Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the holiday of Cinco de Mayo commemorating the victory of the Mexican Army 1862 over France at the Battle of Puebla during the Franco-Mexican War.

The fifth day of May, or Cinco de Mayo, is a special day because it represents the importance of freedom, liberty and determination for the people of Mexico and for Mexican-Americans.

It was on that day, May 5, 1862, that untrained, outnumbered, and outgunned Mexican forces--determined to protect their land-- successfully defended the town of Puebla against the French.

The quest for an independent Mexico started on September 16, 1810, when the people of Mexico, following the will to become a free nation, refused to submit to Spanish rule.

The struggle went on for 10 years.

Finally, in 1821, the first independent Mexican government was established.

But being an independent nation was not easy.

Over the years, Mexico received economic support from several nations, France and England among them.

Later on, even Spain supported the new country.

Thus, Mexico became heavily indebted to foreign powers.

Due to ongoing political unrest caused by many groups struggling for power, Mexico was not able to pay back the loans.

On July 17, 1861, President Benito Juarez issued a moratorium in which all-foreign debt payments would be suspended for a period of two years, with the promise that after this period, payments would resume.

In 1862, France, Spain, and England dispatched their fleets to Mexican shores pursuing not only money but also land rights as payment for their loans.

A government representative greeted them and explained that Mexico acknowledged its debts but had no funds to pay them.

They were offered payment warrants in exchange.

The Spaniards and the British decided to accept the warrants and withdrew from the scene.

But the French government's representative did not accept the offer and ordered his troops to invade the country and head toward Mexico City, the nation's capital.

They had to cross through the state of Puebla to get to the capital.

Mexican President Benito Juarez reacted immediately and prepared the defense.

He commanded Ignacio Zaragoza, a young and brave General, to fortify the City of Puebla and repel the French invaders.

The battle was by no means even.

France, under Louis Napoleon's rule, had the most world's powerful army, and sent more than six thousand men to invade Mexico.

But the courage and the love of freedom impelled the Mexican people to fight back.

General Ignacio Zaragoza led 5,000 ill-equipped Mestizo and Zapotec Indians called Zacapoaxtlas.

On the 5th of May 1862, the forts of Loreto and Guadalupe, in the city of Puebla, became the scene of the historic defeat of the great army of France.

Against overwhelming odds, they managed to drive the enemy back, achieving a total victory over the best trained and equipped soldiers in the world and ending the era of European domination of the Americas.

For Mexico, this day has come to represent a symbol of Mexican unity.

In the United States, Cinco de Mayo is also a celebration of the rich cultural heritage Mexican Americans have brought to the United States.

Hispanics are the fastest-growing minority group in the United States.

According to the most recent data available, the estimated Hispanic population in the U.S. is 57.5 million--constituting 17.8 percent of our nation's population.

Hispanics now own a record number of small businesses--1.6 million, with annual revenues of more than $221 billion.

Small businesses create two-thirds of American jobs, and the fastest- growing small business sector is Latino-owned firms.

Today, there are 52 Hispanic Members in the United States Congress, including 6 Senators and 46 House Members, many of whom are Mexican- American, representing constituencies in all regions of the country, from California to New York, from Arizona to Illinois, from Colorado to Florida.

These gains and numbers tell us that Hispanics are a driving force in our country--economically, socially and politically.

Hispanics share the common goals with all other Americans of freedom, opportunity, and a chance to build a better life.

In pursuing these aspirations, Hispanics have made important contributions to life in the United States in the fields of culture, sports, entertainment, business enterprise, science, politics and others.

Today, millions of Americans will join our neighbors to the south in celebrating Cinco de Mayo.

On this day, we are reminded that all people--regardless of their race, color, or gender--have enriched cultures and are worthy of respect and self-determination.

I am happy to be here today to celebrate this momentous day and to recognize the values, traditions, and positive contributions of the Mexican culture.

Mr. Speaker, in the Judiciary Committee right now, we are holding hearings to fight against the scourge of voter suppression and the unfortunate abolishment of section 5 by the Shelby case. I heard shouts of hallelujah when that case was abolished. The reason is because we are here today denying citizens of the United States the right to be represented fairly in the United States Congress.

The 23rd Amendment?

Well, I can cite for you the 14th Amendment and the 15th Amendment, not depriving people of their liberty and their justice.

What about those soldiers who shed blood from the District of Columbia? What about those who are paying taxes from the District of Columbia? What about the very citizens who work to move the engine of government living in the District of Columbia?

My friends know that the Capitol will be separated. My friends understand that there is a basic constitutional unfairness when you deny people the right to vote.

I wonder whether or not the problem is that, when I first arrived here many years ago, it was called chocolate city.

Let us not make this a racial issue. Let us make this a justice issue, a constitutional issue. It is important, Mr. Speaker. Vote for this legislation, for the 51st State.

Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the Committee on the Judiciary, as an original cosponsor of the legislation, I rise in strong and enthusiastic support of H.R. 51, the Washington, D.C. Admission Act,'' which declares the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth, to be a State of the United States of America, and declares its admission into the Union on an equal footing with the other States in all respects whatsoever.

In passing this legislation, we remove a stain that has blighted our nation for more than 200 years.

Today, we vote to end two centuries of shame and correct an injustice to the citizens of the District of Columbia.

Mr. Speaker, let us not lose sight of one indisputable and shameful fact: nearly 500,000 people living in the District of Columbia lack direct voting representation in the House of Representatives and Senate.

Specifically, the citizens of the District of Columbia pay more in federal taxes than 22 states and pay more in federal taxes per capita than any state.

The District of Columbia's population (705,000) is larger than the populations of Wyoming and Vermont, and seven states had populations under one million in the last census.

The District of Columbia's annual budget ($15.5 billion) is larger than the budgets of 14 states.

The District of Columbia has a higher per capita personal income and gross domestic product than any state.

District of Columbia residents have fought and died in every American war, including the Revolution itself, and almost 200,000 District residents have served in the military since World War I alone.

Approximately 30,000 veterans live in the District of Columbia, and it should be noted that during the Vietnam War, 243 District residents were casualties of war, a casualty figure greater than that observed by 10 different states.

So, Mr. Speaker, it is undisputable that residents of the District of Columbia serve in the military, pay billions of dollars in federal taxes each year, and assume other responsibilities of U.S. citizenship.

But for over 200 years, the District of Columbia has been denied voting representation in Congress--the entity that has ultimate authority over all aspects of the city's legislative, executive, and judicial functions.

Mr. Speaker, if a person can be called upon to pay federal taxes and serve in the armed forces of the United States, then he or she should at least have the opportunity to vote for a representative who could at least cast a symbolic vote in this chamber on critical matters facing our nation.

Issues like war and peace, equality, and justice.

And tear-gassing peaceful protestors in Lafayette Square exercising their First Amendment rights.

Mr. Speaker, taxation without representation is tyranny.

H.R. 51 would create a state from essentially the eight hometown wards of the District of Columbia and provides that the new state would be equal to the other 50 states in all respects, and that the residents of the State of Washington, D.C. would have all the rights of statehood, including voting representation in Congress and full local self-government

Under the legislation this new state would have no jurisdiction over the reduced federal district, which would consist of the area that Members of Congress and visitors associate with the capital of our country: the U.S. Capitol, the U.S. Supreme Court, the White House, the principal federal monuments, and the federal buildings and grounds adjacent to the National Mall and the U.S. Capitol.

It is unconscionable that more than a half million American citizens are being unconscionably denied a vote and a voice in the most important legislative body in the world.

As a supporter of freedom, democracy, and equality, I believe that it is long overdue for the citizens of the District of Columbia to have representation in the House and the Senate to advocate for their interests on vital matters coming before the Congress of the United States.

Mr. Speaker, it is wrong that we must be reminded daily by license plates in the District of Columbia that ``Taxation without representation is tyranny.''

The people in Boston felt so strongly about this in 1775 that they rebelled in Boston Harbor, launching the ``Boston Tea Party.''

The principle that political authority derives from the consent of the government is no less applicable when it comes to the District of Columbia.

Let us be clear, there is no dispute that hundreds of thousands of American citizens reside in the District of Columbia.

We all agree that universal suffrage is the hallmark of a democratic regime, of which the United States is the world's leading exemplar.

None of us believes it is fair that citizens of the District of Columbia pay federal taxes, risk life and limb fighting wars abroad to protect American democracy and extend the blessings of liberty to people living in foreign lands.

In short, there is no moral reason to deny the citizens of the District of Columbia admission as a state in the United States and the right to full representation in Congress.

The only question is whether Congress has the will and the constitutional authority to do so.

Congress has always had the constitutional authority but for much of the last 200 years, it has not had the will.

Let us change that, beginning today with our vote to pass H.R. 51, the Washington, D.C. Admission Act.

Madam Speaker, we have had a tumultuous, but yet invigorating 2 weeks. Just a week ago, we were able, in the Judiciary Committee, to pass H.R. 40, the Commission to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals.

Those who voted for it came from all parts of the country and represented all racial groups. It was a wonderful experience of understanding the cruciality and recognizing the slave history of African Americans and further developing proposals to deal with the dastardly impacts on African Americans.

We are delighted to have the support of Japanese Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Pacific Americans, and, of course, White Americans because they understand the healing power of H.R. 40.

Then we just recently had a judgment--as I have said on this floor, I know the Floyd family. They are America's family.

We had a judgment on Tuesday that showed the strength of America and her justice system and the recognition that we are all created equal and each one has to be held accountable for his actions.

So this has been a good week. America needs to know that. We look forward to passing H.R. 40 on this floor in celebration of the commemoration of Juneteenth when slaves were finally freed and passing the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act.

Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for his leadership, and I thank Congresswoman Judy Chu for her leadership.

Madam Speaker, I rise with great enthusiasm for the National Origin- Based Antidiscrimination for Nonimmigrants Act, and that is the NO BAN Act.

I proclaim a breath of fresh air, and that was the election of 2020 and the inauguration of President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, who made it very clear what our position is as it relates to those who come to this country.

First of all, they did not turn a blind eye to the Statue of Liberty, which acknowledges the fact that we are a refuge for those who are fleeing persecution. They also understood that we are not a country that discriminates against individuals simply because of their religion. That is what the NO BAN Act represented. It had nothing to do with terrorism.

I wonder why President Trump never said anything about domestic terrorists? Why didn't they have a structure to ban them, the very terrorists that jumped this Capitol on January 6th?

I am reminded of a little 15-year-old on the day that the ban was issued. When I was flying in from Washington, I went straight over to the international terminal because my staff had called me and others had called me. This little boy, innocent, with legal documents, a tourist visa, coming to visit his family, innocently indicated who he was. And, of course, by law, those CBP officers had to detain him.

Do you know what was worse? He was not able to see anyone at that time, but more importantly, he wound up in Chicago.

And so I rise to support the NO BAN Act, and I indicate that there is a policy. The border is closed. The Vice President will be working on a broader plan for dealing with the border. The shelter in Houston was a temporary shelter. It was an emergency shelter. It was rightly closed when other beds were found. 130 of those children were reunited with their families. This bill is important.

Madam Speaker, I am delighted that this bill includes an important provision of mine offered last year during the committee markup, which requires the administration to report to Congress on the impacts, positive, negative, and unintended of any action by the President pursuant to executive orders.

We know that banning Nigeria was the wrong thing to do, and I support the NO BAN Act.

Madam Speaker, as a senior member of the Committee on the Judiciary and a cosponsor, I rise in strong and enthusiastic support of H.R. 1333, the ``National Origin-Based Anti-Discrimination For Non-Immigrants Act, or No BAN Act, which stops executive overreach by preventing the abuse of

the system pioneered by the 45th President with his several abuses of the authority to restrict the entry of non-citizens into the United States under section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).

Thankfully, it is unnecessary for Congress to repeal by legislation the several section 212(f)-based executive actions of the 45th President's, including his original Muslim ban, because were rescinded by his successor, President Joseph Biden, in the initial days of the new Administration.

Madam Speaker, I support this legislation because the NO BAN Act amends section 212(f) of the INA to place checks and balances on the President's authority to temporarily suspend or restrict the entry of aliens or classes of aliens into the United States, when it is determined that such individuals ``would undermine the security or public safety of the United States or the preservation of human rights, democratic processes or institutions, or international stability.''

Specifically, the bill requires the President to find and document that any suspension or restriction:

(1) is based on specific and credible facts;

(2) is narrowly tailored;

(3) specifies a duration; and

(4) includes waivers.

The NO BAN Act expands the INA's nondiscrimination provision to prohibit discrimination based on religion and extends the prohibition on discrimination beyond the issuance of immigrant visas to include the issuance of nonimmigrant visas, entry and admission into the United States, and the approval or revocation of any immigration benefit.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased that the NO BAN Act includes an important provision offered last year during the committee markup of this legislation, which requires the Administration to report to Congress on the impacts--positive, negative, and unintended--of any action taken by the President pursuant to executive orders he has or will issue pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA.

I strongly support this legislation, and President Biden's rescission of his predecessor executive order which added the countries of Belarus, Myanmar, Eritrea, Kyrgyzstan, Nigeria, Sudan and Tanzania to the President's new and offensive Muslim Ban.

Madam Speaker, as a co-chair of the Congressional Nigerian Caucus, it is important to convey to our colleagues that the United States cannot afford to hamper diplomatic relations with Nigeria due to its importance in the region.

Nigeria is the largest economy and most populous country in Africa with an estimated population of more than 190 million, which is expected to grow to 400 million by 2050 and become the third most populous country in the world after China and India.

The United States is the largest foreign investor in Nigeria, with U.S. foreign direct investment concentrated largely in the petroleum and mining and wholesale trade sectors.

At $2.2 billion in 2017, Nigeria is the second largest U.S. export destination in Sub-Saharan Africa and the United States and Nigeria have a bilateral trade and investment framework agreement.

In 2017, the two-way trade in goods between the United States and Nigeria totaled over $9 billion.

Due to many of the residents of these countries practicing Islam, the 45th President's executive order was appropriately nicknamed the ``Muslim Ban'', and only exemplified his xenophobic and prejudiced mindset that the American people renounced as unacceptable in the 2020 presidential election.

Tanzania is also an important partner of the United States, and through numerous presidential initiatives, the United States has provided development and other assistance to Tanzania for capacity building to address health and education issues, encourage democratic governance promote broad-based economic growth, and advance regional and domestic security to sustain progress.

