Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thought it was extremely important to rise today to congratulate the President on recognizing the crucialness of the fight against this horrific disease Ebola in Africa.

I have been in Africa over the last 4 or 5 months. Ebola is devastating to the West African countries. They have been fighting on their own, but it has been recognized that they do not have the infrastructure to be able to contain the disease. We are sending 3,000 of our men and women of the United States military but, as equally important, we are providing for the self-made hospital containers that can be utilized to provide the infrastructure for these countries to be able to fight Ebola.

There is no medical system existing now because everyone is fighting, and therefore everyone is, in essence, ensuring that the illness is not taken care of. This is a crisis. We need to be engaged, and we need to fight against Ebola so it can be extinguished and the people in Africa can get back to their lives again.

Mr. Speaker, sometimes we have the opportunity to come and to share some of the joys of America. This month is gospel music history month, and I am delighted to be able to say that we are celebrating the history of gospel music.

In 2008, former Senator Blanche Lincoln and myself introduced a resolution to name September gospel music heritage month, and we are doing that to be able to reflect upon the writers and singers and musicians of gospel music throughout the country, in different areas around, in Appalachia and the Deep South and Midwest and the Far West and the east coast where people sing it in their own way, where soldiers sing the music and people sing it for comfort and joy.

Tonight at the Kennedy Center, we will be honoring the former Senator, Blanche Lincoln, of Arkansas with Yolanda Adams and Kirk Franklin. These are individuals who represent a long trend of history in gospel music, but the real idea is to say that America is such a free and wonderful country that we can reflect upon the goodness of so many, singing songs of joy and praise, without the degradation and the trepidation of government interference, gospel music heritage, simply to say thank you--thank you for the music over the years.

From the 1700s and 1800s and 1900s, through war and peace, gospel music has been a comfort to many Americans. I am delighted to celebrate and thank all of those who have contributed to the great history of America, gospel music history month.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 3522, the Employee Health Care Protection Act of 2014, a bill that sponsors say will permit a health insurance issuer that sold insurance coverage to employers who are mandated under the Affordable Care Act to provide insurance to their employees in 2013 to continue offering the same insurance in 2014.

I oppose H.R. 3522 for three reasons:

It does not obligate employers to provide insurance coverage for the essential health care services enumerated in the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

Provisions of the ACA that prevent discrimination based on age, pre- existing conditions and gender are not part of the plans allowed under this bill.

Finally, the bill is opposed by the Administration and will not become law.

The ACA limits the ability of insurers in the small group market to charge higher premiums based on age, preexisting health conditions and gender.

The H.R. 3522 creates exceptions to these important protections in the ACA for the next five years.

In addition, this bill allows insurers to charge small businesses higher insurance rates for coverage based on the age, gender and health status of their employees, which is prohibited by the ACA.

This will make working for small employers less attractive to workers, which can make the cost of labor higher as employers are forced to offer higher pay to attract workers while simultaneously paying higher rates for insurance.

H.R. 3522, will continue unnecessary uncertainty regarding the year- to-year cost of providing ACA mandated healthcare coverage to employees should a major health event occur or accident impact the health care cost of an employee.

The Administration strongly opposes H.R. 3522 because it threatens the health care security of hard working, middle class families.

Today, the nation is experiencing the lowest rate of health care price inflation in nearly 50 years.

We are also seeing a very slow growth in other measures of health costs, which have combined to dramatically slow the growth of small business premiums.

While health care costs are rising at low rates and choices for small businesses are improving through the Health Insurance Marketplace, this bill would be a major setback.

The Administration's transition program for non-ACA compliant plans to ACA compliant health insurance plans allows States to work to make sure that health plans remain affordable and compliant with the ACA.

We should make sure insurance plans offered to millions of small business workers do not reverse the progress made to extend quality, affordable coverage to millions of uninsured, hardworking, middle class families.

Before the ACA, ill people could only obtain high premium insurance that did not provide coverage for a pre-existing illness or medical condition.

Insurance companies could use annual caps on coverage that resulted in very high out-of-pocket costs to people who were paying for health insurance, but had no coverage for a medical condition.

The ACA brought relief to those with health insurance, those with pre-existing health conditions and the working poor where the Medicaid expansion was implemented.

Because of the health care law, for the first time, insurance companies in the individual and small group market are required to cover ten essentials, which include:

Outpatient care;

Emergency room visits;

Treatment in the hospital for inpatient care;

Care before and after child births;

Mental health and substance use disorder services: behavioral health treatment, counseling, and psychotherapy;

Prescription drugs;

Services and devices to promote recovery from injuries, disabilities or chronic condition: physical and occupational therapy, speech- language pathology, psychiatric rehabilitation, and much more;

Lab tests;

Preventive services such as counseling, screenings, and vaccines; and

Pediatric services that cover dental care and vision care for kids.

The Affordable Care Act is one of the largest expansions of general healthcare, mental health and substance abuse disorder coverage in a generation.

The Affordable Care Act

13 million Americans received $1.1 billion in rebates from their health insurance companies last year.

105 million Americans have free preventive services.

Millions of women now have free coverage for comprehensive women's preventive medical services.

100 million Americans no longer have a life-time limit on healthcare coverage.

17 million children with pre-existing conditions can no longer be denied coverage by insurers.

6.6 million young-adults up to age 26 can stay on their parents' health insurance plans.

6.3 million Seniors in the ``donut hole'' have saved $6.1 billion on their prescription drugs.

3.2 million Seniors have access to free annual wellness visits under Medicare, and

360,000 Small Businesses are using the Health Care Tax Credit to help them provide health insurance to their workers.

Statistics on Texas and the Affordable Care Act

3.8 million Texas residents receive preventative care services.

7 million Texans no longer have lifetime limits on their healthcare insurance.

300,731 young adults can remain on their parents' health insurance until age 26.

5 million Texas residents can receive a rebate check from their insurance company if it does not spend 80 percent of premium dollars on healthcare.

4,029 people with pre-existing conditions now have health insurance.

In 2014, insurance companies will be banned from: discriminating against anyone with a preexisting condition, charging higher rates based on gender or health status, enforcing lifetime dollar limits, enforcing annual dollar limits on health benefits.

Attempts to weaken or end the ACA are wrong. The unwillingness of the majority to make sure that those in our society with the greatest need health care coverage, but do not have the financial means to be denied access to healthcare are doing the nation a disservice.

I urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 3522.

Mr. Speaker, I don't believe there is one American that will forget where they were on 9/11, that crisp morning with the bright sun shining. I was here in the United States Capitol when the unimaginable occurred. We could not have fathomed that the homeland would be attacked.

I rise today to acknowledge the brave men and women who risked their lives and those that lost their lives, along with the families that still mourn. It is particularly important, now that we are in the backdrop of another terrorist act and another President has to rise to defend America. This Congress must also do so.

But we must recognize, as well, that peace is an important value that Americans love. We are peace-loving. We must do that in the name of those who

lost their lives on United Airlines Flight 93, American Airlines Flight 77, American Airlines Flight 11, and United Airlines 175.

We must recognize that we were unsuspecting of this diaster. Therefore, our pledge to those who still mourn--those who have lost their father, mother, husband, wife, child, or friend--as we debate these serious times is we are reminded that there must be no one that terrorizes us and causes us to do the wrong thing.

Whether we are Republicans or Democrats, I ask that on this day we hold a moment of personal silence, one that will reflect our love for those who were lost. Then, to take the words of George W. Bush, the President at that time:

Whether terrorists are brought to justice or justice is

brought to the terrorists, justice will be done.

A firm hand, yes; but we must be reminded of the humanitarian aspect of this and realize that, as we stand with the President and debate our further steps, we honor those who are in mourning. Let's remember 9/11 as a tribute to the Americans who sacrificed their lives.

I mourn this day.

Mr. Speaker, on this, the 13th anniversary of the attack launched against the United States on September 11, 2001, I rise to remember the victims of that horrific tragedy and those first-responders who risked, and in too many cases, sacrificed their lives to rescue the occupants of the besieged World Trade Center Towers.

The morning of September 11, 2001 is, and will always be, a day like no other. It is a day all living Americans will remember because not since Pearl Harbor had there been such a dastardly and deadly attack on American soil.

As I stand here today, my heart still grieves for those who perished on flights United Airlines 93, American Airlines 77, American Airlines 11, and United Airlines 175.

When the sun rose on the morning of September 11, none of us knew that it would end in an inferno in the magnificent World Trade Center Towers in New York City and the Pentagon and in the grassy fields of Shanksville, Pennsylvania. I stand here remembering those who still suffer, whose hearts still ache over the loss of so many innocent and interrupted lives.

My prayer is that for those who lost a father, a mother, a husband, a wife, a child, or a friend will in the days and years ahead take comfort in the certain knowledge that they have gone on to claim the greatest prize, a place in the Lord's loving arms. And down here on the ground, their memory will never die so long as any of the many of us who loved them lives.

Mr. Speaker, as hard as it is to believe, out of a tragedy so overwhelming and horrific, something good and great emerged in the aftermath of September 11. On that day there were no Republicans or Democrats. There were no Northerners or Southerners or West or East Coasters. We were not Red State or Blue State. We were all simply Americans.

On that day, we were united in our shock and anger and sadness. We were united in our resolve to defend our country and protect the freedoms that has made America the greatest country in the history of the world.

