Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the Judiciary and Homeland Security Committees, I rise in strong support of H.R. 468, ``Homeless Victims of Youth Trafficking Act of 2015.''

I support this bipartisan legislation which amends the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 by inserting the phrase ``sever forms of trafficking in persons'' and including ``youth who are victims of trafficking,'' in the definitions for the law.

Mr. Speaker, trafficking in persons is an inconceivable, callous and inhumane crime that unquestionably deserves the nation's utmost attention. It is particularly difficult to see the victimization of the very young who are sold or tricked into becoming victims of Human Trafficking.

I join my colleagues is working to strengthen laws against human trafficking, and supporting the allocation of resources to further the efforts of law enforcement and aid agencies in identification of youth victims and provide vital support to preventing further victimization and to reclaim the lives of the most vulnerable among us--our children from traffickers.

It is estimated 2.8 million children living on the streets of this nation are at risk for trafficking into the sex industry. Children who are

abused or victims of molestation are most vulnerable.

If they are lured into human trafficking they are isolated from the rest of the world and start living lives controlled by pimps, escort and massage services, private dancing clubs, pornographic clubs and much worse.

The work of the authors of this bill contribute to raising public awareness must be at the forefront of our hearts and minds and these unlawful, immoral traffickers, beyond a doubt must unavoidably be brought to justice. We must seek them out and press them from our society by standing up together with a collective voice saying, ``Human trafficking stops today, right now, with us.''

Mr. Speaker, I along with my Colleagues on the Committee on Homeland Security held a field hearing in Houston Texas last year on the issue of Human Trafficking.

The day before that hearing local law enforcement with support from federal law enforcement agencies raided a house where suspected victims of human trafficking were being held.

According to the U.S. Department of Justice, Houston, Texas is one of the nation's largest hubs for human trafficking, with over 200 active brothels in Houston and two new ones opening each month.

In 2006, the Department of Justice National Conference on Human Trafficking identified the I-10 corridor as one of the main routes for traffickers. Interstate I-10 links the major Texas urban areas Houston, San Antonio and El Paso and dozens of mid- and small sized towns in between.

Mr. Speaker, one of the most important things that can and must continue to be done is to raise public awareness and force the activity of traffickers and their victims out of the shadows into the light.

Raising the visibility and status of the governmental entities charged with the responsibility of documenting the problems, successes, and remaining challenges confronting the United States and the international community in eradicating the scourge of human trafficking is a positive step forward in achieving this goal.

I urge all of my colleagues to join me in supporting passage of H.R. 468.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support H.R. 469, the ``Strengthening Our Child Welfare Response to Trafficking Act of 2015,'' which strengthens the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (Pub. L. 93-247) by requiring that state plans for federal grants for child abuse or neglect prevention and treatment programs include elements focused on human trafficking.

Trafficking in humans is a major problem across the globe and in our own country. As lawmakers, we have a moral responsibility to combat this scourge and protect our children, especially those without parents to care for them, from being exploited and falling through the cracks.

As the Founder and Chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus, I understand how important it is to defend those who are too young to defend themselves.

This problem is personal for me because according to the U.S. Department of Justice, my home city of Houston, Texas is the epicenter of human trafficking in the United States with over 200 active brothels in Houston and two new ones opening each month.

Houston has also surpassed Las Vegas for the dubious distinction of having the most strip clubs and illicit spas serving as fronts for sex trafficking.

Human trafficking in Texas is not limited to Houston. During the 2011 Dallas Super Bowl, 133 underage arrests for prostitution were made and during this year's massive effort ``Operation Cross Country'' led by the FBI, several pimps were arrested.

Between 1998 and 2003 more than 500 people from 18 countries were ensnared in 57 forced labor operations in almost a dozen cities throughout the State of Texas.

Currently, our state child welfare systems do not properly identify and help the children that have been taken by this horrible industry.

Even more disturbing is that the protections provided by our child welfare systems often do not extend to young victims of trafficking.

Hard as it is to believe, in some states trafficked youths are not even regarded or classified as victims.

Houston is a popular trafficking hub in part because the city is so diverse, with large Hispanic, Asian and Middle Eastern populations, which allows traffickers and their victims to blend into local communities.

A recent report estimated that 25% of all trafficking victims in the U.S. end up in Texas.

Rather, they are treated as youthful offenders and consigned to the criminal justice system.

The city is so diverse, the traffickers and victims easily blend into the community.

The TIP Report also contains tier rankings of each country on which it reports, which are used to help protect victims, prevent trafficking and prosecute traffickers.

According to a report published in the Northwestern Journal of International Human Rights, Mexican authorities are working to address the problem of trans-border human trafficking, but the country's ``legal framework remains largely untouched and hence limited in its crime-fighting scope and effectiveness.''

According to the U.S. Department of Justice, Houston, Texas is one of the nation's largest hubs for human trafficking, with over 200 active brothels in Houston and two new ones opening each month.

Human trafficking in Texas is not limited to Houston. During the 2011 Dallas Super Bowl, 133 underage arrests for prostitution were made and during this year's massive effort ``Operation Cross Country'' led by the FBI, several pimps were arrested.

In general The Center shall carry out the following activities:

1. Receive information on travel by child-sex offenders.

2. Establish a system to maintain and archive all relevant information, including the response of destination countries to notifications under subsection where available, and decisions not to transmit notification abroad.

3. Establish an annual review process to ensure that the Center is consistent in procedures to provide notification to destination countries or not to provide notification to destination countries, as appropriate.

Mr. Speaker, one of the most important things that can and must continue to be done is to raise public awareness of the continuing prevalence of modern day slavery and human trafficking.

Such identification requires cooperative efforts between the United States and foreign governments. In exchange for providing notice of child-sex offenders traveling to the United States, foreign authorities will expect United States authorities to provide reciprocal notice of child-sex offenders traveling to their countries.

Raising the visibility and status of the governmental entity charged with the responsibility of documenting the problems, successes, and remaining challenges confronting the United States and the international community in eradicating the scourge of human trafficking is a positive step forward in achieving this goal.

I urge all of my colleagues to join me in supporting passage of H.R. 469.

Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the Judiciary and Homeland Security Committees, I rise in strong support of H.R. 514, ``Human Trafficking Prioritization Act.''

I support this bipartisan legislation which amends the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 to change the status of the State Department Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking to that of the Bureau to Combat Trafficking in Persons.

Mr. Speaker, this change in the name of this vital office can be accomplished without an increase in funding or personnel.

H.R. 514, a bipartisan Foreign Affairs Committee bipartisan bill, directs the Secretary of State to report to Congress on each current Assistant Secretary of State position the exact title and length of designation as Assistant Secretary, and whether that designation was legislatively mandated or authorized and, if so, the relevant statutory citation; and

Further, the Secretary State is asked whether they intend to designate one of the Assistant Secretary of State positions as the Assistant Secretary of State to Combat Trafficking in Persons, and the reasons for that decision.

I have a concern regarding the bill's amendment of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 to prohibit subsequent inclusion for more than one consecutive year on the special watch list of countries whose compliance with minimum standards for the elimination of human trafficking is full, partial, or insignificant if the country:

was included on the list for four consecutive years after enactment of the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008, and

was subsequently included on the exclusive Tier 3 list of countries not making significant efforts to bring themselves into compliance with such standards.

It is important that the mechanisms for reaching determinations regarding compliance with anti-human trafficking measures are consistent and reliable over time.

There should be care taken that places around the globe with long histories of human trafficking do not find ways limit access to information that would better measure their progress in eradicating the practice and bring to justice those involved.

According to the Report, the most common form of human trafficking (79%) is sexual exploitation. The victims of sexual exploitation are predominantly women and girls. Surprisingly, in 30% of the countries which provided information on the gender of traffickers, women make up the largest proportion of traffickers. In some parts of the world, women trafficking women is the norm.

The second most common form of human trafficking is forced labour (18%), although this may be a misrepresentation because forced labor is less frequently detected and reported than trafficking for sexual exploitation.

Globally about 20% of all trafficking victims are children. Unfortunately in parts of Africa children are the majority, these numbers rise to 100% in some parts of West Africa.

Many of those who are victims of human trafficking are exploited in locations near their home.

According to the 2009 United National Report on ``Human Trafficking Exposes Modern Form of Slavery'' research reveals that internal regional and domestic trafficking are a source of the problems.

The United Nations Protocol against Trafficking in Persons reports that in the past few years the number of Member States seriously implementing the Protocol has doubled going from 54 to 125 out of the 155 nations.

In 2009, there were many countries that lacked the necessary legal framework or political will to take on the issue of human trafficking.

I join my colleagues in working to strengthen laws nationally and internationally against human trafficking, and supporting the allocation of resources toward that end.

I urge all of my colleagues to join me in supporting passage of H.R. 514.

Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the Judiciary and Homeland Security Committees, I rise in strong support of H.R. 515 International Megan's Law to Prevent Demand for Child Sex Trafficking.

This legislation protects children from exploitation, especially sex trafficking in tourism, by providing advance notice of intended travel by registered child-sex offenders outside the United States to the government of the country of destination, requesting foreign governments to notify the United States when a known child-sex offender is seeking to enter the United States, and for other purposes.

Child sex tourism, where an individual travels to a foreign country and engages in sexual activity with a child in that country, is a form of child exploitation and, where commercial, child sex trafficking.

Human trafficking is a problem for the United States because the U.S. State Department estimates that approximately 17,500 foreign nationals are trafficked into the United States, the largest number of people trafficked into the United States come from East Asia and the Pacific and the next highest numbers coming from Latin America and Europe.

Law enforcement reports indicate that known child-sex offenders are traveling internationally, and that the criminal background of such individuals may not be known to local law enforcement prior to their arrival.

The commercial sexual exploitation of minors in child sex trafficking and pornography is a global phenomenon.

The International Labor Organization has estimated that 1.8 million children worldwide are victims of child sex trafficking and pornography each year.

It is estimated 2.8 million children living on the streets of this nation are at risk for trafficking into the sex industry.

Children who are abused or victims of molestation are most vulnerable.

If they are lured into human trafficking they are isolated from the rest of the world and start living lives controlled by pimps, escort and massage services, private dancing clubs, pornographic clubs and much worse.

The State Department's Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons produces the annual Trafficking in Persons Report (``TIP Report''), which is Congress' primary resource for human trafficking reporting, analysis and recommendations for the United States and 186 countries around the world.

These kids are not criminals. They are victims, robbed of their innocence by adult criminals.

They are boys and girls who have been taken advantage of and are unable to escape an ugly system.

I support H.R. 515 because it is focused on helping at-risk and vulnerable children rather than treating them as criminals.

Specifically, the bill requires that state plans for federal grants for child abuse or neglect prevention and treatment:

1. provide procedures to identify and assess all reports involving children known or suspected to be victims of sex trafficking;

2. provide training for child protection service workers to appropriately respond to reports of child sex trafficking; and

3. develop and implement policies and procedures to connect child victims to public or private specialized services.

Additionally, the bill requires States to report annually the numbers of children identified as victims of sex trafficking within the already existing National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System.

H.R. 515 also requires the Department of Health and Human Services to submit a report to Congress outlining the prevalence and type of child trafficking nationwide as well as the current barriers to serving child victims comprehensively.

I strongly support H.R. 515 and urge my colleague to join me in voting for its passage which will help bring an end to the evil practice that is child sex trafficking.

