preventing gun violence has led to countless unnecessary, preventable deaths.

We cannot continue to allow countless lives to be lost to guns, when we can instead work together to save them.

It is for this reason that I, once again, stand to advocate for my bill, H.R. 52, the Kimberly Vaughn Firearm Safe Storage Act, named in honor of Kimberly Vaughn, a student of Sante Fe High School, who was just 17 years of age when a student entered her art class with a stolen gun and killed 10 people.

Firearm injury is the leading cause of death for children and young adults in the United States.

American children are twice as likely to be shot and killed as they are to die drowning. And still, there are more safety regulations for pools than gun storage.

An estimated 4.6 million minors live in homes with at least one unlocked, loaded firearm.

One in three U.S. households with children have firearms, and firearms accounted for nearly 19 percent of childhood deaths in 2021, which is a 50 percent increase since 2019.

My Bill, H.R. 52, establishes best practices for safe firearm storage to protect Americans, especially children, from improperly stored or misused firearms, to ensure that tragic deaths, such as the one of Kimberly Vaughn, do not happen again.

H.R. 52 will require labeling for weapons that says ``Safe Storage Saves Lives'' to spread awareness of the importance of storage to those that purchase firearms.

My bill will also provide grants and tax incentives to incentivize safe-storage devices to those that purchase weapons.

Gun storage will save countless lives by ensuring that weapons do not end up in the hands of the young.

We must work together to secure firearms and protect children, by passing legislation such as H.R. 52 to help prevent unintentional shootings and ensure that tragic stories such as Kimberly Vaughan never happen again.

Furthermore, despite affecting all communities, gun violence affects all communities differently, with a disproportionate effect on Black communities.

Black Americans are 10 times more likely than white Americans to die by gun homicide.

Black Americans are three times more likely than white Americans to be fatally shot by police.

And while Black Americans made up 12.5 percent of the United States population in 2020, they were the victims in 61 percent of all gun homicides.

According to the American Progress, ``this is due to a combination of weak gun laws; systemic racial inequities, including unequal access to safe housing and adequate educational and employment opportunities; and a history of disinvestment in public infrastructure and services in the communities of color most affected by gun violence.''

Black Americans are disproportionately impacted by gun violence and experience gun homicide at 10 times the rate of white Americans.

Nonfatal shootings, most of our nation's gun violence, impacts Black Americans at an even higher rate.

They experience gun assault injuries at 18 times the rate of White Americans.

Despite not directly causing these horrific events, our government shares in the blame.

Our role as executives in municipal government is to ensure we utilize every tool available to us and those provided by the state and federal government to keep our cities safe.

We need to reimagine public safety by holding law enforcement officers who violate the public trust accountable, using public health

resources to address mental health crises, and ensuring all communities are not overpoliced, well-resourced with access to job opportunities, affordable childcare, and capable social services to improve the quality of life.

We need to increase the use of civilian responders deployed to incidents involving mental health concerns and disturbances or disputes.

We need to strengthen governmental agencies dedicated to violence intervention and neighborhood safety.

We need to pass legislation, such as H.R. 48, the Gun Violence Reduction Resources Act of 2023, which will work to hire additional Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosive agents and investigators to enforce gun laws.

We need to pass legislation such as H.R. 46, the Mental Health Access and Gun Violence Prevention Act, which will authorize funding to increase access to mental health care treatment to reduce gun violence. Being that:

Suicide is the leading cause of gun related deaths in America;

more than 60 percent of deaths by guns in the country are the result of individuals using these weapons to commit suicide;

approximately 1 in 4 American adults have a mental illness and nearly half of all adults in America will develop at least one mental illness during their lifetime; and

less than half of children and adults with diagnosable mental health problems receive the treatment they need.

Gun violence is a nonpartisan issue with bipartisan solutions.

We act as though as hands are tied behind our back, despite the countless options at our disposal.

I join my CBC colleagues in advancing their bills that work to prevent gun violence.

Protecting our communities and protecting our family's need to be a priority.

Mr. Speaker, this morning I rise to share with my colleagues both pain and a sense of remorse, sense of fear that many Americans will face, and attempt to have a dialogue and an understanding as will be reflected in the Congressional Record.

I am a student of the Constitution. I have served as a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, former chair or ranking member of most of the subcommittees, covering everything from immigration to administrative law to criminal law.