We lit candles, held hands, helped neighbors, and prayed for our country and its leaders. A united America can never be defeated as Operation Enduring Freedom showed.

The brave and valiant armed forces of the United States swiftly toppled the Taliban and liberated Afghanistan.

As President George W. Bush announced to the American people and to the world: ``Whether the terrorists are brought to justice or justice is brought to the terrorists, justice will be done.''

And though he ran and hid for almost ten years, Osama bin Ladin could not hide forever and evade the long arm of American justice, which, under the leadership of President Barack Obama, caught up with him on May 2, 2011.

Mr. Speaker, Americans take care of their own. Americans cherish freedom. Americans cherish liberty. And Americans want peace. Not just for themselves alone, but all persons in every corner of the globe.

Mr. Speaker, ensuring that America is safe and secure and protected from another attack on American soil is the least we owe to the heroic passengers on Flight 93 and to the brave firefighters of the FDNY and officers of the NYPD and the officers and civilians we lost in the Pentagon who gave faithful service to our nation.

I believe all Americans want their country to remain safe, free, and invulnerable to another cowardly attack like the one we witnessed thirteen years ago today.

We owe that much to the Americans who lost and gave their lives. We owe it to them to ensure that their children and loved ones will never again experience such pain, suffering, and loss.

We can do this. We must do this. After all, we are Americans.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably delayed in a security briefing on the issues dealing with the terrorist group ISIL and I missed the vote on the motion to recommit on H.R. 3522, the Employee Health Care Protection Act. If I had been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. Speaker, many of us are disappointed that sometime on the floor today we will spend precious time that could be utilized for our focus on ISIS, focus on increasing the minimum wage and addressing social issues across America on condemning the President for authority that he had and for, in essence, rescuing Sergeant Bergdahl. But that is, unfortunately, where we find ourselves. I am here to indicate that the President has enormous responsibilities and has been thoughtful but forceful on behalf of the American people.

As they indicated, there are many issues that we have great concern with, and last evening colleagues of mine in the Congressional Black Caucus stood on the floor of the House to address the heinous killing of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri.

First, let me thank Congressman Lacy Clay and Congressman Cleaver for their leadership. They had to be on the front lines embracing the family members and community. But those of us in distance want to extend our deepest sympathy to the family of Michael Brown and indicate that we have had great police-community relations through many of our districts overcoming some very serious obstacles, as we did in Houston, Texas. We started community-oriented policing at the leadership of former Mayor Lee P. Brown. It can be done.

On the Judiciary Committee, I have worked with funding for community- oriented policing, and, therefore, I don't take a backseat to my support of law enforcement across this Nation. The actions that were played out by the media in video, to me, took the life of a boy who had a life in front of him.

So it is crucial that this body does not leave for its recess again and not address, in some direct way, the killing of Michael Brown, hearings regarding the militarization of our police, adding more funding back to community-oriented policing, and, yes, asking the question of the utilization of firepower against an unarmed Black boy.

The epidemic of the killing of Black men is real; you can see the numbers. Those of us who are mothers who have to tell our sons how they ought to respond when they are on the street--educated, military personnel, high school graduates or not--this is something that all of America should be concerned about because we are America. I hope to be part of the solution and not the problem.

We will be looking to introduce legislation that addresses the question of how we utilize equipment that was given for natural disasters and fighting terrorism, not to go against unarmed civilians. That is, I believe, a charge for this body.

Let me also indicate that, as a member of the Homeland Security Committee, having just come from the Mideast, I know that ISIS is real, and I believe that the President had a strategy. It was a deliberative strategy. It was one that was not to be spoken of precipitously or to announce what you are going to do next. But as he engages in consultation with our leadership, it is crucial that he engages in consultation with Members of Congress. I know that that is the President's effort. He has done so in the past.

We have willing allies in the Mideast who are willing to stand up with United States leadership on strategy where they are in the front. We must define what boots on the ground means, what does the 1,000 individuals who are there now who are military personnel. We must find a way to address Syria without collaborating with President Assad. And we must be reminded that the religious minorities in Iraq are still under siege and attack, and there are, in the wake of those attacks, often children that we must address.

We must be able to provide international resources for the children who are left after the bloody siege of ISIS. And then we must explain to the American people that we have their national security in our hands, that we realize that the rising numbers wanting to attack Syria and wanting to continue to attack Iraq in those areas where ISIS is is because of the fear of the homeland.

As I indicated, as the senior member on Homeland Security, we get that. We will be holding a hearing in the Border and Maritime Security Subcommittee, where I serve as ranking member, along with my chairwoman, Congresswoman Miller. I have introduced legislation as an aside to declare the Russian rebels as terrorists. I look forward to looking at this question, as Congressman Wolf has, this issue of those with U.S. passports and this question of how do we keep them from flying, adding them to the no-fly list. We are looking at ways of getting our walls around those individuals being able to attack the homeland.

Again, we have many issues to come together on as a body. We must address the crisis of the killing of Michael Brown. But we also have to say that we can do it together. We must address this crisis of dealing with ISIS. It is real, it can be assessed, and it can be handled. Collaborate with our Western allies and our friends in the Mideast. It is our duty, and we must do it now.

I thank the gentleman for his courtesy, for his time, and for his very eloquent words.

Very quickly, Madam Speaker, as I indicated in the Rules Committee, what poor timing for a resolution, in the midst of a crisis with ISIS, to be able to criticize the President for using his constitutional powers, and now, in a debate on ISIS, why he isn't doing something. The American people are confused. This is the wrong time for the wrong resolution. It has no purpose.

I am grateful that Sergeant Bergdahl is home. We don't leave our soldiers behind. We looked at the heinous killing of our two precious journalists. Now, we are asking for the great leadership of this administration, which it has been doing, but this resolution is wrong.

It is misdirected in law, and it is conflicting with law, and we have already addressed the question. I am not condemning the administration. I believe that this resolution should be pulled off the floor.

Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule governing debate of H. Res. 644, and the underlying resolution.

I oppose the resolution because at bottom it is nothing more than another partisan attack on the President and will make it difficult for this body and the Administration to find the common ground and goodwill needed to devise and support policies needed to address the real threats and challenges facing our country, particularly the threat posed by ISIS.

H. Res. 644, a resolution disapproving of the Obama administration's failure to provide Congress with 30 days advance notice before making the transfer of certain Guantanamo detainees that secured the release of an American soldier, U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl.

Sgt. Bergdahl's health was poor and rapidly deteriorating at the time his release from captivity was secured by his Commander-in-Chief, President Obama, who speaking for the nation, said on June 3, 2014 in response to critics of his decision:

The United States has always had a pretty sacred rule, and

that is: we don't leave our men or women in uniform behind.

Regardless of the circumstances, we still get an American

soldier back if he's held in captivity. Period. Full stop.

Madam Speaker, the resolution condemns the Obama Administration for failing to comply with the 30-day advance notice requirement imposed by Section 1034 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66; 10 U.S.C. 801 note) and section 8111 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2014 (Public Law 113-76).

I disagree for several reasons. First, as Defense Secretary Hagel testified before the House Armed Services Committee on June 11, 2014, ``this was not simply a detainee transfer, but a military operation with very high risk and a very short window of opportunity that we didn't want to jeopardize--both for the sake of Sergeant Bergdahl, and our operators in the field who put themselves at great risk to secure his return.''

As a military operation, rather than a routine transfer of detainees, the President had the constitutional authority as Commander-in-Chief to authorize this sensitive military operation for which time was of the essence.

The resolution put forward by the House majority assumes that the provisions of Section 1034 of National Defense Authorization Act trump the President's constitutional authority under Article II if the two are in conflict. This clearly is an erroneous assumption since Article VI of the Constitution makes clear that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land and prevails in the event of a conflict with federal or state law. See, e.g., INS v. CHADHA, 462 U.S. 919 (1983) (federal law conferring ``legislative veto'' power to be exercised by only House of Congress held unconstitutional).

But even if it were less clear whether a conflict existed between a federal law and the President's authority as Commander-in-Chief, as Justice Robert Jackson pointed out 62 years ago in the famous ``Steel Seizure Case,'' Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579, 640 (1952), it does not automatically follow that the President has ``broken the law'' if he relies upon his claimed constitutional authority:

[B]ecause the President does not enjoy unmentioned powers

does not mean that the mentioned ones should be narrowed by a

niggardly construction. Some clauses could be made almost

unworkable, as well as immutable, by refusal to indulge some

latitude of interpretation for changing times. I have

heretofore, and do now, give to the enumerated powers the

scope and elasticity afforded by what seem to be reasonable,

practical implications instead of the rigidity dictated by a

doctrinaire textualism.

Additionally, Madam Speaker, it should be pointed out that the constitutionality of Section 1035, the statutory provision which the resolution asserts the President has violated, has never been upheld by any court, and certainly not upheld against a challenge that it impermissibly infringes upon the President's duty as Commander in Chief to protect the lives of Americans abroad and to protect U.S. servicemembers.

The Administration strongly objected to the inclusion of Section 1035 in the National Defense Authorization Act for 2014, on the ground that it unwisely and inappropriately interferes with the Executive Branch's ability to manage detainees in a time of armed conflict.

