Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, the head of the NFL said that racism of any kind is unacceptable.

Having worked on these issues since the very beginning of my tenure in the United States Congress, including hearings in Houston on brain injuries that were undiagnosed, I take a special interest in the Brian Flores lawsuit for the reality that it means something is wrong and it must be changed.

Yesterday, I honored a Houston Texan who had a great history. Today, as I tweeted early this morning, the vacancy should be filled by Lovie Smith, an African American, a coach for the Houston Texans. Later today they announced that Lovie Smith will be the new coach. With experience having taken the Chicago team to the Super Bowl, could it be anyone else?

Now, we need to begin to assess how we can act on the words ``racism is unacceptable'' in any sport in any part of America's life.

I am excited. Congratulations to Coach Smith and to the Houston Texans. But let us acknowledge David Culley and go forward so that the example can be across the landscape of sports wherever it is and across the Nation.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from California, as always, for reminding us in almost every moment of her tenure here in the United States Congress of the spirit and the investment that Shirley Chisholm made in her personally and the investment that she made as a young college student, saying that I am going to find Shirley Chisholm or accept the call and be in her Presidential election. What a historic moment for her.

Also, the very pathway that she has taken in the United States Congress is evidence that she is definitely a living example of the fighting spirit of Shirley Chisholm.

It is great to be here to acknowledge this 50th commemoration of this historic moment. I thank our chair, the Honorable Joyce Beatty, for reminding us of Our Power, Our Message. I would like to say our message, our power, and to recognize that the Congressional Black Caucus is the pacesetter for justice and equality and the elimination of racism, which still lifts its head today.

To my other colleagues that are here today, I am grateful for their presence on the floor, for Shirley Chisholm deserves the recognition and the acknowledgment of who she was but also what she did and what she invested in America.

Let it be known that even as she was an African-American woman, she was a great American that made differences that can be seen today.

I want to honor and acknowledge the shoulders upon which I stand. That includes, in our Congress, Shirley Chisholm, John Conyers, John Lewis, Ron Dellums, and Barbara Jordan.

I also want to acknowledge my parents, Ivalita ``Ivy'' Jackson, a vocational nurse, and Ezra C. Jackson, one of the first African Americans to succeed in the aftermath of being discriminated against in the comic book industry.

All of that pours into the work of Shirley Chisholm and her campaign slogan in this, her congressional district race in 1968: ``Fighting Shirley Chisholm: Unbought and Unbossed.'' That continued throughout her life.

She remarked that women in this country must become revolutionaries, that we must refuse to accept the old, traditional roles and stereotypes.

This is a sentiment that I take to heart myself and that the women of the Congressional Black Caucus have taken to heart. We have told the Nation that we must have self-determination. We want to lead. Shirley Chisholm was at the core of the movement of women leading. That is why, on January 25, 1972, Shirley announced her candidacy.

She stood before the cameras, and in the beginning of her speech, she said--before I say these words, let me be very clear. There weren't thousands of people. There may not have been hundreds and hundreds of people. I can tell you there was a bounty of skeptics, people standing back and saying: This is unimaginable. Why would she do this? We don't need her to do this. She is getting in the way.

I am grateful that Shirley Chisholm, fighting Shirley Chisholm, unbought and unbossed, maintained the dignity of the right of a Black woman, an American, to run for the Presidency of the United States.

So, she said: ``I stand before you today as a candidate for the Democratic nomination for the Presidency of the United States.''

How sweet those words are.

``I am not the candidate of Black America, although I am Black and proud. I am not the candidate of the women's movement of this country, although I am a woman and I am equally proud of that. I am not the candidate of any political''--bosses--``or special interests. . . . I am the candidate of the people.''

We keep that in mind, this Congress, the Democratic Members of Congress. The Congressional Black Caucus must keep in mind that we are the candidates, the spokespersons of the people, that it is their truth that we must tell. Shirley Chisholm always told their truth.

She did not win the nomination, but she went on to the Democratic Convention in Miami and received 151 votes.

We know that the Vice President of the United States, Kamala Harris, stands on the shoulders of Shirley Chisholm. The women today that are elected across America, in all different positions, stand on the shoulders of Shirley Chisholm.

We recognize that barriers still stand. One that we hope will be corrected in this month, Black History Month, in Shirley Chisholm's fighting spirit, is that an African-American woman, a Black woman, will be nominated to the United States Supreme Court.

We want more than that as well. We want an age-old bill that has been languishing for so long, H.R. 40, the Commission to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African Americans Act, that Congresswoman Chisholm would have been on. We want it to be pronounced and announced this month.

As we honor her tonight, fighting Shirley Chisholm, let me acknowledge the different poses, the different leadership, as she has stood for the people of Brooklyn, but the people of America. That is the face of a fighting woman, and that is the face of the person we honor tonight.

I am delighted to be here with my colleague, who has always put Shirley Chisholm in the forefront of our thinking, of how progressive and innovative and powerful and strong and empowering--I want to leave you with that. She believed in empowering others and understood the words of Martin Luther King: Injustice anywhere is injustice everywhere. Shirley Chisholm was ahead of her time.

Shirley Chisholm is to be honored every day, as my colleague said, as we walk through these Halls. I look up and see Barbara Jordan, and then I look up and see Shirley Chisholm, unbought and unbossed. Honor her tonight and always.

Congresswoman, thank you so very much. I wanted to offer my appreciation first to you because I want you to be the last word on this floor tonight because I truly mean what I said earlier, and in almost every moment there has been an anecdotal story, a very important one that you have reminded us of the strength of Shirley Chisholm.

I do want to go back to Shirley's Caribbean roots, but her strong roots in Brooklyn. I know that you said this, or I am sure it has been referred to or you will, is that when she came to the United States Congress, being the first African-American woman and being dismissed not by her constituents, but by the hierarchy that was here, and I am sure someone with a little chuckle thought: Brooklyn, urban, guess where we will put her? On the Agriculture Committee. And that will get her packing up and running out.

But Shirley Chisholm, again, fighting Shirley Chisholm was her theme, showed them. I remember those words either said by her or describe her, a tree grows in Brooklyn. Don't sell us short. A tree grows in Queens, a tree grows in Manhattan, a tree grows in New York.

She did take to the leadership of the Agriculture Committee, particularly becoming an expert on SNAP and many other aspects of agriculture that really dealt with the vulnerable and starving people in America. That was Shirley Chisholm.

And then as I intertwine the question of the selection and nomination of an African-American woman to the United States Supreme Court, I want to put in the Record the words, if you are always ruled but denied the opportunity to rule, in turn, you are simply a subject and not fully a citizen. And so Congresswoman Chisholm's presence was to deny being only ruled and simply being a subject.

The cases that spoke to that are the Supreme Court decisions like Dred Scott v. Sandford, Plessy v. Ferguson, Korematsu v. United States, civil rights cases in 1883, Bowers v. Hardwick, Lochner v. New York, and Buck v. Bell. These cases from 1857 to 1927 all showed where America was in terms of this cancer called racism.

I want to refer us tonight in my final words on the floor in tribute to Shirley Chisholm to the words she said about do women dare. As I do so, with a little bit of sense of great honor is to show a picture of myself and Shirley Chisholm that I now found and relocated and will actually get framed, my presenting her with an award after a speech that she gave in front of the Black women lawyers. When we were few, unknown, and unlisted and probably unappreciated, she actually came to speak before the Black women lawyers in Houston, Texas, having some years before that worked as an intern in her district at one of the State representatives' offices, Representative Bellamy.

And I might say, as I talk about Shirley, I have to put on the record that she was selected for the Agriculture Committee, but I am told by my former colleague, Pat Schroeder, that when she and Ron Dellums went to the Armed Services Committee, they were given one chair. And they had to sit in one chair because they were trying to diminish them and dismiss them. They could not do that. And though this is not about Ron Dellums, he became the chair of the Armed Services Committee.

But let me give these words in conclusion on the fighting Shirley Chisholm. This is her speech ``Do Women Dare,'' and it just has been discovered. ``The topic this morning of course is, `do women dare?' ''

These are her words.

``And I have said, of course women dare. Do women dare? I assume that the question implies do women dare take an active part in society, and, in particular, do they dare to take a part in the present social revolution?''

We need this now more than ever. And I would say, Do Americans dare? Do men and women dare? Do African Americans dare? Do vulnerable people dare?

``And I find the question as much of an insult as I would the question, `Are you, as a Black person, willing to fight for your rights?' America has been sufficiently sensitized to the answer, whether or not Black people are willing to both fight and die for their rights. To make the question itself is asinine and superfluous. America is not yet sufficiently aware, but such a question applied to women is equally asinine and superfluous.''

And so she goes on to say: ``I am, as is obvious, both Black and a woman. And that is a good vantage point from which to view at least two elements of what is becoming a social revolution. The American Black revolution and the women's liberation movement. But it is also a horrible disadvantage. It is a disadvantage, my friends, because America as a Nation, is both racist and antifeminist. Racism and antifeminism are two of the prime traditions of this country that we have to face objectively. For any individual, therefore, challenging social traditions is a giant step. A giant step, because there are no social traditions which do not have corresponding social sanctions, the sole purpose of which are to protect the sanctity of the traditions.''