Madam Speaker, I join my colleagues today in honoring, recognizing, and respecting those who traveled through the devastation and horror of the Holocaust. To those who lost their lives, I prayerfully mourn them. For those who survived, I champion them and thank them and make a commitment as we have done as brothers and sisters, Republicans and Democrats, and as Americans: Never again.

I rise as well to speak of the heinousness of the acts of Boko Haram and the killing and murderous acts against innocent children in Nigeria. We must stand together and act against this crisis. We must recognize that this bloodshed will not stop.

I am grateful that Secretary Kerry is in Nigeria and collaborating on what the next steps are. I want to thank the United States military, which has provided insight and cooperation.

But, Madam Speaker, there needs to be more. We need to have a waiver of some of the provisions dealing with utilization and collaboration in the Nigerian military. We must ask them to do what is right. We cannot sit by while the bloodletting Boko Haram continues to kill women and children across Nigeria. Enough--it must stop now.

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

I rise in support of H.R. 350, the Human Trafficking Prevention, Intervention, and Recovery Act of 2015.

According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, sex trafficking is the fastest growing business of organized crime and the third-largest criminal enterprise in the world. The scourge of our society is estimated to be a $9 billion industry in the United States and as much as a $30 billion industry worldwide.

All of the criminals and all of those who wish to do wrong realize that it is a bigger and better business than drugs because, tragically and unfortunately and with great sadness, they use their product over and over again. They use these innocent persons, many women, many children, many boys, over and over again.

Because this criminal activity rarely occurs in public view, it is difficult to say exactly how many children are being victimized. What we do know, however, is that the problem is extensive. All you have to do is walk along any of the streets of major cities and find homeless teenagers, or even younger than that, and you will find out that in some way they have been tainted and touched and brutalized by sex trafficking.

Madam Speaker, an estimated 290,000 American children are at risk of becoming victims of sex trafficking. The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children estimates that one of every seven endangered runaways who reported to the center are likely victims of minor sex trafficking.

I am told that the average age of minors entering the sex trade is between 12 and 14 years old. Vulnerable youth are primary targets. They are more easily lured into prostitution and other forms of child exploitation, while runaways and children in foster care are especially vulnerable. Child victims of sex trafficking can and do come from a type of home or socioeconomic background that makes them particularly, if you will, in the line of fire.

The bottom line, however, Madam Speaker, is that all of these children are deserving of rescue, recovery, protection, and shelter. One of the advocacies that I had in my own hometown was to provide for children in foster care that had aged out, because those are likely victims, unbeknownst to themselves, and they are worthy of saving.

The bill before us, H.R. 350, the Human Trafficking Prevention, Intervention, and Recovery Act of 2015, is an important step toward pursuing traffickers and those who solicit the services of trafficked individuals. It mandates a review of Federal and State prevention activities by the Interagency Task Force to Monitor and Combat Trafficking, and this review is to be done in consultation with nongovernmental organizations. That is a great partnership.

The purpose of this review is to identify best practices in the prevention of

trafficking. This study, along with the mandated GAO, will provide much-needed intelligence to be shared among those Federal, State, and local agencies dedicated to combating sex trafficking.

And might I add, Madam Speaker, that what is also needed is a commitment, an investment of resources, to not just have the studies but to make sure that we match the importance of this legislation with resources.

Witnesses testified at a Homeland Security Committee field hearing in Houston in March of last year, which I convened and brought Members of Congress to Houston for, which has a particularly serious problem.

First, one of the biggest limitations on the ability of area law enforcement agencies to successfully combat human trafficking in and around Houston is a lack of data sharing. Another witness said we-- local enforcement--need the Feds to build a Houston trafficking regional database accessible only to vice and human trafficking personnel to store, share, and search data on all aspects of Houston- area human trafficking investigations.

Madam Speaker, the need for the information that will be collected by the GAO study and the Interagency Task Force to monitor and combat trafficking is not only needed, it is long overdue.

This bill also addresses a major concern that anti-trafficking advocates have shared with me--the lack of housing or shelter for survivors. Trafficked kids need a way out, someplace to escape. Without such refuge, these children will return to their traffickers, and their traffickers will be waiting for them. This bill provides funding for local shelters so they get the support they need to house survivors and to get these young people started on the path to recovery.

Today, we are considering several bills that address domestic minor sex trafficking, and it is right that we do all we can to protect our children. Most statistics indicate that the average age of a female when she is first victimized in human trafficking is a very young year of age. With this fact alone, we can understand why the majority of Federal investigations and prosecutions of trafficking involve minors. One of the statements we made on the floor today with all of these bills is that the minors are victims--they are not the criminals--and they need to be saved. That is what we are committing to.

I will share with you the testimony of another witness at last year's field hearing. The witness said:

Many of the females my officers are encountering on the

streets, in the massage parlors, at the strip clubs, and on

the Internet sites are typically 18 to 21. We know from

experience that, while these young women may be adults now,

they have, with all likelihood, been under the control of a

pimp trafficker for many years.

Madam Speaker, I met those women. Yes, they have been under the horrible domination of these traffickers for many years, and some were sold by their parents. We need to take definitive steps to ensure that this group of victims does not fall through the cracks because we are focusing on the minors. We do this by ensuring that the laws we pass and the supportive assistance we establish are also available to these older young women.

In closing, Madam Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 350, the Human Trafficking Prevention, Intervention, and Recovery Act. I compliment the sponsors and cosponsors, and I encourage them to remember that there are still those other victims of human trafficking who are equally deserving of our consideration and protection. While we will accomplish much in combating human trafficking by our actions today, let us commit ourselves to doing more.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 350, the ``Human Trafficking Prevention, Intervention and Recovery Act of 2015.''

According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, sex trafficking is the fastest growing business of organized crime, and the third largest criminal enterprise in the world. This scourge of our society is estimated to be a $9.8 billion industry in the United States and as much as a $30 billion industry worldwide. Because this criminal activity rarely occurs in public view, it is difficult to say exactly how many children are being victimized. What we do know, however, is that the problem is extensive.

Madam Speaker, an estimated 290,000 American children are at risk of becoming victims of sex trafficking, and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children estimates that one of every seven endangered runaways reported to the Center are likely victims of minor sex trafficking. I am told that the average age of minors entering the sex trade is between 12 and 14 years. Vulnerable youth are primary targets. They are more easily lured into prostitution and other forms of child exploitation, and while runaways and children in foster care are especially vulnerable, child victims of sex trafficking can and do come from any type of home or socioeconomic background.

The bottom line, however, Madam Speaker, is that all of these children are deserving of rescue, recovery, protection and shelter. The bill before us, H.R. 350, the Human Trafficking, Prevention, Intervention, and Recovery Act of 2015, is an important step toward pursuing traffickers and those who solicit the services of trafficked individuals. It mandates a review of federal and state prevention activities by the Interagency Task Force to Monitor and Combat Trafficking, and this review is to be done in consultation with nongovernmental organizations. The purpose of this review is to identify best practices in the prevention of trafficking. This study, along with the mandated GAO will provide much-needed intelligence to be shared among those federal, state and local agencies dedicated to combatting sex trafficking.

Witnesses at a Homeland Security Committee field hearing held in Houston in March of last year testified,

First, one of the biggest limitations on the ability of

area law enforcement agencies to successfully combat Human

Trafficking in and around Houston is our lack of data

sharing.

Another witness stated,

We (local law enforcement) need the feds to build a Houston

Trafficking Regional Database, accessible only to Vice/Human

Trafficking personnel to store, share, and search data on all

aspects of Houston area Human Trafficking investigations.

Madam Speaker, the need for the information that will be collected by the GAO study and the Interagency Task Force to Monitor and Combat Trafficking is not only needed. It is long overdue!

This bill also addresses a major concern that anti-trafficking advocates have shared with me--the lack of housing or shelter for survivors. Trafficked kids need a way out, some place to escape to. Without such a refuge, these children will return to their traffickers. This bill provides the funding for local shelters to get the support they need to house survivors and get these young people started on the path to recovery.

Madam Speaker, today we are considering several bills that address domestic minor sex trafficking, and it is right that we do all we can to protect our children. Most statistics indicate that the average age of a female when she is first victimized into Human Trafficking is years old. For this fact alone, we can understand why the majority of federal investigations and prosecutions of human trafficking involve minors.

I must share with you, however, the testimony of another witness at last year's field Houston field hearing. That witness said,

. . . (many of the females that my officers are

encountering on the streets, in the massage parlors and strip

clubs, and on the internet sites are typically age 18-21. We

know from experience that while these young women may be

adults now, they have, in all likelihood been under the

control of a pimp/trafficker for many years. We need to take

definitive steps to ensure that this group of `victims' does

not fall through the cracks because we are focusing on the

minors by ensuring that the laws we pass and the support/

assistance we establish is also available to these young

women.

In closing, Madam Speaker I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 350, the Human Trafficking, Prevention, Intervention and Recovery Act of 2015, and I encourage them to remember that there are still those other victims of human trafficking who are equally deserving of our consideration and protection. While we will accomplish much in combating human trafficking by our actions today, there is still much more to be done.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, as I have no further requests for time, I will just close by saying our children need our response. They are suffering. It is important that we work together to minimally provide them with the shelter that they need and with the resources that they need to eliminate the scourge of human trafficking and sex trafficking. With that, I ask for the support of the underlying legislation, H.R. 350.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

The manager, Mr. Sensenbrenner, is right. These are certainly both cases and legislation that, one, we are appalled at with the case studies that we have seen and with the legislation that we seek in a bipartisan manner to solve that exploitation.

I rise in support of H.R. 159, the Stop Exploitation Through Trafficking Act of 2015. The Stop Exploitation Through Trafficking Act is another weapon in the war against sex trafficking in our country.

Madam Speaker, we are truly at war. As we stand here today, some child is being sex-trafficked--some runaway who is away from her family, not able to be found, not finding a place of refuge--falling into the deadly hands, if you will, of someone who will take advantage of her almost for the rest of her life. In Houston, I met women who had engaged in or who had been subjected to that in the early part of their lives, and they will tell you how it follows them for a long, long time, so they subject themselves to drugs and alcohol to eliminate the pain.

This bill contains important victim-based initiatives to help combat sex trafficking. One of those initiatives,

the national safe harbor law, is essential to making sure that victims of sex trafficking are not criminalized but, instead, are diverted to Child Protective Services. Only 12 States have safe harbor laws for minor victims of sex trafficking. That is far too few. Obviously, we need all 50 States to have this safe harbor.

My colleagues, there is no such thing as a child prostitute. There are only child victims of rape. Children cannot give consent. There is no such thing as a child prostitute. Likewise, it is illegal for adults to have sex with children, children who by their very ages are under the age of consent. Sex with a minor, again, is rape. The seriousness of the offense is not diminished by having the john pay for the sex, making him feel good. It is still rape. It is time we stopped referring to the customer--the person having sex with a child--with such a polite title as a ``john.''

In addition, we must label those who provide the johns with children, with minors, as what they are--horrific and horrible and vile criminals. The person who is the john is a rapist, a child rapist. We must punish those who prey on the vulnerable, and that includes not only the pimps and the traffickers, but also the rapists.

On the other hand, in an effort to help their recovery, we must not continue to victimize the victims. This bill empowers victims by providing for a national hotline to request help. The importance of this national hotline must not be underestimated.