Indeed, the President has informed Congress of his objection to the inclusion of these and similar provisions in prior versions of the Defense Authorization and Defense Appropriations Act in law, and it is interesting to note that they only began to be inserted after President Obama assumed the office.

Madam Speaker, not only is the resolution before us ill-conceived and unwise, its timing could not be worse.

There are only a few days left before the Congress adjourns. We need to devote all our time on addressing the real problems facing the American people, like raising the minimum wage, making college more affordable, passing immigration reform, and responding to the threat to the security of the nation and the homeland by ISIS.

Madam Speaker, the threat posed by ISIS is serious and real and the President has reached out to Congress to work with him to develop a unified and international response to meet the threat.

And tomorrow evening, the President will address the nation on the nature of the ISIS threat and the actions the United States will take to protect the security of the nation and the homeland.

In the midst of this international crisis, it does not help or strengthen our country for the House to be debating a partisan resolution condemning the President and Commander-in-Chief.

In concluding, let me quote again Defense Secretary Hagel:

The options available to us to recover Sergeant Bergdahl

were few, and far from perfect. But they often are in

wartime, and especially in a complicated war like we have

been fighting in Afghanistan for 13 years. Wars are messy and

full of imperfect choices.

In the decision to rescue Sergeant Bergdahl, we complied

with the law, and we did what we believed was in the best

interests of our country, our military, and Sergeant

Bergdahl.

The President has constitutional responsibilities and

authorities to protect American citizens and members of our

armed forces. That's what he did. America does not leave its

soldiers behind.

We made the right decision, and we did it for the right

reasons--to bring home one of our people.

I hold to the beliefs of the role of Congress in any declaration of war and the value and purpose of the Administration adhering to the rules of consultation with Congress. In this instance the administration explained its reasoning and Congress already through committee hearings expressed its disagreement. This resolution is nothing but political and wholly without purpose and just simply wrong.

Madam Speaker, we should not waste this precious time remaining on matters intended to score political points or to hold the current President to standards we never applied to his predecessors.

I urge all Members to join me in opposing the rule and the underlying resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I think it is important to take note of the importance of this debate and, as well, the respect that we as Members of Congress owe each other and this institution.

I have long said that our longevity comes not only because of the democratic principles of our Constitution, but because there is the groundwork of the Founding Fathers and those who took to the floor to debate such raging issues as the question of slavery in the 1800s. Each time we are given the microphone, I think that we should adhere to that respect, and each time we put our pen to paper to create legislation, it should equally be based on the grounds of respect and understanding of the constitutional divisions of the three branches of government.

Today I think we have failed. This is, as I said, a personal attack against the President. If we would read the resolution, we would see five items that completely dictate the failure of the Obama administration.

Let me say that all of us concede the point that section 1035 that was added under the Obama administration in 2012--or, more recently-- does ask the President to give a 30-day notice to Congress. No other President has been asked to do that.

The President has been very clear on his intent to close Guantanamo. Many of us have been to Guantanamo. But the issue before us was not an effort to close Guantanamo. And so to suggest that there was malicious intent of this President is, from my perspective, showing disrespect and dishonor to us, the institution, and the three branches of government.

Let me be very clear. There is a debate on the powers that the President has under the war powers. Some say there is a statute that says he had to notify us. But there was an explanation. This very strong committee, the Armed Services Committee, with the chairman, whom I respect, and the ranking member, had a very thorough hearing that many of us were able to read some of the transcript where the Secretary of Defense came and explained.

I think one of the key elements for me as a member of Homeland Security is that the Secretary made it very clear that this was a military operation with very high risk, as spoken by Secretary Hagel on June 11, 2014, and a very short window of opportunity that we didn't want to jeopardize, both for the sake of Sergeant Bergdahl--there is a sentence that congratulates us for not leaving our precious treasure behind--and our operators in the field who put themselves at great risk to secure this return. There are those of us who remember that brief glimpse that we had of the rescue. Our men and women swooped down and picked up Sergeant Bergdahl. It was a military action.

This is an unnecessary resolution, Mr. Speaker. It is wrongly condemning. The President had authority and he explained what the action was.

Vote against this resolution. It is untimely and wrong. Vote against it.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule governing debate of H. Res. 644, and the underlying resolution.

I oppose the resolution because at bottom it is nothing more than another partisan attack on the President and will make it difficult for this body and the Administration to find the common ground and goodwill needed to devise and support policies needed to address the real threats and challenges facing our country, particularly the threat posed by ISIS.

H. Res. 644, a resolution disapproving of the Obama administration's failure to provide Congress with 30 days advance notice before making the transfer of certain Guantanamo detainees that secured the release of an American soldier, U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl.

Sgt. Bergdahl's health was poor and rapidly deteriorating at the time his release from captivity was secured by his Commander-in-Chief, President Obama, who speaking for the nation, said on June 3, 2014 in response to critics of his decision:

The United States has always had a pretty sacred rule, and

that is: we don't leave our men or women in uniform behind.

Regardless of the circumstances, we still get an American

soldier back if he's held in captivity. Period. Full stop.

Mr. Speaker, the resolution condemns the Obama Administration for failing to comply with the 30-day advance notice requirement imposed by Section 1034 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66; 10 U.S.C. 801 note) and section 8111 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2014 (Public Law 113-76).

I disagree for several reasons. First, as Defense Secretary Hagel testified before the House Armed Services Committee on June 11, 2014, ``this was not simply a detainee transfer, but a military operation with very high risk and a very short window of opportunity that we didn't want to jeopardize--both for the sake of Sergeant Bergdahl, and our operators in the field who put themselves at great risk to secure his return.''

As a military operation, rather than a routine transfer of detainees, the President had the constitutional authority as Commander-in-Chief to authorize this sensitive military operation for which time was of the essence.

The resolution put forward by the House majority assumes that the provisions of Section 1034 of National Defense Authorization Act trump the President's constitutional authority under Article II if the two are in conflict. This clearly is an erroneous assumption since Article VI of the Constitution makes clear that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land and prevails in the event of a conflict with federal or state law. See, e.g., INS v. CHADHA, 462 U.S. 919 (1983) (federal law conferring ''legislative veto'' power to be exercised by only House of Congress held unconstitutional).

But even if it were less clear whether a conflict existed between a federal law and the President's authority as Commander-in-Chief, as Justice Robert Jackson pointed out 62 years ago in the famous ``Steel Seizure Case,'' Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579, 640 (1952), it does not automatically follow that the president has ``broken the law'' if he relies upon his claimed constitutional authority:

[B]ecause the President does not enjoy unmentioned powers

does not mean that the mentioned ones should be narrowed by a

niggardly construction. Some clauses could be made almost

unworkable, as well as immutable, by refusal to indulge some

latitude of interpretation for changing times. I have

heretofore, and do now, give to the enumerated powers the

scope and elasticity afforded by what seem to be reasonable,

practical implications, instead of the rigidity dictated by a

doctrinaire textualism.

Additionally, Mr. Speaker, it should be pointed out that the constitutionality of Section 1035, the statutory provision which the resolution asserts the President has violated, has never upheld by any court, and certainly not upheld against a challenge that it impermissibly infringes upon the President's duty as Commander in Chief to protect the lives of Americans abroad and to protect U.S. service members.

The Administration strongly objected to the inclusion of Section 1035 in the National Defense Authorization Act for 2014, on the ground that it unwisely and inappropriately interferes with the Executive Branch's ability to manage detainees in a time of armed conflict.

Indeed, the President has informed Congress of his objection to the inclusion of these and similar provisions in prior versions of the Defense Authorization and Defense Appropriations Act is law, and it is interesting to note that they only began to be inserted after President Obama assumed the office.

Mr. Speaker, not only is the resolution before us ill-conceived and unwise, its timing could not be worse.

There are only a few days left before the Congress adjourns. We need to devote all our time on addressing the real problems facing the American people, like raising the minimum wage, making college more affordable, passing immigration reform, and responding to the threat to the security of the nation and the homeland by ISIS.

Mr. Speaker, the threat posed by ISIS is serious and real and the President has reached out to Congress to work with him to develop a unified and international response to meet the threat.

And tomorrow evening, the President will address the nation on the nature of the ISIS threat and the actions the United States will take to protect the security of the nation and the homeland.

In the midst of this international crisis, it does not help or strengthen our country for the House to be debating a partisan resolution condemning the President and Commander-in-Chief.

In concluding, let me quote again Defense Secretary Hagel:

The options available to us to recover Sergeant Bergdahl

were few, and far from perfect. But they often are in

wartime, and especially in a complicated war like we have

been fighting in Afghanistan for 13 years. Wars are messy and

full of imperfect choices.

In the decision to rescue Sergeant Bergdahl, we complied

with the law, and we did what we believed was in the best

interests of our country, our military, and Sergeant

Bergdahl.

The President has constitutional responsibilities and

authorities to protect American citizens and members of our

armed forces. That's what he did. America does not leave its

soldiers behind.

We made the right decision, and we did it for the right

reasons--to bring home one of our people.

Mr. Speaker, we should not waste this precious remaining on matters intended to score political points or to hold the current president to standards we never applied to his predecessors.

I urge all Members to join me in opposing the rule and the underlying resolution.

Madam Speaker, let me indicate that as our Members come back from the work recess--and I think it is important to establish that although 1 or 2 vacation days may have been taken and Members got a chance to see their families, they were working--and I am going to take the optimistic approach and say that the American people want to see us working over the next couple of days.