And so she goes on to talk about do women dare. I cannot think of more important words in 2022 as we fight against racism and sexism, as we fight to give a sense of reality and honesty and equality to the idea of a Black woman going to the Supreme Court.

And as we raise up the issue of the study of slavery and the development of reparation proposals under H.R. 40, can that be a simple, obvious reality? Can that be something that is just accepted because it is right?

Shirley Chisholm has taught us to keep fighting and to dare. I thank the gentlewoman for bringing us to this place and also to this understanding.

Madam Speaker, this February we recognize and celebrate the 44th commemoration of Black History Month and the Jubilee anniversary of Shirley Chisolm's historic run for the presidency in 1972.

I am honored to co-anchor this Congressional Black Caucus Special Order with my dear friend and colleague, Congresswoman Barbara Lee of California.

This month we celebrate the contributions of African Americans to the history of our great Nation, and pay tribute to trailblazers, pioneers, heroes, and leaders like Kamala D. Harris, the 49th Vice-President of the United States and the first woman and person of color to be elected to the office; 44th President of the United States and First Lady,

Barack Obama and Michelle Obama, respectively; Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.; Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall; U.S. Senator Blanche Kelso Bruce; U.S. Congresswoman Barbara Jordan; U.S. Congressman Mickey Leland; Astronauts Dr. Guion Stewart Bluford, Jr. and Mae C. Jemison; activists, intellectuals, authors, artists, and entrepreneurs like Frederick Douglass, Booker T. Washington, James Baldwin, Harriet Tubman, Rosa Parks, Maya Angelou, Toni Morrison, Gwendolyn Brooks, Shonda Rhimes, Ava Duvernay, Oprah Winfrey, and Super Bowl LIV winning quarterback Patrick Mahomes and National Football League Most Valuable Player Lamar Jackson, just to name a few of the countless number of well-known and unsung heroes whose contributions have helped our Nation become a more perfect union.

The history of the United States has been marked by the great contributions of African American activists, leaders, writers, and artists.

As a member of Congress, I know that I stand on the shoulders of giants like Shirley Chisolm, John Conyers, John Lewis, Ronald Dellums, and Barbara Jordan whose struggles and triumphs made it possible for me to stand here today and continue the fight for equality, justice, and progress for all, regardless of race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation.

The greatest of these giants to me are Mrs. Ivalita ``Ivy'' Jackson, a vocational nurse, and Mr. Ezra C. Jackson, one of the first African Americans to succeed in the comic book publishing business.

They were my beloved parents, and they taught me the value of education, hard work, discipline, perseverance, and caring for others.

And I am continually inspired by Dr. Elwyn Lee, my husband and the first tenured African American law professor at the University of Houston.

Madam Speaker, I particularly wish to acknowledge the contributions of African American veterans in defending from foreign aggressors and who by their courageous examples helped transform our Nation from a segregated society to a nation committed to the never-ending challenge of perfecting our union.

Several years ago about this time, I was honored to join my then colleagues Congressmen John Lewis and former Congressman Charles Rangel, a Korean War veteran, in paying tribute to surviving members of the Tuskegee Airmen and the 555th Parachute Infantry, the famed ``Triple Nickels'' at a moving ceremony sponsored by the U.S. Army commemorating the 50th anniversary of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

The success of the Tuskegee Airmen in escorting bombers during World War II--achieving one of the lowest loss records of all the escort fighter groups and being in constant demand for their services by the allied bomber units--is a record unmatched by any other fighter group.

So impressive and astounding were the feats of the Tuskegee Airmen that in 1948, it helped persuade President Harry Truman to issue his famous Executive Order No. 9981, which directed equality of treatment and opportunity in all of the United States Armed Forces and led to the end of racial segregation in the U.S. military forces.

They proved that ``the antidote to racism is excellence in performance,'' as retired Lt. Col. Herbert Carter once remarked.

It is a source of enormous and enduring pride that my father-in-law, Phillip Ferguson Lee, was one of the Tuskegee Airmen.

Madam Speaker, Black History Month is also a time to remember many pioneering women like activists Harriet Tubman and Rosa Parks; astronaut Mae C. Jemison; mathematicians like Katherine G. Johnson, Dorothy Vaughan, and Mary Jackson; authors Maya Angelou, Toni Morrison, and Gwendolyn Brooks; all of whom have each in their own way, whether through courageous activism, cultural or intellectual contributions, or artistic creativity, forged social and political change, and forever changed our great Nation for the better.

Madam Speaker, it is particularly fitting and proper this evening to remember and celebrate the 50th anniversary of the historic and audacious campaign for President of the late U.S. Congresswoman Shirley Anita St. Hill Chisholm.

Shirley Chisholm became the first African American woman elected to Congress, when she was elected to represent the New York's Twelfth Congressional District in 1968 running on the slogan, ``Fightinq Shirley Chisholm: Unbought and Unbossed.''

She reflected that spirit well during her 14 years in Congress.

During her first term she spoke out for civil rights, women's rights, the poor and against the Vietnam War.

Her first term in Congress was set against the backdrop of the Civil Rights Movement and the women's movement for equal rights.

Shirley Chisolm had an understanding that during those turbulent times the Nation required a determined leader to represent the voice of so many Americans who felt dismay at their treatment.

She took an extremely active role in changing the way women were to be judged from that point on.

She remarked that ``Women in this country must become revolutionaries. We must refuse to accept the old, the traditional roles and stereotypes.''

This is a sentiment that I myself take to heart, women in this Nation are now told they have a right to determine the kind of life they want to lead; Shirley Chisholm was at the core of this movement.

On January 25, 1972, Chisholm announced her candidacy for President.

She stood before the cameras and in the beginning of her speech she said:

``I stand before you today as a candidate for the Democratic nomination for the Presidency of the United States.

``I am not the candidate of black America, although I am black and proud.

``I am not the candidate of the women's movement of this country, although I am a woman, and I am equally proud of that. I am not the candidate of any political bosses or special interests.

``I am the candidate of the people.''

Shirley Chisholm did not win the nomination; but she went on to the Democratic Convention in Miami and received 151 delegates' votes.

More than that, she demonstrated the will and determination of so many Americans, particularly black women, who had previously felt forgotten, and she lit the fire inspiring so many who had felt disenfranchised.

I am glad to walk in their footsteps and will continue to encourage women to uphold the principles they taught us to fight for and cherish.

Madam Speaker, because Shirley Chisolm dared to reach for the brass ring 50 years ago, she ushered in the era where women could aspire, seek, and win leadership roles in this country's local, State, and national governments.

Before Shirley Chisolm, no black woman had ever served in the U.S. House of Representatives or the U.S. Senate, but following in her footsteps are 51 black women Members of Congress, two black women U.S. Senators, including the President of that body and Vice-President of the United States; 23 Hispanic members; and 15 Asian-Pacific Members, along with the first woman Speaker of the House, and mayors of several of the largest cities in the Nation, including the District of Columbia, Chicago, San Francisco, Atlanta, New Orleans, Baltimore, Hartford, Minneapolis, San Antonio, and St. Louis.

One barrier left to fall, however, is one of the most important, and that is membership on the Supreme Court of the United States.

For most of our national history, Presidents and Senators have turned a deaf ear to Abigail Adams' plea to her husband ``to remember the ladies and be more generous and favourable to them than your ancestors.''

Since Justice O'Connor's 1981 appointment, only four women have been nominated to the High Court for the 18 vacancies occurring during this time despite the fact that women constitute a majority of the general population, 37 percent of all attorneys in America, a number that will soon exceed the majority since a substantial majority (54 percent) of all law students in America are women.

With the announcement of his retirement by Associate Justice Stephen Breyer, President Biden and the U.S. Senate, now have been presented and should move quickly to capitalize on this opportunity to begin to rectify the High Court's gender imbalance and to diversify its composition by nominating and confirming a member of the most underrepresented, disadvantaged, marginalized, longest suffering, and most patient demographic in America: black woman.

Longer than any other racial or ethnic group, black women have been subjected to the coercive powers of the law while being excluded from the opportunities to make the laws citizens are to live under.

If you are always ruled but denied the opportunity to rule in turn, you are simply a subject, and not fully a citizen. And that is how you get Supreme Court decisions like Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857), Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), Korematsu v. United States (1944), Civil Rights Cases (1883), Bowers v. Hardwick (1986), Lochner v. New York (1905), and Buck v. Bell (1927).

Simply stated, the purpose of pursuing diversity in the composition of a political system's decision-making institutions is not to elevate any particular man or woman, but to enhance, as Condorcet's Theorem posits, the quality and accuracy of institutional decision making and to bolster institutional legitimacy by increasing its diffuse support from marginal members of the political community.

Researchers have shown that people are more likely to trust those with whom they share physical characteristics and thus as documented by the Center for American Progress, ``in the interests of both equality and

the perception of fairness, it is important that judges reflect the parties and populations they serve.''

Or as described by scholars Jason Iuliano and Avery Stewart, ``In dispensing justice to all citizens, the legal system cannot allow one demographically homogenous group to hand down decisions while other racial and ethnic groups bear the brunt of those decisions.''

The federal judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court, does not resemble the public at large. Glaring disparities exist for women, African Americans, Hispanics, Asian Americans, American Indians, and LGBTQ individuals.

Consider for example that of all the judges currently sitting on federal Article III courts, only about 10 percent are African American and 2.6 percent are Asian American.