In my earlier statement, I spoke of a field hearing that I convened last March in Houston as a member of the Homeland Security Committee. During that hearing, Mr. McClelland, the chief of the Houston Police Department, testified that an 18-year-old victim of human trafficking contacted the national hotline asking for help to escape her violent pimp.

The young victim had been forced to have sex with a john who ended up stabbing her and leaving without paying any money--a stabbing. She was fearful and wanted to get the money. It was a horrible situation.

While her injuries were not life threatening, she did require medical attention for her injuries. However, the pimp refused to take her to get medical treatment, and she owed him to make up the money that the previous john who stabbed her did not pay.

Vice's human trafficking unit received the information from hotline personnel and were able to contact, locate, and rescue the young female. They also arrested the pimp and charged him with felony of compelling prostitution. Madam Speaker, I wish there was a harsher charge, but it was good work by the local law enforcement.

Madam Speaker, this story ends well. The young victim was reunited with family members that same day. This case serves as a great example of how law enforcement and nongovernmental organizations can successfully work together to not only rescue victims of human trafficking, but also arrest the perpetrators of this crime and get them off the street and away from other victims who are still out there.

H.R. 159 also helps victims obtain restitution, and this is what I like: it puts them back on the right track by giving them eligibility for the Job Corps program, where we have seen lives turn around. It wants to say to them: You are valuable, you are worthy, and you have a future.

This bill will help ensure that all victims of sex trafficking are treated as victims in every State and every jurisdiction. For these reasons, I join with my colleague, Mr. Sensenbrenner, and urge my colleagues to support this legislation as well.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 159, the ``Stop Exploitation Through Trafficking Act of 2015.''

The Stop Exploitation Through Trafficking Act is another weapon in the war against sex trafficking in our country. This bill contains important victim-based initiatives to help combat sex trafficking. One of those initiatives, the National Safe Harbor Law, is essential to making sure that victims of sex trafficking are not criminalized, but instead are diverted to child protective services. Only 12 states have safe harbor laws for minor victims of sex trafficking.

My colleagues, there is no such thing as a ``child prostitute''; there are only child victims of rape. Likewise, it is illegal for adults to have sex with children who, by their very age, are under the age of consent. Sex with a minor is rape! The seriousness of the offense is not diminished by having the ``john'' pay for the sex. It is still rape, and it's time we stopped referring to the customer, the person having sex with a child, with such a polite title as a ``john.'' He is a rapist, a child rapist! We must punish those who prey on the vulnerable, and that includes not only the pimps and traffickers but also the rapists.

On the other hand, we must not continue to victimize the victims. In an effort to help their recovery, this bill empowers victims with a national hotline to request help. The importance of this national hotline must not be underestimated.

In my earlier statement, I spoke of a field hearing that the Committee on Homeland Security held in Houston in March of last year. During that hearing Mr. Charles McClelland, Jr, Chief of Police, of the Houston Police Department, testified,

. . . an 18 year old female victim of Human Trafficking . .

. contacted the National Human Trafficking Resource Center

Hotline asking for help to escape her violent pimp. The young

victim had been forced to have sex with a ``john'' who ended

up stabbing her and leaving without paying her any money.

While her injuries were not life threatening, she did require

medical attention for her injuries, however, the pimp refused

to take her to get medical treatment until she earner him

more money to make up for the money that the previous

``john'' did not pay. Vice/Human Trafficking Unit personnel

received the information from Hotline personnel, and were

able to contact, locate, and rescue the young female, and

also arrest the pimp and charge him with felony compelling

prostitution.

Madam Speaker, this story ends well. This young victim was reunited with family members that same day. This case serves as a great example of how law enforcement and non-governmental organizations can successfully work together to not only rescue victims of Human Trafficking, but also arrest the perpetrators of this crime and get them off the street and away from other victims who are still out there.

H.R. 159 also helps victims obtain restitution and grants them eligibility for Job Corps programs. This bill will help ensure that all victims of sex trafficking are treated as victims in every state and in every jurisdiction.

For these reasons I support this bill and urge my colleagues to support it as well.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore), who has championed these bills.

I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30 seconds.

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

In closing, we have all come today with an important project, and that is to help save our children.

I wouldn't want to leave this very important bill that talks about saving our children from sex trafficking without letting our colleagues know that we want every possible act of human trafficking to be reported at 1-866-347-2423. We want those who are victims to know that they can seek help, too, at 1-888-373-7888.

The statement we are making is that we are doing everything we can to extinguish and eliminate this heinous tragedy in our country. I ask my colleagues to support this legislation and to recognize that we must stop exploitation through trafficking.

I ask my colleagues to support H.R. 159, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Johnson), an active and committed member of the House Judiciary Committee and ranking member on the Commercial Subcommittee.

Madam Speaker, it is my privilege to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott), who has served so ably on this committee, and we congratulate him for his ranking position on the Education Committee.

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

We started out this afternoon by saying that we join together in stopping the scourge of human trafficking and sex trafficking, and I still stand by that premise. I support the Stop Advertising Victims of Exploitation Act. I do believe that adding advertising and having the provision in the law that includes mens rea is an important protection, that there must be an intent to sell and to advertise victims of exploitation.

This, of course, is part of a number of proposals that we are considering today--and we hope we are successful--to combat sex trafficking; but, as we have discussed with respect to these other bills, much more must be done to prevent sex trafficking as well as to aggressively investigate and prosecute these crimes. H.R. 285 amends the current Federal sex trafficking statute so that advertising would now be one of the prohibitive means of facilitating this type of exploitive criminal conduct.

We know, of course, that technology, however, sometimes is tricky. The bill correctly recognizes the fact that sex traffickers increasingly obtain customers for their illegal acts through the means of mass communication, either through various forms of print media or via the Internet. Maybe they throw in the cell phone or hard line as well, but they are out to get their victim. They are out to get that child. They are out to get that young woman or young man, boy or girl, and we must stop them in their tracks. In fact, sex traffickers use generalized marketplace Web pages to advertise, as well as sites and pages devoted to advertising the availability of commercial sex.

While the Internet has enriched our lives greatly, these sex traffickers are only interested in using it in the most vile manner; and they use the Internet to perpetrate heinous criminal schemes, such as the selling of minors for sex. Without question, sex traffickers who advertise their scheme should be penalized for their criminal acts.

While I realize that some have raised questions about how the advertising prohibitions under this bill would apply to online companies, I am concerned that we have a free use of that, if I might throw in a word, ``net neutrality.'' Because of this, we adopted an amendment during the Judiciary Committee's markup last Congress and now again, in a bipartisan effort, to address such concerns. That amendment is included in the text of H.R. 285.

We know, for example, however, that with the way the Internet is, some innocent person might wind up finding things on their site that they may not have had anything to do with. We hope the standard of mens rea will help those individuals have a defense.

So as it relates to this legislation, I raise concerns, as my colleagues have done, about the utilization, conduct, of mandatory minimums, primarily because of the vastness of the Internet, and our friends made the point that this advertising could wind up or some act could wind up on there without their knowledge.

We know the one-size-fits-all approach, which is part of the mandatory minimum approach, to criminal actions in the form of mandatory minimums has greatly contributed to our Nation's crisis of overincarceration, and our Judiciary Committee, rightly so, has looked at this over the years.

In the markup of this bill, the Judiciary Committee did not adopt an amendment that would have removed application of the statute's mandatory minimum penalties and instead allow a judge to apply an appropriate sentence under the circumstances of the case up to the statute's existing penalty, which I support enthusiastically, life in prison.

Given the complicated nature of Internet communications networks with respect to how advertisements are delivered, the role of the judge might help to carve through, to ferret out, the facts and determine the level of guilt. So authorizing life imprisonment is a good thing. It would allow sufficient latitude for the imposition of extremely lengthy sentences where appropriate.

I am hoping as we move forward with this legislation, which has a very important premise and point, that we will have the opportunity to discuss with our colleagues in the Senate to see how we can best make sure that this bill works to, in essence, target the bad guys and make sure that it does it fairly and directly, because sex trafficking, as I have always said on this floor, should be weeded out. Sex trafficking should not be.

I ask my colleagues again to consider the mandatory minimum. I ask my colleagues to support this legislation.

Madam Speaker, H.R. 285, the ``Stop Advertising Victims of Exploitation Act,'' is among a number of important proposals we are considering today to combat sex trafficking.

As we have discussed with respect to these other bills, much more must be done to prevent sex trafficking as well as to aggressively investigate and prosecute these crimes.

H.R. 285 amends the current federal sex trafficking statute so that advertising would now be one of the prohibited means of facilitating this type of exploitative criminal conduct.

The bill correctly recognizes the fact that sex traffickers increasingly obtain customers for their illegal acts through the means of mass communication, either through various forms of print media or via the Internet.

In fact, sex traffickers use generalized marketplace Web pages to advertise, as well as sites and pages devoted to advertising the availability of commercial sex.

While the Internet has enriched our lives greatly, these sex traffickers use the Internet to perpetrate heinous criminal schemes such as the selling of minors for sex.

Without question, sex traffickers who advertise their schemes should be penalized for their criminal acts, while I recognize that some have raised questions about how the advertising prohibitions under this bill would apply to online companies.

Because of this, we adopted an amendment during the Judiciary Committee's markup last Congress to help address such concerns. That amendment is included in the text of H.R. 285.

Nevertheless, I cannot support this bill in its current form because it would subject yet another category of conduct to mandatory minimum sentences.

Mandatory minimums lead to sentences that sometimes are not appropriate based on the facts of a particular case. A one-size-fits- all approach to criminal actions in the form of mandatory minimums has greatly contributed to our Nation's crisis of overincarceration.

In the markup of this bill, the Judiciary Committee declined to adopt an amendment that would have removed application of the statute's mandatory minimum penalties and instead allow a judge to apply an appropriate sentence--under the circumstances of the case--up to the statute's existing maximum penalty of life in prison.

Given the complicated nature of internet communications networks with respect to how advertisements are delivered, the role of the judge in evaluating each case is particularly important.

And, authorizing life imprisonment would allow sufficient latitude for the imposition of extremely lengthy sentences--when appropriate.

Because of this defect involving mandatory minimum sentences, I must oppose the bill that we consider today.

By voting ``no,'' the House will allow the Judiciary Committee time to fix this serious flaw.

With this important consideration in mind, I must ask my colleagues to oppose the bill today so that we may consider a better bill dealing with this aspect of sex trafficking in the near future.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I would ask the gentleman from Wisconsin, the chairman, if he has any further speakers.

Madam Speaker, I will continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, in closing, I yield myself such time as I might consume.

Madam Speaker, we have had three bills so far, and we are getting ready to offer two others that all speak to this very devastating impact on our children--human trafficking and sex trafficking. I think the Stop Advertising Victims of Exploitation Act, H.R. 285, does focus on a particular niche that is heinous.

Our children are on the Internet, they are tech savvy, and they easily can become victims of an attractive site or attractive sounds and music, so I think this legislation, again, pinpoints a very serious issue.

The bill is an amendment of an existing legislation that includes a mens rea. There must be intent; but we do know, in the course of legislation, we have the opportunity to make sure that what we do does meet the test of getting those who are truly the perpetrators.

I would hope as this bill moves to the Senate, as we recognize the importance of this legislation, we, again, be reminded that one size does not often fit all and that judges can rightly have discretion to a sentence of life.