I believe we can collectively, with the President, address the terrorist threat of ISIS. Those of us who had a chance to be in the Middle East know how serious an impact that it has on the homeland, but I also believe that we can put on the floor of the House a comprehensive immigration bill, raise the minimum wage, provide for pay equity, and provide for the education of our children by bringing down the high interest rates for higher education.

Madam Speaker, it should be the rule of this House and the rule of the other body to work on behalf of the American people. Yes, we were working in our districts.

Now, we need to come and work on behalf of them and to ensure that the national security of our homeland is protected, to be reminded of those lives that were lost as we approach 9/11, and to raise the minimum wage, and to save lives by passing comprehensive immigration reform.

As a Member from the border State of Texas, I know we can do this.

Mr. Speaker, it was really good to hear the initial description of Congressman Mickey Leland. He loved being called Mickey Leland. Although his full name is George Thomas, Mickey was what he went by. He was a person of the people.

Today, I stand here in support of H.R. 78, designating the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 4110 Almeda Road in Houston, Texas, as the George Thomas ``Mickey'' Leland Post Office Building.

I thank the ranking member and the chair of the full committee of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee for their kindness and their diligence in helping to bring this to the floor of the House. It is appropriate to have it in this year, the 25th commemoration of Mickey's death, along with 15 other brave individuals who were flying to provide lifesaving commodities for those who were starving and dying.

This bill will acknowledge this 25th year that we have lost Mickey Leland. It will acknowledge the charitableness of his heart. It will acknowledge he was a person who was willing to sacrifice his own life. It will also acknowledge that he was our fellow colleague in the United States Congress.

I am glad that we are doing this, and I again thank the committee because it is important to note that, over the years of this very historic, hallowed institution, Members have come and they have served. That should be our continuing challenge: to serve America and to serve the world.

Mickey was born in November 1944. He was born to George Thomas and Alice Raines in Lubbock, Texas. Soon, Mom brought the family to Houston, Texas--to our advantage and benefit. He thrived in this city, where as a youth he enjoyed a successful career as a high school sports star at historic Phillis Wheatley High School in Houston, Texas, which is still standing. In fact, as I speak on the floor today, there are advocates trying to preserve the historic old Wheatley High School where Mickey went to school.

Mickey entered Texas Southern University in 1965 and received a bachelor of science degree in pharmacy in 1970. In fact, we called Mickey ``the pharmacist,'' as a nickname. It introduced him to caring about people and health care.

Mickey was so good, he served after graduation as an instructor of clinical pharmacy at TSU for 1 year. While working there, he established a door-to-door outreach campaign in low-income neighborhoods to educate people

about medical care options and to perform preliminary health screenings.

Can you imagine, Mickey Leland, a graduate of the Texas Southern University pharmacy school, helping those poor people who really had no access to health care?

His first effort in public service was to work with the City of Houston health officials to set up community health clinics. We could call him the father of that endeavor. Then, of course, he also was an activist trying to improve the civil rights of African Americans in the fifth ward community, and also involved himself in the Jensen Medical Referral Service.

In 1972, he was elected to the 88th session of the Texas House of Representatives. He was one of the first groups of African Americans to be elected to that body.

Heretofore, prior to the 1965 Voting Rights Act, there were no African Americans of number in the Texas State Legislature, including the Honorable Barbara Jordan, who was able to be elected as well during that time after the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

He was reelected for 2 years, two terms, serving until 1978, and then, during that tenure, he served on the senate-house conference committee as a member of the house appropriations committee, and then came to the United States Congress.

He will be remembered in the United States Congress as someone who helped create and support health maintenance organizations, HMOs. He did that through the State of Texas.

He then came to Congress in January of 1978, was elected in 1978 to the 18th Congressional District, and he served 10 years here. He was chosen as a freshman majority whip and an at-large majority whip, chaired the Congressional Black Caucus, advocated for ethnic diversity through affirmative action and broadcast, served as a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, and he and Bill Emerson established the Select Committee on Hunger.

Now, my colleagues, this is where his heart showed even larger than it did in his local community. He was an effective spokesperson for ending the suffering of hunger in the United States, and he joined with his good friend, Republican William ``Bill'' Emerson, who represented Missouri's Eighth Congressional District. His wife later represented him.

Through the power of bipartisanship, Mickey Leland and Bill began a mission that still resonates today--that food is a basic right and should never be used as a weapon.

Today we still have the Mickey Leland hunger center, of which I serve on the board, and many are still advocating around the world, Mickey Leland Fellows who are around the world and who are fighting against hunger.

Bill died in office and, as I indicated, his wife took his place.

But Mickey married, in 1983, his wonderful wife, Alison. His beautiful sons, Jarrett David and twins Austin Mickey and Cameron George Leland, and his mother, Alice Raines, of course, are still living.

In 1983, in the midst of the civil war, the nation of Ethiopia experienced the worst famine in nearly 100 years, which led to more than 400,000 deaths. Mickey heard that cry, and so the Speaker of the House asked him to go there to Sudan in 1985.

The hunger was so overwhelming he came back and passed the African Famine and Relief and Recovery Act of 1985. He then continued to serve on the Select Committee on Hunger, led by himself and Bill Emerson, and provided $8 million for a vitamin A program.

Mickey loved people. He loved solving their problems, and so it was maybe fate that he would die on August 7, 1989, on the side of an Ethiopian mountain with other brave individuals, such as Hugh Anderson Johnson, Jr., and Patrice Yvonne Johnson, two of his aides; Joyce Francine Williams, an aide to Ron Dellums; Robert Woods, a political aide at the American Embassy; Gladys Gilbert, a staff person with USAID; and Thomas Warrick, the USAID representative, and many others who were on that flight with him.

I can only say that, in closing, it is an honor to introduce this legislation, and I would ask my colleagues to support this legislation, not in the honor of a colleague so much as in honor of an American who cared enough about people to be willing to sacrifice his life.

I ask my colleagues to support this legislation in the 25th year of the commemoration of the death of the Honorable Mickey Leland, George Thomas Mickey Leland, the late Congressperson of the 18th Congressional District.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 78, which designates the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 4110 Almeda Road in Houston Texas as the ``George Thomas `Mickey' Leland Post Office Building.''

I thank the Chair and Ranking Member of the House Oversight and Government Reform for taking up consideration of H.R. 78, which I introduced to honor our beloved former colleague George Thomas `Mickey' Leland, by having a post office in the 18th Congressional District designated in his name.

My thanks to Congressman Doug Collins and Congressman Danny Davis for management of the floor debate on this bill.

In 1983, Mickey Leland married Alison Clark Walton, and fathered three wonderful children, Jarrett David; and twins, Austin Mickey and Cameron George Leland, who were born on January 14, 1990, following his tragic death.

On November 27, 1944, George Thomas Leland, III was born to George Thomas Leland, II and Alice Raines, in Lubbock, Texas.

Mickey Leland's mother moved the family, which included his brother William Gaston Leland, to Houston where she worked in a drugstore and later became a teacher.

Mickey Leland thrived in the city of Houston where as a youth he enjoyed a successful career as a high school sports star at the Phyllis Wheatley High School in Houston.

In 1965, Mickey graduated in the top 10% of his class from Wheatley High School and enrolled in Texas Southern University (TSU), where he received a Bachelor of Science degree in Pharmacy in 1970.

Mickey Leland had heart, passion and brains and he used all three to the benefit of the poor and working poor living in the city of Houston.

Following his graduation from TSU he was hired as an Instructor of Clinical Pharmacy at TSU from 1970-1971. This was not enough for Mickey who saw so much work that needed to be done for those in need.

While working as a TSU instructor he established a ``door-to-door'' outreach campaign in low-income neighborhoods to educate people about their medical care options and to perform preliminary health screenings.

Benjamin Mayes once said, ``The tragedy of life is often not in our failure, but rather in our complacency; not in our doing too much, but rather in our doing too little; not in our living above our ability, but rather in our living below our capacities.''

Mickey Leland was not complacent--one of his first efforts in public service was to work with city of Houston health officials to set up community health clinics.

Mickey Leland, as an active member of the Black Community Action Team, (``Black Cats'') worked towards other reform measures, which led to the establishment of the health system for Casa del Amigos.

In Fifth Ward, Houston, Mickey Leland helped initiate a free community health clinic called the Jensen Medical Referral Service. Long before the passage of the Affordable Care Act, he was creating an opportunity for universal health care for poorest of the poor living in the 18th Congressional District.

In 1972, he made the full transition to public servant when he ran for and won election to the Texas House of Representatives to represent the 88th District of Houston Texas. He was reelected to successive two- year terms, serving in the Texas House until 1978.

Mickey Leland was the first African-American legislator in the Texas State legislature to serve on the Senate-House conference Committee as a member of the House Appropriations Committee.

During his time as a member of the Texas House of Representatives Mickey Leland is remembered for promoting legislation that provided Texas residents access to generic prescription medication; and for his support of employment opportunities for minorities.

He also supported the creation of universal access to health care for Texas residents through establishment of Health Maintenance Organizations (HMO's).

In 1978, Mickey Leland expanded his public service to include the entire 18th Congressional District when he was elected to Congress, succeeding the legendary Congresswoman Barbara Jordan.