In contrast, Blacks and African Americans comprise 12.5 percent of the U.S. population, while Asians make up 5.7 percent of the population.

Hispanics are woefully underrepresented on the courts compared with their share of the population with only 6.6 percent of sitting federal judges of Hispanic origin despite the fact that this group comprises 18.3 percent of the U.S. population.

It is neither improper nor erroneous to say that President Biden owes black women because without their overwhelming support, his reeling campaign would not have cruised to victory in the 2020 South Carolina presidential primary, which led to his resounding wins on Super Tuesday, which put him on the glide path to the Democratic nomination and victory in the general election.

So, if anybody is ever due to fulfill a key campaign promise, it is President Biden vowing to make ``sure there's a Black woman on the Supreme Court, to make sure we in fact get every representation.''

And when President Biden acts to keep his sacred promise, Shirley Chisolm will be smiling down at us from Heaven.

It is also fitting, Madam Speaker, that in addition to those national leaders whose contributions have made our Nation better, we also honor those who have and are making a difference in their local communities.

In my home city of Houston, there are numerous men and women who are great because they have heeded the counsel of Dr. King who said:

``Everybody can be great because anybody can serve. You only need a heart full of grace. A soul generated by love.''

By that measure, I wish to pay tribute to some of the great men and women who help to make Houston the wonderful, dynamic, vibrant, inclusive, and progressive city that it is.

As we celebrate Black History Month, let us pay tribute to those who have come before us, and pay forward to future generations by addressing what is the number one issue for African American families, and all American families today: preserving the American promise of economic opportunity for all.

Our immediate focus must be to work `For The People' to crush the pandemic, continue this Administration's and this Congress's record setting pace for job creation (6.5 million in the first year), and enacting legislation that will foster and lay the foundation for today's and tomorrow's generation of groundbreaking activists, leaders, scientists, writers and artists to continue contributing to the greatness of America.

We must continue to preserve the American Dream for all.

Madam Speaker, I am proud to stand here in celebration of the heroic and historic acts of African Americans and their indispensable contributions to this great Nation.

It is through our work in creating possibilities for today and future generations that we best honor the accomplishments and legacy of our predecessors.

[From Rolling Stone, February 3, 2022]

Shirley Chisholm's Newly Unearthed `Do Women Dare?' Speech Is Just as

Relevant Today

In July 1971, Shirley Chisholm began to talk about it.

Chisholm, who in 1968 had become the first African American

woman elected to Congress, would run for president. The

congresswoman from New York announced her intentions to

secure the Democratic nomination in September, and formally

announced on Jan. 25, 1972. The Democratic candidates who

sought to oppose President Nixon's bid for a second term

counted ``Fighting Shirley'' and nine white men, all of whom

had higher degrees, like Chisholm. Of the 10, all but

Chisholm, Wilbur Mills, and Hubert Humphrey had served in the

military. Chisholm was the first African American to contend

for the presidential nomination of a major party.

On the 50th anniversary of Chisholm's protest-era run,

America is again reassessing itself and its history; the

lesson of historical re-evaluation is seemingly how well we

forget, and how fallible we are in remembering. Chisholm

taught at the New School from 1971-75. ``Black Power and

White Politics,'' her inaugural course (eight sessions for

$40) posed the question: ``Can the political system be made

responsive to the needs of minorities?''

The issues are familiar, as is the broil of her audience

and a citizenship that feels unheard. Chisholm, in 1972, is

already a celebrity--simultaneously a voice of the people and

a spokesperson for a lying, thieving political system

manipulated by Ivy League elites. The Chisholm audience, as

well as the camera crew, chuckles uncomfortably as one

questioner takes the soapbox, picking up ``the hot coal'' and

imploring listeners to consider: ``Why do we fail as a

country to address these urgent needs . . . what is basically

wrong with America that we can keep talking and everything

gets worse?''

``The American public as a whole is too complacent,''

Chisholm answers. ``Not only is it complacent but it's also

gullible. . . . We don't question enough. We don't concern

ourselves about things until they hit us on our front

doorstep. . . . For a long time we had been taught in America

about the need to bring about 'social justice' that nobody

worried about before in this society. But all of a sudden,

middle-class America woke up about six years ago, when we

began to have riots and conflagrations in the big cities of

this country. Prior to that, nobody wondered what was

happening to the Indian, the African American, or even the

Puerto Rican, or even the Black because we were getting along

as a whole and it didn't touch us on our front doorstep.''

Tracking back to 1969, we find Chisholm empaneled at the

New School with Gloria Steinem, author, feminist, and

activist, and Jacqueline Grenenwexler, the former president

of Webster College. The three women, inaugurating the Human

Relations Center at the New School, considered the

provocation ``Do Women Dare?''

In the wake of the social upheavals of recent years, the

speech, which is not known to have been published or

broadcast since the event 50 years ago, feels as vital today

as it did half a century ago. Through the discussion,

Chisholm pointed to what we would now call intersectionality;

the term was coined by Kimberle Crenshaw in 1989 to describe

the ways in which identity is nuanced and individual

experience is not based on skin color or class alone.

Intersectionality makes the invisible visible. It adds

dimensionality to a type of racism that can be one-

dimensional. What is diversity without diverse socioeconomic

backgrounds?

Recorded via a WBAI broadcast, and newly digitized and

transcribed here, Chisholm's opening remarks for the 1969

panel are expansive, yet immediate. She's radical in one

moment, citing the divisive author Eldridge Cleaver, and

pronouncedly centrist in the next, pointing back to personal

responsibility: ``The law cannot do it for us. We must do it

for ourselves.'' Chisholm's words are charged and nuanced and

controversial, she is hearing the unheard, endeavoring to

listen and to keep listening and vowing to fight. Here are

her remarks.

Shirley Chisholm:

The topic this morning of course is, ``do women dare?'' And

I have said, of course women dare. Do women dare? I assume

that the question implies do women dare take an active part

in society and, in particular, do they dare to take a part in

the present social revolution? And I find the question as

much of an insult as I would the question, ''Are you, as a

Black person, willing to fight for your rights?'' America has

been sufficiently sensitized to the answer, whether or not

Black people are willing to both fight and die for their

rights. To make the question itself is asinine and

superfluous. America is not yet sufficiently aware, but such

a question applied to women is equally asinine and

superfluous.

I am, as is obvious, both Black and a woman. And that is a

good vantage point from which to view at least two elements

of what is becoming a social revolution. The American Black

revolution and the women's liberation movement. But it is

also a horrible disadvantage. It is a disadvantage, my

friends, because America as a nation, is both racist and

antifeminist. Racism and antifeminism are two of the prime

traditions of this country that we have to face objectively.

For any individual, therefore, challenging social traditions

is a giant step. A giant step, because there are no social

traditions which do not have corresponding social sanctions,

the sole purpose of which are to protect the sanctity of the

traditions.

Then when we ask the question, ``do women dare?'' we are

not asking are women capable of a break with tradition so

much as we are asking, are they capable of bearing with the

sanctions that will be placed upon them? Coupling this with

the hypothesis presented by some social thinkers and

philosophers that in any given society the most active group

are those who are nearest to the particular freedom that they

desire, it does not surprise me that those women, most active

and vocal on the issue of freedom for women, are those who

are young, white, and middle class. Nor is it also too

surprising that there are not more from that group involved

in the women's liberation movement. There certainly are

reasons why more women are not involved, and this country, as

I said, is antifeminist. Few, if any Americans, are free of

the psychological wounds imposed by racism and antifeminism.

Madam Speaker, this morning at the National Prayer Breakfast, the outstanding speakers of President Joe Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, and Bryan Stevenson combined together to say, Use your faith to make a difference. Let me applaud the President of the United States.

And in this month of February, where we typically honor African Americans and the history of how they contributed to this Nation, the President announced that he would nominate to the United States Supreme Court an African-American woman, a Black woman.

Since 1789, March 4, was when the Supreme Court first organized, there has never been one of the major elements of society--first, a woman, and then a Black woman, who, of course, in slavery, suffered alongside of men and children. Black women continued, in essence, to be subordinate. Continuing as domestics, fighting in wars, supporting families, and intellectually some of the smartest geniuses around. They were in fact ready to be on the Supreme Court.

They won't have a ``woke'' agenda. There won't be a question of whether they know a law book. Let me just say, it is time for a Black woman on the United States Supreme Court. Do it now. I thank the President.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in enthusiastic support of H.R. 5577, which designates the United States Postal Service facility located at 3900 Crown Road Southwest in Atlanta, Georgia, as the ``John R. Lewis Post Office Building.''

As a senior member of this body, a former colleague of the great and beloved John Lewis, and as a member of a generation that engaged in direct action inspired by his work in the Civil Rights Movement, I am proud to vote for H.R. 5577 in this tribute to an American original.

I thank my colleague, Congresswoman Williams of Georgia, for introducing this historic legislation to honor the memory of our dear friend and one of the greatest Americans, the beloved Congressman John Robert Lewis, who died in July 2020, leaving a big hole in the hearts of freedom loving people everywhere.

To honor John's outstanding contributions to the civil rights community in Atlanta and his extraordinary life of service to others, it is both fitting and proper to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 3900 Crown Road Southwest in Atlanta, Georgia, as the ``John R. Lewis Post Office Building.''