I ask my colleagues to support this legislation so that we can have a comprehensive approach to legislative bills that have been on the floor today to attack head on, if you will, those who prey on our children, young men and women, people who find themselves lost with no place to go and become the serious victims of child pornography, sex trafficking, and human trafficking. As Members, we know that, many times, the entire life of that individual is changed forever.

I yield back the balance of my time and ask for support of the underlying bill.

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

Madam Speaker, I am glad that the manager, Congressman Poe, set the tone again for the vigorousness of the bipartisanship around what all of us want, which is to, in essence, cut out the cancers of human trafficking and sex trafficking.

Let me first of all congratulate Mr. Poe, Judge Poe, a Texan whose language I can fully understand, as well as his partner, Congresswoman Maloney. Over the years, she has championed the rights of women and the empowerment of our children: what a great partnership, Judge Poe and Congresswoman Maloney. I am delighted to join with them in my commitment to fighting human trafficking and sex trafficking in supporting H.R. 181, the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act of 2014, marked up in the Judiciary Committee. Many amendments were accepted, and so this bill has a holistic approach.

I am also glad that we did not run away from this issue in Houston, as we convened a hearing that I called for with my colleagues, Republicans and Democrats, to openly and forthrightly listen to law enforcement, people who had been victimized, adults who are still suffering from what had happened to them as a child. This hearing was held in March. It was a field hearing, titled, ``Combating Human Trafficking in Our Major Cities.'' It was a fitting venue because, regrettably, Houston has been noted as a human trafficking hub in the United States. But it was the important contributions of my colleagues, many on the floor today, who added to the record to begin to craft or to continue to work on important legislation such as the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act. I am glad that we are here again to move it so it can ultimately be signed by the President of the United States.

At that hearing, we heard testimony from Federal, State, and local law enforcement officials regarding an operation the day before in which they discovered and rescued 115 from a packed, rancid stash house in south Harris County. It was not completely vetted as to whether or not all of the individuals in the stash house or some of the

individuals or a few were victims of human trafficking or sex trafficking. I would venture to say that their future would not be a future worthy of promoting. Ninety-nine of those victims were men, 16 were women, one of whom was pregnant, and 19 others were juveniles. You wonder what would happen to the juveniles.

I went to that stash house. It was a terrible scene. All of them had been kidnapped and smuggled into the United States. And as previously said, human trafficking, sex trafficking, is a great business for those who are of that kind of vile mind because they can use them and use them and use juveniles over and over again, some of whom, however, have been driven to such low ends of the Earth, meaning the victims, that their life is ruined. Some have probably been driven to suicide.

Trafficking of any human being, especially domestic child trafficking, has no place in civilized society. The term ``slavery'' has often been used. And it is true that slavery exists around the world. We need to ensure that State and local law enforcement agencies have the tools, resources, and training necessary to identify, apprehend, and prosecute criminals who ruthlessly traffic in children.

These children have suffered the worst imaginable trauma, and as a result, they require and are deserving of comprehensive and tailored services to assist in their recovery. We need to ensure that funding is in place to provide for such comprehensive services. This bill is an essential step toward combating the crisis of domestic minor sex trafficking and helping survivors begin their lives anew. Throughout this afternoon, we have said that they have to have an opportunity to change their lives.

While the rescue of trafficking victims is necessary, so is the prosecution of traffickers. While we habitually refer to those who solicit commercial sex acts from minors as ``customers'' and ``johns,'' and I have said this before on the floor, the cold, hard fact is that these people are nothing more than child rapists. We need to stop being polite and call them what they are--child rapists. Let us not let them hide behind polite names such as ``john,'' particularly when they prey on our children.

Federal courts have interpreted the existing statute, title 18 U.S.C. section 1591, to cover the acts of patronizing and soliciting. Therefore, the specifications of the terms ``patronize'' and ``solicit'' in this bill simply clarify and emphasize the fact that these actions are actually covered.

Those who patronize and solicit are already criminally liable under the language contained in the original text of section 1591. Under this legislation, a child rapist will no longer be able to find refuge in any jurisdiction. This bill will also promote the coordination of investigations among Federal, State, and local law enforcement and enhance reporting data for missing children--everything that the witnesses at the March 2014 hearing told us call for this.

Let me say that I am also grateful that this bill emphasizes the local, State, and Federal collaboration. As a member of the Homeland Security Committee, which is what the hearing was held under, under the auspices of the Homeland Security Committee, we recognize that is part of the threat to national security. The utilizing of our children, the victimizing of our children, the co-opting of our children, the soliciting of our children, and this bill gets right at the target.

Human trafficking is the second fastest growing criminal industry in the world, generating over $32 billion annually. This bill is the most comprehensive piece of legislation to deal with this problem over the years, and it is a great foundation to continue to build, to weed out every nuance, every person hiding behind the rock who is dealing in sex trafficking and human trafficking.

For years, we have labeled child victims of sex trafficking as prostitutes and juvenile delinquents rather than the victims that they are. We have seen runaways and we have condemned them for being a runaway, but we don't know the horrible stories and what they have experienced. They are victims of criminal conduct, and we need to treat them that way--not prostitutes, not juvenile delinquents.

This bill recognizes and treats victims as victims, provides for more services and shelters for them, and provides resources to law enforcement, child welfare, health care officials, and others who will come into contact with them.

One of the early organizations, the Center for Missing and Exploited Children, which I have associated with throughout my entire time in the House of Representatives, early on raised the clarion call that we must do something about these exploited and missing children. I know that they are celebrating as we have been on the floor talking about human trafficking and sex trafficking.

So, Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased that the Judiciary Committee saw fit to adopt section 11 in H.R. 181, the Jackson Lee amendment, which expresses a sense of Congress that human trafficking has no place in a civilized society and that perpetrators of such vile acts should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, and we can build on this for finding those who may be thinking that they are squeezing outside the law.

Mr. Speaker, as a global leader in combating global trafficking throughout the world, the United States must hold all nations to the same standards by which we hold ourselves. The demand for commercial sex is a primary cause of the human rights violation of human trafficking. Elimination of that violation requires elimination of that demand. I am glad that we are here confronting it head-on, and I ask my colleagues to support the underlying legislation.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 181, the ``Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act of 2015.''

Madam Speaker, last year, on March 20, 2014, the Homeland Security Committee, of which I am a member, held a field hearing titled, ``Combatting Human Trafficking in Our Major Cities,'' in my home city of Houston. It was a fitting venue because, regrettably, Houston is a human trafficking hub of the United States.

At that hearing my colleagues, Chairman McCaul, Judge Poe, Congressman Al Green, Congressman Farenthold, and I heard testimony from Federal, state and local law enforcement officials regarding an operation the day before during which they discovered and rescued 115 people from a packed, rancid stash house in south Harris County. 99 of those victims were men, 16 were women, one of whom was pregnant, and 19 were juveniles. All of them had been kidnapped and smuggled into the United States.

Trafficking of any human being, especially domestic child trafficking, has no place in civilized society. We need to ensure that state and local law enforcement agencies have the tools, resources, and training necessary to identify, apprehend, and prosecute criminals who ruthlessly traffic in children.

These children have suffered the worst imaginable trauma, and as a result, they require and are deserving of comprehensive and tailored services to assist in their recovery. We need to ensure that funding is in place to provide for such comprehensive services. This bill is an essential step toward combatting the crisis of domestic minor sex trafficking and helping survivors begin their lives anew.

While the rescue of trafficking victims is necessary, so is the prosecution of traffickers. And while we habitually refer to those who solicit commercial sex acts from minors as ``customers'' and ``johns,'' the cold, hard fact is that these people are nothing more than ``child rapists.'' We need to stop being polite and call them what they are-- ``child rapists''!

Federal courts have interpreted the existing statute, Title 18 United States Code, section 1591, to cover the acts of patronizing and soliciting. Therefore, the specifications of the terms ``patronizing'' and ``solicit'' in this bill simply clarify and emphasize the fact that these actions are actually covered.

Those who patronize and solicit are already criminally liable under the language contained in the original section 1591. Under this legislation, child rapists will find no refuge in any jurisdiction. This bill will also promote the coordination of investigations among federal, state and local law enforcement and enhance reporting data for missing children--everything that the witnesses at the March 2014 Houston field hearing called for.

Human Trafficking is the second fastest growing criminal industry in the world, generating over $32 billion annually. This bill is the most comprehensive piece of legislation to deal with that problem in years.

For years we have labeled child victims of sex trafficking as prostitutes and juvenile delinquents rather than as the victims they are. They are victims of criminal conduct, and we need to treat them that way. This bill recognizes that and treats victims as victims, provides for more services and shelters for them,

and provides resources to law enforcement, child welfare, healthcare officials and others who will come into contact with these victims.

Finally, Madam Speaker, I am very pleased that the Judiciary Committee saw fit to adopt as Section 11 of H.R. 181 the Jackson Lee Amendment which expresses the Sense of Congress that human trafficking has no place in a civilized society and that perpetrators of such vile acts should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Madam Speaker, as the global leader in combatting human trafficking throughout the world, the United States must hold all nations to the same standards to which we hold ourselves. The demand for commercial sex is a primary cause of the human right violation of human trafficking. Elimination of that violation requires the elimination of that demand.

I received yet more tragic illustration of the global horrors of human trafficking as recently as last evening during a meeting with the Prime Minister of Jamaica. Last year Jamaica improved its position in the U.S. State Department's Annual Trafficking in Persons (``TIP'') Report after it passed amendments to its Trafficking in Persons Act. Those amendments stipulated harsher penalties for offenders with penalties of up to 30 years.

Despite this new legislation, Jamaican children subjected to sex trafficking in the country's sex trade remains a serious problem with reports of sex trafficking of children and adults occurring on streets and in night clubs, bars, and private homes. The Jamaican government realizes that it must move more vigorously to not only prosecute, convict and punish trafficking offenders, but to also identify, and assist more victims.

Madam Speaker, while it is entirely proper for the United States to hold all nations to the same standard to which we hold ourselves, it is also entirely proper for the United States to lend assistance to those nations that may lack the resources needed to effectively combat Human Trafficking. I hope that we will give consideration to providing such assistance in future anti-human trafficking legislation.

Finally, Madam Speaker, I must also thank Representative Poe and his staff as well as Committee staff on both sides of the aisle for working together to address a point raised by an amendment that Rep. Poe offered and withdrew during the bill's markup. The changes that were made to the bill as a result of that collaborative work yielded some real improvements to the bill.

For these reasons I support H.R. 181 and encourage my colleagues to do likewise.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney), who, as I indicated, has worked unceasingly on empowering the most vulnerable, particularly in her work on empowering women, vulnerable women around the world, providing them rights, and, of course, the work she has done in collaboration with Congressman Poe and our committee in her work on this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentlelady.

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

The previous speaker indicated that we are in the national month acknowledging and recognizing the gravity of human trafficking, and I believe that it calls upon us to stand by the most vulnerable who really can't help themselves.

My last comment before yielding was the demand for commercial sex is a primary cause of the human rights violation of human trafficking, so eliminating that violation requires the elimination of the demand.

What I might not have added, which a number of Members have said, is the violence that goes along with sex trafficking and human trafficking, the violence that goes along when some entity--a person called a pimp, which is an old-time term, really becomes an abuser, a violent abuser and abuses the frail, small body of a little girl or boy because they really haven't risen to the occasion, provided them with their daily infusion of dollars to continue to do their dastardly work.

