Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6411, known as the STRONG Veterans Act of 2022.

As a senior member of the House Committees on Judiciary and Homeland Security, I care deeply about our veterans.

I offer my deepest gratitude to our Nation's troops and reservists, their families, and the 21.6 million veterans, including 29,126 in the 18th Congressional District of Texas that I proudly represent.

In Congress, I have sponsored many legislative proposals and co- sponsored well over 50 pieces of legislation that will positively benefit our veterans and their families.

Veterans with mental health diagnoses have a significantly elevated suicide risk. Suicide rates of veterans are at an all-time high, rising 25 percent in 2021 over the previous year. Veterans continue to have a 50 percent higher risk of suicide than their peers who have not served.

More than 80 percent of post-9/11 veterans say that the public does not understand the problems that veterans face when transitioning to civilian life.

Current resources to help the mental health of our veterans are inadequate. Our veterans need our support when transitioning back to civilian life.

The STRONG Veterans Act will:

Open eligibility for more student veterans at Vet Centers;

Expand culturally competent suicide prevention at VA for native veterans;

Significantly increase mental health staffing and training at VA medical centers and Vet Centers;

Further strengthen the Veterans Crisis Line;

Allow more veterans to benefit from engaging with peer specialists; and

Collect data for VA to guide expansion of inpatient mental health and substance use treatment.

I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 6411.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New York, Chairwoman of the Oversight Committee, for her leadership, and Chairman Grijalva for his dynamic leadership, as well.

I rise today because I just feel moved by the moment to really talk about truth in the moments that I have. I started this morning by citing the Declaration of Independence that said, we all are created equal--a portion thereof--with the unalienable rights of life and liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

It is important that today in Pride Month, as I recognize my constituents in Houston, all of them, and the caucus that has been a steadfast advocate in Houston for the rights of all people in the LGBTQI community.

It is important to be counted, to be recognized, and I want to emphasize, again, the distortion of how punitive this will be. It is voluntary.

I know my constituents. Some of them don't even fill out the Census because they are free. They know they don't have to do it. Some of them don't answer questions on the Census.

For anyone to suggest that this would be punitive and that people would be fearful and they would think not to do it, it is voluntary. And I can assure you that this community, LGBTQI+ Americans, remains vulnerable to discrimination on a daily basis.

Only 21 States have laws that explicitly prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation in employment, housing, and public accommodations, and only 20 States have such protections for gender identity.

H.R. 4176, the LGBTQI+ Data Inclusion Act, is to include and affirm and to be counted.

Do you realize that in most States a same-sex couple can get married on Saturday, then be legally denied service at a restaurant on Sunday, be fired from their jobs on Monday, and evicted from their apartment on Tuesday?

We thought we would be past that after years of working and fighting, but it is important to note that this bill will provide us with the appropriate information.

Madam Speaker, it is high time that we provide equal protection for all members of the LGBTQI community in accordance with the 14th Amendment.

H.R. 4176--again, not punitive--will take us one more step forward in the decades-long journey toward equality by creating a tool kit through which our LGBTQI community members can be represented and the demographic data can be taken.

Let me just simply say that the numbers speak truth. I said I wanted to discuss a moment of truth. When we have the data, we can help with housing, healthcare, schooling, or special needs that this community would have, representation as it relates to them being counted in Federal funding that may be necessary to aid in their circumstances.

I am reminded of tragedies that have happened before. Does anyone remember a young man being assailed against a fence just because he was part of the LGBTQI+ community?

I met with Matthew Shepard's mother. I remember these atrocities.

I see in a State like mine that transgender families are threatened over trying to find resources for their children. We love our children. We love our families.

The only thing I can see in this legislation is the importance of affirming, counting, treating with dignity, and recognizing that this wonderful community, the LGBTQI+ community, they, too, are America. We, too, are America.

This is a moment of truth, and it is simply collecting data, punishing no one but uplifting all Americans. I ask my colleagues to support H.R. 4176.

Madam Speaker, I am proud to rise in strong support of H.R. 4176, the LGBTQI+ Data Inclusion Act, and to discuss my amendment to this legislation.

Despite significant legal advances over the past several years, including marriage equality, LGBTQI+ Americans remain vulnerable to discrimination on a daily basis.

Today, only 21 states have laws that explicitly prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation in employment, housing, and public accommodations, and only 20 states have such protections for gender identity.

In most states, a same-sex couple can get married on Saturday, then be legally denied service at a restaurant on Sunday, then be fired from their jobs on Monday, and evicted from their apartment on Tuesday.

Our country is comprised of trans people of color, lesbians living with a disability, gay immigrants, and those experiencing all other manners of intersecting and layering levels of oppression and privilege.

H.R. 4176 would make note of these stories and add their voices to the mosaic of our country.

The data available through these newly developed federal surveys will allow federal agencies to create better policies and practices designed to accommodate the needs of all our Nation's people.

I am conscious of the fact that if Congress expects the LGBTQI+ community to trust the federal government with their information, we must ensure their privacy and protection.

It is imperative that this data not be used to exclude, discriminate against, vilify, ostracize, or in any other way negatively impact anyone in this already vulnerable community.

That is a promise we make today.

Again, I remind you of the long path to full equality we walk. Let it be known, however, that one day our Nation will find itself knocking on equality's door.

When that happens, future LGBTQI+ Americans will look back and see themselves not hidden in shame, but present.

Present in our census, in our housing surveys, in our employment surveys.

They will be present in our metropolitan cities and in our rural towns, from the Atlantic beaches to the Pacific Northwest. From the forests of Alaska to the plains of my own Texas.

Through the LGBTQI+ Data Inclusion Act, LGBTQI+ Americans will be able to say--I was there. I am here.

It is high time that we provide equal protection for all members of the LGBTQI+ community in accordance with the 14th Amendment, which ensures equal protection for ALL Americans.

H.R. 4176 will take us one more step forward in the decades-long journey towards equality by creating a toolkit through which our LGBTQI+ community members can be represented in demographic data collection--and ultimately protected under the law.

This bill will require federal agencies to assess the ways in which they document sexuality, gender identity, and gender variance in surveys and provide new opportunities for LGBTQI+ individuals to self- identify themselves--all while ensuring the privacy and dignity of the people involved.

Though this legislation enacts a simple change on federal surveys, it represents a great gesture for our future.

We are not just talking about numbers today.

We are not just talking about percentages and ratios and clusters.

We are talking about the documentation and legacy of the great diversity of this Nation, and about enacting tools through which that diversity can be represented and protected.

As you all know, representation is the bedrock of American democracy.

If the government does not see you, how can it serve you?

As we discuss this Act, I especially want to keep in mind the members of the LGBTQI+ community who experience the fluidity and intersectionality that are aspects of gender and sexual identity.

Of course, gender and sexuality are just two facets of personhood.

Race, religion, socio-economic status, geographic region, disability status, and culture all play a part in crafting identity.

Madam Speaker, all of this is true about H.R. 4176, and yet, I encourage my colleagues in Congress to push for more.

That is why I believe my amendment is very important.

My amendment would direct the Comptroller General to issue a report to Congress about the impact of the implementation of this Act on the provision of services to LGBTQI+ persons.

It would assess the impact of H.R. 4176 by ensuring transparency into the correlation between the provision of services and one's gender identity, sexual orientation, and variations in sex characteristics.

Data collected through this Act would be used to monitor the flow of social services to LGBTQI+ communities. This will encourage the provision of services to the LGBTQI+ community, and if there are shortcomings, Congress and the public will be informed of them so that they can be remedied soon thereafter.

Despite our many gains, the United States is not always a welcoming place for individuals across the spectrum of genders and sexualities.