I love this Nation. I would argue with anyone on any assessment other than that I am a patriot, one who views the Bill of Rights as an anchor of our uniqueness, who appreciates every day the men and women who put on the United States uniform, and who has had the privilege--obviously to my dismay--to visit every war zone during my tenure, to acknowledge those in combat, to honor and respect them and, yes, to attend funerals of those who gave the ultimate sacrifice and to acknowledge those of years past in our veterans cemetery in Houston, Texas.

As I begin this discussion, I want it to be known that these are wonderful documents, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States of America.

If we look at the beginning of the Constitution, it is really poetry, but it is truth. As we are reminded of the Pledge of Allegiance, these words are equally potent: ``We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union . . . '' They remind us of the backdrop of these pioneers fleeing persecution themselves. Many listening today may be the progeny, the descendants of these people. `` . . . establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.''

Our Founding Fathers, who recognized that slavery was an abomination, and that all Americans deserve equal protection of the laws, in essence determined that the Bill of Rights was appropriate. All of us know the First Amendment, but I don't know how many know the functioning of the 14th Amendment, which guarantees equal protection of the laws and allows all of us to live in liberty and prosperity.

I come here today to argue vigorously against the wrong-headed decision that was made by the United States Supreme Court on two issues and more to come. Citizens, law, and precedent, and the Constitution were completely ignored in the wrongheaded affirmative action decision.

Let me be very clear. This is not about words; it is not about enforcing wrongness against my fellow Americans. It is an affirmation of affirming everyone. Whether your history is embedded in Pilgrims' pride, that your ancestors came here that way, or you are part of the Irish who came because of the famine and the lack of food in Ireland, or you came early in the 1900s as Italians or many, many other ethnicities, or maybe you are now Ukrainians who are fleeing the persecution of a horrible war and the lack of democracy, you are an American who desires freedom, democracy, and opportunity, as the laws of this land will allow you to enter.

We are a potpourri. We are a place where people said this will not work, these people come from all places, but our ancestors realized in the Bill of Rights that slavery was wrong and abolished it in the 13th Amendment. However, every day we continue to fight slavery that still exists around the Nation.

Then we put in place the 14th Amendment of equal protection of the law, and you could look at that and say, well, isn't it equal protection to let someone trump over someone else if they indicate that they have reasons to do so? No, it is not.

Affirmative action has come about through the death of many people, and it wasn't the death of the Civil War, which was the dastardly war where brother was against brother which caused the greatest loss of life and one that we remember in pain, but we also remember the heroes.

I say to you that the affirmative action decision did not affirm anyone. It took away that affirmation from the LGBTQ community. It will take it away from race, away from religion and ethnicity. Realize that equal protection of the law is a vital point. It is lost by the Supreme Court's decision on affirmative action.

Mr. Speaker, in this week to stop gun violence, it is important to remind all of you that 4.6 million minors live with guns in the home, many of those unstored. Every year, almost 20,000 children are shot and killed or wounded by firearms. In fact, homicide is now the number one killer of children.

Kimberly Vaughan, a young innocent of 14 years old with a wonderful mother who served in the military, was killed in 2018 when a 17-year- old student went on a shooting spree. Those guns were left in the home.

Mr. Speaker, I introduced the Kimberly Vaughan Firearm Safe Storage Act, and I ask my colleagues, Republicans and Democrats, to join me.

The act provides for the Attorney General to give voluntary practices related to safe firearm storage and to label and publish them on a website advising persons to safely store their firearms. It would urge retailers to provide storage locks to secure devices when possible. It would provide a $10 million grant program to States, local governments, and nonprofits to distribute safe storage devices, at no burden to you whatsoever. Of course, they will receive a tax credit for doing so.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my Republican and Democratic colleagues to join us. Save lives. Save our children's lives. Stop gun violence with the Kimberly Vaughan Firearm Safe Storage Act.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Having had some tenure on this floor, my recollection is that, in many instances, the NDAA has been a welcomed bipartisan initiative. We have worked together and formulated ways to improve the lives of the men and women of the United States military.

Let me just make it very clear that that is what the NDAA is supposed to be, strengthening our ability to be a fighting force. Who do you have as a fighting force? The men and women of the United States military.

I take great offense at the suggestion that there are not young people in America who are willing to lay down their lives as our fathers, mothers, and grandparents did. They do want to join the United States military.