As I have heard mentioned on this floor, we are not alone here in the United States. For those of us who met the victims of sex trafficking and human trafficking around the world, we understand that America's standards will help others.

What is good about what we are doing today and the underlying bill is that we set a standard that the world can look at, that we are not going to tolerate or be sufferers of the abuse of little children.

Yesterday, as I listened to a great success story spoken about by the Prime Minister of Jamaica, relating their economic success, she was willing to talk about Jamaica's concerted effort at fighting human trafficking.

An island where it might be easy for that trafficker to move from one place to the next, here was a leader of government acknowledging the scourge of human trafficking and that Jamaican children were suffering and subjected to sex trafficking and that it remains a serious problem, but we are going to fight it.

I felt very good about that because you would think that an island that is very much dependent on tourism and entertainment would not have that calling and that cause; but, yes, the fight is spreading.

I believe the Jamaican Government should be congratulated, and I ask other governments to take heed of the underlying legislation, rise to the standard, be part of the total elimination of cutting into the lives of children, of little boys, of little girls, of cutting them off from any kind of aspirations and hope that they could ever have.

Maybe we don't necessarily connect it, but we know the story of the three women that were held for a period of time in our own Nation. Some started out as children. When they were ultimately found, they were women. One cannot help note that the violence that they described was a vile sex trafficking, human trafficking episode. We don't know how many around the Nation that are today, as we stand on the floor of the House, suffering.

I thank Representative Poe. I thank my colleague Representative Maloney and committee staff on both sides of the aisle to help address this issue, and as well, I am glad that this particular legislation will set a standard that this dastardly series of acts will not be suffered by any human being not only in this Nation, but around the world.

With that, I ask support for H.R. 181 and yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I indicated this afternoon was an important afternoon. I thank the gentleman for his legislation and his leadership, and I add my appreciation of the ranking member of the Homeland Security Committee, Mr. Thompson, and, as well, the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, who previously did four bills, Mr. Conyers. It seems that we are having bipartisan support on a very important crisis in our Nation and around the world.

In 2014, President Obama said:

At home, we are leading by example. My administration is

cracking down on traffickers, charging a record number of

perpetrators. We are deploying new technology in the fight

against human trafficking, developing the Federal

Government's first-ever strategic action plan to strengthen

victim services and strengthening protections against human

trafficking in Federal contracts. During the past year, the

White House has hosted events on combating human trafficking,

bringing together leaders from every sector of society.

Together, we came up with new ideas to fight trafficking at

the national and grassroots levels.

The present legislation before us, as I rise to strongly support it, H.R. 460, is the Human Trafficking Detection Act of 2015. This is a great partnership between Homeland Security, the committee which I am a senior member on, and Judiciary to fight against human trafficking. In particular, this bill has a very important purpose because our Homeland Security personnel are in our airports and ports, they are along our borders, they are the eyes and ears, they are the first responders. It is crucial that this bill is effectively working with personnel to train, to deter, detect, disrupt, and prevent human trafficking during the course of their primary roles and responsibilities and for other work.

This is a very good idea. Human trafficking is not only a crime but also a horrible violation of human rights. Human trafficking is often a hidden crime. Victims of human trafficking may be afraid to come forward and get help because they may be forced or coerced. They may fear retribution or they might not have control over their documents.

According to the most recent estimate from the Department of State, approximately 600,000 to 800,000 people are trafficked across global borders each year.

According to the U.S. Department of Justice, Houston, Texas, is one of the Nation's largest hubs in human trafficking. There are over 200 active brothels in Houston and more strip clubs and illicit spas than Las Vegas. These businesses serve as fronts for sex trafficking.

Let me be very clear. This is not a condemnation of my city. This is a recognition that every single elected person; local, county, and State government; and our law enforcement are working every day and we are being successful, in essence, in shutting down strip clubs, illicit spas, and others.

The main factors that contribute to high levels of trafficking throughout the Nation and in Texas are proximity, demographics, and a large migrant labor population. Houston's proximity to the Mexican border, I-10, a highway running cross-country through Houston, and the port make it a popular point. But that is not solely the site of human trafficking. As my colleague has mentioned, it is everywhere. It is a national problem. Therefore, our Homeland Security personnel, thank goodness, will now have the opportunity to have special training so that in the capacity of their work, their eyes and ears will be extra trained to detect those trying to move past the law.

Houston's huge geographic size and large ethnic and culturally diverse population is seen in and around the Nation, which creates optimal conditions. It is not the only city with that.

To combat human trafficking, the Department of Homeland Security, recognizing there needs to be a national campaign, launched the Blue Campaign in 2010. Through the Blue Campaign, DHS works in collaboration with law enforcement, government, nongovernment, and private organizations to protect the basic right of freedom and to bring those who exploit human lives to justice.

This legislation will begin to institutionalize the training. Last year, this training--the Blue training--was credited when two men were arrested at Miami International Airport. TSA personnel who had received training to detect trafficking observed the interaction between the young men and young woman and noticed the signs.

What we want to do today, again, is to institutionalize and codify this effort so that no human trafficker, no child being held by an adult but being trafficked can escape the eye of our trained Homeland Security personnel, and they can break that hand away from that adult that is trying to do that child harm because they will know that is not the friendly parent or wonderful grandparent or best aunt or uncle. They will know it is a dastardly act.

I support the underlying bill, ask my colleagues to support it.

Mr. Speaker, Human trafficking is not only a crime, but also a horrible violation of human rights.

Human trafficking is often a hidden crime.

Victims of human trafficking may be afraid to come forward and get help because they may be forced or coerced, they may fear retribution, or they might not have control over their documents.

According to the most recent estimate from the Department of State, approximately 600,000 to 800,000 people are trafficked across global borders each year.

According to the U.S. Department of Justice, Houston, Texas is one of the nation's largest hubs for human trafficking.

There are over 200 active brothels in Houston and more strip clubs and illicit spas than Las Vegas; these businesses serve as fronts for sex trafficking.

The main factors that contribute to high levels of trafficking through Houston and the rest of Texas are proximity, demographics, and a large migrant labor force.

Houston's proximity to the Mexican border, I-10, a highway running across country through Houston, and the port of Houston make it a popular point of entry for international trafficking.

Additionally, the presence of two large airports provides ways in and out of the city.

Houston's huge geographic size and large ethnic and culturally diverse population create optimal conditions for trafficking because of the ability to blend in with the community.

To combat human trafficking, the Department of Homeland Security launched the ``Blue Campaign'' in 2010.

Through the ``Blue Campaign,'' DHS works in collaboration with law enforcement, government, non-government and private organizations to protect the basic right of freedom and to bring those who exploit human lives to justice.

In part, DHS does so by increasing awareness and training for its front line employees such as Transportation Security Officers, Customs and Border Protection Officers, and others.

Last year, this training was credited when two men were arrested at Miami International Airport.

TSA personnel, who received training to detect trafficking, observed the interaction between the men and a young woman and noticed the signs.

The bill before us today seeks to codify in law the training of DHS personnel on how to

deter, detect, and disrupt human trafficking and, where appropriate, interdict a suspected trafficker during the course of their primary roles and responsibilities.

For CBP, this means Officers at our ports of entry will be trained on how to identify potential victims of trafficking.

For TSA, it means that screening personnel, who screen approximately 1.8 million passengers a day, will be knowledgeable about signs of trafficking.

Importantly, the bill requires that the training received be appropriate for a particular location or environment in which the personnel receiving the training perform their official duties.

This will help tailor the training received so that it is relevant to the specific personnel receiving the training.

Mr. Speaker, with this bill, we have the opportunity to call attention to the human rights crisis that is human trafficking.

January is ``National Slavery and Human Trafficking Prevention Month.''

To ensure that continued attention be paid to this often hidden crime, I urge passage of H.R. 460.

Though the bill before us today will not eliminate human trafficking, it may help prevent it by ensuring that DHS' frontline workforce is properly trained to fight it.

President's Interagency Task Force

Progress in Combating Trafficking in Persons: The U.S. Government

Response to Modern Slavery

Trafficking in persons, or human trafficking, is the act of

recruiting, enticing, harboring, transporting, providing,

obtaining, or maintaining a person for compelled labor or

commercial sex acts through the use of force, fraud, or

coercion. Sex trafficking of a minor under the age of 18 does

not require the use of force, threats of force, fraud, or

coercion. The Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) of

2000 (Pub. L. 106-386), as amended, describes this compelled

service using a number of different terms, including

involuntary servitude, slavery, debt bondage, and forced

labor.

Human trafficking can include, but does not require,

movement. Under the TVPA, people may be considered

trafficking victims regardless of whether they were

transported to the exploitative situation, previously

consented to work for a trafficker, or participated in a

crime as a direct result of being trafficked. At the heart of

this phenomenon are the traffickers' aim to exploit and

enslave their victims and the myriad of coercive and

deceptive practices they use.

Human trafficking is an opportunistic crime. Traffickers

target all types of people: adults and children, women, men,

and transgender individuals, citizens and noncitizens alike.

No socioeconomic group is immune; new immigrants, Native

Americans, runaways, the homeless, and lesbian, gay,

bisexual, and transgender youth are particularly vulnerable.

One of the most common assumptions about ``average''

trafficking victims is that they are vulnerable simply

because they come from the poorest, most isolated

communities, whether overseas or in the United States.

Indeed, many do. Yet some victims, from a variety of

backgrounds, have reported that their suffering began with

their aspirations for a better life and a lack of options to

fulfill them.

That's where the traffickers come in. Exploiting these

realities, traffickers appear to offer a solution--a good

job, a brighter future, a safe home, or a sense of belonging,

even love. They prey on their victims' hope and exploit their

trust and confidence, coercing them into using themselves as

collateral for that chance.

In the United States, the President's Interagency Task

Force to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons (PITF) and

its operational arm, the Senior Policy Operating Group

(SPOG), bring together federal departments and agencies to

ensure a whole-of-government approach that addresses all

aspects of human trafficking--enforcement of criminal and

labor law, development of victim identification and

protection measures, support for innovations in data

gathering and research, education and public awareness,

enhanced partnerships and research opportunities, and

strategically linked foreign assistance and diplomatic

engagement. The agencies of the PITF are the Departments of

State (DOS), Defense (DOD), Justice (DOJ), the Interior

(DOI), Agriculture (USDA), Labor (DOL), Health and Human

Services (HHS), Transportation (DOT), Education (ED), and

Homeland Security (DHS), as well as the Domestic Policy

Council (DPC), the National Security Council (NSC), the

Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the Office of the

Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), the Federal Bureau

of Investigation (FBI), the U.S. Agency for International

Development (USAID), and the U.S. Equal Employment

Opportunity Commission (EEOC). As part of the PITF, these

agencies convene routinely to coordinate both federal

policies to combat trafficking in persons and implementation

of the TVPA.

Agencies of the PITF have brought together leaders from

government, the private sector, advocates and survivors,

faith leaders, law enforcement and academia, and have made

significant progress following President Obama's March 2012

call to strengthen federal efforts to combat human

trafficking, his September 2012 speech announcing a number of

new and strengthened initiatives, and the first-ever White

House Forum to Combat Human Trafficking in April 2013, where

the first recipients of the Presidential Award for

Extraordinary Efforts to Combat Trafficking in Persons--

survivor advocate Florrie Burke and hospitality and travel

company Carlson--were honored.