This is especially true for those coming from un-affirming communities and families--those for whom living their authentic lives may come at the cost of social ties and support systems.

For some, authenticity can be isolating.

As my colleagues know, the depression and suicide rates of LGBTQI+ individuals are horrifically high.

LGBTQI+ youth in particular are at greatest risk.

In Texas, The Trevor Project saw nearly 15,000 crisis contacts from LGBTQI+ youth in 2021.

Research consistently shows that trans and gay youth are more likely to experience depression when living in un-affirming or discriminatory environments.

Alternatively, the presence of supportive close friends and family in the life of an LGBTQI+ youth has a direct positive impact on that youth's self-esteem and overall health.

That supportive person could be a teacher, an athletic coach, a mental health counselor, or a troop leader.

The data available in H.R. 4176 could be used to help put more of these mentors in the lives of LGBTQ+ youth every day.

The LGBTQI+ Data Inclusion Act would enable agencies that provide mental health and other social services to gain access to a wealth of information about the communities they serve, so that they can better serve the LGBTQI+ community.

My amendment would allow us to see if they then use this data and their resources to safeguard the well-being of some of our Nation's most vulnerable individuals.

Ultimately, the Comptroller General study required by my amendment enables Congress to monitor the progress of H.R. 4176 in action.

It is with that in mind that I urge my colleagues to step forward in support of the LGBTQI+ Data Inclusion Act and my amendment.

Our lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex communities deserve to be documented in our Nation's history. They deserve to have their stories collected and used for their well-being. I am honored to be a part of that aim today.

Madam Speaker, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Speaker, I thank the sponsor of this legislation and the chairwoman of the Oversight and Reform Committee for bringing this legislation to the floor.

Data collection is an indispensable tool to understand and address changes facing the LGBTQI community and other sexual- and gender- diverse communities.

Madam Speaker, I include in the Record an article from American Progress dated May 24, 2022.

[From American Progress, May 24, 2022]

Collecting Data About LGBTQI+ and Other Sexual and Gender-Diverse

Communities

Data collection is an indispensable tool to understand and

address challenges facing LGBTQI+ and other sexual and

gender-diverse communities. Although strides have been made

in recent years, a persistent lack of routine data collection

on sexual orientation, gender identity, and variations in sex

characteristics (SOGISC) is still a substantial roadblock for

policymakers, researchers, service providers, and advocates

seeking to improve the health and well-being of LGBTQI+

people. More comprehensive and accurate point-in-time and

longitudinal demographic data on SOGISC are crucial to:

Advance research agendas;

Evaluate population trends;

Identify community-based needs;

Provide high-quality services;

Track and address discrimination;

Equitably distribute funding and other resources; and

Shape evidence-based policy solutions to promote equity and

reduce disparities faced by LGBTQI+ populations.

As the size and diversity of LGBTQI+ populations in the

United States continue to expand, particularly among youth

and young adults, the importance of collecting data on these

communities only continues to grow. Failing to collect these

data can create harms by hindering the ability of

researchers, policymakers, service providers, and advocates

to understand the experiences of LGBTQI+ communities,

identify disparities, generate policies that promote equity,

and evaluate the effectiveness of those policies. Yet

currently, the number of federally funded surveys that

include questions to identify LGBTQI+ respondents is limited.

While there are many kinds of data relevant to the

experiences of LGBTQI+ communities, this report focuses

specifically on data collection to capture SOGISC in two

types of settings: general population surveys and surveys of

LGBTQI+ communities. General population surveys assess a

large sample of the entire population, of which the majority

identify as cisgender and heterosexual and will not have

intersex traits. In contrast, LGBTQI+ community-based surveys

sample a population predominantly comprising sexual and

gender minorities. Community-based surveys can provide

important opportunities to learn more about even smaller or

less-studied sexual and gender minority populations, such as

people who are asexual, same-gender-loving, or Two-Spirit.

Because of their specific focus on sampling LGBTQI+

populations, community-based surveys may also be more likely

to reach larger proportions of groups such as LGBTQI+ people

of color, older adults, youth, people with disabilities,

people receiving social welfare support services, people

whose primary language is not English, and people interacting

with the criminal legal system.

When designing questions to accurately and effectively

survey either the general population or a predominantly

LGBTQI+ population, researchers must carefully weigh a number

of key considerations that are explained in this report.

Regardless of the type of survey, however, it is imperative

to ensure the following:

Entities collecting demographic data, including data

related to SOGISC, do so with a specific and well-defined

goal, such as collecting statistics on health experiences or

understanding the performance of a government benefit

program.

Data are collected, used, maintained, and shared only with

strong privacy, confidentiality, and ethical standards in

place to minimize the risk of data disclosure and misuse.

Entities collecting data adopt and post clear

nondiscrimination and confidentiality policies. These

policies should identify relevant legal nondiscrimination

protections; state why the data are being collected and how

they will be used; share contact information for resources to

enforce protections; and provide assurance that

confidentiality will be respected and that participation is

voluntary, allowing respondents to provide well-informed

consent with the knowledge that disclosure is voluntary and

that they have the right to opt out of responding.

Research and researchers comply with and are certified

through the Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative

and consult community-based resources about how to conduct

effective and ethical research with LGBTQI+ populations that

ensures minority populations have a voice and role in the

design of survey questions.

LGBTQI+ people are meaningfully involved in question

development, testing, and the evaluation process.

This report examines best practices and key considerations

for collecting data on SOGISC in both general population

surveys as well as LGBTQI+ community-based surveys. The first

section of the report highlights evidence related to asking

these questions in general population surveys and examines

critical considerations, as well as avenues of future

research that policymakers and researchers should support.

The second section of the report compiles both evidence from

existing survey designs and interviews with LGBTQI+

individuals to create new suggestions and recommendations for

SOGISC question design in surveys of LGBTQI+ communities.

Ultimately, improving SOGISC data collection through these

kinds of general population and community-based instruments

is crucial to identifying disparities and crafting policy

solutions that promote more equitable outcomes for LGBTQI+

communities.

General population surveys are used to collect data from

representative samples of the population, allowing

researchers to create population estimates, describe

population demographics, assess disparities, compute

statistical weights for survey analysis, and develop policy,

program, and funding priorities. Federal, state, and local

governments rely on data from general population surveys such

as the decennial census, the American Community Survey (ACS),

and the Current Population Survey (CPS) for everything from

allocating budget resources to deciding where to locate

hospitals.

The persistent lack of routine data collection on SOGISC

remains a significant challenge for policymakers,

researchers, service providers, and advocates seeking to

improve the health and well-being of LGBTQI+ people.

Currently, most surveys, including those fielded by the U.S.

federal government and many state governments, do not collect

SOGISC information. While some surveys, such as the census

and the ACS, now invite people to answer questions about

their marital status or living arrangements in ways that

allow researchers to identify same-sex couples, this only

captures a small segment of the LGBTQI+ population. By not

asking specific questions about SOGISC, these surveys fail to

account for single LGB people or LGB people who are in a

relationship but not cohabitating with their partner(s), as

well as transgender people and intersex people altogether.

For example, according to the latest Gallup data, just 10

percent of LGBT adults in the United States are married to a

same-sex spouse, while an additional 6 percent live with a

same-sex domestic partner. This means that more than 5 in 6

LGBT adults cannot be identified by existing questions in

nonexperimental surveys conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau

such as the ACS and the census, which only account for

cohabitating same-sex couples. Failing to collect SOGISC data

creates real harms--hindering the ability to fully understand

the experiences of LGBTQI+ communities; to craft sound

policies that are inclusive of LGBTQI+ people and their

needs; and to evaluate the effectiveness of policies to

address disparities and promote more equitable outcomes.