Congressman Leland served in the United States House of Representatives for nearly 10 years.

He was chosen Freshman Majority Whip in his first term, and later served twice as At-Large Majority Whip.

Martin Luther King, said, ``Human progress is neither automatic nor inevitable . . . Every step toward the goal of justice requires sacrifice, suffering, and struggle; the tireless exertions and passionate concern of dedicated individuals.''

During his time in Congress Mickey Leland engaged in tireless and passionate concern for others. As a member of Congress, he Chaired the Congressional Black Caucus; Advocated for ethnic diversity through affirmative action in broadcast employment both on and off camera to promote responsible and realistic television and cable programming; served as a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee; chaired the Subcommittee on Postal Operations and Services; served on the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service and the Subcommittee on Compensation and Employment; established the Select Committee on Hunger.

Mickey Leland was an effective spokesman for those suffering from hunger in the United States and he joined with Republican Congressman William ``Bill'' Emerson, who represented Missouri's 8th Congressional District, to create the House Select Committee on Hunger.

Through the power of bipartisanship Mickey Leland and Bill Emerson began a mission that still resonates today--that food is a basic human right--and should never be used as a weapon.

The Select Committee on Hunger led by Mickey Leland and Bill Emerson is credited gaining Congressional approval of an $8 million annually appropriation for a developing the nation's Vitamin A program that is believed to have reduced child mortality.

The anti-hunger committee also worked to improve hunger conditions for impoverished neighborhoods in the United States.

Bill Emerson died while in office and was succeed by his wife Jo Ann, who served the people of Missouri's 8th District for many years.

In 1983, in the midst of civil war, the nation of Ethiopia experienced the worse famine in nearly 100 years, which led to more than 400,000 deaths. A significant drought contributed to the famine, but it had more to do with the war that impeded aid and the violence that was visited upon people who were displaced as they searched for food.

He led the effort for the Africa Famine Relief and Recovery Act of 1985. The legislation provided $800 million in food and humanitarian relief supplies.

He was asked by then Speaker Tip O'Neill to lead a bipartisan Congressional delegation to assess conditions and relief requirements in Ethiopia.

Mickey Leland's trip to the Sudan in the spring of 1989, made a tremendous impression on him, which made his mission against hunger a personal commitment to help the Sudanese refugees in Ethiopia.

Throughout his time in the House of Representatives his commitment to end hunger and homelessness became his mission and now it is his legacy.

Nelson Mandela observed that, ``If you talk to a man in a language he understands, that goes to his head. If you talk to him in his language, that goes to his heart.''

Mickey Leland knew how to speak to the hearts of people to move them to action with the goal of relieving suffering where he found it.

The international attention Congressman Leland brought to the plight of famine victims in Ethiopia by his personal commitment to bring non- governmental assistance to support government efforts saved thousands of lives.

Mickey Leland met personally with Pope John Paul II about food aid in Africa.

Pope John Paul II once said, ``Have no fear of moving into the unknown. Simply step out fearlessly knowing that I am with you, therefore no harm can befall you; all is very, very well. Do this in complete faith and confidence.''

While Chairing the Congressional Black Caucus he proudly presented the first awards the Caucus had ever given to non-black recipients: Rock musician Bob Geldorf and news person Ted Koppel.

Bob Geldorf was honored for his Band Aid concert and fundraising efforts for Africa Famine victims; and Ted Koppel was honored for his news stories on the African famine.

On Leland's sixth visit to Africa on August 7, 1989, his plane crashed near Gambela, Ethiopia on a mountainside on his way to visit the Fugnido refugee camp on the Sudan-Ethiopian border. The camp held more than 300,000 Sundanese escaping famine and war in their adjacent country.

The plane, carrying sixteen people, was found after a six day search in southwestern Ethiopia.

Congressman Leland was joined on that fateful flight by: Hugh Anderson Johnson Jr.; Patrice Yvonne Johnson, both his Congressional aides; Joyce Francine Williams, an aide to fellow Congressman Ronald V. Dellums, who served as an expert on child nutrition; Y. Ivan Tillen, a New York businessman and friend of Congressman Leland's; Robert Woods, a political and economic officer at the American Embassy in Addis Ababa; Gladys Gilbert, a special projects officer for the mission of the U.S. Agency for International Development attached to the embassy; Thomas Worrick, the acting AID representative in Ethiopia, and Worrick's wife, Roberta.

Also seven Ethiopians were killed including Debebe Agonofer, an Ethiopian agricultural economist with the AID mission, and six other Ethiopians, including the plane's crew of three.

Mickey Leland's dedication and service were honored at services throughout the State of Texas and in Washington, DC. The U.S. Congress named the Mickey Leland Harris County Courthouse Annex located in the city of Houston in his name. TSU honored Mickey Leland and Barbara Jordon by dedicating the School of Public Affairs as the ``Barbara Jordan and Mickey Leland School of Public Affairs.''

Mickey Leland was laid to rest in accordance to his wishes in a plain pine coffin, under an oak tree in Houston's Golden Gate Cemetery located in his former neighborhood.

Mickey Leland we stand on this floor among the shadows of yesterday and the dreams of tomorrow to honor you for what you have done in far too short a lifetime

There is much more to the life of Mickey Leland that I want to share with my colleagues who will be voting on this bill to name a Post Office in his name. His life's work to end famine, hunger, and provide access to health care to the poor are tremendous in and of themselves, but he contributed much more to the lives of people he touched.

Mickey Leland was a person who loved people and found great joy in gatherings where he could meet new people or share moments with family and friends. He had a great sense of humor and would soon have others laughing at one of his stories or an account of a personal experience.

He accomplished a great deal and still had time to encourage young people to pursue careers in public service. In 1980, Mickey Leland and his close friends J. Kent Friedman and Vic Samuels founded the Mickey Leland Kibbutzim Internship. Mickey Leland was so deeply moved by his visit to Israel in 1979 that he wanted other young people to share that experience. His admiration for the Kibbutzim Movement, and his own childhood experiences of growing up in poverty inspired him to create a program to fund urban youths' travel to the Holy Land.

The Mickey Leland Kibbutzim Internship has benefited outstanding high school students from the fifth Congressional District who demonstrated leadership skills allowing them to have travel to Israel.

To honor his legacy and commitment to youth, the Leland Fellowship Program at the University of Houston was initiated and launched.

The Leland Fellowship Program supports historically, economically disadvantaged students who may want to pursue employment opportunities as congressional staff members.

Leland Fellows are provided with a monthly stipend and round-trip airfare, as well as paid housing. Upon successful completion of the program, interns earn 3-12 upper level hours in political science.

Mickey Leland as Chair of the House Post Office and Civil Service Subcommittee on Postal Operations and Services championed the United States Postal Service--which remains one of the world's most efficient low cost national postal systems.

In 1987, when the Postal service considered closing a 52-year-old post office in Philadelphia he raised questions about the buildings future after the announcement to abolish 87 jobs.

Mickey Leland championed the cause of our men and women of the Postal Service by acknowledging that they were then and remain the most productive and efficient in the entire world. He chaired the committee at a time when the Postal Service was undergoing change and renovations that spoke to its age and the demand for its services by the American public.

It is the one agency that touches every home and business in the United States 6 days a week. The Post Office for roughly a hundred million Americans is the face of the Federal government.

Mickey Leland reminded us that life is made by those who take the hard road and tough challenges. Your mission to change how America viewed famine and hunger was monumental because it saved the lives of millions through domestic and international food programs that you created or inspired.

First Corinthians Chapter 12 verse 11 through 13 reads ``When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things. For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known. And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.''

George Thomas ``Mickey'' Leland once was a child, but he grew into a man and knew in part the wages of hunger and famine and it was enough to set his course in life to relieve the suffering of people no matter where they were or who they were. He demonstrated charity in the truest sense of the word.

I was proud to call you a friend and mentor--and I am honored to stand before our colleagues in the United States House of Representatives to affirm your impact on the city of Houston, this nation and the world.

I thank my colleagues who join me in honoring former Congressman Mickey Leland by naming the Post Office located at 4110 Almeda Road in Houston, Texas, as the ``George Thomas `Mickey' Leland Post Office Building.''

This post office will be a living memorial to a dedicated public servant. It has been over 25 years since we lost the Honorable George Thomas ``Mickey'' Leland.

I ask that my colleagues in the House of Representatives honor the life and legacy of Honorable George Thomas ``Mickey'' Leland by passing

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Con. Res. 107, a resolution expressing the sense of the House of Representatives in support of the State of Israel as it defends itself against rocket attacks launched by Hamas.

These deadly rocket attacks launched from Gaza into Israel by Hamas against unarmed civilian populations are deserving of the condemnation of this House and the international community.

Mr. Speaker, since the most recent airstrikes began, hundreds of persons--Israelis and Palestinians--have been killed and many hundreds more injured.

No sovereign nation can be expected to stand idly by while unprovoked acts of violence are perpetrated against its citizens by terrorists or foreign entities.

Israel has, as do all countries under the law of nations, the right to exist and the right to self-defense. This means Israel is allowed to take all necessary, appropriate, and measured actions required to keep its people safe. Hamas should cease using their fellow citizens as human shields.