Although Sudan has had some internal issues during the last decade, the U.S. was a major donor in the March 1989 ``Operation Lifeline Sudan,'' which delivered 100,000 metric tons of food into both government and rebel held areas of the Sudan, thus, averting widespread starvation.

The United States established diplomatic relations with Eritrea in 1993, following its independence and separation from Ethiopia.

The United States supported Eritrea's independence and through a concerted, mutual effort that began in late 2017 and continues today, there are vast improvements to the bilateral relationship.

U.S. interests in Eritrea include supporting efforts for greater integration of Eritrea with the rest of the Horn of Africa, encouraging Eritrea to contribute to regional stability and partner on shared peace and security goals, urging progress toward a democratic political culture, addressing human rights issues and promoting economic reform and prosperity.

A comprehensive and coordinated strategy needs to be developed in coordination with the United States Congress to ensure that each country affected by this law may peacefully have its residents enter the United States and complete visa and asylum applications.

We live in a nation of laws, but we also live in a nation that seeks to establish and maintain diplomatic ties to these important African nations and imposing a discriminatory and arbitrary ban would adversely affect foreign relations with a critical continent for decades to come.

Madam Speaker, in light of the crisis presented by current COVID-19 pandemic, the NO BAN Act contains a provision to ensure that the President can use section 212(f) to protect the United States from the spread of communicable diseases, including COVID-19, by suspending the entry of a class of individuals if the President determines their entry would undermine the public safety of the United States.

However, to remove any perceived ambiguity and avoid the propensity of this president to abuse delegated authority, the legislation includes language to clarify that the term ``public safety'' ``includes efforts necessary to contain a communicable disease of public health significance.''

Madam Speaker, the NO BAN Act is supported by a bipartisan coalition of the nation's leading immigrants' rights organizations, faith-based organizations, and civil rights organizations, including the following:

American Civil Liberties Union, Church World Service, U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Muslim Advocates Immigration Hub, Asian Americans Advancing Justice Association, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Bend the Arc, Center for American Progress, The Public Affairs Alliance of Iranian Americans, Interfaith Immigration Coalition, Human Rights Campaign, Franciscan Action Network, HIAS, Jewish and Muslims and Allies Acting Together, Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, National Council of Jewish Women, National Iranian American Organization Action, National Immigration Law Center, International Refugee Assistance Project, Friends Committee on National Legislation, Engage Action, Airbnb.

I urge all Members to vote for H.R. 1333 and send a powerful message that this House stands firmly behind America's well-earned and long- established reputation of being the most welcoming Nation on earth.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York for his leadership.

I thank the gentlewoman from the State of Washington for her grand and superb and astute leadership in understanding the Bill of Rights.

I have watched this debate, and I have seen people go to the microphone and talk about ``on the left.'' I didn't know the Constitution was on the left or the right. I thought the Constitution was a document that our Founding Fathers started with the language ``to form a more perfect Union.'' And in the Bill of Rights, citizens or noncitizens can have access to due process just because of the basic foundation of this Nation.

For a moment, I am going to pause, but I rise to support enthusiastically the Access to Counsel Act, H.R. 1573. But let me pause, as a resident and citizen of a border State.

Oh, how interesting it is, the interpretation of those one-time visitors. What about those of us who have been at the border over and over again? What about those of us who stood in the dark of night and saw a 2-year-old or a baby come off the wall.

No, that was not what we wanted. But people fleeing persecution have always sought to come to the place where the Statue of Liberty stands in the harbor. As far as I know, she is not gone. There is an Office of Refugee Resettlement. We have been a refuge for refugees.

Madam Speaker, I can tell you that, in the last 4 years, I saw scenes that I had never seen in my life. Do I need to remind Republicans of the children who died in our custody? No, I don't blame those Border Patrol or others there, my neighbors. But I blame the policies of the previous administration that did not care and simply left them to their own devices, which was a crowded, unsanitized place with metallic blankets and people not able to move because their idea was: Move them out. Make it so horrible, short of losing their lives, they will leave.

Then, what about the MPP program? I went to Mexico and saw desperate people in the streets. They had no place to live. They were being taken advantage of. I don't fault Mexico that, in essence, made an agreement. Maybe they were intimidated by the last administration and didn't know what else to do. But the MPP program subjected people to very dangerous conditions.

So, besides the Biden administration's policy of a closed border, sending people back who are single adults, but for the ports of entry, obviously; and, as well, those families, still giving them the opportunity to apply for asylum, which was literally cut off--domestic abuse persons couldn't apply for asylum under the last administration-- fleeing bloodshed.

I would rather stand with President Biden and Vice President Harris, who are strategically trying to work on behalf of the American people, but they have not left their compassion and humanity at the front door of the White House.

This legislation is absolutely in compliance with the Constitution because what it says is that you have access to counsel. We don't pay for it. You have legal entry documents, and it is only when you are in secondary detention that this takes place so that little Ali, who I mentioned earlier on the floor, coming from Egypt with the appropriate documents, would have been able to call his father or his uncle, who was here in Houston, Texas.