More than 5 in 6 LGBT adults cannot be identified by

existing questions in nonexperimental surveys conducted by

the U.S. Census Bureau such as the ACS and the census.

As recommended by the National Academies of Sciences,

Engineering, and Medicine in their 2020 report, U.S.

population surveys must routinely collect, analyze, and

report demographic data that include SOGISC questions. The

information gathered by general population surveys shapes

major policy decisions and allocations of critical resources

related to health care, housing, employment, education, and

other services and benefits, affecting the everyday lives of

LGBTQI+ people and making the need to adopt SOGISC measures

even more urgent. Notably, expanding data collection on

SOGISC through government population-based surveys will

result in a larger sample size than in privately conducted

surveys. This is important because larger samples allow for

better, more reliable study and a richer understanding of the

diversity of the LGBTQI+ community. Moreover, having larger

samples will facilitate analysis and provide greater

comprehension of the experiences of populations that are

living at the intersection of multiple marginalized

identities.

Expanding and enhancing SOGISC data collection also

provides critical tools necessary to craft policy solutions

to improve outcomes and advance equity. By improving data

collection on LGBTQI+ populations, government agencies can

take meaningful steps to fulfill the directives set out by

executive orders 13988 and 13985, which President Joe Biden

signed on day one of his presidency.

LGBTQI+ advocates have long called for the federal

government and researchers to add SOGISC questions to major

surveys and other data collection efforts as a way to begin

addressing the deficiency of data on LGBTQI+ populations and

gaps in knowledge and policy affecting LGBTQI+ people.

Government officials, researchers, and others have questioned

whether the general population, composed mainly of non-

LGBTQI+ people, would understand these questions, answer them

accurately, or even refuse to answer them. The answers to

these questions are important because they affect the quality

of data gathered about LGBTQI+ people and, by extension, the

resources allocated, decisions made, and policies created

that affect LGBTQI+ communities.

Importantly, numerous federally supported entities and

other expert bodies have issued reports to determine

methodological best practices and improve measurement of

SOGISC in federal surveys. These groups have contributed to a

robust and continually growing body of research providing

evidence that SOGISC questions can be readily deployed in

federally funded and other surveys. For example, evidence

indicates that:

Sexual orientation and gender identity data are not

considered especially difficult or sensitive for survey

respondents to report, meaning that people generally

understand what the questions are asking and are willing to

answer them.

Securing participation of sexual minorities in surveys does

not require higher levels of effort, meaning it will not

create added costs or obstacles that would prohibit the

government or other researchers from conducting more

inclusive data collection.

People with intersex traits appear willing to disclose

their status and support collecting data on this measure in

research.

People will answer sexual orientation and gender identity

questions even across a variety of modes (for example,

telephone surveys and paper surveys) and via both self-

reporting and proxy reporting (for example, when a single

household member responds on behalf of all household members)

in federal large-scale general population surveys.

In other words, existing evidence addresses many of the

major hesitations or questions posed by government

researchers and others. Put simply, while more research is

needed to continue improving SOGISC measures, evidence

suggests these questions can function well in major general

population surveys, and they should be asked. For example, in

2021, the Census Bureau updated its experimental data

collection effort on the COVID-l9 pandemic to include

questions about sexual orientation and gender identity in the

Household Pulse Survey. This historic step marks the first

time a Census Bureau-sponsored survey has asked sexual

orientation and gender identity questions and highlights the

ways in which these questions can--and do--work in large,

nationally representative surveys. Expanding LGBTQI+-

inclusive data collection by asking SOGISC questions on

general population surveys is paramount to advancing equity

for LGBTQI+ communities.

Madam Speaker, I include in the Record an article from the National Education Association, ``New Survey Data Shows LGBTQ+ Youth Mental Health Crisis.''

[From the National Education Association, May 25, 2022]

New Survey Data Shows LGBTQ+ Youth Mental Health Crisis

Last year, nearly half of LGBTQ+ youth seriously considered

killing themselves, including more than half of trans youth,

according to new data from The Trevor Project.

These figures reveal a deadly, mental-health crisis among

high school and college-age LGBTQ+ youth of all races, which

has been worsened by the Covid-19 pandemic and by recent,

political attacks on LGBTQ+ students by state legislators

across the nation.

``The [Trevor Project] study is actually on my computer

screen right now to send it to my colleagues,'' says Florida

high school teacher Michael Woods, whose state recently

passed a law that enables parents to sue school districts for

teaching LGBTQ-positive curriculum. ``Especially here in

Florida, with the `Don't Say Gay' law, which should also be

called `Don't Say Trans,' we have a lot of kids in stress,''

he says.

The study, which involved 35,000 LGBTQ+ high school and

college-age youth, of various races and identities, also

shows how schools and colleges can help. A little more than

half of LGBTQ+ youth identified their school or college as

``an LGBTQ-affirming space''--and those students reported

lower rates of attempted suicide. Even something as simple as

using the correct pronouns--the ones that match students'

gender identify--can decrease suicidal ideas.

``Small steps can make a big difference,'' says Joe Bento,

a Seattle high school teacher who also is chair of the

Washington state chapter of GLSEN, a national organization

that helps educators make schools more affirming for LGBTQ+

students.

The Trevor Project data shows how things have gone from bad

to worse for LGBTQ+ youth in the past two years. In 2019, 40

percent of LGBTQ+ seriously considered suicide; in 2021, the

rate hit 45 percent.

And it's even scarier among students of color. About one in

five Black LGBTQ+ students attempted suicide last year, as

did a slightly higher rate of Indigenous LGBTQ+ students.

Meanwhile, mental-health care is scarce. Nearly half of

LGBTQ+ youth--and more than half of Latino LGBTQ+ students--

told the Trevor Project that they wanted counseling and

didn't get it.

The pandemic is an obvious factor, educators say. When

colleges and schools switched to virtual learning, many

LGBTQ+ students were closeted in homes where their identities

are hidden. (Only 1 in 3 LGBTQ+ youth said they have LGBTQ-

affirming homes.) These students may have lost access to

counselors or other supports, like a Gay-Straight Alliance or

GenderSexuality Alliance (GSA) club.

``For a lot of queer students, school is their safe

space,'' says Bento. ``For a year and a half, they weren't in

that safe space.''

Now, students are back on campuses, in school buildings--

but that doesn't mean everything is okay, notes Bento. After

two years of pandemic-related isolation and trauma, students

desperately need mental-health support ``When we got back,

that didn't necessarily happen,'' he says. ``Suddenly it's

state testing! And it's this, this, this! Everything is `back

to normal,' but normal was garbage.''

Many students are suffering. But it's almost always the

most marginalized students who have the least access to

mental-health supports, Bento points out.

It's not just the pandemic. Making matters worse for LGBTQ

students, nearly 240 anti-LGBTQ+ bills have been filed this

year in state legislatures, most of them targeting trans

people, according to an NBC News analysis.

Many of these bills have been signed into laws that ban

trans women and girls from participating in high school

sports, prohibit trans students from using school bathrooms

and locker rooms that match their gender identity, and

restrict LGBTQ-positive school curriculum. For example,

Florida's new law enables parents to sue districts if they

think their child has had inappropriate instruction on gender

and sexuality. The cost of litigation will be borne by

districts, which already are removing curricula.

LGBTQ+ students are very aware of laws that seek to harm

them, educators say--and it causes them anguish. ``They're

just coming back to the rigors of school [after the

pandemic]--and now this!'' says Woods.

NEA and its affiliates strongly oppose these laws. This

spring, NEA President Becky Pringle wrote an open letter to

Florida students, published in the Sun-Sentinel newspaper.