But at the end of the day, the peace and justice we all seek will come from the parties acting in good faith to find a just and lasting peace that recognizes Israel's right to exist, renounces violence and terrorism, and achieves the two-state solution.

Among the most important things that can be done to bring peace and the two-state solution into being and to halt the suffering is for the Administration to redouble its efforts to mediate a peaceful resolution of the conflict and for the President Mahmoud Abbas to exercise stronger leadership in rallying and uniting the Palestinian people under the banner of peace with justice.

Mr. Speaker, I condemn launching rockets into civilian populations. In addition to death and destruction, such attacks instill fear and cause suffering to innocent men, women, and children.

Finally, I offer sympathies for the loss of life among the Israelis and the Palestinians.

As the great theologian St. Augustine reminds us, ``peace is the necessary condition in which people can be free to work out their eternal destiny.''

Madam Speaker, I rise to speak in strong opposition to H.R. 5230, a bill to make supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2014 to address the humanitarian crisis on our nation's southern border.

As a senior member of the House Committee on Homeland Security and the Ranking Member on the Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security, I have visited the border and seen the children that this bill intends to help.

This bill offers too little in funding to address the need that over 50 states are attempting to address by providing shelter and assistance to the tens of thousands of unaccompanied minors who are now living in our country.

Over two-thirds of the language in H.R. 5230 will make significant changes in existing law or creates new law regarding immigration policy without going through the committees of jurisdiction such as the House Committees on Homeland Security, Judiciary, and Foreign Affairs.

H.R. 5230 contains too much language that is legislative such as:

The bill makes significant changes to 2008 Trafficking Victims Protection Act. This change will subject all children to the initial screening process that now applies only to children from Mexico and Canada; erects a new expedited immigration court screening for any children who pass the initial screening; prohibits administrative appeals from children ordered removed through the new expedited process; requires detention of certain children who demonstrate a credible fear of persecution throughout the pendency of their asylum proceedings; establishes new, high burdens of proof; and sets up a principle of ``Last In, First Out'' in the adjudication process.

The bill prohibits the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture from impeding, denying, or restricting the activities of U.S. Customs and Border Protection on Federal land located within 100 Miles of the U.S./Mexico border--This issue has already been addressed. Both Interior and Agriculture have existing Memorandum of Understanding (MOUs) with U.S. Customs and Border Protection and all these agencies, as well as the GAO, have testified that these agreements are working and that federal land management laws and activities do not impair border security.

The bill provides too few emergency immigration judges--the bill only requires the Department of Justice to designate up to 40 temporary immigration judges within 14 days of enactment of this legislation. Then the bill permits hiring of retired judges or magistrate judges, or the reassignment of current immigration judges, to conduct expedited hearings for unaccompanied alien children to try to meet the new requirement that their cases be heard within 7 days of being screened by DHS officials.

This is a rushed process for an emergency situation involving children. They require our best efforts to ensure their safety and wellbeing not a rushed job.

The bill undermines a long standing policy regarding asylum--H.R. 5230 Prohibits anyone believed to have been convicted outside the U.S. of any drug-related offense punishable by a prison term of more than a year from being granted asylum.

This provision has nothing to do with unaccompanied children entering the United States and clearly is an immigration reform that would impact several committees such as the House Committees on Judiciary and Foreign Affairs.

This provision is problematic because what is considered unlawful in one country is a constitutionally protected right in the United States. Often people are fleeing religious, ethnic or political persecution.

Persecution means that they are experiencing or have experienced actions taken by their countries governments, which often includes imprisonment or torture while in custody.

This one change would hand repressive regimes like North Korea with an easy way to block the United States from helping those seeking to escape that country--charge and convict them of a felon.

A Sudanese woman was sentenced to death for being a Christian--would this Congress bar her entry into the United States?

The bill makes the wrong decision on border security by sending the National Guard support for border operations--H.R. 5230 would deploy National Guard under Title 32 Status. National Guard troops with this change may be assigned duties as deemed necessary to provide assistance in operations, with priority given to high traffic areas experiencing the highest number of crossing by unaccompanied children.

Sending armed soldiers to greet children escaping violence--Mr. Speaker what is the leadership thinking?

These children need our help not frightening images of more adults with guns.

The bill denies safe shelter to children through its sense of Congress--the states that the Secretary of Defense should not be allowed to shelter unaccompanied children or other migrants unless certain conditions are met.

The military and the administration are well aware of the conditions that are acceptable for children and this Congress should provide what is needed so that their needs can be met.

This bill does too little to actually help the thousands of children who are awaiting immigration hearings. They are victims of human trafficking, sexual violence, and witnesses to murders as well as acts of violence against other children who took that dangerous trek to the United States.

We should be focused on learning what they know and what they experienced to be sure the guilty are found and punished.

I offered, along with several other members of the House amendments in attempts to improve the bill, but all were rejected by the Rules Committee, which chose to place H.R. 5230 before the House in the form of a closed rule.

The Jackson Lee Amendment would have authorized designated federal agencies to reimburse State and local governments and private nonprofit organizations for the costs incurred in providing psychological counseling, housing, education, medicine and medical care, food and water, clothes, personal hygiene and other indispensable consumables, other human services in response to the humanitarian crisis on the Southwest Border.

This Congress has had the Senate's version of a Comprehensive Immigration reform bill for nearly a year, without accomplishing the task of taking up the issue and passing a House version.

Our nation's immigration system is broken and needs reform, but the only attempt at addressing immigration into the United States is this bill that is being presented as an appropriations bill.

H.R. 5230 is not an appropriations bill it is an immigration reform bill, which covers the jurisdictions of the two committees I serve on-- the House Judiciary and Homeland Security Committees. Neither of these committees were given the opportunity to hold hearings or make the needed changes to the bill to make sure it conforms with long standing policies relating to unaccompanied minor or issues related to refugees.

The Jackson Lee amendment would have helped nonprofits, local and state governments in all of the 50 states who are now providing assistance to the tens of thousands of unaccompanied minors within the United States.

The message has gotten to families in El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala. Parents are no longer sending their children to the United States once they learned of the dangers and the prospects for their children surviving the journey without becoming victims of human trafficking.

These children have found the compassion and love of thousands of Americans found in the states of Texas, Alabama, Alaska, California, Illinois, North Carolina, South Dakota, New York, Utah, Virginia and-- yes even the U.S. Virgin Islands.

The nature of America is that of the Good Samaritan.

On July 3, 2014, I went to McAllen, Texas and observed a Customs and Border Protection (CBP) facility where unaccompanied children were being processed by the Border Patrol.

As I walked through the facility, I saw frightened and needy children, some as young as five years old.

Madam Speaker, some members of this body who have not taken the time to visit the border or visit the children who are now in their own states will stand before this body and accuse them of being dangerous-- but they are not.

They are traumatized and frightened children driven from their homes by violence and inducements of these same gangs to get payments from desperate parents seeking to save the lives of their children to bring them to the United States.

These children had risked their lives to make their way to the U.S. by riding atop freight trains through dangerous territories in Mexico. One can only imagine the desperation and hopelessness that would prompt a parent to send their young child on such a treacherous journey.

It takes courage and desperation to escape senseless violence and I know that is what Cuban Americans faced, and Christians, Jews and all other groups facing violence have endured.

These are refugees and their status requires that the United States act appropriately.

Some may mention that the United States has a quota on refugees that we can take each year and that number has been reached. The program that refer to is for refugees that other nations around the world are providing shelter--but if the refugees are crossing our own border there is not limit.

This international law that the United States has backed for decades and pressured other nations to enforce. If the refugees are Christians escaping ISIS or Boko Haram or they are children escaping violent gangs in Central America they are not and should not be turned back.

Children do not leave their homes and families by the tens of thousands unless fear is driving them from their homes.

Upon my visit to South Texas borders, I witnessed hundreds of children whose young faces were pressed against glass jails with tears running down their faces. We are dealing with helpless children who have traveled a treacherous journey, and it should be within our American values to care for these children who fled their homes to escape violence.

These children are not perpetrators or criminals--they are in many cases victims fleeing deadly violence in Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador, and are seeking temporary safe haven in the United States, as so many people before them have done for centuries.

The surge of unaccompanied children on our southern border does not pose a threat to our national security. Contrary to the shrill rhetoric used by some commentators, the nation is not being invaded by an army of children dispatched to do us harm.

We are confronted instead with a humanitarian crisis resulting from the alarming scale of violence and economic desperation in three Central American countries that now lead the world in murder rates: El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala.

Politicizing the issue will not solve the problem. Taking actions that address the root causes in the short and long term will. We should be taking up Immigration Reform to deal with the wide range of immigration problems.

The current status on the border is the number of children coming across the border has abated. Those children remaining in detention shelters along the border number only a few hundred.

According to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, these three Central American countries have among the highest per capita homicide rates in the world, with Honduras topping the list and the other two nations in the top five.

To address this issue of the humanitarian crisis, I introduced H.R. 4990, the ``Justice for Children Now Act of 2014,'' which authorizes the immediate hiring of an additional 70 immigration judges in the Executive Office of Immigration Review.

This bill will help but it is not sufficient to address the backlogs to help advance the flow of the children's immigration court hearings.

The amount allowed under this bill will leave states and aid agencies footing a significant portion of the cost for assisting these helpless children--when it is the role of the federal government to be present and actively engaged in leading the effort.