Is that not simple humanity? Is that simple kindness? Is that recognizing the dignity of all people?

What about this New York City design gallery owner detained at an airport because of this ridiculous process? Of course, that was in 2017, the last administration, Juan Garcia Mosqueda, founder of the New York art-and-design gallery called Chamber and a decade-long legal permanent resident. I don't know how he got detained at the John F. Kennedy International Airport. Not only did he get detained, but he was shipped back to his native Argentina with no opportunity to talk to anyone ahead of his gallery art show that very day.

In an open letter titled ``The Visible Wall,'' released by Mosqueda, he called the experience dehumanizing and degrading. He had his documents and detailed his 36-hour-long detainment, questioning, and return to Buenos Aires.

We already know I was getting ready to speak in the last debate on the No BAN Act. Nigeria was added to the list. I co-chair the Nigerian Caucus. There are doctors, lawyers, teachers, and businesspersons who have served from Nigeria in this Nation.

I believe this is a right-thinking bill, the Access to Counsel Act of 2021. I rise to support this legislation, and I oppose all of those who think that the Constitution no longer exists. Support the bill, H.R. 1573.

Madam Speaker, as a senior member of the Committee on the Judiciary, I rise in strong and enthusiastic support of H.R. 1573, the ``Access to Counsel Act of 2021'', which would ensure that certain individuals who are subject to prolonged inspection by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) at ports of entry have the ability to communicate with and receive the assistance of counsel and other interested parties at no expense to the government.

The Access to Counsel Act does the following:

Allows individuals who already have legal status in the United States who are held in secondary inspection at airports or other points of entry for more than an hour with an opportunity to access legal counsel or an interested party, such as a relative or someone with a bona fide relationship, under certain circumstances.

Allows counsel or a covered interested party the ability to advocate on behalf of the individual by providing information or documentation in support of the individual.

Affirms the opportunity to access to counsel attaches no later than one hour after the secondary inspection process begins and as necessary throughout the process.

Invalidates any effort by CBP to persuade someone to relinquish their legal status (by executing a I-407 or Record of Abandonment of Lawful Permanent Resident Status) if that person has been denied access to counsel or voluntarily waives, in writing, the opportunity to seek advice from counsel.

In 2017, Juan Garcia Mosqueda, a decade-long legal permanent resident of the U.S., was detained at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York City and sent back to his native Argentina by a CBP agent who told him that, ``lawyers had no jurisdiction at the borders.''

This statement, made in the weeks following implementation of the former president's 2017 travel ban, lays bare the vulnerable situation faced by people upon their arrival to the United States.

Behind closed doors without a friend or counsel, people are subjected to prolonged questioning, coercion, extended detention, mistreatment and summary expulsion.

Many lose valuable rights, and sometimes more, as CBP agents interpret and apply complex immigration rules to decide people's lives without the benefit of a knowledgeable advocate.

While many within the agency interpret and apply the law competently, the position does not require more than a high school degree, and CBP inspectors continue to act as judge, jury and expulsioner without so much as a

whisper allowed during that decision making from an attorney representing the banished.

We are a country of laws, and we hold as a cherished tradition the concept of due process of law.

The need for this bill became apparent after the Trump Administration implemented the Muslim ban in early 2017, resulting in individuals being detained at airports, while others being barred from boarding flights and pulled off planes abroad.

In 2020, we saw additional instances of CBP officers unjustly detaining Iranian Americans for up to 12 hours at the northern border in Blaine, WA and detaining and deporting Iranian students who were attending U.S. universities and people from Iran traveling on valid visas.

Immigrants and civil rights activists have also raised concerns that CBP appears to target individuals for inspection based on racial profiling, and often holds U.S. citizens with proper documentation in secondary inspection without access to an attorney.

For example, three Black CBP officers recently filed a lawsuit against DHS, alleging CBP routinely targets and harasses Black travelers at the Blue Water bridge between Port Huron and Sarnia on the Canada-Michigan border.

A March 25, 2021 report by the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan examined CBP data on apprehensions at the Michigan-Canada border and corroborates these allegations.

The report found that between 2012 and 2019, over 96 percent of the 13,000 documented apprehensions involved people of color, and one-third involved U.S. citizens.

In another example, Tianna Spears, a Black U.S. citizen diplomat working at the U.S. consulate in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico said that she was targeted regularly for inspection over a four month period, despite crossing the border daily, possessing a diplomatic passport and Global Entry approval, and having registered her car in the SENTRI system.

She states that during these encounters, she was unable to contact counsel or State Department colleagues who could verify her identity.

After four months of regular apprehensions, she began to develop symptoms of PTSD, and was forced to transfer to a different post. She later resigned from the State Department.

Madam Speaker, we must ensure that people are treated fairly during the inspections process, and to do so at the very minimum requires that CBP permit representation of counsel when requested during inspections.