``From protests to walkouts, you are bravely showing these

politicians that you aren't afraid to stand up for yourselves

. . . To our students in Florida and elsewhere: We see you!

We hear you! We are with you!''

For his part, Woods, an educator of 29 years, isn't afraid

either. He wears his ``We're All Human'' t-shirt and answers

his students' distressed questions. But he worries about

younger teachers with less job security, living in more

conservative areas. Many may feel like they can't be the

educators that students need.

``When young people don't feel like they have anywhere to

turn or anyone to talk to . . . well, I know why the stats

are the way they are,'' he says.

NEA members and their unions are working hard to get more

supports for students. In St. Paul, Minn., educators went to

the brink of striking this spring to protect the presence of

mental-health teams in every St. Paul school. Other K12

unions--like in Natrona County, Wyo.--are making sure federal

pandemic-relief funds are spent to hire more school

counselors and other professionals.

Recently, the Biden administration urged colleges and

universities to do the same with their money.

But it's also possible for individual educators to create

affirming spaces in their offices, classrooms, buses, and

other spaces. ``Words matter,'' says Bento, who introduces

himself to his students like this: ``My name is Mr. Bento. I

use he/him pronouns.''

Safe space posters are great at signaling that you support

your LGBTQ+ students but may not be allowable in all places.

``In those places, you can still put something on your body,

like a lanyard,'' says Bento. (The NEA LGBTQ+ caucus, of

which Bento is a member, offers ``Safe Person, Safe Space''

cards for educators to put in their lanyards.)

Bento uses the word ``partner,'' instead of boyfriend or

girlfriend, a subtle nod to the fact that not every

relationship looks the same and that some students may not

identify as male or female. ``Think about who is not

represented [in your words, in your curriculum],'' urges

Bento.

Yes, curriculum matters, too. (See GLSEN's inclusive

curriculum resource.) ``Students need curriculum that

reflects who they are, they need positive representation,''

says Bento. ``And not just Harvey Milk! Not just the AIDS

epidemic! Where's the joy?''

In fact, The Trevor Project asked LGBTQ+ youth the same

question: ``Where do you find joy?'' The responses can guide

educators in creating better spaces for all students. Answers

include:

Learning about LGBTQ history;

Learning I'm not alone and there are more people like me;

Supportive teachers;

Having a safe space to express gender, gender identity, and

sexuality;

LGBTQ clubs on campus; and

Living as their authentic self.

Madam Speaker, I include in the Record an article from National Public Radio titled ``The Census Bureau's first ever data on LGBTQ+ people indicates deep disparities.''

[From National Public Radio, Sept. 24, 2021]

The Census Bureau's First Ever Data on LGBTQ+ People Indicates Deep

Disparities

The U.S. Census Bureau in July began asking Americans about

their sexual orientation and gender identity--a watershed

moment that marks the first time the federal government has

tried to capture data on LGBTQ+ Americans in its large real-

time national surveys.

The results so far are preliminary, but they do indicate

that the disparities queer

Americans experienced prior to the pandemic have continued to

endure 18 months in. For some, those disparities have grown

deeper.

According to the data, which captures results from July 21

to September 13, LGBTQ+ people often reported being more

likely than non-LGBTQ+ people to have lost employment, not

have enough to eat, be at elevated risk of eviction or

foreclosure, and face difficulty paying for basic household

expenses, according to the census' Household Pulse Survey, a

report that measures how Americans are faring on key economic

markers during the pandemic.

While think tanks like the Williams Institute at the UCLA

School of Law and advocate-led research groups have

previously studied LGBTQ+ poverty, no large government

population surveys, like those conducted by the census or the

Treasury Department, have attempted to capture the realtime

economic experiences of LGBTQ+ people.

Previously, those analyses were limited to studies of

``same-sex couples,'' a question the census began analyzing

with limited success in 1990, but that leaves out significant

portion of LGBTQ+ people. Lack of accurate data on the

population as a whole--and particularly on transgender

people, a group that has been chronically under surveyed--

hampered any federal response to persisting inequities,

advocates say.

``Having this on [the Pulse survey], both as a way to

understand what's going on during the pandemic, but also

hopefully as a starting point to more federal data

collection, is really an important moment,'' said Bianca D.M.

Wilson, the senior scholar of public policy at the Williams

Institute.

The data has only begun to be collected, and it's still too

early to tell whether the differences between groups are

representative of the LGBTQ+ population overall or just those

who were surveyed by the census at a given moment in time.

While researchers cautioned against drawing major

conclusions, the trends that emerge in the data are

consistent with what other surveys have found prior to the

pandemic as a result of employment discrimination, underpay,

discriminatory lending practices and other policies that have

limited economic mobility for queer people.

According to The 19th's analysis of the first four releases

of data from the census survey, as much as 23 percent of

LGBTQ+ people and 32 percent of trans people reported having

lost employment in the month before the census conducted its

questionnaire. About 15 to 16 percent of non-LGBTQ+ people

reported the same.

About 12 percent of LGBTQ+ people said they sometimes or

often did not have enough to eat. For non-LGBTQ+ people, the

figure was between 6 and 7 percent, and for trans Americans,

it was as high as 24 percent. About 31 percent of queer

people also said they had difficulty paying for basic

household expenses; for non-LGBTQ+ people it was 23 percent.

Housing insecurity was prevalent across all groups, with

more than 40 percent of people--both LGBTQ+ and non-LGBTQ+--

saying they were very or somewhat likely to face eviction by

the end of September or October.

It's unclear how accurate the data for transgender

Americans is because the sample sizes are much smaller. But

it does follow what is already known: Roughly 29 percent of

respondents to the 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey, done by the

National Center for Transgender Equality and seen as the only

comprehensive study of its kind, said they lived in poverty.

About 30 percent said they had experienced homelessness in

their lifetimes.

``These are sort of the systemic disparities that we

observed pre-pandemic, that the pandemic has not only

deepened for both groups, but also sort of widened,'' said

David Schwegman, assistant professor of public policy and

administration at American University, who has conducted

research on ``same-sex couples'' and housing discrimination.

Wilson at the Williams Institute said that absent this kind

of large-scale data collection about LGBTQ+ people,

policymakers couldn't truly answer big questions about

whether attempts to address economic stress exacerbated by

the pandemic--like the now-expired federal eviction

moratorium--were working for everyone.

But data collection is only one step toward equity.

Dean Spade, an associate professor at Seattle University

School of Law who has also advised the upcoming National

LGBTQ+ Women's Community Survey by think tank Justice Work,

said that real change requires more than just counting trans

and LGBTQ+ people at the federal level.

Counting marginalized people to better understand the

issues they face doesn't necessarily mean their suffering

will be addressed through policy, he noted--and trans people

are accustomed to social services leaving them out or not

being designed with them in mind. It's why trans people, for

example, are helping each other pay for medical procedures

that aren't covered by insurance, housing those experiencing

homelessness and creating mutual aid networks, Spade said.

``We're helping each other survive right now,'' he said.

And there are still significant challenges with the data as

it is. Samples sizes are small, an issue that has barred

marginalized communities, including Asian women, Native

Americans and Pacific Islander women, from representation in

real-time data on some national surveys.

Those small sample sizes make it difficult to draw big

conclusions from the data until months down the line. The

Census Bureau said in a statement that it currently doesn't

have additional analysis to offer on the data, though it did

publish a report on the first set of LGBTQ+ data this summer,

finding that LGBTQ+ people are more likely than non-LGBTQ+

people to face economic hardship.

``The primary focus has been on collecting and releasing

data in a timely manner but there are plans in the future to

release data products that will provide additional context,''

the bureau said in a statement.