It is the ability of the military to govern itself within the civilian framework that we should be promoting in the NDAA. It is a terrible shame that Members of color on this floor will be forced to vote on something that takes us back to the dark ages, to not talking about how richly diverse we are.

All of these race amendments that have been allowed to come to the floor are literally a disgrace.

Did we talk about the diminishing returns when the Tuskegee Airmen took to the skies in the 1940s in World War II and were one of the most successful bombing units ever? Black--my father-in-law, Philip Ferguson Lee.

Did we find a diminishing in the military when Truman integrated legally to allow African Americans to join the United States military or to rise and not be discriminated against and others followed?

It was a magnificent move and a fearless move. Many thought Truman would lose his election.

How dare we come to the floor on this? This is about our men and women.

Why would my amendment be left out that talks about Black maternal mortality? There are Black women soldiers and officers who would benefit from that. Or $10 million that I introduced dealing with triple-negative breast cancer that has been accepted and is in year after year because it is to save lives.

Mr. Speaker, $2.5 million in post-traumatic stress disorder, it is to save our soldiers' lives and to be able to admit that there is PTSD continuing. We need to be able to help or to address injuries that come after someone comes out of the military and to connect them to military benefits, which we see many times.

Yes, I have an amendment in this that deals with providing emergency housing for those of us who live in the Gulf region or live in the West where these natural disasters are coming or on the East Coast in Connecticut, so that when people are totally displaced, we are very grateful for the fact that the bases would be open to providing disaster care.

Mr. Speaker, this amendment that is in adds a report to be submitted within 220 days following enactment on capacity to provide disaster survivors with emergency short-term housing.

This bill should be a bill that builds the mighty fighting force. It should not deny women the right under their medical care, and Secretary Austin and the Pentagon to say quietly, you can have a medical decision. If it cannot be made in the State that you are forced to be assigned to, posted, you can go to another State.

It is a disgrace that they would interfere in private reproductive rights. This is undermining what we are here for; to build up a fighting force of men and women, and that is what this bill should be.

We will stand to the death to make sure this bill supports the men and women and the fighting forces of America.

Madam Chair, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding time.

I am on the floor again holding up the Constitution, which should not be eliminated for the fighting force of Americans who have been declared by nations around the world as the strongest, most powerful fighting force in the world.

Whatever my friend says on the other side of the aisle, I have no basis for his statistics. No one has undermined the force of the men and women.

Let me pay tribute to them. Equal protection of the law says basically a healthcare issue is a healthcare issue. Trans people have healthcare issues. Trans children have healthcare issues. It is an outrage that we should deny Americans who want to die on a battlefield the right to get TRICARE.

Black maternal mortality is more prone to African-American women. Should they be in the military and denied healthcare because they have a Black maternal mortality and are more apt to have babies that die? No. They want to die on the field, too. They want to be able to wear the uniform.

I have never been able to understand how you can deny people healthcare. It is healthcare. Let me say it again: It is healthcare.

For trans children, it is more your denial, your denunciation, your contempt, your hatred that drives them to do anything toward themselves.

It could be a heterosexual, and you condemn them, and they may be prone to suicide. This is not apt to those who happen to be trans.

Please, I beg of this floor, do not pass these amendments because the Constitution will be trampled on. Healthcare, Madam Chair, is healthcare.

Madam Chair, families care about their children, and it stuns me that the gentleman on the other side has indicated that he wants to take health decisions out of the hands of parents who are serving in the United States military, committed to laying their life down for America, and eliminate it to the point that the parents who love the military must leave the military and diminish our fighting force.

Let me be clear. As relates to trans children and medical care, every major medical and mental health association in the United States, representing more than 1.3 million U.S. doctors, support age- appropriate gender-affirming care for transgender people.

In addition, in the special needs of the soldiers and others in the United States military, there is no indication that money would be taken away from special needs children as relates to the particular needs of trans children. What it does say is that parents who love their children would be discriminated against depending on what their health need is.

Therefore, I rise today in opposition to this ill-thought-out and ill-fated, I hope, amendment that clearly divides us as Americans, as members of the United States military, in that it goes against science and medicine because this affirming medical care has been accepted.

I am struck, as I end, by someone suggesting that someone who has their hand on a nuclear weapon or they are in some strategic assignment is diminished because they have a life that is different from someone else, that they are no more of a soldier than someone else. They are a soldier. They are part of the military, and families should be allowed to make decisions for their children.