The pages that follow reflect the work these agencies have

accomplished over the past year, as well as their commitment

to continue their efforts in the year to come. From

strengthening the SPOG and its four Committees to

implementing the nation's first-ever Services for Trafficking

Victims in the United States, to implementing an Executive

Order that strengthens protections against human trafficking

in government contracting, PITF agencies are enabling law

enforcement and service providers to deploy resources more

effectively and raising public awareness both at home and

abroad.

Federal agencies also worked to expand partnerships with

civil society and the private sector in order to bring more

resources to bear in fighting this horrific injustice.

Although the primary responsibility, for fighting this crime

and protecting its survivors lies with governments,

governments alone cannot solve this problem. Everyone has a

role--from local law enforcement and first responders to the

heads of major corporations and everyday citizens. Effective

anti-trafficking strategies require partnerships that

integrate the experiences and guidance of survivors and reach

industries, local communities, schools, religious

congregations, and multilateral partners. The U.S.

government, for example, funds the National Human Trafficking

Resource Center (NHTRC), a national hotline (1-888-373-7888)

operated by a nongovernmental organization that provides

emergency assistance every day of the year, as well as anti-

trafficking task forces in which law enforcement and victim

service providers combine efforts to respond to this crime in

their communities. Significant partnerships and support for

non-governmental efforts have also taken root, including the

Partnership for Freedom, where Humanity United and DOJ, HHS,

and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)

launched the first of three challenge award contests,

Reimagine: Opportunity, to develop innovative solutions to

address human trafficking; twelve finalists will compete to

expand access to housing, social services, and economic

empowerment for trafficking victims. In addition, DOS has

teamed up with Veritee, an NGO leader in supply chain

management, to implement a project in consultation with

federal agencies and other stakeholders to help gather data

on the risks of trafficking in the production of goods and

provision of services. Working with partners the Aspen

Institute and Made in a Free World, Veritee will also convene

stakeholders and develop a tool for federal contractors and

businesses to analyze supply chain risks and adopt ethical

sourcing guidelines and compliance plans that align with

Executive Order 13627. Finally, partnering with survivors of

human trafficking, federal anti-trafficking experts from DOJ,

with partners from DHS, DOS, HHS, and the White House, hosted

a day-long Survivor Forum and Listening Session to gain

insight from a diverse group of survivors in developing more

effective programs and strategies.

The Task Force has drawn strength and direction from these

partnerships, which have brought procurement officers and

CEOs, professors and human resources professional together

with law enforcement and victim advocates in the service of

freedom. Such effective collaboration has led to concrete

results in the United States' efforts to advance government

priorities and combat modern slavery both domestically and

globally. This compilation of the Obama Administration's

accomplishments represents merely a snapshot, as of February

2014, of the work made possible by the multifaceted approach

the United States has adopted to combat trafficking in

persons. Each day, the Obama Administration strives to

improve its strategy and to enhance its partnerships in order

to fulfill not only the mandates of the TVPA, but also the

promise of the Emancipation Proclamation and the Thirteenth

Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

In closing, let me emphasize what I just said earlier. Two people were caught at Miami International Airport. They were caught by officers of TSA who had received training to detect trafficking and observed the interaction between the two men and a young woman. It was the exact description that I gave--holding a little girl's hand, holding a teenager's hand, looking innocent--but our DHS personnel could be the savers of the day.

Just a few years ago, in our own airport, a number of Chinese nationals--young women--were brought in, ultimately, to be held against their will. It was astute personnel who knew that even though girls traveled together that something was wrong.

That is why this legislation is so important. The bill before us today seeks to codify in law the training of DHS personnel on how to deter, detect, and disrupt human trafficking and, where appropriate, to interdict a suspected trafficker during the course of their primary roles and responsibilities. Our front liners from the Department of Homeland Security are everywhere. There is not a place you can travel when entering this country--through our airports or through our ports-- that our agents in some capacity, in some roles, are not there.

For the CBP, this means officers at our ports of entry will be trained on how to identify potential victims of trafficking--smuggling, human slavery. For the TSA, it means that screening personnel, who screen approximately 1.8 million passengers a day, will be knowledgeable about signs of trafficking. Importantly, the bill requires that the training received be appropriate for a particular location or environment in which the personnel receiving the training perform their official duties, streamlining it to make it work. This will help tailor the training received so that it is relevant to the specific personnel receiving the training.

Mr. Speaker, with this bill, we have the opportunity to call attention to the human rights crisis that is human trafficking. I am glad that this bill has been generated out of the Homeland Security Committee, which emphasizes the security of this Nation but, as well, the important act of making sure America stands against human trafficking. January is National Slavery and Human Trafficking Prevention Month. To ensure that continued attention be paid to this often hidden crime, I urge the passage of H.R. 460. The bill before us today will not eliminate human trafficking, but it may help prevent it by ensuring that DHS' frontline workforce is properly trained to fight it.

In conclusion, let me say that we are all committed. Again, I refer to all of us. To report suspected human trafficking, dial 1-866-347- 2423. If you are a victim, to get help, call the National Human Trafficking Resource Center at 1-888-373-7888.

I thank the gentleman from North Carolina for his leadership, and I thank our committee chairman and ranking member for their leadership.

I ask for support of the bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert my statement in the Record that the House should vote for bigger paychecks and better infrastructure instead of attacking women's access to health care.

I thank the gentlewoman for her courage.

Madam Speaker, I stand here today, refusing to surrender on behalf of millions of women of all economic backgrounds, races, ethnicities, and religions who rely upon the Supreme Court of the United States, which, under the Ninth Amendment, has indicated that Roe v. Wade--the right to choose--is a viable and important law of the land. How can we undermine the Constitution in its premise and its articulation?

Today, very quickly, let me say that I know there are millions who are here to disagree with me. I respect that disagreement, but I am saddened that we would take advantage of this day to misrepresent the law and pass a law that will do damage to millions of Americans.

This is the face of Republican women, who, in essence, decided that H.R. 36 was too extreme. Even Republican men said that they could not vote on a bill that caused or asked women to report a rape before they would be able to benefit from an abortion. How sad, in the trauma of rape, that you must require someone to go to the police department before she could get assistance. That bill was pulled. That extreme bill was pulled.

In order not to leave us without dramatics, we come again to do what is hurting millions of women in Texas--where they cannot even get health services because of the laws passed in Texas, which completely shut down good health care clinics that deal in abortion and other women's services for health care--with this dastardly law about requiring those clinics to be within a certain milage of hospitals, with their never having any problem before.

Now we come with another masquerade in H.R. 7, which prohibits Federal funds from being used for any health benefits coverage which includes the coverage of abortion, making permanent already existing Federal policies, prohibiting the inclusion of abortion in any health care service furnished by Federal or the District of Columbia health care--again, interfering with the women in the District of Columbia-- and prohibiting individuals from receiving refundable Federal tax credits--individuals interfering with private health insurance.

Madam Speaker, this is a bad bill, and I ask my colleagues to vote against it. It undermines the Constitution and the Ninth Amendment.

Madam Speaker, I rise again in strong opposition to the rule for H.R. 7, the so-called ``No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act,'' and the underlying bill.

I oppose this bill because it is unnecessary, puts the lives of women at risk, interferes with women's constitutionally guaranteed right of privacy, and diverts our attention from the real problems facing the American people.

A more accurate short title for this bill would be the ``Violating the Rights of Women Act of 2015''!

Instead of resuming their annual War on Women, our colleagues across the aisle should be working with Democrats to build upon the ``Middle- Class Economics'' championed by the Obama Administration that have succeeded in ending the economic meltdown it inherited in 2009 and revived the economy to the point where today we have the highest rate of growth and lowest rate of unemployment since the boom years of the Clinton Administration.

We could and should instead be voting to raise the minimum wage to $10.10 per hour so that people who work hard and play by the rules do not have raise their families in poverty.

A far better use of our time would be to provide help to unemployed job-hunters by making access to community college affordable to every person looking to make a new start in life.

Instead of voting to abridge the constitutional rights of women for the umpteenth time, we should bring to the floor for a first vote comprehensive immigration reform legislation or legislations repairing the harm to the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by the Supreme Court's decision in Shelby County v. Holder.

Madam Speaker, the one thing we should not be doing is debating irresponsible ``messaging bills'' that abridge the rights of women and have absolutely no chance of overriding a presidential veto.

The version of H.R. 7 before us now is as bad today as it was when the House Republican leadership insisted on bringing it to a vote a year ago.

The other draconian provisions of that terrible bill are retained in H.R. 7, which would:

1. Prohibit federal funds from being used for any health benefits coverage that includes coverage of abortion. (Thus making permanent existing federal policies.)

2. Prohibit the inclusion of abortion in any health care service furnished by a federal or District of Columbia health care facility or by any physician or other individual employed by the federal government or the District.

3. Apply such prohibitions to District of Columbia funds.

4. Prohibit individuals from receiving a refundable federal tax credit, or any cost-sharing reductions, for purchasing a qualified health plan that includes coverage for abortions.

5. Prohibit small employers from receiving the small-employer health insurance credit provided by the health care law if the health plans or benefits that are purchased provide abortion coverage.

If H.R. 7 were enacted, millions of families and small businesses with private health insurance plans that offer abortion coverage would be faced with tax increases, making the cost of health care insurance even more expensive.

Under the Affordable Care Act, insurers are able to offer abortion coverage and receive federal offsets for premiums as long as enrollees pay for the abortion coverage from separate, private funds.

If enacted, H.R. 7 would deny federal subsidies or credits to private health insurance plans that offer abortion coverage even if that coverage is paid for from private funds.

This would inevitably lead to private health insurance companies dropping abortion coverage leaving millions of women without access to affordable, comprehensive health care.

Currently, 87% of private insurance health care plans offered through employers cover abortion.

If H.R. 7 were to become law, consumer options for private health insurance plans would be unnecessarily restricted and the tax burden on these policy holders would increase significantly.

H.R. 7 would also deny tax credits to small businesses that offer their employees insurance plans that cover abortion, which would have a significant impact on millions of families across the nation who would no longer be able to take advantage of existing tax credits and deductions for the cost of their health care.

For example, small businesses that offer health plans that cover abortions would no longer be eligible for the Small Business Health Tax Credit--potentially worth 35%-50% of the cost of their premiums-- threatening 4 million small businesses.

Self-employed Americans who are able to deduct the cost of their comprehensive health insurance from their taxable income will also be denied similar tax credits and face higher taxes.

H.R. 7 would also undermine the District of Columbia's home rule by restricting its use of funds for abortion care to low-income women.

The Hyde Amendment stipulates that no taxpayer dollars are to be used for abortion care, and has narrow exceptions for rape, incest, and health complications that arise from pregnancy which put the mother's life in danger.

H.R. 7 would restrict women's access to reproductive health care even further by narrowing the already stringent requirements set forth in the Hyde Amendment.

When the Affordable Care Act was signed into law, the President issued an Executive Order to ``ensure that Federal funds are not used for abortion services.''

This version of H.R. 7 goes far beyond the safeguards established under the Affordable Care Act, and sets a dangerous precedent for the future of women's reproductive health in this country because it includes two new provisions that were added at the nth hour but have never received a hearing or a mark-up.