John Lewis was a lifelong warrior for a more just, equitable, fairer, and better America, one of the Original Big Six, and a giant of the Civil Rights Movement.

John Lewis was one of the original Freedom Riders, who in 1961 challenged segregated interstate travel in the South.

He was a founder and early leader of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, which coordinated lunch-counter sit-ins.

He helped organize and was the last surviving person who addressed the multitude at the March on Washington, where Dr. King delivered his immortal ``I Have A Dream'' speech on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial.

John Robert Lewis was born on February 21, 1940, the third of ten children, to Eddie and Willie Mae (Carter) Lewis near the town of Troy on a sharecropping farm owned by a white man.

John was a child when his parents bought their own farm--110 acres for $300.

He performed farm work, leaving school at harvest time to pick cotton, peanuts, and corn.

John Lewis's family members called him ``Preacher,'' and becoming one seemed to be his destiny.

John often said he drew inspiration by listening to a young minister named Martin Luther King on the radio and reading about the 1955-56 Montgomery bus boycott.

John Lewis did not just listen to Martin Luther King, Jr., he took action to follow his example.

The first time John Lewis was arrested was in February 1960, he and other students demanded service at whites-only lunch counters in Nashville, the first prolonged battle of the movement that evolved into the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee.

John Lewis's advocacy was fierce and joyful, as embodied in his common refrain to involve oneself in the actions and passions of one's time, `to get in the way, make necessary trouble.

Less than two years after, in the shadow of the Lincoln Memorial, John led over 600 peaceful demonstrators across the Edmund Pettus Bridge, in Selma, Alabama, in a march demanding the right to vote.

That protest was met with violence by Alabama State Troopers, as John Lewis was beaten and his skull left bloodied, the horror left bare for a nation to see on television.

That incident, forever remembered as Bloody Sunday, led to the passage and enactment of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

It was my personal honor to accompany John Lewis on countless pilgrimages to the Edmund Pettus Bridge to remember and acknowledge those common persons with common dreams and uncommon courage and love for the promise of the country.

In 1986, John Lewis was elected to the United States House of Representatives from

Georgia's 6th District and served in that role for 17 terms until the sun set on his heroic and extraordinary life.

John Lewis's moral authority was colossal because he had seen the worst of us, but he always appealed to the best of us and never ceased to inspire us to strive to create the beloved community.

John Lewis was the conscience of the Congress, widely beloved and revered on both sides of the aisle and the Capitol, he became the first African American lawmaker to lie in the rotunda of the U.S. Capitol.

John Lewis' moral authority in the United States House of Representatives was in full display when he led members in a 24-hour sit in on the floor of the House of Representatives.

In John Lewis' final act of civic engagement and civil disobedience, he stood in the middle of Black Lives Matter Plaza showing solidarity and the continuity with the now global movement fighting galvanized by the horrific murder of George Floyd to peacefully protest for justice and equal treatment in the criminal justice system.

Mr. Speaker, John Lewis was among the finest Americans this country ever produced, it is no exaggeration to say he was a man, the likes of which we shall not see again.

In 2011, at a White House ceremony, President Barack Obama awarded John Lewis the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation's highest civilian honor.

John Lewis also received the Martin Luther King Jr. Nonviolent Peace Prize, the John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage Award, and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People's (NAACP) Spingarn Medal.

John Lewis was a true man of honor who dedicated his life to civil and human rights, as he broke down racial barriers while maintaining imperishable perseverance.

John Lewis lived a consequential life, and his legacy is all around us, in the realization of talent and opportunity of millions of persons who walked through the doors of progress that John Lewis helped open.

I hope it is comfort to the family and loved ones of John Lewis that people around the world are celebrating his life, including the act of Congress designating a post office in his name.

Mr. Speaker, sadly I rise to indicate that domestic terrorism is on the rise in America. We have all faced the tragedies of terroristic acts by our fellow Americans, chiefly, of course, the January 6 insurrection, which it is so striking to me that people want to dumb down the language used. It was insurrection by terrorists who happened to be Americans.

We focused on 9/11. The very action of terrorism was associated internationally. I was in this place, in this Capitol on 9/11, in a meeting on 9/11. As we fled this building, clearly looking, as I went to the right to escape what we thought was an imminent attack on this building by foreign terrorists, I could see the building, the black smoke of the plane that had just hit the Pentagon. It is real, and January 6 is real as well.

So it is important that we as Members of Congress address this for the Nation. One, it was real in Colleyville for my fellow Texans as they were attacked in their synagogue, their place of worship. How horrific anti-Semitism is. I stand against it, as I stand against the horrors of representing what critical race theory is, which it is not in any way an attempt to create racist divide. It is a college phenomenon. It is a higher-grad phenomenon. It is not teaching our elementary school children about George Washington Carver

or the history of African Americans or slavery or the importance of passing H.R. 40, the commission to study slavery and develop reparations, not anything that is going to not stand on its own about the wonderment of our history and acknowledging the original sin.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak of the dastardly behavior of the numbers of historically Black colleges in this month who have now received bomb threats. This is not something to take lightly. It is not something to ignore. It is not something that we, as Members of Congress, parents, who can understand the frightening prospect of parents who send their children to school, just as it was certainly frightening to have two officers in the Virginia college shot dead.

We don't know what the facts are in that, but certainly that is an extreme action--to shoot dead. One of the witnesses said that when the officer was down, this perpetrator shot them dead blank, again. How outrageous. What could it be? I speculate we don't know what it is.

As we are in the midst of a hearing with Homeland Security, I call upon Homeland Security and those reinforced entities dealing with social media. I also think the FBI should specifically focus on domestic terrorism with a more enhanced and reinforced section of agents that are dealing both with social media but, also, dealing more vigorously with an action that seems to be a collective action.

So I want to put into the Record, tragically, the following colleges: Rust College, Tougaloo College, Jackson State, Alcorn State, Mississippi Valley State, Fort Valley State, Spelman, Morgan State, Coppin State, Harris-Stowe State University, Kentucky State, Xavier University, Philander Smith College, Edward Waters University, Howard University, the University of the District of Columbia.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record this article from the Washington Post.

[From the Washington Post]

Fear, Anxiety Follow Third Wave of Bomb Threats Targeting HBCUs

(By Lauren Lumpkin and Susan Svrluga)

For the third time in just a month, Howard University

warned its campus on Tuesday of a bomb threat. Each time, a

law enforcement search found no sign of the threatened

explosives.

But as students spilled out of academic buildings and

headed to their next classes, or lined up for burritos at a

nearby Chipotle, the campus was still on edge.

``Most of us are feeling anxiety,'' said Troix McClendon, a

19-year-old freshman. ``There's not really a lot of

information.''

The bomb threats at Howard are part of a wave to hit

historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) this

year. On Jan. 4, at least eight HBCUs were threatened. On

Monday, at least six were.

Tuesday's threats, most coming early in the morning on the

first day of Black History Month, broadened and deepened the

sense of unease: At least 16 universities closed or swept

their campuses. In all, more than two dozen have faced

similar threats this year.

No bombs were found, and law enforcement agencies did not

identify possible motives. But the threats weigh heavily on

many, particularly given the emotional attachment and deep

loyalty many students, faculty, staff and alumni feel for the

campuses--a haven, a calling, a family.

``February 1st, it's a moment when we usually celebrate the

innovation and the resilience of our people, and now to be

faced with an issue of this kind at our HBCUs nationwide, we

want our community to know that we're standing together,''

said Tashni-Ann Dubroy, Howard's executive vice president and

chief operating officer.

The university in the District has increased the police

presence on campus, reminded students of the safety resources

on campus and offered support, Dubroy said.

The FBI has said it is working with law enforcement

partners to address potential threats, according to the

agency, and it asked the public to report anything suspicious

to law enforcement immediately.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

also is aware of bomb threats received by some HBCUs, Carolyn

Gwathmey, a spokeswoman for the agency, said in a written

statement. ``We take all potential threats seriously and we

regularly work with our law enforcement partners to determine

the threat credibility.''

She said it could not comment on the specific details at

this time because it is a fluid situation with ongoing

investigations.

The threats in the past month have touched some of the

country's most iconic schools, such as Howard and Spelman

College, as well as regional institutions all across the

country, triggering cancellations, lockdowns and fear.

On Tuesday, the schools targeted included: Rust College,

Tougaloo College, Jackson State University and Alcorn State

University in Mississippi, as well as Mississippi Valley

State University; Fort Valley State University and Spelman

College in Georgia; Morgan State University and Coppin State

University in Maryland; Harris-Stowe State University in

Missouri; Kentucky State University; Xavier University of

Louisiana; Philander Smith College in Arkansas; Edward Waters

University in Florida; Howard University and the University

of the District of Columbia.

``We stand in solidarity with our historically Black

institutions,'' Jay A. Perman, chancellor of the University

System of Maryland--which includes Coppin State and Bowie

State, another school targeted by a threat this week--said

Tuesday in a written statement.

He added: ``Knowing that their strength is our strength,

and that their power--on display like never before--will not

be diminished by cowardly acts meant to menace and harm and

intimidate. If the intent of these threats was to restrict

access to our historically Black institutions--to restrict

access to higher education itself--it will fail. If it was

meant to sow division, it will fail. If it was meant to

terrorize students and communities of color, it will fail.''