I urge all Members to vote for H.R. 1573 and send a powerful message that this House stands firmly behind America's well-earned and long established reputation of being the most welcoming nation on earth.

[From Curbed, Mar. 2, 2017]

Owner of NYC Design Gallery Detained at Airports, Denied Re-entry to

Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce for the constant diligence that he has in the landscape of healthcare and energy, consumer issues. Certainly, as a member of the Committee on the Judiciary, we are looking forward to working with this committee on a very important matter.

So I want to acknowledge the work of the Committee on Energy and Commerce and indicate that isn't it sad that we have not been able to find common ground to work on this issue. I am very concerned that what we are now doing, we probably would need more time for our committees to work together. I am concerned that we might be extending the Trump administration's temporary class-wide emergency scheduling of fentanyl, a substance that all of us vigorously opposed.

Madam Speaker, I think the chairman is well-aware of my longstanding concern on criminalizing substance abuse instead of preventing and treating it. I know that our two committees have a common perspective and agreement on that, but I have seen failed policies in my own neighborhood that have disproportionately impacted communities of color.

For instance, in the 1980s, Congress adopted harsh mandatory minimum sentences for crack cocaine offenses and putting many in unjust and lengthy terms of imprisonment.

Madam Speaker, I simply want to indicate an acknowledgment of fentanyl and its impact that it has had, and I want to acknowledge the importance of us working together. But I also want to put on the record my concern with the DEA's temporary order that would group all fentanyl-related substances under a class-wide ban.

You see, what I know we can document is that the recipient, the taker, gets the short end of the criminal justice stick, and with that, I have concerns. But as we take more time to do this, I want to make sure the traffickers, the cartels, the gangs, are put in the eye of the storm where they belong.

Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding.

Madam Speaker, just to put on the record that the data shows that there are already significant racial disparities in some of the Federal cases and mandatory minimum sentences involving fentanyl analogues.

I don't want to put words in the mouth of my chairman, Chairman Pallone, but I have heard him speak to these issues, and I am grateful for it. I am grateful for his sensitivity. So I wanted to come to the floor knowing the work that has been done, but also knowing your understanding. And I wanted to just make sure that these communities that cannot speak for themselves clearly are put on the record.

I need not say that the trial that we just had with the George Floyd case and what was trying to be represented in that case, albeit was a very tiny or minute or nonexistent amount. So I want to make sure that we do this right and we get the time to do it.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his leadership.

Washington, DC,

April 19, 2021.

President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.,

The White House,

Washington, DC.

Dear President Biden: We write to express our serious

concerns with class-wide scheduling of fentanyl-related

substances, joining with our colleagues Senators Booker,

Hirono, Markey, Warren and Whitehouse, who wrote to you about

this issue on April 14. We too commend your commitment to end

mandatory minimums, to address racial disparities, and to

achieve criminal justice reform. We also agree with the

Administration's recognition of the pressing need to

``eradicate racial, gender and economic inequities that

currently exist in the criminal justice system. We look

forward to working with your Domestic Policy Council and the

interagency working group that has been formed to develop

specific policy solutions for criminal justice reform. At the

same time, we also hope to collaborate with you and your

Administration to enact just and restorative policies that

will meaningfully transform our nation's response to

substance use disorders through the lens of public health and

racial equity.

We agree with our Senate colleagues that fentanyl use is a

serious concern. Combatting substance use, including the

illicit use of fentanyl, is a top priority for all of us.

However, we ask that you reject the last Administration's

misguided approach to the opioid epidemic, especially

regarding class-wide scheduling of fentanyl analogues.

As an initial matter, federal prosecutors may already

pursue charges concerning harmful fentanyl analogues, with or

without class-wide scheduling. In addition, classifying all

fentanyl analogues as Schedule I substances is unnecessary

for federal prosecutions of these cases. Independent from any

temporary scheduling order for certain substances, the

federal government has the authority to prosecute anyone who

possesses, imports, distributes, or manufactures any

unscheduled fentanyl analogue with a high potential for

abuse, no medical value, and the ability to cause overdose

deaths. In addition, the Department of Justice can continue

to prosecute any case involving the illicit manufacturing or

distribution of any fentanyl-related substances under a

separate statutory scheme established by the Federal Analogue

Act. The DEA can also continue to use its existing authority

to schedule specific fentanyl-related substances as

Controlled Substances under the well-established interagency

process.

However, under the Trump Administration, the Drug

Enforcement Administration used its emergency scheduling

authority to place certain fentanyl analogues onto Schedule I

of the Controlled Substances Act. The Temporary Scheduling

Order (``the Order'') scheduled a general ``class'' of

``fentanyl-related substances.'' In doing so, the Trump

Administration expanded the application of mandatory minimum

penalties to a broader range of federal cases, while also

creating additional barriers to medical research. The Order

also circumvented the standard procedures for the scheduling

of substances under the Controlled Substances Act, preventing

input from the Department of Health and Human Services and

other relevant interagency experts.