I support the President's request for $3.7 billion to respond to the humanitarian crisis on the border and urge my colleagues in leadership to reconsider the level of funding for this great need.

Congress should allocate the resources needed to deal with the increase in unaccompanied children seeking refuge in the United States. Some of these persons are attempting to enter the country unlawfully and without justification. Our laws do not permit this and they should not be allowed entry.

The Administration is following immigration law as it relates to these unaccompanied minors.

The Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008, signed by President George W. Bush establishes the legal status of the children who have entered the nation unaccompanied.

That law provides persons fleeing lethal violence or escape from human trafficking the opportunity to have their case heard by an immigration judge.

Over the time Congress has delayed acting and an additional 366,000 pending cases were added to the immigration courts that must have hearings before any action can be taken.

Because this situation is untenable for everyone--law enforcement, taxpayers, and individuals petitioning for relief, the first thing that we can and should do to reduce the backlog is provide the funding needed to appoint 70 new immigration judges, as provided under legislation.

Ensuring that there are available sufficient facilities to house detained children in a humane manner while they await their immigration hearing is another challenge.

I ask that the Rules Committee approve the Jackson Lee Amendment for inclusion in H.R. 5230.

Mr. Speaker, I wonder what my grandmother coming from Jamaica, West Indies, with two babies thought about this great country called America. I wondered as I went to the border and I looked into the eyes of a little 7-year-old who had just gotten off a bus by himself from someplace in Central America, or the toddler in a diaper who came here because there was true and actual violence, the beheading of their neighbors, the cutting of the throats of their young boys, the fear of the cartels, and to think of the words ``no room at the inn.''

Our Republicans are confused. They are prosecuting the children, not prosecuting the drug dealers, the criminals, and others. Why? Because they are taking away basic due process rights for humble children who have come just for opportunity. Not only that, they don't even want to give resources to all the cities in America who are helping, the Good Samaritans. And then they want legislation that literally undermines due process for these children.

I will tell you this is a bad bill. Do not pass it. Pass comprehensive immigration reform. Pass it now.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in fervid opposition to this Martial Law Resolution and ask that you consider doing comprehensive immigration reform--a vote you would not even need to whip.

Yet we insist on wasting valuable House Floor time while we could be doing comprehensive immigration reform, comprehensive tax reform, the Export-Import Bank Reauthorization, or the Voting Rights Act.

As the GOP Majority reaches further to the anti-immigrant right to scrounge up the votes for what was already an inadequate and heartless proposal, we Democrats have a better idea: comprehensive immigration reform.

The bipartisan immigration legislation that passed the Senate over a year ago offers comprehensive answers to the problems with our immigration system--but for more than a year House Republicans have refused to give the American people a vote.

The humanitarian crisis at the border is a powerful reminder of the importance of an immigration system that honors our values as a nation. The time is now. While House Republicans search for the compassion to help desperate children, Democrats are demanding a vote on the comprehensive immigration reform our nation needs.

The United States is a country made up of immigrants, and it is part of what makes us so strong and vibrant. And while immigration reform remains an unsolved challenge for our nation, House Democrats are leading the way towards comprehensive reform.

Indeed, the decision made by President Obama two years ago to defer deportation action against young people who were brought here by undocumented parents but have been raised here in our country was an important step in the right direction.

This decision has helped ensure that over half-a-million hard- working, eager, and talented individuals who came here not of their own choice, and who are contributing to our economy and our defense, can remain here and continue to be part of building a strong future for America.

Now we are faced, Mr. Speaker, with the surge of unaccompanied children on our southern border. They do not pose a threat to our national security; nevertheless the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act must be passed before Congress leaves town for its district work-recess.

Contrary to the shrill rhetoric used by some commentators, the nation is not being invaded by an army of children dispatched to do us harm. In fact the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee and I witnessed one month ago the deplorable conditions with your own eyes--babies as young as three years old.

We are confronted with a humanitarian crisis resulting from the alarming scale of violence and economic desperation in three Central American countries: El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala. Politicizing the issue will not solve the problem.

In the short term, we need to allocate the resources needed to deal with the increase in unaccompanied children seeking refuge in the United States.

Yet this Congress has failed to provide any resources needed to fund the courts and judges needed to send these children through the legal system; therefore, we should fund the number of immigration judges needed. Without them, the result is a current average delay of 578 days to hear over 366,000 pending cases.

Because this situation is untenable for everyone--law enforcement, taxpayers, and individuals petitioning for relief, the first thing that we can and should do to reduce the backlog is pass the emergency supplemental and provide the funding needed to appoint 70 new immigration judges, as provided under legislation I recently introduced, H.R. 4990, the Justice For All Children Act.

I remain committed to working with my colleagues, on a bipartisan basis, on this very important issue, and would hope for a spill-over effect into the realm of comprehensive immigration reform.

I remain committed to advocating for common sense enforcement measures as part of a broader immigration reform package that will further secure our borders, ensure agricultural interests have an ample labor supply, universities and businesses are not short workers, and proper workplace compliance is achieved, but also uphold our values as a Nation of immigrants.

Mr. Speaker, No Room at the inn! The Republicans are confused. Let us as Americans give relief to these innocent children. I ask my colleagues to reject this resolution and call for a vote on comprehensive immigration reform and the full funding of the emergency supplemental by hiring 70 new immigration judges, provide more resources for the border, to protect vulnerable children, and help communities that are helping these children.

Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. Speaker, the course of the debate is about to end. There is representation that there is an underlying bill to this martial law. The Democrats have already made a commitment to stay and finish the job.

My inquiry is, the underlying bill's principles are based upon protecting children and fully funding the President's mark on the emergency supplemental to deal with this crisis and emergency.

Those are simple parliamentary inquiries as the underlying premise of the bill--two points: protecting the children and providing the full resources for helping the children. That is not giving us the contents of the bill. It is the premise of the bill for Members to be able to intelligently come to floor to assess the need to vote for the martial law.

I, again, state the parliamentary inquiry.

I hope the Speaker says that word from Texas very loud because I listened earlier today of all of the relief in the appropriations bill given to Texans down at the border, $594 million.

Let me tell you that there are people in Texas who are ready to serve and help the unaccompanied children. There are people in Texas who recognize that we are the good Samaritans. Don't label us with wanting $594 million, and don't label us with standing against the DACA children, the DREAMers, who have come to this country and been here for 5 years.

Mr. Speaker, these children ran into the arms of the Border Patrol. There is no criminal or legal crisis at the border, but the DACA bill that is here on

the floor of the House is a disgrace to the words of the Star-Spangled Banner. We are the home of the free and the brave. We are free enough to be able to welcome those in need.

This body knows that DACA has nothing to do with the unaccompanied children, and it is a disgrace that we would undermine the hardworking students like Juan Jesus in my office this summer, that we would undermine it with a disgraceful bill--a disgraceful bill. It is disgraceful. Pass comprehensive immigration reform.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 5272, a bill brought to the floor at the eleventh hour by the House Republican leadership to placate its extreme right-wing Tea Party faction and one of the most hypocritical, irresponsible, and mean-spirited legislative proposals brought to the House floor this year.

H.R. 5272 seeks to prohibit the Administration from exercising its administrative discretion to focus resources on identifying and apprehending those aliens who are present in country illegally who pose the most serious danger to our national security and the safety of our citizens.

This cynical bill is hypocritical because the vast majority of its proponents have been claiming for years now that the reason they refuse to compromise on budget issues, support for sequestration, and voted to shut down the government is because of their belief in the importance of setting spending priorities.

Yet, H.R. 5272 would deny ICE the ability to use its limited resources in the most efficient manner to achieve its highest priorities which is to apprehend, detain, and remove aliens who pose a danger to national security or a risk to public safety.

This bill is irresponsible because it seeks to prevent trained, experienced, and professional agents and prosecutors from exercising their discretion and acting on the basis of what everyone knows to be true: that there is a vast difference between a terrorist bent on harming America and a DREAM Act kid studying hard in school so he or she can graduate, join the Armed Services and willingly risk his or her life to defend the country, or go to work to support his or her family.

This inefficient use of resources wastes taxpayer dollars and does nothing to keep America safe.

This bill is mean-spirited because it would have ICE target its limited resources on innocent, law abiding, young people who were brought to this country as children and would have them deported to a foreign land even though America is the country they may know as home and the only one to which they may have ever pledged allegiance.

Mr. Speaker, I traveled many times to Iraq and Afghanistan and always the highlight of my visit was meeting the young men and women who were willingly risking their lives to defend the country they love more than life.

More than 5,000 of the soldiers who fought for us in Afghanistan and Iraq were not yet American citizens but DREAMers who dreamed that one day they might become citizens of the nation they gladly risked their lives to defend.

Instead of honoring their service, this heartless bill before us crushes their dream by forcing ICE agents and prosecutors to pretend that there is no difference between one of these veterans who came to this country as an undocumented immigrant and an alien engaged in or suspected of espionage or terrorism.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5272 also wastes the money of hard-working taxpayers and does nothing to make America safer, and eliminates a fair and just policy legal under the President's executive authority which allows for relief for young children who have been in America for a certain number of years, follow certain requirements and may be deferred from deportation to serve in the U.S. military, go to school and contribute to America.

And, just as bad, it is inconsistent with American values of justice and fair play.