At the University of the District of Columbia on Tuesday,

officials cleared a threat placed about 3:20 a.m. and opened

the campus.

Xavier University of Louisiana evacuated the area of the

threat and issued a shelter-in-place order for students

living on campus, according to Patrice Bell, the school's

vice president and chief of staff, until it was cleared to

reopen by law-enforcement officials.

Tougaloo College, one of several HBCUs threatened Tuesday

in Mississippi, received a call about 4:20 a.m. that brought

FBI and other law enforcement to sweep campuses. Even after

the threat was found to be unsubstantiated, the campus

remained in virtual mode for students, faculty and staff on

Tuesday, with college officials pledging to remain vigilant.

Mississippi Valley State University locked down after a

threat was received through its guardhouse.

Philander Smith College, in Arkansas, lifted its lockdown

and resumed classes and operations at noon Tuesday. Kentucky

State University issued an all-clear Tuesday and planned to

resume normal operations and classes Wednesday.

Morgan State University was also targeted. Leaders received

the threat around 4:50 a.m. and issued a shelter-in-place

order. Classes went virtual and employees were told to work

from home.

``My main concern is my students' mental health. As college

students, we already have so much mentally to deal with,''

said Jamera Forbes, a senior at Morgan State and student body

president. ``We've tried to push through and overcome so much

with covid over the years, and we're just trying to get back

to a norm.''

At Howard, freshman Jalen McKinney, 18, said the threats

are making him worried, but some on campus seem less

concerned.

``People are kind of brushing it off because it didn't

happen,'' McKinney said. D.C. and university police performed

a sweep after the threat was made about 2:55 a.m. ``But at

the same time, it could happen.''

An expert in campus security was reassuring about the

potential danger.

``I've always subscribed to the theory that bombers bomb

and threateners threaten,'' said Robert Mueck, director of

public safety at St. John's College and a member of the

International Association of Campus Law Enforcement

Administrators' Domestic Preparedness Committee. Calling in a

bomb threat is ``more of a nuisance crime,'' he said, ``like

back in high school, kids pulling a fire alarm to get out of

an exam.''

Of course, he said, officials cannot ignore it--they must

ensure there is no explosive.

But Mueck cautioned against overreactions by college

officials, because the warnings, building closures and

lockdowns are disruptive and alarming.

These particular threats are troubling, though, he said,

because they appear to be targeting HBCUs, and might be

motivated by bias. The menace is there: ``It's almost like

reaching out and saying, 'We can get you,''' he said.

While law enforcement have not identified suspects or named

their motives, the recent threats evoked the long history of

intimidation and violence against Black schools, said Greg E.

Carr, chair of Howard's Afro-American studies department and

associate professor of Africana studies.

``There is this deep-seated racial insecurity that has

historically come from segments of White populations that

feel that somehow the self-improvement of Black folks will

cost them something, either in prestige or social position,''

Carr said. ``Whether any of these threats would manifest into

anything tangible or not, it's just the idea that `Ya'll are

a little too big for your britches.' ''

As officials continue to monitor the situation, students

and faculty are hoping to get back to business.

``Our response has been, historically, to simply redouble

our efforts,'' Carr said. ``The intimidation never works.''

Mr. Speaker, my real point is that we need to get serious about domestic terrorism. The lives lost through domestic terrorism is compelling and increasing. Until we get serious about the actions of the Oath Keepers and the boogaloo boys

and the Nazi wearers and proponents, in light of the First Amendment, which as a member of the Committee on the Judiciary I highly respect, we are losing lives. Our children are in jeopardy. Misrepresentation is occurring about innocent discussion about race and history. Let us put that kind of attack aside. Let us find a way to deal with domestic terrorism to save lives in America.

Mr. Speaker, I hope that I will draw upon my colleagues. I will be introducing legislation, as I have done, on dealing with this idea of bomb threats to universities in this instance, bomb threats to historically Black colleges last week and coming into this week. God knows what will be next. I pray for their safety, as I do all students and all Americans. We must stand against domestic terrorism.

Madam Speaker, this is reminiscent of more than a decade and a half ago, but it means that it is long overdue for us to now start anew with the America COMPETES Act, H.R. 4521.

Let me, first of all, say that in the passage of legislation, isn't it exciting that we have a bipartisan infrastructure bill that will match very nicely along with the America COMPETES Act and, as well, we will pass the Build Back Better Act, that has a sizeable proportion of broadband and many other aspects dealing with climate.

So I rise today to support H.R. 4521 for a number of reasons, but I will put in the forefront the idea that it will promote around the world America's values of justice and competitiveness, equality and, yes, human rights. And all the nations that pretend to be competitive, but yet do not have the aspect of compassion and laws that the United States has will be in the back seat, and we will be in the front seat.

Let me, first of all, say that we are bringing relief to all the folks that are trying to get their automobiles; $45 billion in the American fund for chips that will incentivize private sector investments and continued American leadership in semiconductor fabrication, and will address simply the supply chain disruption, and ensure that more semiconductors are produced here at home.

There are also jobs for my inner-city young people, my rural young people.

I was at TRRX in the city of Houston, and we were looking at--a truck driver talked to me and said, I stopped driving trucks. I had health issues, and I am now dealing with technology training that they are giving in at-risk communities.

Strengthening the supply chain with $45 billion to improve the Nation's supply chain and national security by preventing the shortages of critical goods and ensuring that more of these goods are made right.

And advancing what is very important to me, having served on the Science Committee, NASA is in my backyard, the Johnson Space Center, and I am excited about what we have been able to do over the decades. But

now we will be able to focus on scientific research, technology and innovation and excellence. That creates jobs.

Madam Speaker, I rise with enthusiasm to support H.R. 4521. Let's compete. Let's show our values. Let's train, and let's make money. Make it in America.

Madam Speaker, as a senior member of the House and the Committee on Homeland Security, and as Chair of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security, I rise in strong support of the Rule governing debate of Rules Committee Print 117-31 and H.R. 4521, the America Creating Opportunities for Manufacturing Pre-Eminence in Technology and Economic Strength or ``America COMPETES Act of 2022,'' as well as the underlying legislation.

I also support the Rule as it pertains to H.R. 3485--Global Respect Act H.R. 4445--Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021, both of which I strongly support on the merits.

Madam Speaker, the America COMPETES Act of 2022 is a bold legislative package that makes transformational new investments in research, innovation and American manufacturing that will ensure that America can outcompete any nation in the world, now and for decades to come.

The package will accelerate production of critical semiconductor chips, strengthen the supply chain to make more goods in America, turbocharge our research capacity to lead the technologies of the future, and advance our global competitiveness, while supporting strong labor standards and human rights, among other key provisions.

The America COMPETES Act of 2022 is a bold, comprehensive package to strengthen America's competitiveness, which includes the ``Creating the CHIPS for America Fund,'' providing $52 billion to incentivize private- sector investments and continue American leadership in semiconductor fabrication, helping address supply chain disruptions and ensure that more semiconductors are produced here at home.

The legislation strengthening the supply chain and American manufacturing by authorizing $45 billion to improve our nation's supply chains and strengthen our economy and national security by preventing shortages of critical goods and ensuring that more of these goods are made right here in the United States.

The America COMPETES Act of 2022 advances American scientific research, technology, and innovation excellence by making major new solutions-driven investments in every aspect of innovation and scientific research, making the kind of investments that will lead to breakthrough discoveries.

I am particularly pleased that the America COMPETES Act will help maintain and secure America's global competitiveness and leadership through economic development diplomacy, human rights, and partnering with allies by including numerous provisions to strengthen and promote America's leadership around the globe, including in such areas as investing in partnerships and alliances, investing in standing up for America's values, expanding our investments in diplomacy, and promoting human rights.

Madam Speaker, the United States has long been a beacon of excellence in science and technology in the world.

I have worked hard on the COMPETES Act over time to make sure that this legislation includes provisions that stimulates government reinvestment in the private sector; and reimagination of the Federal government's approach to innovation that ignites and excites new ideas that ensure that the United States remains the leader in innovation globally.

The need to reinvest in and reimagine our approach to science and innovation has become a national imperative so I am very pleased that the legislation before us retains provisions I sponsored that were included when the America COMPETES Act was previously passed.

One of those provisions, which is incorporated in RCP 117-31 addresses the STEM education gap for K-12 students by creating State and regional workshops to train K-12 teachers in project-based science and technology learning, allowing them to provide instruction in initiating robotics and other STEM competition team development programs.

Another provision included in the legislation requires the National Science Foundation (NSF) to report on the economic and ethnic breakdown of ``Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics'' (STEM) industry internship program recipients.

Facilitating links between institutes of higher education and the private sector is vital to ensuring that education enables a skilled and relevant workforce.

Such links are especially important for minorities and under-served communities because these students often lack alternative avenues to connect their education with an industry.

Internship experience is an increasingly vital component of a successful resume, yet the unpaid nature of internships is cost- prohibitive for many people.

Mandating that the National Science Foundation report on the economic and ethnic breakdown of STEM program recipients will help ensure that minorities and economically-disadvantaged students have adequate access to internships that bridge STEM academia and industry.

I am hopeful this data will provide evidence of robust participation by minority and economically-disadvantaged students; however, if such students are not fully participating, these reporting requirements will provide Congress with the data it needs to facilitate broader participation.