Madam Chair, these health decisions are life-changing and needed, and medical doctors and science affirm it. I oppose this amendment.

Madam Speaker, I rise to speak in support of H.R. 2622, a bill to amend the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 to codify certain Securities and Exchange Commission no-action letters that exclude brokers and dealers compensated for certain research services from the definition of investment adviser.

This bill provides statutory authority for specified Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) guidance allowing broker-dealers to receive payments for research services provided to investment managers.

Under current law, broker-dealers that receive payments for performing this service must register as investment advisors.

However, the SEC currently waives enforcement against these broker- dealers.

The current no-action relief, which was temporarily granted in 2017 by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), has received multiple complaints from investors and advocacy groups who have expressed reservations about the current no-action relief.

This bill helps to address these concerns, correct the defects of the current no-action relief, and resolve issues regarding the potential expiration of the current relief.

H.R. 2622 helps to strengthen American capital markets by providing U.S. brokers and dealers relief from undue external security market regulations and prevent a reduction in investment research that can potentially harm investment managers and the retail investor customers that they serve.

This bill also helps to further strengthen the standard conduct of investment advisory by ensuring that the best interests of customers are protected without regard to the financial and other private interests of brokers and dealers.

H.R. 2622 ensure that the SEC provides secure framework of rules and regulations that help to enhance investors' confidence in the system and safeguards their investment by ensuring transparency of the records.

This bill provides more concrete measures for the over 15,000 Registered Investment Advisors (RIAs) to effectively carry out their primary duties of providing tailored financial advice to their clients, management of investment portfolios, and other services to the public.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1548, Improving Access to Small Business Information Act.

The Securities Exchange Act of 1934 regulates transactions of securities in the secondary market.

The act typically governs transactions which take place between parties which are not the original issuer, such as trades that retail investors execute through brokerage companies.

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 is a federal law designed to reduce the total amount of paperwork burden the federal government imposes on private business and citizens.

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, agencies must comply with specific procedures when gathering information from the public.

H.R. 1548 will amend the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to specify that actions of the Advocate Small Business Capital Formation are not a collection of information undue the Paperwork Reduction Act.

In other words, this bill excludes from the Paperwork Reduction Act actions taken by the Office of the Advocate for Small Business Capital Formation within the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The Office of the Advocate for Small Business Capital Formation does hard work to provide an annual report to the United States House and Senate to ensure that we understand the state of small business capital formation.

The Office of the Advocate for Small Business Capital Formation will continue to advocate for solutions to improve the capital raising opportunities for the dreamers, builders, doers, creators, and investors who you don't see in the headlines today.

For this reason, it is vital that we pass H.R. 1548.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join my colleagues in the Congressional Black Caucus, and I will continue to work with them and proceed to analyze the very wrongheaded decision that was made by the United States Supreme Court on the question of affirmative action.

I thank the gentlewoman from Florida, the gentleman from New York, and, certainly, the gentleman from Nevada for their leadership.

I rise today as a clear recipient of affirmative action, particularly in higher education. I may have been admitted on affirmative action, both in terms of being a woman and a woman of color, but I can declare that I did not graduate on affirmative action. This is my personal story, but as I read the Supreme Court opinion led by Justice Roberts and a number of Justices reading their opinion aloud, they really skewed and misdirected what affirmative action is.

Affirmative action is affirmatively selecting out of the group excellent persons who happen to be people of color who would not have been noted, recognized, or accepted heretofore, and that is evident because that did not happen in the 20th century, in the 19th century, when African Americans, in particular, were not admitted to institutions of higher learning such as Ivy League and other schools.

This very mean-spirited decision will close the door of opportunity to many, from Latinos to Asians to African Americans to Anglos.

My plea tonight is that this Congress looks squarely at ensuring that America and her cities are open to equal opportunity and that, affirmatively, we ensure that everyone has a seat at the table of empowerment.

Madam Chair, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 3799, which makes two substantial changes to health coverage policy, both of which are very harmful to workers.

H.R. 3799 aims to codify a Trump Administration rule on Individual Coverage Health Reimbursement Accounts (ICHRAs) and rename them ``CHOICE'' accounts.

While this bill certainly allows employers to make choices, it also allows employers to discriminate against certain employees.

First, H.R. 3799 could circumvent Affordable Care Act (ACA) protections on pre-existing conditions, lifetime and annual limits, and preventive care.