We must address our broken immigration system through comprehensive reform rather than extinguish Ms. Liberty's lamp of freedom or close her Golden Door.

We are better than that and I urge all Members to join me in rejecting this terrible legislation.

Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, my parliamentary inquiry as to the bill that is on the floor, is this not the bill dealing with deferred action for juveniles or young people who have been in this country for 5 years, graduated from high school, going to college or working, and in actuality is not dealing with the unaccompanied children? But more importantly, is it not true that this bill is destined for a veto, will not be passed in the Senate, and in essence, we are here passing a bill that has no future?

Mr. Speaker I rise to speak in strong opposition to the Rule for H.R. 5230, a bill to make supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2014 to address the humanitarian crisis on our nation's southern border.

As a senior member of the House Committee on Homeland Security and the Ranking Member on the Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security, I have visited the border and seen the children that this bill intends to help.

This bill offers to little in funding to address the need that over 50 states are attempting to address by providing shelter and assistance to the tens of thousands of unaccompanied minors who are now living in our country.

This bill does too little to actually help the thousands of children who are awaiting immigration hearings. They are victims of human trafficking, sexual violence, and witnesses to murders as well as acts of violence against other children who took that dangerous trek to the United States.

We should be focused on learning what they know and what they experienced to be sure the guilty are found and punished.

I offered, along with several other members of the House amendments in attempts to improve the bill, but all were rejected by the Rules Committee, which chose to place H.R. 5230 before the House in the form of a closed rule.

The Jackson Lee Amendment would have authorized designated federal agencies to reimburse State and local governments and private nonprofit organizations for the costs incurred in providing psychological counseling, housing, education, medicine and medical care, food and water, clothes, personal hygiene and other in dispensable consumables, other human services in response to the humanitarian crisis on the Southwest Border.

This Congress has had the Senate's version of a Comprehensive Immigration reform bill for nearly a year, without accomplishing the task of taking up the issue and passing a House version.

Our nation's immigration system is broken and needs reform, but the only attempt at addressing immigration into the United States is this bill that is being presented as an appropriations bill.

H.R. 5230 is not an appropriations bill it is an immigration reform bill, which covers the jurisdictions of the two committees I serve on-- the House Judiciary and Homeland Security Committees. Neither of these committees were given the opportunity to hold hearings or make the needed changes to the bill to make sure it conforms with long standing policies relating to unaccompanied minor or issues related to refugees.

The Jackson Lee amendment would have helped nonprofits, local and state governments in all of the 50 states who are now providing assistance to the tens of thousands of unaccompanied minors within the United States.

The message has gotten to families in El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala. Parents are no longer sending their children to the United States once they learned of the dangers and the prospects for their children surviving the journey without becoming victims of human trafficking.

Over two-thirds of the language in H.R. 5230 will make significant changes in existing law or creates new law regarding immigration policy without going through the committees of jurisdiction such as the House Committees on Homeland Security, Judiciary, and Foreign Affairs.

H.R. 5230 contains too much language that is legislative such as:

The bill makes significant changes to 2008 trafficking victims protection act. This change will subject all children to the initial screening process that now applies only to children from Mexico and Canada; erects a new expedited immigration court screening for any children who pass the initial screening; prohibits administrative appeals from children ordered removed through the new expedited process; requires detention of certain children who demonstrate a credible fear of persecution throughout the pendency of their asylum proceedings; establishes new, high burdens of proof; and sets up a principle of ``Last In, First Out'' in the adjudication process.

The bill prohibits the secretaries of the interior and agriculture from impeding, denying, or restricting the activities of U.S. customs and border protection on federal land located within 100 miles of the U.S./Mexico border--This issue has already been addressed. Both Interior and Agriculture have existing Memorandum of Understanding (MOUs) with U.S. Customs and Border Protection and all these agencies, as well as the GAO, have testified that these agreements are working and that federal land management laws and activities do not impair border security.

The bill provides too few emergency immigration judges--the bill only requires the Department of Justice to designate up to 40 temporary immigration judges within 14 days of enactment of this legislation. Then the bill permits hiring of retired judges or magistrate judges, or the reassignment of current immigration judges, to conduct expedited hearings for unaccompanied alien children to try to meet the new requirement that their cases be heard within 7 days of being screened by DHS officials.

The bill undermines a long standing policy reparging asylum--H.R. 5230 Prohibits anyone believed to have been convicted outside the U.S. of any drug-related offense punishable by a prison term of more than a year from being granted asylum.

The bill makes the wrong decision on border security by sending the national guard support for border operations--H.R. 5230 would deploy National Guard under Title 32 Status. National Guard troops with this change may be assigned duties as deemed necessary to provide assistance in operations, with priority given to high traffic areas experiencing the highest number of crossing by unaccompanied children.

The bill denies safe shelter to children through its sense of congress--the states that the Secretary of Defense should not be allowed to shelter unaccompanied children or other migrants unless certain conditions are met.

These children have found the compassion and love of thousands of Americans founds in the states of Texas, Alabama, Alaska, California, Illinois, North Carolina, South Dakota, New York, Utah, Virginia and-- yes--even the U.S. Virgin Islands.

The nature of America is that of the Good Samaritan.

On July 3, 2014, I went to McAllen, Texas and observed a Customs and Border Protection (CBP) facility where unaccompanied children were being processed by the Border Patrol.

As I walked through the facility, I saw frightened and needy children, some as young as five years old.

Mr. Speaker, some members of this body who have not taken the time to visit the border or visit the children who are now in their own states will stand before this body and accuse them of being dangerous--but they are not.

They are traumatized and frightened children driven from their homes by violence and inducements of these same gangs to get payments from desperate parents seeking to save the lives of their children to bring them to the United States.

These children had risked their lives to make their way to the U.S. by riding atop freight trains through dangerous territories in Mexico. One can only imagine the desperation and hopelessness that would prompt a parent to send their young child on such a treacherous journey.

It takes courage and desperation to escape senseless violence and I know that is what Cuban Americans faced, and Christians, Jews and all other groups facing violence have endured.

These are refugees and their status requires that the United States act appropriately.

Some may mention that the United States has a quota on refugees that we can take each year and that number has been reached. The program they refer to is for refugees that other nations around the world are providing shelter--but if the refugees are crossing our own border there is not limit.

This international law that the United State has backed for decades and pressured other nations to enforce. If the refugees are Christians escaping ISIS or Boko Haram or they are children escaping violent gangs in Central America they are not and should not be turned back.

Children do not leave their homes and families by the tens of thousands unless fear is driving them from their homes.

Upon my visit to South Texas borders, I witnessed hundreds of children whose young faces were pressed against glass jails with tears running down their faces. We are dealing with helpless children who have traveled a treacherous journey, and it should be within our American values to care for these children who fled their homes to escape violence.

These children are not perpetrators or criminals--they are in many cases victims fleeing deadly violence in Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador, and are seeking temporary safe haven in the United States, as so many people before them have done for centuries.

The surge of unaccompanied children on our southern border does not pose a threat to our national security. Contrary to the shrill rhetoric used by some commentators, the nation is not being invaded by army an of children dispatched to do us harm.

We are confronted instead with a humanitarian crisis resulting from the alarming scale of violence and economic desperation in three Central American countries that now lead the world in murder rates: El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala.

Politicizing the issue will not solve the problem. Taking actions that address the root causes in the short and long term will. We should be taking up Immigration Reform to deal with the wide range of immigration problems.

The current status on the border is the number of children coming across the border has abated. Those children remaining in detention shelters along the border number only a few hundred.

According to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, these three Central American countries have among the highest per capita homicide rates in the world, with Honduras topping the list and the other two nations in the top five.

To address this issue of the humanitarian crisis, I introduced H.R. 4990, the ``Justice for Children Now Act of 2014,'' which authorizes the immediate hiring of an additional 7o immigration judges in the Executive Office of Immigration Review.

This bill will help but it is not sufficient to address the backlogs to help advance the flow of the children's immigration court hearings.

The amount allowed under this bill will leave states and aid agencies footing a significant portion of the cost for assisting these helpless children--when it is the role of the federal government to be present and actively engaged in leading the effort.

I support the President's request for $3.7 billion to respond to the humanitarian crisis on the border and urge my colleagues in leadership to reconsider the level of funding for this great need.

Congress should allocate the resources needed to deal with the increase in unaccompanied children seeking refuge in the United States. Some of these persons are attempting to enter the country unlawfully and without justification. Our laws do not permit this and they should not be allowed entry.

The Administration is following immigration law as it relates to these unaccompanied minors.

The Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008, signed by President George W. Bush establishes the legal status of the children who have entered the nation unaccompanied.

That law provides persons fleeing lethal violence or escape from human trafficking the opportunity to have their case heard by an immigration judge.

Over the time Congress has delayed acting and an additional 366,000 pending cases were added to the immigration courts that must have hearings before any action can be taken.

Because this situation is untenable for everyone--law enforcement, taxpayers, and individuals petitioning for relief, the first thing that we can and should do to reduce the backlog is provide the funding needed to appoint 70 new immigration judges, as provided under legislation.

Ensuring that there are available sufficient facilities to house detained children in a humane manner while they await their immigration hearing is another challenge.

I ask that the Rules Committee approve the Jackson Lee Amendment for inclusion in H.R. 5230.