The Trump Administration's Order also widened the net as

far as the application of mandatory minimum penalties. As you

know, people of color have been disproportionately subject to

mandatory minimum sentences, preventing judges from being

allowed to apply penalties that fit the facts and

circumstances of each case. Continuation of this Order will

further perpetuate current racial disparities that exist

throughout the criminal justice system. According to the most

recent statistics from the U.S. Sentencing Commission, there

are significant racial disparities in the prosecution of

fentanyl cases, with people of color comprising almost 75% of

those sentenced in 2019. This also holds true for federal

convictions in cases involving fentanyl analogues, for which

68% of those sentenced were people of color. To keep this

approach in place--even temporarily--will further exacerbate

existing racial disparities.

In addition, mandatory minimum penalties continue to

disproportionately impact individuals with a minor role in

the offense. In 2019, more than half of all federal fentanyl-

analogue prosecutions involved a street-level seller or other

minor role. During this challenging time, our most vulnerable

communities, especially communities of color, have been

disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Moving

forward, we must not exacerbate these health and justice

inequities. We need to reject approaches that expand criminal

penalties, rather than prioritize evidence-based approaches

to this public health crisis.

Moreover, we need to work to reduce barriers to research in

order to expand opportunities to identify antidotes to

fentanyl-analogue overdoses and to improve treatment options.

By extending the Order, critical medical research will

continue to be limited during a time when the country is

facing even greater concerns regarding the opioid crisis and

the rising number of overdoses. For these reasons, we urge

you to discard this misguided approach.

Drug addiction is a serious problem in communities across

the country, and we are profoundly concerned about fentanyl-

related deaths. The current pandemic has furthered worsened

the tragic impact of overdoses as so many Americans continue

to struggle through this isolating and stressful crisis. We

must learn from the lessons of the past as we prioritize

evidence-based, public health approaches and pursue better

and more just means to address this problem, rather than

the class-wide scheduling of fentanyl analogues.

Sincerely,

Jerrold Nadler, Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr., Hakeem

Jeffries, Ted Lieu, Val B. Demings, Sheila Jackson Lee,

Theodore E. Deutch, David N. Cicilline, Pramila Jayapal,

Mondaire Jones, Deborah K. Ross, Tony Cardenas, Yvette D.

Clark, Cori Bush, and Bobby L. Rush, Members of Congress.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to George Floyd's family, a family that I have come to know even more than the time we spent together in Houston, Texas.

The family grew up in my congressional district, and they lived in what is called Cuney Homes, which stands today proud, as I know they are, of this family. And they, of course, went to the famous Jack Yates High School.

Why would I pay tribute to this family?

Because I think America has come to see them as America's family, and the world has come to admire them for their steadfastness, their passion and compassion, as well as their calm and peaceful understanding of the crisis and the terrible tragedy that has befallen them. They have acted in generosity. They have prayed. They have embraced those who have come to honor them. They realize the symbol that they stand for, yet they were hurting--hurting and hurting.

Thank goodness for the decision yesterday, the judgment, the just justice for them, for they are America's family; and their commitment is that they will continue to serve this country to bring about justice for all.

Madam Speaker, with humility, gratitude, and a broken heart, I rise to anchor this Congressional Black Caucus Special Order in remembrance of Congressman Alcee Hastings, senior member of the Committee on Rules, a man who travelled the world leading congressional delegations to defend, protect, and strengthen democracies while serving as Chair of the Helsinki Commission, a highly respected and valued member of the Congressional Black Caucus, one of this House's greatest debaters, one of the first three African Americans elected to this body from Florida since Reconstruction, a member of Congress for 28 years, my mentor, a beloved colleague, and dear friend who died Tuesday, April 6, 2021, at the age of 84.

Madam Speaker, Alcee Hastings, who was affectionately referred to by his colleagues and constituents as ``Judge Hastings,'' was a statesman and strong supporter of equality, economic and social justice, civil rights, Israel, and human dignity for all.

He took to heart and lived the admonition he received from his father as a young child'' ``Be your own boss man,'' who through it all was his own man as he blazed trails and pioneered paths to improve the lives and life chances of the was so honored to serve.

Alcee Lamar Hastings was born September 5, 1936, in Altamonte Springs, to Julius Hastings, a butler, and Mildred nee Merritt, a maid.

His parents left Florida to find jobs .to earn money for Alcee's education, during which time he was raised by his maternal grandmother and attended Crooms Academy in Sanford, Florida, which was founded for African-American students, graduating in 1953.

Five years later, Alcee Hastings graduated from Fisk University with dual majors in zoology and botany.

Alcee Hastings started law school at Howard University before transferring to Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University in Tallahassee, from which he received his law degree in 1963.

Always a fighter and foot soldier for justice, Alcee Hastings was involved in early civil rights struggles, including the famous sit-ins in drugstore lunch-counters in North Carolina in 1959.