This legislation describes individual market coverage but does not explicitly reference the code in defining an individual health insurance plan that requires the ACA market protections like pre- existing conditions protections.

The policy is intended to allow plans that are unable to selffund with adequate reserves to instead purchase a high level of stop-loss insurance.

Lack of adequate reserves leave many of these plans, and their enrollees, at risk since stop-loss insurers often retain the right to drop the insurance if medical costs for the group begin to climb.

This is not a stable form of coverage.

Secondly, this bill leaves room for employers to offer less coverage through ICHRAs to lower income workers, hourly workers, or seasonal workers, reserving better coverage for executives.

The mere offer of an ICHRA may leave employees worse off.

For example, an employee who has an offer of an ``affordable'' HRA is prevented from accessing premium tax credits in the marketplace.

A Brookings analysis found that allowing employers to offer IHRAs alongside a traditional group health insurance plan could increase marketplace premiums by 16 percent to 93 percent.

This offer hurts lower-wage workers where they would otherwise be able to find more affordable coverage in the marketplace and could lead to higher premiums and out-of-pocket costs than under ACA coverage for the employee.

We have seen this from Republicans before, using policies to make the marketplace risk pool weaker, instead of more robust.

Overall, this bill makes it easy for employers to target workers with higher health costs, sending them to the individual market with a voucher.

Republicans once again, are putting wealth before health.

We must work together to mitigate these concerns and include important safeguards that protect employees from discrimination.

Every American is entitled to affordable healthcare, and we must ensure that every American can make the best health care choices for their families.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3801, the Employer Reporting Improvement Act.

This bill streamlines reporting requirements for small businesses when it comes to health insurance coverage information.

This bill will reduce administrative burdens and make it easier for businesses to comply with the Affordable Care Act.

More specifically, it permits employers to electronically file certain documents related to employees' health coverage if the employee has previously agreed to electronic statements.

The bill further streamlines reporting by allowing employers the option to use covered individuals' full name and date of birth if the employer is unable to collect the covered individuals' taxpayer identification number.

Currently, small businesses can be left in limbo by the IRS, sometimes for years, without knowing whether they correctly filed their health insurance coverage information.

The Employer Reporting Improvement Act reins in the IRS' ability to penalize American small businesses and gives them peace of mind that they won't be unfairly hit with a penalty.

Thanks to these streamlined procedures, small businesses will now have more time to focus on running their business, providing opportunities for their employees, expanding their business, and serving their customers.

In my home district of Houston, nearly 97 percent of the region's businesses are considered small businesses.

These small businesses employ 44 percent of the region's workforce, over 1.2 million employees across the city of Houston.

These small businesses continue to rise as over 150,000 new business applications were filed across Houston last year.

The city ranks 10th nationally in new businesses per capita and these businesses continue to drive the city's economic growth upwards.

Further, nearly 35 percent of these small businesses with 50 or fewer employees are minority-owned and Houston ranks 5th in the nation for minority entrepreneurship.

Small businesses are not only vital for Houston, but for our entire nation.

Across America, small businesses account for over fifty-nine million jobs, constituting nearly half of the national workforce.

Overall, they generate one third of all U.S. business revenue, approximately 13.7 trillion dollars annually.

This bill helps to relieve the burdens of complex paperwork and uncertainty on these small businesses and best equips them for success in Houston and across the nation.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 3801 and in supporting small businesses by streamlining reporting processes.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3797, the Paperwork Burden Reduction Act.

This bill amends the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide an alternative process for providing individuals with certain health insurance coverage statements.

H.R. 3797 allows American workers to access health insurance tax forms online, rather than mailing this form in excess to American households.

While only 1.4 percent of American workers and their families need this form, it gets mailed to millions each year, wasting taxpayer resources, and creating more work for small businesses.

This bill recognizes that more Americans than ever fill out their tax returns online and allows them to access this health insurance tax form online as well.

This bill saves small businesses owners time and money by relieving them of mailing excess copies of outdated paperwork.

As a result, small businesses will now have more time to focus on running their business, providing opportunities for their employees, expanding their business, and serving their customers.

In my home district of Houston, nearly 97 percent of the region's businesses are considered small businesses.

These small businesses employ 44 percent of the region's workforce, over 1.2 million employees across the city of Houston.

These small businesses continue to rise as over 150,000 new business applications were filed across Houston last year.

The city ranks 10th nationally in new businesses per capita and these businesses continue to drive the city's economic growth upwards.