The other challenge has been crafting questions in a way

that takes into account knowledge gaps people may have about

what terminology best describes them.

The census survey, for example, asks respondents to choose

which best represents how they think of themselves: ``gay or

lesbian''; ``bisexual''; ``something else''; ``I don't

know''; or ``straight, that is not gay or lesbian.'' In past

attempts to phrase these questions, heterosexual people have

been found to incorrectly mark themselves, economists said,

so additional phrases have been added to improve clarity.

The survey also asks if people describe themselves as male,

female or transgender, and some transgender people may not

want to identify themselves given the rise in anti-trans

bills across the country, Schwegman said.

Spade pointed to smaller studies led by advocates as

important pools of information that can't be found anywhere

else, since they ask questions about daily threats like over-

policing and poverty.

``I think that those kinds of studies can be, to a lot of

us, more valuable than something larger that didn't ask the

questions or that missed whole groups of people in our

community,'' he said.

The real-time data from surveys like the current census

one, which will be collecting responses from July 21 to

October 11, could help impact policies in real time. The

problem for pandemic-related policies being negotiated in

Congress this fall is that this data may be coming too late,

Wilson said.

``It's 18 months into the pandemic, and had that been the

starting place, we would not be looking at a sample size that

would create problems for all the analyses that we want to do

to understand a trans-specific experience,'' Wilson said.

Madam Speaker, my amendment would direct the Comptroller General to issue a report to Congress about the impact of the implementation of this act on the provision of services to LGBTQI+ persons. It would ensure the impact of H.R. 4176 by ensuring transparency in the correlation between the provision of services and one's gender identity, sexual orientation, and variation in sex characteristics.

Again, I have emphasized, we want to have truth and discussion here. We want to be helpful. We want to affirm people and have them counted. Data collection through this act will be used to monitor the flow of social services to LGBTQI communities.

This will encourage the provision of services to the LGBTQI+ community, and if there are shortcomings, Congress and the public will be informed of them so that they can be remedied soon thereafter.

Despite our many gains, the United States is not always a welcoming place for individuals across many spectrums. This is essentially true for those coming from unaffirming communities and families, those for whom living their authentic lives may come at the cost of social ties and support systems.

Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to support this amendment because it affirms children, families, our fellow colleagues, our soldiers, law enforcement, first responders, firefighters, teachers, people who see us in the retail area. It affirms America. This knowledge about who we are can be enormously helpful to being a better America.

Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney), the distinguished chairwoman of the full committee.

Madam Speaker, may I inquire how much time remains on each side.

Madam Speaker, let me offer what we are living in. There are more than 300 laws that have been passed across the Nation that are discriminating against the LGBTQI+ community. In addition, we find that less than half of these 50 States are protecting this community. That means that there is a half loaf for many in this community.

How do we remedy and educate States and local communities? We do so by ensuring that information is given. That is how you protect taxpayer dollars, that you are constructive in the use of dollars.

This is only to help with better implementation of social services that are already rendered, but such social services may not be geared toward addressing some of the populations here in the United States.

My amendment, which is what we always ask for, is making sure that we are accountable when we are addressing the concerns that have not been addressed in the LGBTQI+ community.

That is what I hope most people will see. But at the same time, I hope my amendment characterizes what America is: a compassionate, with passion, caring, and humanitarian Nation.

We go all over the world to fight for human rights, justice, and equality. Our soldiers put on the uniform to dignify our Constitution. Why not here in America?

Do my friends on the other side of the aisle realize how many men and women in the United States military come from the LGBTQI+ community? They didn't ask questions; they put on the uniform. I know they fought really hard not to have questions asked.

I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment for accountability and fairness and to recognize all of us are Americans.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Houston pride community and the 44th annual pride parade in Houston and to celebrate the caucus that has fought against HIV/AIDS, political empowerment, educating the public, and helping those in the LGBTQI community who could not help themselves.

I congratulate them for a stupendous commitment to civic participation in our State and in our community.

Let me also say that I rise again to raise the Protect Our Kids Act, an act passed by this House really dealing with gun safety and protecting our kids by raising the age for assault weapons, by banning magazines, by ensuring they are stored, by stopping trafficking, stopping ghost guns, and stopping bump stocks.

Yes, we did a magnificent job in the House. We look forward to moving forward with legislation that we hope will make a difference. We are a part of the change, and I hope that we will move some elements of the Protect Our Kids Act as we go forward to make sure we do, in fact, protect our kids.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution calling for the stability and the cessation of violence and condemning ISIS-affiliated terrorist activity in northern Mozambique.

For months, insurgents linked to the Islamic State have attacked innocent Mozambican citizens and soldiers in the region of Cabo Delgado.

The region is home to one of the world's richest natural gas reservoirs, making it the target of considerable attention for Islamic revolutionaries.

Since the early 2010s, a mixture of economic inequality, unemployment, and a religious movement have bred a strong, violent extremist organization called Ansar al-Sunna.

That movement is now characterized by cells of the Islamic State working to terrorize the Mozambican people, funded by illegal drug and ivory trading.

The violence has displaced nearly one million people and killed thousands of others.

The insurgents decimate villages, especially targeting Christian districts, while murdering civilians with terrifying callousness.

This resolution calls on the government of Mozambique, specifically President Filipe Nyusi, to finally take action to counter the extremism.

Under the status quo, people are killed for practicing their religion, and extremists have overrun all forms of policing in the Northern province.

A right to liberty and justice is not something designed only for Americans or those in the West. Every human being deserves an equitable chance to pursue a fulfilling, secure life.

That opportunity is being stripped away by deadly revolutionaries in Mozambique. It is time for this Congress to take a stand against an insurgency that has decimated lives since 2017.

As defenders of the defenseless, America must take a stand and pressure the Mozambican government to protect its own citizens.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 892: Calling on the Government of the Republic of Rwanda to Release Paul Rusesabagina on Humanitarian Grounds.

The resolution calls on the government of Rwanda to immediately release Paul Rusesabagina on humanitarian grounds, ensure that he receives access to appropriate qualified medical professionals and all medical care, and permit him to return safely to the United States .

The resolution als urges the U.S. government in all interactions with the government of Rwanda to raise e case of Paul Rusesabagina and to press for his immediate release on humanitarian grounds.

Paul Rusesabagina is a 67-year-old cancer survivor who suffers from a cardiovascular disorder, and his permanent residency is in Texas.

He is also very special in the eyes of our entire nation, as he is a Presidential Medal of Freedom honoree.

He came to global prominence because he was the manager of the Hotel des Mille Collines in Kigali, a hotel that provided safe haven to over 1,200 Hutu and Tutsi refugees during the 1994 Rwandan genocide.

In August 2020, Mr. Rusesabagina, on a flight meant to land in Burundi, was extrajudicially transferred to Kigali by the Rwandan government and put on trial.

He was immediately arrested, although the Rwandan government did not acknowledge his detention for three days during which he was reportedly subjected to torture.

Paul Rusesabagina was sentenced to 25 years in prison on September 20, 2021.

The rogue extrajudicial transfer of Mr. Rusesabagina from Texas to Rwanda, and the subsequent trial, have been widely criticized by human rights organizations for the lack of fair trial standards, including violations of attorney-client privilege.

Human Rights Watch called the trial ``flawed'' and ``emblematic of the government's overreach and manipulation of the justice system.''

The U.S. State Department said it was ``concerned'' about Rusesabagina's ``lack of confidential, unimpeded access to his lawyers and relevant case documents and his initial lack of access to counsel.''

His own daughters only get to speak to him for about five minutes once a week.