Now is the time to recommit to boldly and strategically investing in our nation's future--to promote America's economic strength, the well- being of our communities, our national security and our leadership in the world. This transformative legislation will ensure that America can out-compete any nation, for decades to come.

Madam Speaker, I also support the provisions of the rule governing debate of H.R. 4445, the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021, bipartisan and bicameral legislation that empowers survivors of sexual assault and sexual harassment by giving them a choice to go to court instead of being forced into arbitration.

This legislation would amend the Federal Arbitration Act for disputes involving sexual assault and sexual harassment in order to stop employers and businesses from forcing employees and customers out of the court system and into arbitration.

It would ensure that predispute arbitration clauses and waivers of the right to bring joint actions in cases of sexual assault or sexual harassment would not be valid or enforceable for cases that are filed under Federal, Tribal, or State law.

Under current law, many employment and other contracts require binding arbitration for a wide range of matters before a dispute arises, which denies survivors the ability to decide whether to pursue their claim with the procedural protections provided by courts, and silences victims of abuse by forcing them into a confidential dispute forum without the right to appeal.

More than 60 million Americans are subject to mandatory arbitration clauses in the workplace, often without realizing it until they come forward to bring a claim against their employer.

The Report of the Co-Chairs of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's Select Task Force on the Study of Harassment in the Workplace notes that between 50-75 percent of women have faced some form of unwanted or unwelcome sexual harassment in the workplace.

Additionally, contracts for services may include mandatory arbitration clauses in the fine print that shield companies and businesses from being held publicly accountable for the harm caused.

I support this necessary legislation because it advances efforts to prevent and address sexual harassment and sexual assault, strengthen rights, protect victims, and promote access to justice.

Finally, I strongly support H.R. 3485 the Global Respect Act, which would mandate the listing of, and visa restrictions on foreign persons responsible for or complicit in human rights violations against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex (LGBTQI+) persons.

In the face of rising violence targeting LGBTQI+ persons around the world, the Administration recognizes that LGBTQI+ persons face serious and unique threats to their safety due to their sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or sex characteristics.

While many countries have made tremendous strides in embracing equality for LGBTQI+ community members, other countries remain stagnant or, worse, are undertaking steps to further marginalize or harm LGBTQI+ community members.

That is why I support H.R. 3485, a bi-partisan bill, which requires the Administration to provide Congress with a list of foreign individuals found responsible for human rights violations against LGBTQI+ persons abroad, and equally important, mandates that individuals included on this list are ineligible for visas to, or entry into, the United States.

Madam Speaker, I strongly support this legislation and urge all Members to join me in voting for the rule governing debate of RCP 117- 31, the America COMPETES Act of 2022, H.R. 4445, the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021, and H.R. 3485, the Global Respect Act.

Madam Speaker, first of all, I think it is important to say how great it is to have an opportunity to create jobs and promote human rights at the same time, while respecting our fellow Americans, Asian Pacific Americans.

I think it is important that we make that statement, that as we promote this very important legislation, Asian Pacific Islanders and others will also have the respect of this Nation because we do believe in human rights.

But I want to pause for a moment to be able to thank my friend, my colleague, the Honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson, for sticking to her higher values, her commitment to science for more than two decades, going on three decades.

As I watched her on the Science Committee, first as a member myself, and then as she proceeded to take the leadership reins, look where we are today, with an outstanding America COMPETES Act that builds on previous legislation, brings together 11 jurisdictional committees, and comes out on the side of creating jobs. We owe her a great debt of gratitude, and I am grateful to call her a Member of the United

States Congress, but I am even more grateful to call her a fellow Texan.

This legislation will answer the questions of those who are complaining about the supply chain because $45 billion will improve our Nation's supply chain and strengthen our economy and national security by preventing shortages of critical goods.

There is an outcry of inflation. There is an outcry of empty shelves, but I will tell you that the immediate signing of this bill will turn the corner for all Americans. I am grateful that we will be advancing the American scientific research technology and innovation.

Just the other day I was at the Ion Center sponsored by Rice, and looking at a number of technology companies in my 18th Congressional District. I was glad to talk to a former truck driver who was there in a program that dealt with training at-risk persons or persons who were changing careers. He was saying he could not do trucking anymore, but how glad he was to do this.

I am also very glad that legislation that I had is in this bill regarding STEM and also K-12 students by creating State and regional workshops to create jobs. This is a bill that will continue to create jobs and working with the National Science Foundation to ensure the diversity in STEM.

I will continue to work on these issues and create jobs. The COMPETES Act creates jobs.

Madam Speaker, as a senior member of the House and the Committee on Homeland Security, and as Chair of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security, I rise in strong support of Rules Committee Print 117-31 and H.R. 4521, the America Creating Opportunities for Manufacturing Pre-Eminence in Technology and Economic Strength or ``America COMPETES) Act of 2022,'' as well as the underlying legislation.

I particularly wish to thank my colleague from Texas, Congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson, the Chair of the Science, Space, and Technology Committee, for her extraordinary leadership and the progress and success made possible by her steadfast commitment to fairness and equality.

For 15 terms the constituents of her congressional district have been ably represented by one of this body's great legislators, who will be missed deeply when she leaves this body at the end of the current Congress.

Madam Speaker, the America COMPETES Act of 2022 is a bold legislative package that makes transformational new investments in research, innovation and American manufacturing that will ensure that America can outcompete any nation in the world, now and for decades to come.

The package will accelerate production of critical semiconductor chips, strengthen the supply chain to make more goods in America, turbocharge our research capacity to lead the technologies of the future, and advance our global competitiveness, while supporting strong labor standards and human rights, among other key provisions.

The America COMPETES Act of 2022 is a bold, comprehensive package to strengthen America's competitiveness, which includes the ``Creating the CHIPS for America Fund,'' providing $52 billion to incentivize private- sector investments and continue American leadership in semiconductor fabrication, helping address supply chain disruptions and ensure that more semiconductors are produced here at home.

The legislation strengthening the supply chain and American manufacturing by authorizing $45 billion to improve our nation's supply chains and strengthen our economy and national security by preventing shortages of critical goods and ensuring that more of these goods are made right here in the United States.

The America COMPETES Act of 2022 advances American scientific research, technology, and innovation excellence by making major new solutions-driven investments in every aspect of innovation and scientific research, making the kind of investments that will lead to breakthrough discoveries.

I am particularly pleased that the America COMPETES Act will help maintain and secure America's global competitiveness and leadership through economic development diplomacy, human rights, and partnering with allies by including numerous provisions to strengthen and promote America's leadership around the globe, including in such areas as investing in partnerships and alliances, investing in standing up for America's values, expanding our investments in diplomacy, and promoting human rights.

Madam Speaker, the United States has long been a beacon of excellence in science and technology in the world.

I have worked hard on the COMPETES Act over time to make sure that this legislation includes provisions that stimulates government reinvestment in the private sector; and reimagination of the Federal government's approach to innovation that ignites and excites new ideas that ensure that the United States remains the leader in innovation globally.

I am very pleased that the legislation before us retains provisions I sponsored that were included when the America COMPETES Act was previously passed.

One of those provisions, which is incorporated in RCP 117-31 addresses the STEM education gap for K-12 students by creating State and regional workshops to train K-12 teachers in project-based science and technology learning, allowing them to provide instruction in initiating robotics and other STEM competition team development programs.

Another provision included in the legislation requires the National Science Foundation (NSF) to report on the economic and ethnic breakdown of ``Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics'' (STEM) industry internship program recipients.

Facilitating links between institutes of higher education and the private sector is vital to ensuring that education enables a skilled and relevant workforce.

Such links are especially important for minorities and under-served communities because these students often lack alternative avenues to connect their education with an industry.

Internship experience is an increasingly vital component of a successful resume, yet the unpaid nature of internships is cost- prohibitive for many people.

Mandating that the National Science Foundation report on the economic and ethnic breakdown of STEM program recipients will help ensure that minorities and economically disadvantaged students have adequate access to internships that bridge STEM academia and industry.

I am hopeful this data will provide evidence of robust participation by minority and economically disadvantaged students; however, if such students are not fully participating, these reporting requirements will provide Congress with the data it needs to facilitate broader participation.

Now is the time to recommit to boldly and strategically investing in our nation's future--to promote America's economic strength, the well- being of our communities, our national security and our leadership in the world. This transformative legislation will ensure that America can out-compete any nation, for decades to come.

Madam Speaker, I strongly support this legislation and urge all Members to join me in voting for the rule governing debate of RCP 117- 31, the America COMPETES Act of 2022.

Madam Speaker, today I rise with a heavy heart, to remember the life of a special young woman, and to celebrate a life interrupted too soon.

Zenobia Viola Harris Bivens, 40, of Houston, Texas, passed away on January 8, 2022 after a sudden and unexpected case of meningitis.

Zenobia was a mother, wife, sister, daughter, aunt, cousin, and friend. She was born on September 15, 1981, in Goldsboro, North Carolina at Seymour Johnson Air Force Base to Johnny Harris Jr. and Major Regina V. Harris. She is preceded in death by her father, Johnny Harris Jr. and is survived by her husband, Darvell Bivens; son, Dean Roque Harris Bivens; mother, Regina V. Harris; sister, LaGina R. Harris; and brother, Johnny B. Harris III and his wife, Jessica M. Saulter Harris.