These new provisions would (1) ban abortion coverage in multi-state health plans available under the ACA; and (2) mandate that health plans mislead consumers about abortion coverage by requiring all plans in the health-insurance exchanges that include abortion coverage to display that fact prominently in all advertising, marketing materials, or information from the insurer but interestingly, does not require the same disclosure from plans that do not cover abortion.

Madam Speaker, H.R. 7 would also force health plans to mislead consumers about the law's treatment of abortion.

As a concession to anti-choice lawmakers, the ACA requires insurance plans participating in the new health system to segregate monies used for abortion services from all other funds.

In order to aid in identifying these funds and simplify the process of segregating general premium dollars from those used to cover abortion services, the ACA requires that health plans estimate the cost of abortion coverage at no less than $1 per enrollee per month.

H.R. 7 would require plans covering abortion to misrepresent this practice as an ``abortion surcharge,'' which is to be disclosed and identified as a portion of the consumer's premium.

By describing abortion coverage in this way, H.R. 7 makes it look as though it is an added, extra cost, available only at an additional fee, when in fact it is not.

Taken together, the provisions in H.R. 7 have the effect, and possibly the intent, of arbitrarily infringing women's reproductive freedoms and pose a nationwide threat to the health and wellbeing of American women and a direct challenge to the Supreme Court's ruling in Roe v. Wade.

Madam Speaker, one of the most detestable aspects of this bill is that it would curb access to care for women in the most desperate of circumstances.

Women like Danielle Deaver, who was 22 weeks pregnant when her water broke. Tests showed that Danielle had suffered anhydramnios, a premature rupture of the membranes before the fetus has achieved viability.

This condition meant that the fetus likely would be born with a shortening of muscle tissue that results in the inability to move limbs. In addition, Danielle's fetus likely would suffer deformities to the face and head, and the lungs were unlikely to develop beyond the 22-week point.

There was less than a 10% chance that, if born, Danielle's baby would be able to breathe on its own and only a 2% chance the baby would be able to eat on its own.

H.R. 7 hurts women like Vikki Stella, a diabetic, who discovered months into her pregnancy that the fetus she was carrying suffered from several major anomalies and had no chance of survival. Because of Vildri's diabetes, her doctor determined that induced labor and Caesarian section were both riskier procedures for Vildd than an abortion.

Every pregnancy is different. No politician knows, or has the right to assume he knows, what is best for a woman and her family.

These are decisions that properly must be left to women to make, in consultation with their partners, doctors, and their God.

H.R. 7 lacks the necessary exceptions to protect the health and life of the mother.

H.R. 7 is an unconstitutional infringement on the right to privacy, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in a long line of cases going back to Griswold v. Connecticut in 1965 and Roe v. Wade decided in 1973.

In Roe v. Wade, the Court held that a state could not prohibit a woman from exercising her right to terminate a pregnancy in order to protect her health prior to viability.

While many factors go into determining fetal viability, the consensus of the medical community is that viability is acknowledged as not occurring prior to 24 weeks gestation.

Supreme Court precedents make it clear that neither Congress nor a state legislature can declare any one element--``be it weeks of gestation or fetal weight or any other single factor--as the determinant'' of viability. Colautti v. Franklin, 439 U.S. 379, 388-89 (1979).

The constitutionally protected right to privacy encompasses the right of women to choose to terminate a pregnancy before viability, and even later where continuing to term poses a threat to her health and safety.

This right of privacy was hard won and must be preserved inviolate.

The bill before us threatens this hard won right for women and must be defeated.

I urge all members to join me in opposing the rule and the underlying bill. H.R. 7 should be pulled off of this floor!

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 36, the ``Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act.'' In the last Congress, I opposed this irresponsible and reckless legislation.

I opposed the bill, which arbitrarily bans a woman from exercising her constitutionally protect right to choose to terminate a pregnancy after 20 weeks, last year for the same reasons I do now. This purely partisan and divisive legislation:

1. Unduly burdens a woman's right to terminate a pregnancy and thus puts their lives at risk;

2. Does not contain exceptions for the health of the mother;

3. As introduced and considered in the Judiciary Committee, unfairly targeted the District of Columbia; and

4. Infringes upon women's right to privacy, which is guaranteed and protected by the U.S. Constitution.

Madam Speaker, in 2010, Nebraska passed a law banning abortion care after 20 weeks. Since then 10 more red states--Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, North Dakota, and Oklahoma--have enacted similar bans. None of these laws has an adequate health exception. Only one provides an exception for cases of rape or incest.

H.R. 36 seeks to take the misguided and mean-spirited policy of these states and make it the law of the land. In so doing, the bill poses a nationwide threat to the health and wellbeing of American women and a direct challenge to the Supreme Court's ruling in Roe v. Wade.

Madam Speaker, one of the most detestable aspects of this bill is that it would curb access to care for women in the most desperate of circumstances. It is these women who receive the 1.5 percent of abortions that occur after 20 weeks.

Women like Danielle Deaver, who was 22 weeks pregnant when her water broke. Tests showed that Danielle had suffered anhydramnios, a premature rupture of the membranes before the fetus has achieved viability. This condition meant that the fetus likely would be born with a shortening of muscle tissue that results in the inability to move limbs.

In addition, Danielle's fetus likely would suffer deformities to the face and head, and the lungs were unlikely to develop beyond the 22- week point. There was less than a 10% chance that, if born, Danielle's baby would be able to breathe on its own and only a 2% chance the baby would be able to eat on its own. Danielle and her husband decided to terminate the pregnancy but could not because of the Nebraska ban. Danielle had no recourse but to endure the pain and suffering that followed. Eight days later, Danielle gave birth to a daughter, Elizabeth, who died 15 minutes later.

H.R. 36 hurts women like Vikki Stella, a diabetic, who discovered months into her pregnancy that the fetus she was carrying suffered from several major anomalies and had no chance of survival. Because of Vikki's diabetes, her doctor determined that induced labor and Caesarian section were both riskier procedures for Vikki than an abortion. Because Vikki was able to terminate the pregnancy, she was protected from the immediate and serious medical risks to her health and her ability to have children in the future was preserved.

Madam Speaker, every pregnancy is different. No politician knows, or has the right to assume he knows, what is best for a woman and her family. These are decisions that properly must be left to women to make, in consultation with their partners, doctors, and their God.

That is why the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the nation's leading medical experts on women's health, strongly opposes 20- week bans, citing the threat these laws pose to women's health.

Madam Speaker, I also strongly oppose H.R. 36 because it lacks the necessary exceptions to protect the health and life of the mother. In fact, the majority Republicans rejected an amendment offered by our colleague, Congressman Nadler, which would have added a ``health of the mother'' exception to the bill.

Madam Speaker, this may come as news to some in this body, but each year approximately 25,000 women in the United States become pregnant as a result of rape. And about a third (30%) of these rapes involved women under age 18!

Madam Speaker, last and most important, I oppose H.R. 36 because it is an unconstitutional infringement on the right to privacy, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in a long line of cases going back to Griswold v. Connecticut in 1965 and Roe v. Wade decided in 1973. In Roe v. Wade, the Court held that a state could prohibit a woman from exercising her right to terminate a pregnancy in order to protect her health prior to viability. While many factors go into determining fetal viability, the consensus of the medical community is that viability is acknowledged as not occurring prior to 24 weeks gestation.

Late Wednesday night because of how absurd H.R. 36 was--it was pulled from the floor.

By prohibiting nearly all abortions beginning at ``the probable post-fertilization age'' of 20 weeks, H.R. 36 violates this clear and long standing constitutional rule.

In striking down Texas's pre-viability abortion prohibitions, the Supreme Court stated in Roe v. Wade:

With respect to the State's important and legitimate

interest in potential life, the `compelling' point is at

viability. This is so because the fetus then presumably has

the capability of meaningful life outside the mother's womb.

State regulation protective of fetal life after viability

thus has both logical and biological justification. If the

State is interested in protecting fetal life after viability,

it may go as far as to proscribe abortion during that period,

except when it is necessary to preserve the life or health of

the mother.

Supreme Court precedents make it clear that neither Congress nor a state legislature can declare any one element--``be it weeks of gestation or fetal weight or any other single factor--as the determinant'' of viability. Colautti v. Franklin, 439 U.S. 379, 388-89 (1979). NOT can the government restrict a woman's autonomy by arbitrarily setting the number of weeks gestation so low as to effectively prohibit access to abortion services as is the case with the bill before us.

If this bill ever were to become law, it would not survive a constitutional challenge even to its facial validity. A similar 20-week provision enacted by the Utah legislature was struck down years ago as unconstitutional by the United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit because it ``unduly burden[ed] a woman's right to choose to abort a nonviable fetus.'' Jane L. v. Bangerter, 102 F.3d 1112, 1118 (10th Cir. 1996). And just last month, the Ninth Circuit struck down a 20 week ban on the ground that the U.S. Supreme Court has been ``unalterably clear'' that ``a woman has a constitutional right to choose to terminate her pregnancy before the fetus is viable.'' Isaacson v. Horne, F.3d, No. 12-16670, 2013 WL 2160171, at *1 (9th Cir. May 21, 2013).

Madam Speaker, the constitutionally protected right to privacy encompasses the right of women to choose to terminate a pregnancy before viability, and even later where continuing to term poses a threat to her health and safety.

This right of privacy was hard won and must be preserved inviolate.

Mr. Speaker, what an interesting coincidence. We are here today to hear from the President of the United States, President Barack Obama, on his State of the Union.

Just yesterday, millions of Americans honored together the legacy and the message of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. I rise today to emphasize that Dr. King's message was not a message for one particular ethnic or racial or religious group, but as I have reflected over the years, he equals the original values of this Nation.

The Constitution begins by saying we have come to order a more perfect Union. It is a small document. The Bill of Rights gives flesh to the bones of the Constitution because it gives us the freedom of religion and speech and access and the ability to move around, and the right to a jury trial and the right to due process and the right to dignity, and it freed the slaves.

But it also is a document that can free us from the biases that sometimes come because of isolation, and that was Dr. King. He sought for America her higher angels. He wanted her to be able to be true to her values. For those who fled persecution in faraway places, he wanted America to be that place that did not see color, religion, ethnicity, did not see differences because one was disabled or gay or straight, but really saw us in an equal manner.

He marched for all people, and I would hope that as we begin this session of Congress, as we listen to the President of the United States, who literally stands on the shoulders of Dr. Martin Luther King--for it was the Civil Rights Act of 1964 where many lost their lives and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 where a young woman by the name of Viola Liuzzo died right after the Selma march. As she was bringing back those protestors and marchers, she was shot dead. She was a white woman from Michigan. And so I pay tribute to Dr. King today, and I look forward to listening to the President's message that will hopefully be a message of hope and the opportunities for America to work together.

At the same time, I remember my own community. I pay tribute to a place called Freedmen's Town, founded by former slaves, and Camp Logan, a place where Black soldiers were isolated in World War I, but they had on the uniform of this country.

I pay tribute to Christie Adair, Zollie Scales, C. Anderson Davis, Reverend F.N. Williams, and, as well, S.J. Gilbert, Reverend J.J. Roberson, and many others who have walked the pathway, the leaders of the NAACP, the leaders of the Urban League, and many of our seniors who came to us to give us knowledge through their sacrifices of World War II, to the Buffalo Soldiers that we see in our community all the time, and to those who have put on the uniform through the ages. All of those persons combined make up the spirit of Dr. Martin Luther King, who leaves us with the most important statement: ``injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.''