Mr. Rusesabagina has been a vocal critic of Rwandan President Paul Kagame, accusing the president of war crimes and human rights violations, and is suffering because of it.

Our Constitution was built with the belief that every person has the right to express political dissent.

An attack on free speech anywhere is an attack on our American values.

The reported lack of fair trial guarantees calls into question the fairness of the verdict and the lack of protections meant to be consistent with Rwanda's international commitment.

To allow a foreign government to abduct and hold hostage an American permanent resident without a fair trial is to turn our back on a fundamental rule of law and democracy.

I urge all my colleagues to support H. Res. 892, calling on the Government of the Republic of Rwanda to Release Paul Rusesabagina on Humanitarian Grounds.

Madam Speaker, I stand in support of H.R. 7174, the ``National, Computer Forensics Institute Reauthorization Act of 2022'' which will bolster the education of those defending the American people against cyber security threats.

Soon after the devastating attacks on 9/11, Congress passed the Homeland Security Act of 2002 through which it consolidated the separate branches of our security efforts into one dedicated office.

Through this Act, the Department of Homeland Security provided provisions such as infrastructure protection, chemical, biological, and nuclear defenses, as well as other measures to safeguard national security.

Congress voted in 2012 to reauthorize these important protections. We gather here to do so again today.

During the drafting of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, the United States faced a wave of terrorism and extremism that threatened the lives and liberties of our people.

Today, enemies of the State have evolved to infiltrate our computers, cell phones, and cyber infrastructure.

As a result, companies, organizations, and entire cities are targets for attacks.

Last year, more than 400 U.S. government offices were held ransom or affected by a direct cyber threat.

In 2018, Atlanta, Georgia was nearly crippled by a ransomware attack that wreaked havoc on utilities, parking, and other services in the city. Atlanta taxpayers spent over $2.6 million in recovery efforts.

Last year, Washington, D.C.'s Metropolitan Police Department was targeted by cyber-thugs threatening to publish countless pieces of sensitive data including arrest records, the identities of persons of interest, and even the names of confidential police informants.

In December, a Los Angeles location of Planned Parenthood had the private health information of 400,000 patients stolen through ransomware. Addresses, birthdays, and diagnoses of patients were in the hands of those who meant to do the American people harm.

Ransomware attacks cost federal, state, and local government agencies about $915 million last year.

Our Nation is vulnerable.

We are at risk.

We must be proactive to protect against larger and more sophisticated attacks.

That is why I stand in support of the ``National Computer Forensics Institute Reauthorization Act of 2022'' which will continue efforts to train, educate and equip State, local, territorial, and Tribal law enforcement officers to combat cyber-attacks for another 10 years.

With this amended reauthorization, Congress would balance the need for cybersecurity with the prioritization of civil rights, civil liberties, and the safeguarding of private data.

It would also designate curriculum for the Institute, authorize full or partial funding towards attendance at the Institute, require reports of efficacy, future need, and demographic information, as well as expand on the physical and virtual capacities of the Institute's academic reach.

H.R. 7174 would amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to better train those who defend our country from cyber threats today, while preparing for the advanced threats coming tomorrow.

Perhaps the most important section of this Act is the provision outlining the research and development of systems and procedures to enhance the Institute's capabilities and capacity for the future.

If cyber-attackers are willing to target American cities, agencies, and companies today, there is little question that they will be willing to target even more tomorrow.

Our best weapon against such threats is an educated and empowered league of law enforcement and IT professionals working to defend the nation's data, privacy, and security.

Once again, I offer my support for H.R. 7174, ``National Computer Forensics Institute Reauthorization Act of 2022'' and encourage my colleagues to do the same.

Madam Speaker, I rise in defense of Americans' right to due process in support of the NDO Fairness Act.

This bill amends 18 U.S.C. 2705 to increase the federal regulation of law enforcement's use of non-disclosure orders or ``gag orders''.

H.R. 7072 requires federal prosecutors to have obtained a written determination from a court proving that their use of a non-disclosure order is necessary.

This bill also would establish a 30-day limit for gag orders, which can be extended for 30 days if deemed necessary.

After the gag-order expires, law enforcement must ensure that the person subject to the gag-order has been notified within 72 hours.

This bill also creates the historic and necessary right for cellular service providers to contest prosecutors' gag orders in court.

Under the status quo, the process for prosecutors to request and be granted access to an individual's personal electronic communication is streamlined, unregulated, and relatively unrestrained.

Prosecutors then petition for a non-disclosure order, stripping the subject's right to know their personal information is being searched.

The NDO also prohibits the subject's ability to block the search of their personal data.

If this intrusion were done in-person--meaning that the government shows up to a person's home, accesses their desktop, secures their personal data, and then refuses to tell that citizen--Americans would be outraged.

The searching of online data is just as egregious a violation of personal privacy.

Establishing transparency within our democracy, especially within our criminal justice system, is necessary to ensure the legitimacy of government and the preservation of our Union.

Just because the ecosystem for data has changed from analog to digital does not give the government the right to full access of whatever information they see as necessary for prosecution.

This legislation tips the scales of justice back toward the American citizen, protecting them from unwarranted, unconstitutional searches of their property.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Con. Res.E ``Expressing the Sense Of Congress Regarding the Execution-Style Murders Of United States Citizens Ylli, Agron, And Mehmet Bytyqi In The Republic Of Serbia In July 1999''.

This resolution would demand that the individuals who so unconscionably murdered the Bytyqi Brothers shortly after the end of the Kosovo war be held accountable by the Serbian government.

This resolution reaffirms our commitment to American citizens, that, no matter what, they will receive the justice that they and their families deserve, regardless of how long it has been.

Ylli, Agron, and Mehmet were American citizens traveling on a humanitarian mission to combat the genocide of Serbian Albanians in 1999, who, after unknowingly crossing an unmarked border, were extrajudicially kidnapped, imprisoned, tortured, murdered, and callously thrown into a mass grave by Serbian government officials.

Their bodies were not discovered until 2001.

These officials knew the entire time that the Bytyqi brothers were Americans citizens, and undeterred, carried out crime after crime, even after a Serbian judge ordered the brothers' release.

Despite this horrific crime, despite promises from President Aleksandar Vucic and Foreign Minister Ivica Dacic, not one person has been held responsible in the past 23 years.

We cannot allow this injustice to exist, and we cannot allow other countries to believe that it is in any way acceptable to treat American citizens in this manner.

It is unacceptable that there has been no movement on this case in years.

Ylli, Agron, and Mehmet and the remaining Bytyqi family deserve justice, and the Serbian government agrees. How then has nothing been done to secure this justice?

Since the Serbian government has not acted, the United States must devote resources to fully assist and monitor Serbia's efforts to investigate this crime against American citizens.

No American should experience what the Bytyqi brothers and their families have experienced, and we should make it clear that the United States will always seek justice for its people.

I urge all my colleagues to support H. Con. Res.E ``Expressing the Sense of Congress Regarding the Execution-Style Murders of United States Citizens Ylli, Agron, And Mehmet Bytyqi in the Republic of Serbia in July 1999''.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1934, the ``Promoting United States International Leadership in 5G Act of 2021''.

H.R. 1934 will enhance the United States' leadership in setting standards for 5G--or 5th generation--and future evolutions of mobile telecomunications systems and infrastructure.

I would like to thank my colleague, Representative McCaul, for introducing this legislation and taking initiative in addressing the rising importance of 5G standards.

Under H.R. 1934, the President will establish an interagency working group consisting of the Sectretary of State and the head of each Federal department deemed appropriate.