Zenobia's greatest impact was sharing her heart and time with those that knew and loved her, especially Darvell, her college sweetheart and best friend for over 20 years. Together they gathered a `Village' of educators, friends and family to create a loving, fun, and nurturing environment for their son Dean. Zenobia based her actions on her family values of `God, Family, and Education'.

Zenobia graduated from San Angelo Central High School in 1999 and went on to attend college at West Texas A&M where she won a National Title in Speech and Debate was named University Woman of the Year, was featured in Glamour Magazine, and met the love of her life--Darvell Bivens. She graduated magna cum laude with a Bachelor of Science in Mass Communication--Broadcasting.

She received the Future Faculty Fellowship (full scholarship to receive master's degree and doctorate) to attend the University of Alabama. While at the University, Zenobia was the co-founder of the Coalition for Change (organization dedicated to identifying and preserving historic Civil Rights sites including discovering unmarked graves of the enslaved on the campus grounds).

She graduated summa cum laude with a Master of Arts in Communication Studies from the University of Alabama. Zenobia then attended Northwestern University--Pritzker Law School where she was a legal extern to former Senator Barack Obama and graduated cum laude with a Doctor of Jurisprudence.

In her profession, Zenobia's achievements are numerous and impressive. Zenobia served as clerk for the Honorable Carl E. Stewart of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit and the Honorable Justice Dale Wainwright (ret.) of the Texas Supreme Court. She was a renowned trial and appellate lawyer.

She served as counsel in cases involving NASA, the Department of Defense, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development among many. Her cases were featured in Forbes, The New York Times, and The Houston Chronicle.

Zenobia successfully argued a case before the United States Supreme Court. At the time of her death, Zenobia was a Managing Partner for the Frost, Brown & Todd Law Firm.

She was relentless in her pursuit for justice, and this was evident in her pro bono advocacy work as she was particularly passionate about helping those who had been denied justice by the legal system that she so cherished.

Zenobia was truly a force of nature. She commanded attention and respect in any space she entered, be it a family room, courtroom, a garden, or even a podium for one of her epic speeches.

Anyone meeting Zenobia for the first time might have been intimidated by the sheer power of her presence. Those who knew Zenobia realized that one of her most significant impacts was in the one-on-one discussions, when her questions or advice could provide new confidence or reveal a new strength in those she loved.

Zenobia did not get the quantity of time on Earth she deserved or that we wanted; what she lacked in quantity, she more than made up for with quality. Zenobia once mentioned that the greatest people in history made their biggest impacts early in their lives.

She was taken physically from this world much too soon, but Zenobia leaves it, and us, better.

As Zenobia walked ahead of us, she set the bar high and built upon the foundation her predecessors laid. She walked beside us, as a companion on our own journeys of growth. She supported and sustained us when we fell. As a result of having known her, we are invigorated and stronger.

Zenobia did her work to change the world now, we must honor her by continuing ours.

Mr. Speaker, I stand here in strong support of H.R. 1836, the Ensuring Veterans' Smooth Transition Act (EVEST), which provides automatic enrollment in the VA for all transitioning service members, and veterans who don't want to obtain its services have the easy choice of opting out.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in the name of Dr. Martin Luther King and John Robert Lewis, our late colleague.

I rise today to say that we are not finished. The work of this Nation is not finished, even in the aftermath of a sinister vote on the floor of the United States Senate that could not see clearly to determine that the Constitution and the right to vote rose above the silly and insignificant rule of the Senate called the filibuster.

In the midst of that debate, we heard eloquent and beautiful statements about the many times the filibuster had been eliminated or relieved. We heard a brilliant analysis of the Constitution and the Founding Fathers' desire for the filibuster not to be in the Constitution, yet due process and the 15th Amendment are.

Mr. Speaker, we saw justice crushed and democracy gored. In Texas, of course, more criminal laws are now related to voting. Poll watchers can attack voters in terms of what they are doing. We are now in a constitutional hearing in Judiciary. It is my commitment to go forward on the John Robert Lewis and all the bills attached to it because the Nation is crying out for justice. The country is crying out for democracy. We will not let it down. The Senate must continue its debate, and we must get these billed passed.

I thank you, Madam Speaker, for the opportunity to stand here this morning with a very solemn heart, overwhelmed, one would say, with a sense of grief. And in that grief, there is joy.

The grief, of course, is to feel the personal pain of the lack of unity around the very core of democracy, and that is the right to vote.

As has been evidenced by Members over and over again, as I listened to Senators last night, everyone acceded to the point that voting is the core of democracy. It means that the individual in pain, in frustration, in affirmation, in the understanding of policies, gets to select a person of their choosing. It is not about those who are elected or candidates or the elections. It is about the voters having that right.

Right now, today, in the hands of the other body is the crux of democracy. I am, frankly, undone by the usage of an insignificant procedural rule that has been used over the decades and centuries to crush democracy.

The filibuster is insignificant. It is an order. It is not a statute; it is not the Constitution; it is not the 15th Amendment or the 14th Amendment; it is not the 13th Amendment, which freed slaves. It is also the recognition that voting rights is for all persons irrespective of their race, color, creed, or religion, and their party affiliation.

Why is the other body, under the leadership of Minority Leader McConnell, not coming to the table of unity? I extend an olive branch.

The filibuster has been changed already over 161 times. Do we recognize that between 1866 and 1890 many landmark pieces of civil rights legislation

that were essential to protecting the constitutional rights of Americans of color--this was during Reconstruction--they were, if you will, voted along party lines? But from 1917 to 1994, civil rights were crushed by the use of the filibuster.

And so I rise today to ask for the better angels of the other body, two Members who happen to be Democratic Senators, and others who are in total lockstep in the other party.

But listen to William E. Mason saying: ``But every schoolboy in the United States knows that the Senate is practically the only parliamentary body in the world where the majority cannot transact the public business, and where the minority instead of the majority transacts the business of the country.'' Senator William E. Mason, April 21, 1897, a Republican.

I ask for mercy. As someone who worked for the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, who had the privilege of being here for the reauthorization in the mid-2000s, who wrote the Coretta Scott bill legislation that was added that said no mid-term redistricting, and as well helped rename the bill at that time to many icons of diversity.

I want to conclude my remarks by referring to Martin Luther King's mountaintop speech, to read as much of it as I can. He speaks at the beginning by saying if he had sneezed when he was knifed by a demented woman in the 1950s, he says, I wouldn't have been around in 1962 when Negroes in Albany, Georgia, decided to straighten their backs up. And whenever men and women straighten their backs up, they are going somewhere, because a man can't ride your back unless it is bent.

If I had sneezed, I wouldn't have been here in 1963 when the Black people of Birmingham, Alabama, aroused the conscience of this Nation and brought into being the civil rights bill.

If I had sneezed, I wouldn't have had a chance later that year, in August, to try and tell America about a dream that I had had.

If I had sneezed, I wouldn't have been in Selma, Alabama, or Memphis.

And then they were telling me, now, it doesn't matter, now. It really doesn't matter what happens. I left Atlanta this morning, and as we got started the pilot said we had to stop for a moment because Dr. Martin Luther King is on the plane, we have to check and see if there were bombs.

And then I got into Memphis. And some began to say the threats or talk about the threats that were out. What would happen to me from some of our sick brothers, who did not look like me?

Well, I don't know what will happen now. We've got some difficult days ahead. But it really doesn't matter with me now because I've been to the mountaintop.

And I don't mind.

Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I am not concerned about that now. I just want to do God's will. And He has allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I've looked over, and I've seen the promised land.

That is today, today, January 19, 2022.

I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight that we, as a people, will get to the promised land.

And so I'm happy tonight.

I'm not worried about anything.

I'm not fearing any man.

Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord.

Those who say they honor him, do not disgrace him. Vote for the Voting Rights Act.

Madam Speaker, yesterday was the Federal holiday honoring Dr. Martin Luther King, and I accepted the challenge of the Martin Luther King family, under the name of Martin Luther King III, his oldest child: No celebration without legislation.

So I rise in the middle of the debate and debacle that is going on over an ill-fated and wrong policy of the filibuster and cloture to read the words of Dr. Martin Luther King that he issued on April 3, 1968, speaking about having been stabbed by a demented woman and saying that if he had only sneezed, he might not have been there even in 1968.

And so he says: ``And I want to say tonight, I want to say that I am happy that I didn't sneeze. Because if I had sneezed, I wouldn't have been around here in 1960 when students all over the South started sitting in at lunch counters. And I knew that as they were sitting in, they were really standing up for the best in the American Dream and taking the whole Nation back to those great wells of democracy which were dug deep by the Founding Fathers in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. If I had sneezed, I wouldn't have been around in 1962 when Negroes in Albany, Georgia, decided to straighten their backs up. And whenever men and women straighten their backs up, they are going somewhere because a man can't ride your back unless it is bent. If I had sneezed, I wouldn't have been here in 1963 when the Black people of Birmingham, Alabama, aroused the conscience of this Nation.''

Finally, I want to say that he wanted to make sure that his life was not in vain and that he would be recognized and remembered for the work that he had done.

Sometimes it is extremely difficult, Madam Speaker, to really convey in this form both the pain and the emotion of one's journey in life.