As we now go on our new journey, let us look to respect our law enforcement but also look, as we stand alongside of the men and women in blue, that we also find a way to be able to bring justice and opportunity and, as well, fairness to the criminal justice system.

It takes all of us to be able to get that system right side up: our law enforcement officers and their training, and then, of course, the judicial system.

Let us look forward in Dr. King's spirit of coming together, no matter what our race, color, or creed, whatever our body says to do, to be able to do what is right.

I said to young people when I was speaking about Dr. King this weekend, I used one simple theme: he had a humble courage, a quiet courage. He had to make decisions in the quietness of his own presence and his own space to say, ``I am willing to do what is right even though there may be danger.''

He never announced and never spoke about words that dealt with his own personal courage. He did say that he had a peace that would allow him to see the promised land and to acknowledge to us that he might not get there with us, but he knew that we as a people--and I take that ``we'' as the American people--will get there some day.

Let us together fix Ferguson and the many Fergusons around the Nation. Let us bring comfort to parents all around this Nation. Let us be reminded of Dr. King's spirit, not just in this weekend of activities and respect and honor, but let us do it always.

I close by simply saying, thank you at home to Mr. Ovide Duncantell. Mr. Duncantell has been the visionary for our efforts in Houston on honoring Dr. Martin Luther King. He first met with Daddy King and named the street, and then we were able successfully, with Federal funds and working with Mr. Duncantell, to place a Martin Luther King memorial, the first built outside of Washington, D.C., in the last 10 years. We are excited about it. We know that his spirit is not in bricks and mortar; it is living within us.

Mr. Speaker, this morning most Americans woke up to the news that ISIS was holding two citizens of the nation-state of Japan and, in the holding of those citizens, threatening to kill them, asked Japan to give $200 million.

Mr. Speaker, does that sound like an organization that is dedicated and committed to principles however much we disagree with them, or does it sound like a group of thugs who are willing to do anything to gain money to promote their evil and dastardly acts?

The very existence of ISIS and others is not a reflection on Islam. Over the weekend, we have seen so many that have expressed opposition to these terrible acts. That is why it is so important, as we listen to the President's State of the Union, that the Congress, although with different opinions, agree to work on behalf of what is good for all of America, both building the economy but fighting against the war on terror, not only with weapons but with educating about democracy and principles and equality and trying to win the hearts and minds.

Mr. Speaker, we have a lot of work to do.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Royce and Mr. Engel and

Mr. Poe for their leadership in bringing the House together on a very important issue.

Earlier today I stood and spoke about the tragic news that we heard early this morning of two Japanese citizens being held and ISIS asking for $200 million.

The work of these individuals in Paris, France, and beyond was in their mind a connectedness to al Qaeda and others, proudly so, as they slaughtered those individuals who chose to lift up liberte in the spirit of the French people and take to the pen and assess the atmosphere of the day and provide humor to it.

Mr. Speaker, I do not comment on one person's opinion, but I do know that liberte, democracy, liberty, and our own beliefs give every human being dignity and the freedom of expression, the free press, the right to free speech and religion, and I believe these are very valuable ideals. And so this resolution speaks to that by condemning the heinousness of the act.

How many families--children, mothers, and fathers--were impacted by the loss of their loved ones? What a tragedy to see a police officer gunned down in the street who asked, as I reflect on the words as I recall them, to be left alone, and yet was shot again, and other officers in the line of duty being subjected to the violence of these individuals.

This is an intolerable situation that should not be tolerated. But we are hearing from the voices of these terrorist groups that they are now asking individuals to stay in place, to stay at home and create jihad. At the same time, I have heard voices from the Islam extended community, people of the faith, Islamic faith, and I have heard them condemn these violent acts. I have heard them condemn these acts as not reflecting their faith.

Then again, as we watched an individual slaughter Jewish persons in a kosher market purposely because of their faith, we cannot tolerate that. In one single voice, we should rise up as this resolution, H. Res. 37, says to express the affection for all people and their right to exist. That is, if you will, a universal phenomenon, to allow individual persons and individuals to exist without threat of heinous violence. As I talked about Dr. Martin Luther King, I said the very words he has commended to us: Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

As we begin this journey into a new year, I don't know how much we will be confronted with these horrible acts. I am on the Homeland Security Committee, and for a long time we were seeing the signs of what I call franchise terrorism. But I do know that it has to be a world, a global effort, but it also has to, as I began to talk about earlier, reach the hearts and minds of young men and possibly women who are being subjected to radicalism on the Internet or elsewhere.

We have to stop that bleeding, if you will, and begin to promote openly our values, which include respect for religious differences. As we do that, I believe it will be well worth the investment because we don't know where this is going to end, and we certainly need to say to the American people that we are committed, in essence that we are on top of it, and that we have many solutions to this tragic problem.

So I rise in support of H. Res. 37 for its condemnation and recognition of where we are today, and I ask for us to address this in a multitude of ways in order to have peace in this world and in our Nation.

Mr. Speaker, this year, the nation observes for the 29th time the Martin Luther King, Jr. Holiday.

Each year this day is set aside for Americans to celebrate the life and legacy of a man who brought hope and healing to America.

The Martin Luther King Holiday reminds us that nothing is impossible when we are guided by the better angels of our nature.

Dr. King's inspiring words filled a great void in our nation, and answered our collective longing to become a country that truly lived by its noblest principles.

Yet, Dr. King knew that it was not enough just to talk the talk; he had to walk the walk for his words to be credible.

And so we commemorate on this holiday the man of action, who put his life on the line for freedom and justice every day.

We honor the courage of a man who endured harassment, threats and beatings, and even bombings.

We commemorate the man who went to jail 29 times to achieve freedom for others, and who knew he would pay the ultimate price for his leadership, but kept on marching and protesting and organizing anyway.

Dr. King once said that we all have to decide whether we ``will walk in the light of creative altruism or the darkness of destructive selfishness.

``Life's most persistent and nagging question,'' he said, is ``what are you doing for others?''

And when Dr. King talked about the end of his mortal life in one of his last sermons, on February 4, 1968 in the pulpit of Ebenezer Baptist Church, even then he lifted up the value of service as the hallmark of a full life:

I'd like somebody to mention on that day Martin Luther

King, Jr. tried to give his life serving others, he said. I

want you to say on that day, that I did try in my life . . .

to love and serve humanity.

We should also remember that the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was, above all, a person who was always willing to speak truth to power. There is perhaps no better example of Dr. King's moral integrity and consistency than his criticism of the Vietnam War being waged by the Johnson Administration, an administration that was otherwise a friend and champion of civil and human rights.

Martin Luther King, Jr. was born in Atlanta, Georgia on January 15, 1929.

Martin's youth was spent in our country's Deep South, then run by Jim Crow and the Klu Klux Klan.

For young African-Americans, it was an environment even more dangerous than the one they face today.

A young Martin managed to find a dream, one that he pieced together from his readings--in the Bible, and literature, and just about any other book he could get his hands on.

And not only did those books help him educate himself, but they also allowed him to work through the destructive and traumatic experiences of blatant discrimination, and the discriminatory abuse inflicted on himself, his family, and his people.

The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. that we celebrate today could have turned out to be just another African-American who would have had to learn to be happy with what he had, and what he was allowed.

But he learned to use his imagination and his dreams to see right through those ``White Only'' signs--to see the reality that all men, and women, regardless of their place of origin, their gender, or their creed, are created equal.

Through his studies, Dr. King learned that training his mind and broadening his intellect effectively shielded him from the demoralizing effects of segregation and discrimination.

Dr. King was a dreamer. His dreams were a tool through which he was able to lift his mind beyond the reality of his segregated society, and into a realm where it was possible that white and black, red and brown, and all others live and work alongside each other and prosper.

But the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was not an idle daydreamer. He shared his visions through speeches that motivated others to join the nonviolent effort to lift themselves from poverty and isolation and create a new America where equal justice and institutions were facts of life.

In the Declaration of Independence in 1776, Thomas Jefferson wrote, ``We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all Men are Created Equal.''

At that time and for centuries to come, African-Americans were historically, culturally, and legally excluded from inclusion in that declaration.

Dr. King's ``I Have a Dream'' Speech, delivered 51 years ago, on August 28, 1963, was a clarion call to each citizen of this great nation that we still hear today.

His request was simply and eloquently conveyed--he asked America to allow of its citizens to live out the words written in its Declaration of Independence and to have a place in this nation's Bill of Rights.

The 1960s were a time of great crisis and conflict. The dreams of the people of this country were filled with troubling images that arose like lava from the nightmares of violence and the crises they had to face, both domestically and internationally.

It was the decade of the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Vietnam War, and the assassinations of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Malcolm X, Presidential Candidate Robert Kennedy, and the man we honor here today.

Dr. Martin Luther King's dream helped us turn the corner on civil rights.

It started with a peaceful march for suffrage that started in Selma, Alabama on March 7, 1965--a march that ended with violence at the hands of law enforcement officers as the marchers crossed the Edmund Pettus Bridge.

But the dream did not die there.

Dr. King led the Montgomery Bus Boycott, begun with Rosa Parks, that lasted for 381 days, and ended when the United States Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional to discriminate on account of race in the field of interstate public transportation.

Dr. King used nonviolent tactics to protest against Jim Crow laws in the South and he organized and led demonstrations for desegregation, labor and voting rights.

When the life of Dr. Martin Luther King was stolen from us, he was still a very young man, only 39 years old.

People remember that Dr. King died in Memphis, but few remember why he was there.

On that fateful day in 1968 Dr. King came to Memphis to support a strike by the city's sanitation workers.

The sanitation workers there had recently formed a chapter of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees to demand better wages and working conditions.

But the city refused to recognize their union, and when the 1,300 employees walked off their jobs the police broke up the rally with mace and police batons.

It was then that union leaders invited Dr. King to Memphis.

Despite the danger he might face entering such a volatile situation, it was an invitation he could not refuse.

Not because he longed for danger, but because the labor movement was intertwined with the civil rights movement for which he had given up so many years of his life.

The death of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., will never overshadow his life.

That is his legacy as a dreamer and a man of action.

It is a legacy of hope, tempered with peace. It is a legacy not quite yet fulfilled.

I hope that Dr. King's vision of equality under the law is never lost to us, who in the present, toil in times of unevenness in our equality.

For without that vision--without that dream--we can never continue to improve on the human condition.

For those who have already forgotten, or whose vision is already clouded with the fog of complacency, I would like to recite the immortal words of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.:

I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the

sons of former slaves and the sons of former shareholders

will be able to sit down together at the table of

brotherhood.

I have a dream that one day even the State of Mississippi,

a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering

with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an

oasis of freedom and justice.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day

live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color

of their skin, but for the content of their character.

I have a dream today.

I have a dream that one day down in Alabama with its

vicious racists, with its Governor having his lips dripping

with words of interposition and nullification--one day right

there in Alabama, little black boys and black girls will be

able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as

sisters and brothers.

I have a dream today.

I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted,

every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough place

will be made plain and the crooked places will be made

straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and

all flesh shall see it together.

Dr. King's dream did not stop at racial equality; his ultimate dream was one of human equality and dignity.

Dr. King believed that freedom and justice was the birthright of every individual in America.

It is for us, the living, to continue that fight today and forever, following in the great spirit that inspired the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.