Within 180 days, the interagency working group will provide a briefing to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and Senate Committee on Foreign Relations that will include:

A strategy to promote United States leadership in international standards-setting bodies;

A strategy for diplomatic engagement regarding 5G and future generations of mobile telecommunications systems;

A discussion of China's activity in international standards-setting bodies; and

A strategy regarding private sector communications and stakeholders to propose standards for 5G.

Standards are crucial in the future of telecommunications by allowing for global interoperability.

Global interoperability allows companies to market products around the globe, increase innovation, and benefit from fair competition.

Past generations of wireless technology, 2G and 3G, saw a split between networks used in United States, Europe, and China, which complicated the globalization of the wireless market.

For 5G, standards have converged into primarily one standard.

China has become a leader in setting international standards for 5G. In 2019, China submitted 830 technical documents to the International Telecommunication Union (ITU)--the most of any country.

China's dominance in 5G standards would give them an advantage in creating chips and software for 5G-compatible phones.

H.R. 1934 addresses this head-on by spearheading American leadership in both 5G standards setting and global cooperation.

Houston was one of the first cities in America to access 5G services with major providers--AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon--offerring access to Houston customers,

The Texas Comptroller's Office released a report in 2020 indicating that Houston led 5G growth in Texas.

The adoption of 5G has tremendous potential to create jobs and transform the healthcare, energy, and transportation industries.

CTIA, a trade group for the wireless communications industry, found that 5G could have an economic impact of $30.3 billion and create 93,700 jobs in Houston.

5G represents the future and will expand technological limits to a new frontier.

It is important that we continue to prioritize the United States' international leadership as 5G continues to grow.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 1934.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5274, known as the PREVENT Act of 2021.

The Prevent Exposure to Narcotics and Toxics Act seeks to amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to provide additional training for U.S. Customs and Border Protection personnel.

The training outlined in the amendment would instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection on containment devices which prevent secondary exposure to fentanyl and other lethal substances.

These containment devices reduce exposure to hazardous substances and can improve investigations by better preserving chemical substances for forensic analysis.

Fentanyl exposure as little as two milligrams can lead to trouble breathing, dizziness and a possible lethal overdose.

CBP (Customer and Border Protection) Officers are at an increased risk of exposure to fentanyl and other lethal substances through inhalation, ingestion, skin contact, etc. This exposure risk was reported by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's Office of the Inspector General.

The same report cited that many CBP facilities were ill equipped to store fentanyl and other lethal substances.

These facilities were also not equipped with naloxone, a substance critical in preventing overdose when faced with accidental exposures.

Without proper training on how to contain and prevent these threats, our personnel are at risk of endangering themselves and the people they seek to protect.

It is imperative to defend our law enforcement officers from dangers they face while protecting our communities and Nation. This bill would promote the safety of CBP Officers while promoting the effectiveness of their investigations.

I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 5274.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 7777, the ``Industrial Control Systems Cybersecurity Training Act.''

H.R. 7777 amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to authorize the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency to establish an industrial control systems training iniative that will strengthen the skills of our vital cyber-security workforce.

Industrial control systems are the devices, systems, networks, and controls used to operate and automate the industrial functions that keep our Nation running.

They are key components in manufacturing, electrical generation, wastewater treatment, and even oil refineries--all of which are necessary for the proper functioning of our country.

While the technological revolution has streamlined many industrial services, it has also left us vulnerable to threats targeting our national utilities and infrastructure.

The ``Industrial Control Systems Cybersecurity Training Act'' provides an instruction manual for training those on the frontlines of our defense.

First, H.R. 7777 prioritizes increasing access to cybersecurity education courses.

The Act would require the Director to make accessible to the public tuition-free virtual and in-person cyber security courses and trainings for varying skill levels.

It would also ensure that these trainings be available across the country so that those working in even the most remote corners of America have the opportunity to develop their cybersecurity skills.

Trainings would cover topics of cyber defense strategies, the evolution of cyber threats, and strategies for mitigating security vulnerabilities in industrial control systems.

All of these courses would be crafted in collaboration with the National Laboratory of the Department of Energy and when necessary, consultation with expert private sector entities.

Those who wish to harm our country are learning from the best criminals; therefore, we must equally arm our defenders right along side them.

Secondly, H.R. 7777 requires the Director to provide reports on the initiative to the House Committee on Homeland Security and the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

Through these reports, Congress would not only be able to monitor the quality of courses being offered, but would receive yearly recommendations on how to improve the education and training being offered.

In addition to reporting on the contents of the classes taught, the Director would also be expected to provide information on the race, gender, and regional location of those in attendance.

Through this monitoring process, Congress would be assured not only of current demographic diversity, but also the plans to expand access to industrial control systems cybersecurity training to women and underrepresented populations.

In today's increasingly interconnected world, it is critical that the United States produces highly trained cyber security professionals equipped to maintain America's security and defense.

It is also critical that the initiatives utilized to provide for their education encapsulate the needs of our diverse and varied Nation.

H.R. 7777 will put in place the framework needed to train the next generation of leaders in industrial control systems cybersecurity.

That is why I rise in strong support of ``Industrial Control Systems Cybersecurity Training Act.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Con. Res. 59, a resolution ``Condemning the October 25, 2021, military coup in Sudan and standing with the people of Sudan.''

H. Con. Res. 59 is a bipartisan resolution condemning the military coup carried out on October 25, 2021 and calls for Prime Minister Hamdok and other constitutional leaders from his cabinet to be released from unlawful custody.

This resolution urges the Sudanese government to resume measures to transition power to a civilian led government that respects democratic principles and end all violence against its citizens.

Following the ousting of President Al-Bashir on April 11, 2019 the Transitional Military Council (TMC) seized power halting the proposed transition to a representative democracy,

On June 3, 2019 about 127 peaceful protesters were killed at the hands of the Rapid Support Forces, an extension of the Sudanese government that continues to perpetuate violence in the region to this day.

With support from the U.S. and members of the international community, Sudan was showing promise in its democratic transition through actions such as ratifying their intention to turn in former President Al-Bashir to the International Criminal Court, as well as civilian and military leaders agreeing to a transitional framework to implement a civilan-led government.

Unfortunately, Lt. General Burhan and his allies seized power following a coup of the transitional government in October 2021, subsequently imprisoning Minister Hamdok and other officials.

Protests followed the coup as the Sudanese people called for a transition from a military ruling council to true democratic governance.

BBC News reports over 100 people have been killed by Sudanese security forces since October 2021, with tensions between the military and civilians worsening as the region faces increased food shortages and inflation.

Houston is home to thousands of African immigrants including many Sudanese Americans to whom I answer to as their representative. It is critical for Congress to stand with the women and men advocating and speaking up for the Sudanese people.

I applaud the efforts and sacrifices that pro-democracy activists have made. They must be assured that the United States fully supports their desire for freedom and peace, and strongly condemns the violent and oppressive tactics of Sudan's military junta.

When enacted, controlled H. Con. Res. 59 will lay out areas where the Sudan's military-controlled government must improve if it wants to continue engaging with the United States, including political reform and a respect for human rights.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H. Con. Res 59 to confront these atrocities we have seen in Sudan and uplift the democratic values we work to protect.

Madam Speaker, we are in the midst of many elections, primary elections and ongoing to November 2022.

I salute our election officials because what we saw yesterday in the January 6 hearings was appalling and disgraceful and an attack on democracy. From the speaker of the House of Arizona to the elections officers in Georgia, pain was exhibited from being violated, violently attacked by words, and threatened.

I remember the words of the election official from Georgia saying: I don't even want to give my card out or give my name.

Both she and her mother are targeted. These are just people who are Americans who want to serve their country. What an outrage.