I worked for the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, the conference that Dr. Martin Luther King and Ralph David Abernathy organized and gathered foot soldiers for from around America. They were, in fact, the beloved community, and included the likes of John Robert Lewis and many others that sit in this House today.

I walked on plantations and tried to register sharecroppers. And so, I come today to recount for us the words of Dr. King: ``We shall overcome because the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.''

We need to enact democracy reform now more than ever because State lawmakers introduced over 440 suppression bills in 49 States.

We cannot allow the other body to stand on some sort of pro forma dignity that they cannot overturn the filibuster, when people died for the vote.

We honor Dr. King on Monday. I want that vote to be in his honor that we have voting rights.

Madam Speaker, I am grateful for the distinguished leader of this debate, Mr. Butterfield, and his service to this Nation.

Madam Speaker, this is a somber, sacred moment in our lives on this floor. I stand here in the name of the blood shed by those foot soldiers, Dr. Martin Luther King and John Robert Lewis, who shed his blood on the Edmund Pettus Bridge.

My friends who vote ``no'' today will disregard and ignore that bloodshed. I refuse to ignore the blood that was shed for the right to vote.

As a member of the House Judiciary Committee, this committee built over the course of 13 hearings in two Congresses led by Jerry Nadler and Steve Cohen the record for the John Robert Lewis bill, and for that I am grateful, for I stand as a victim of the lack of preclearance.

The bills that we have will eliminate a legislature, as a Texas bill states, to overturn duly voters' choice. It will prevent the purging of voters which happens all the time. It will protect you at the polls, Madam Speaker, and it will disallow people from interfering with your vote. It is now a sacred honor and charge. We must vote now in the name of Martin King and John Robert Lewis. We cannot do any less. The Senate must do its job.

Madam Speaker, as a senior member of the Committees on the Judiciary, on Homeland Security, and on the Budget, and the Congressional Black Caucus, I am pleased to co-anchor this Congressional Black Caucus Special Order with my colleague, the distinguished gentleman from New York, Congressman Ritchie Torres.

I thank the Chair of the CBC, Congresswoman Beatty of Ohio, for organizing this Special Order to discuss the reasons why the CBC strong supports H.R. 4, the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, which for nearly 50 years protected the most precious of all rights of a citizen in a democracy--the right to vote--until it was seriously undermined by the right-wing conservative majority of the United States Supreme Court, starting with the outrageously wrong decision in Shelby County v. Holder, 570 U.S. 193 (2013), and exacerbated by Brnovich v.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak in support of H.R. 1836, the Guard and Reserve GI Bill Parity Act, which will expand eligibility for post-9/11 G.I. Bill educational benefits to members of the National Guard and the Reserves.

Current law defines the term ``active duty'' as those individuals who are on full-time duty in the active military service of the United States, including full-time training duty, annual training duty, and attendance, while in the active military service, at a school designated as a service school by law or by the Secretary of the military department concerned.

H.R. 1836, will expand eligibility criteria to include those training in full-time National Guard duty, which includes the National Guard, the Army National Guard, and the Air National Guard, as well as those same members when performing active duty.

Under current rules, service members need three years on active-duty to be eligible for full Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits, which include 36 months of in-state college tuition, a monthly living stipend and other payouts.

Reaching that amount of time mobilized to active-duty is difficult for guardsmen and reservists, and outdated and confusing eligibility requirements means the difference of tens of thousands of dollars for college for those individuals.

For example, the deployment of thousands of Guard troops to Capitol Hill following the January 6 attack counted towards GI Bill eligibility, because the mission was being paid for with federal funds.

However, troops mobilized for crowd control during racial equality protests in Washington, D.C., last summer were not able to count that time, because those missions weren't funded by federal dollars.

Some other riot response missions across the nation were funded by federal funds, and did count towards the education benefits.

Similarly, tens of thousands of Guard and Reserve troops have been mobilized for pandemic response missions over the last two years, but their eligibility varies depending on the specific orders and units involved.

For years, members of the National Guard and Reserve Components have been disadvantaged and overlooked in the accumulation of their education benefits while performing the same or similar service as their Active-Duty counterparts.

Time and time again, through natural disasters, global pandemics, and threats to our democracy, our National Guard and Reserve members have answered the call to serve.

But despite taking on the same risks and doing the same jobs as their active-duty counterparts, these service members don't have access to the same benefits.

This has become much clearer and more severe during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Members of the National Guard and Reserve Component have risked their lives on the front lines of this pandemic, administering aid and protecting the Capitol on training status.

Our brave men and women continue to selflessly answer our nation's call and are long overdue the benefits befitting their service.

The Guard and Reserve GI Bill Parity Act of 2021 will ensure the men and women of the National Guard are entitled to GI Bill education benefits when activated for service either for training or for operational needs of our country, just like their Active- Duty counterparts.

I want to thank all of our armed serviceman and women for their selfless dedication to our protection every day.

In my home state of Texas, the National Guard has been deployed time and time again to assist citizens and save lives during numerous natural disasters, including the Winter

Freeze of last February and the tragic Hurricane Harvey.

The Texas National Guard is host to nearly 21,000 troops, including its army and air components.

The National Guard is a diverse force that includes all ethnicities:

White: 69 percent;

Black: 15 percent;

Hispanic: 10 percent;

Asian: 3 percent;

Male: 83.1 percent;

Female: 16.9 percent

This bill, in which we further the benefits and recognition that our servicemen and women deserve, also reminds us that we have an overriding duty to protect the health and dignity of those serving today.

For this reason, I would like to discuss the crisis that our National Guardsmen and Guardswomen have been thrust into at the Texas Governor's direction on our Southern Border.

In March 2021, the Texas Governor launched the ill-fated and ineffective Operation Lone Star which he claimed was necessary to stem a so-called invasion of migrants at Texas' southern border.

As of November 2021, more than 10,000 Texas National Guardsmen have been deployed to the southern border in pursuit of this folly.

According to published media accounts, National Guard members who have been activated for Operation Lone Star are experiencing habitual pay delays and poor working conditions during the border mission, including being exposed to COVID-19, and many are missing the equipment necessary for safety and mission success.

In addition, the National Guard has faced austere conditions and limited resources, leading to unsanitary conditions such as the lack of portable restrooms.

Rather than addressing these conditions, just last week the Texas Governor filed a frivolous lawsuit in federal court challenging the authority of President Biden, the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces to require that members of the National Guard be vaccinated against COVID-19.

There is no merit to this nuisance law suit as demonstrated by the summary rejection of similar arguments raised by neighboring Oklahoma Governor Stitt.

The Texas Governor's failure to comply with the policies intended to reduce the spread of COVID-19 among the Armed Forces will mean that there will be less military personnel available national disasters that have struck Texas in recent years, such as the winter freeze of last year.

This will also mean that there are fewer personnel to respond to any attacks on the homeland.

Encouraged by the Texas Governor's obstinacy, about 40 percent of the members of the Texas Army National Guard are refusing to get vaccinated, which puts at risk their colleagues and the persons they are sworn to defend and protect.

National Guardsmen and Guardswomen deployed in this disastrous mission at the Texas Governor's insistence face the deadly spread of COVID-19, unsanitary conditions, lack of pay, and a lack of a certain future.

These uniformed men and women deserve better, and some of them, seeing no alternative to their present reality, have decided to end it all.

Five National guard soldiers have shot and killed themselves in the past three months, and one more survived a suicide attempt.

One of these men, private first class Joshua R. Cortez, was preparing to accept a ``lifetime job'' with one of the nation's biggest health insurance companies in late October last year, but the Texas National Guard had other ideas.

Operation Lone Star required involuntary activations to meet the Texas Governor's troop quotas, and Cortez was one of the soldiers tapped to go on state active duty orders--with no idea how long the mission would last.

In November, the 21-year-old mechanic requested a hardship release from the mission: ``I've been waiting for this job and I'm on my way to getting hired . . . I missed my first opportunity in September when I had to go on the flood mission in Louisiana. . . . I can not miss this opportunity because it is my last opportunity for this lifetime job.''

Cortez's company commander recommended approval. But his battalion commander and brigade commander disapproved.

Within 36 hours of his request being denied, Cortez drove to a parking lot in northwest San Antonio and shot himself in the head.

Three other soldiers tied to Operation Lone Star have died by suicide, including:

Sgt. Jose L. De Hoyos was found dead in Laredo, Texas, on Oct. 26. He was a member of the 949th Brigade Support Battalion's headquarters company.

1st Sgt. John ``Kenny'' Crutcher died Nov. 12, as time ran out on his temporary hardship waiver. He was the top NCO for B Company, 3rd Battalion, 144th Infantry.

1st Lt. Charles Williams, a platoon leader in Crutcher's company, died at home overnight Dec. 17 while on pass.

The string of suicides raises urgent questions about the mission's conditions and purpose, as well as the way it's organized and manned through indefinite involuntary call-ups.

This is an excellent and common-sense bill that will enhance the benefits of our servicemen and women.

We must also act to ensure that our servicemen and women are protected from COVID-19, both for their own safety and the safety of our nation.

When called to action, the National Guard performs the name duties as our active duty forces, oftentimes in extraordinarily difficult situations.

Although we cannot bring back the lives lost due to the Texas Governor's misguided actions, we can remember the names of those we have lost and work to ensure that we treat all members of our military equally and with dignity and respect.