Further, nearly 35 percent of these small businesses with 50 or fewer employees are minority-owned and Houston ranks 5th in the nation for minority entrepreneurship.

Small businesses are not only vital for Houston, but for our entire Nation.

Across America, small businesses account for over fifty-nine million jobs, constituting nearly half of the national workforce.

Overall, they generate one third of all U.S. business revenue, approximately 13.7 trillion dollars annually.

This bill relieves the burden of outdated paperwork on these small businesses and best equips them for success in Houston and nationwide.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 3797, the Paperwork Burden Reduction Act, and the economic growth of our Nation, which is fueled by small businesses.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4004, the United States-Taiwan Initiative on 21st Century Trade First Agreement Implementation Act.

This bill expresses the approval of Congress for the June 1, 2023, agreement regarding trade between the United States and Taiwan.

The bill also imposes requirements on the negotiations of certain further trade agreements between the United States and Taiwan.

The bill also imposes requirements on the negotiation of further agreements under the United States-Taiwan Initiative on 21st-Century Trade, such as requiring the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) to:

(1) share any U.S. negotiating texts with Congress prior to sharing the text with Taiwan or any parties outside of the executive branch.

(2) share any negotiating texts from Taiwan within three days of receipt, and

(3) provide daily briefings to certain Members of Congress during negotiating rounds.

A further agreement shall not take effect unless

(1) the President, at least 60 days before entering into the further agreement, makes the text publicly available on a USTR website; and

(2) a bill is enacted into law expressly approving the further agreement.

The United States and Taiwan signed a first agreement under the U.S.- Taiwan Initiative on 21st-Century Trade, announced in June 2022.

The initial 2022 agreement aimed to streamline customs procedures, help smaller businesses navigate the regulatory procedures in both markets, and prevent corruption.

This agreement is not a formal free-trade agreement that regulates tariffs, but rather aims to strengthen U.S.-Taiwan trade ties amid heightened tensions.

Taiwan and the United States have maintained commercial ties since 1979.

Although the United States does not have diplomatic relations with Taiwan, we maintain a strong unofficial relationship that must continue, and H.R. 4004 will allow the United States to do such that.

Mr. Speaker, impeachment is serious, yet here we are engaged in a baseless political stunt to impeach our current President.

It is not a punishment, sought to be inflicted when one branch of government merely dislikes what a coordinate branch has done.

It is a serious remedy designed to prevent abuses of power and is designed to ensure that ours remains a government of, by, and for the people.

The Constitution governs the order of our nation, and it dictates the work of the Congress.

Article I details the powers of the House and the exercising of these powers as they relate to the coordinate, coequal branches of government, codified in Articles II and Articles III: three equal branches of government coexisting and cohesively working to provide oversight to the respective actions of the Congress, the Executive and Judiciary.

This has worked, with challenges of course, since 1789, yet the outright abuse of our Constitution to use impeachment as a political tool is an abomination of our congressional duties.

This impeachment resolution is centered on accusations that the Biden Administration lacks appropriate security at the Southern U.S. border.

The resolution of impeachment specifically states that President Biden's conduct and dereliction of duty in these matters ``warrants impeachment and trial, removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States.''

This accusation, that the President of the United States has abused his powers and that his conduct is in dereliction of his duties as President is flatly outrageous.

When the Framers of our Constitution designed our government, they bifurcated power between the federal and state governrnents, and divided arnong the branches.

They vested in the Congress the capacity to make the laws, and in the Executive the power to faithfully execute those laws.

Because the House enjoyed a natural superiority, as most representative of the passions of the populace, the Framers vested in the House of Representatives the sole power of impeachment and made the Senate the judges.

Entirely unlike the incredulous and now confirmed illegality of President Trump's behavior while in office, the President Biden has certainly not earned the same stain of impeachment from the House of Representatives and whereby his conduct absolutely does not merit conviction and removal from office by the Senate.

When the Founders inserted the Impeachment Clause in Article I, Section 2, Clause 5, they did so to preserve our democracy, protect the American people, and to prevent the abuses and excesses of the Chief Executive.

The Constitution has served our nation well for over two hundred years.

In order to keep faith with the Framers and with our future, we must preserve, protect and defend that Constitution and all its provisions.

This is why this impeachment attempt is not one that is within the national interest but a disgrace to our governrnent and its entrusted duties.

I ask colleagues to vote no on this shameful resolution.