As we continue to listen to the January 6 proceedings, let us take them very seriously. Those who engage in this kind of outrageous behavior, an attack on the flag of the United States, must be held accountable.

My heart goes out to the election officials and the speaker of the Arizona Legislature, whose daughter was sick while his house was being attacked.

We cannot do any less than to hold those accountable, accountable because this is a disgrace to the American flag.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding. As I begin--I am going to ask the chairman to enter into a colloquy--but, first, let me express my strong support for H.R. 7666 and the work that has been done in a bipartisan manner by both the chairman and the ranking member, and the importance of the issue of dealing with opioid addictions and other addictions that require this additional work. I am gratified to rise to support that.

I thank Chairman Pallone, and ask, as I said, that he engages in a colloquy with me on the need to support the mental health needs of trauma victims impacted by trauma and, yes, mass

shootings. I think I have been here in the United States Congress during Columbine, Virginia Tech, Sandy Hook, Mother Emanuel, Santa Fe, Parkland--and the list goes on--and tragically Uvalde with 19 children, 2 adults, and 1 individual who died of heartbreak. I was in Uvalde, and I saw the impact on our children, to see 9-year-olds--9-year-olds-- crying and saying that because I spoke to them, they said you are making me happy because you spoke to me, and you said you care. Out of the mouth of a 9-year-old.

So we know there is a mental health crisis as relates to the trauma of those who certainly are survivors and those who are in the community.

We also know that too many families and children in this country are hurting from the preventable epidemic of gun violence, shootings, and mass casualty events. These tragic events have lasting scars on the families, friends, and communities. I have seen this pain with my own eyes. And so I am interested in--as my amendment that I withdrew indicated--is there a prioritization of those children who are impacted by trauma?

Madam Speaker, I would like to be able to work with Chairman Pallone on this issue. Will the gentleman yield for the purpose of a colloquy?

I thank the chairman for answering my questions regarding the Restoring Hope Act that there will be provisions for mental health care and services for children, families, and communities who experience these traumatic and violent events.

I look forward working with the chairman on these vital resources. With your partnership I would like to continue to work with you and the administration to ensure that when this legislation is enacted, the needs of the vulnerable victims and those closest to them are in the front of our minds.

Will the gentleman commit to working with me on this matter?

Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for his support. I will support this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise as a staunch advocate for mental health services to speak in favor of the Restoring Hope for Mental Health and Well- Being Act of 2022.

This bill amends the Public Health Service Act to reauthorize critical mental health programs for those dealing with mental health or substance abuse disorders.

H.R. 7666 works to mitigate some of the most pressing issues of our time by designating grants, expanding the availability of high-quality recovery housing, reauthorizing treatment programs, and combatting substance abuse.

In 2019, an estimated 10.1 million people in the U.S. aged 12 or older misused opioids in the past year. Specifically, 9.7 million people misused prescription pain relievers and 745,000 people used heroin.

The bill eliminates a key restrictive classification of opioid addiction so that access to treatment programs is expanded.

These issues disproportionately impact tribal communities. According to the American Addiction Centers, 10% of Native Americans have a substance use disorder.

H.R. 7666 specifically funds the prevention and treatment of mental health and substance use disorders for tribal populations.

This is a needed step in protecting a community with a history of being mistreated by the Federal government.

This bill's expansion of access to mental health care services, most importantly of all, would make these services much more available to children and adolescents, who must always be our top priority.

For example, this bill increases mental health services for our youth by integrating behavioral health into public education in primary schools and creating a grant for pediatric mental health services.

This legislation also addresses another pressing issue that afflicts young Americans: eating disorders. As many as 10 in 100 young women suffer from an eating disorder.

H.R. 7666 provides federal funding for the identification and treatment of eating disorders.

But, above all, Mr. Speaker, who among all of our children, need mental health services more than those who have just experienced the unconscionable? Senseless shootings leave our students, some as young as five years old, devastated and vulnerable.

As adults, the thought of having our peers murdered in front of us is disturbing. How much more traumatizing would that be for pre-school students?

This bill acts as a conduit for protecting children who are victims of a mass shooting or mass casualty event.

Mass shootings, especially school shootings, can leave lethal and obvious physical wounds on victims.

However, the long-lasting and subtle mental trauma is the invisible scar left on many survivors. Friends, family, and classmates often suffer with extreme guilt and sadness.

There have been 278 mass shooting in this year alone. Firearms are now the leading cause of death for children and teens.

In addition to those tragically killed, millions more are left behind, coping with these deaths. An estimated 3 million children in the US are exposed to shootings per year.

Since Columbine, there have been 337 school shootings and 311,000 students have experienced gun violence at school. Even more disturbing, just since Uvalde, there have been 65 mass shootings.

This is not a one-state issue. From the 28 killed at Sandy Hook in Connecticut, to the 17 killed at Marjorie Stoneman-Douglas in Florida, to the 10 killed at Red Lake in Minnesota, to the 22 killed at Robb Elementary in my home state of Texas, school shootings have become a disgusting norm.

Children exposed to violence, crime, and abuse are more likely to abuse drugs and alcohol; suffer from depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress disorder; fail or have difficulties in school; and engage in criminal activity.

These children don't stay children forever. These mental health struggles translate to a life of pain and suffering where crime, drug use, and suicide are more likely.

This trauma has real consequences: in the year following the 2018 massacre at Stoneman-Douglas High school, two students took their own life after suffering with the mental anguish of the events they had lived through.

Passage of this bill will not solve the gun crisis or mass shootings in this country. Only common-sense gun-control will do that.

However, this bill will set a foundation for the government to address the toll of gun violence on children's mental health.

Additionally, enactment of this legislation demonstrates Congress' support of victims of mass casualty events by prioritizing access to mental health services.

Children are the future of our country. Far too many of them have their hopes and dreams stripped away by senseless shootings.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3285, the ``21st Century President Act''--an insightful, common-sense measure, of which I am an original cosponsor.

In considering this bill, I think back to 1970 when Representative Shirley Chisolm, speaking on the need to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment, asked: ``Why is it acceptable for women to be secretaries, librarians, and teachers, but totally unacceptable for them to be managers, administrators, doctors, lawyers, and Members of Congress?'' At that time, it was almost unthinkable that a woman could be elected President of the United States.

Although we have yet to ratify the ERA, our country has made great strides in the struggle for gender equality since then--from the groundbreaking presidential primary campaign of Representative Chisolm in 1972; to the first-of-its-kind vice presidential nomination of Geraldine Ferraro; to the 18 million cracks in the glass ceiling made by Hillary Clinton; and the historic election of President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, which began with a field that included six women and one member of the LGBTQ community.

Given the diversity of candidates for the presidency in recent years and the more inclusive times in which we live, our laws should evolve to reflect this societal progress.

That is why H.R. 3285 amends section 879 of title 18 to do away with the assumption that the president is male and his spouse female by removing gendered terms such as ``wife'' or ``widow.''

I hope we can all agree that ``immediate family'' means much more today than the 1982 law provides and that the spouse of our President should be protected regardless of gender.

Indeed, we have come very far in the pursuit of gender equality since this statute was enacted. Yet H.R. 3285 makes clear there is still much work to be done.

As we approach the 50th anniversary of the enactment of Title IX, women's rights are once again under threat and the push for genuine gender equality-has been renewed.

Each of us must remain vigilant and ensure that equality of rights under the law are neither denied nor abridged by the United States or by any state on account of gender in any manner.

I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin, Representative Mark Pocan, for his efforts to bring us into the 21st century and for recognizing the importance of ensuring the safety and security of those who may come from the wide, vast diversity of America to serve as President.

I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this bill and hope we can pass it by voice vote as we did in the 116th Congress.