About those times, he later said: ``Those were the early days of the civil rights movement, and the people in Walgreens were breaking eggs on our heads and throwing

mustard and ketchup and salt at us. We sat there taking all of that.''

``After graduating from Florida A&M law school, Alcee Hastings went into private practice as a civil rights lawyer in Fort Lauderdale, but when he first arrived a motel refused to rent him a room; a humiliating experience inflicted on African Americans whenever they traveled in the United States before passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

As a civil rights lawyer, Alcee Hastings successfully filed lawsuits to desegregate the public schools in Broward County, Florida, as well as the Cat's Meow, a restaurant that was popular with white lawyers and judges but would not serve African Americans.

It was poetic justice indeed when then Florida Governor Reuben Askew appointed Alcee Hastings to the circuit court of Broward County in 1977 and held the investiture ceremony at a high school he had helped desegregate.

In 1979, Alcee Hastings was nominated by President Jimmy Carter to serve as United States District Judge on the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, becoming the first African American federal judge in Florida; he was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on October 31, 1979, sworn in on November 2, 1979, and served for a decade until leaving the bench in October 1989.

As a judge, Alcee Hastings established his own style, eschewing the typical judicial mien of grave reserve; he cracked jokes from the bench, dropped slang in rulings and interviews, and was unflinching in his support for the poor and the dispossessed.

In 1981, Judge Hastings exasperated the Department of Justice when he extended a court order blocking the deportation of 76 Haitians after the Immigration and Naturalization Service had stepped up removals.

Many thought that with his departure from the federal bench, Alcee Hastings's career in public service had come to end but they underestimated this irrepressible and indomitable human being, who never forgot the lesson taught him years ago by his father: ``Be your own boss man!''

So three years later, in 1992, Alcee Hastings ran for Congress from the newly created 23rd Congressional District of Florida and won election in November of that year and, along with Congresswomen-elect Carrie Meek and Corrine Brown, became the first African Americans elected to Congress since Reconstruction, where he would go to be a productive and constructive member as Dean of the Florida Congressional Delegation, Vice-Chair of the Committee on Rules, and Vice-Chair and senior member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

One of the great joys of my life was serving with Alcee Hastings when he chaired the Helsinki Commission, the Organization for Cooperation and Security in Europe, and we traveled often to distant capitals to meet with our counter-parts in Europe and work on ways to strengthen economic and political ties and support their democratic aspirations.

Alcee Hastings was held in such high esteem by international legislators that he was elected the first African American president of the 323-member OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, an institution of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe charged with facilitating inter-parliamentary dialogue, an important aspect of the overall effort to meet the challenges of democracy throughout the OSCE area.

Madam Speaker, in these days of trial and challenge, I am reminded that our dear departed colleague Alcee Hastings always counseled us to remain steadfast, saying:

``Continuing to do nothing in the face of continued threats to our people and our way of life is hardly what the American people elected us to do.''

Alcee Hastings, the recipient of numerous honors and awards bestowed on him from organizations both at home and abroad, firmly believed that progress and change can be achieved through mutual respect and appreciation, and that individuals and communities can see beyond the limits of parochialism, enabling them to better understand each other.

And we all know how proud he was to be a Nupe, a member of Kappa Alpha Psi Fraternity, Inc., and a member of the National Bar Association.

Alcee Hastings' commanding presence will forever be missed; we all mourn his loss and extend our deepest sympathies to his wife Patricia Williams; his children, Alcee Hastings II, Chelsea Hastings and Leigh Hastings; his stepdaughter, Maisha; and all the relatives and friends who loved him so dearly.

My deepest sympathies go out to them, and I pray they find consolation in the certain knowledge that the Judge is now resting in the Heavenly Chorus.

Madam Speaker, I thank the chairwoman so very much for yielding tonight, and I thank her for establishing the uniqueness of this Special Order.

It is a special Special Order in tribute and in remembrance of Alcee Lamar Hastings, a tireless fighter for justice and equality, dean of the Florida Congressional Delegation, former United States District Court judge, first African American elected to Congress from Florida since Reconstruction, vice chair of the Committee on Rules, and former member of the Intelligence Committee, chairman of the Helsinki Commission, Member of Congress for 28 years, mentor, beloved colleague, and dear friend.

Madam Speaker, tonight, with humility, gratitude and a broken heart, I rise to anchor this Congressional Black Caucus Special Order in remembrance of Congressman Alcee Hastings, a senior member of the Committee on Rules, a man who traveled the world. Most of all, he loved his family, he loved his country, he loved his State of Florida, loved his friends and his colleagues. We humble ourselves today to honor him.

Madam Speaker, I will reserve my words and tribute so that I can acknowledge one of his dear friends, the Honorable Bennie Thompson. Bennie Thompson, the chair of the Homeland Security Committee, a distinguished gentleman from Mississippi, a fighter for justice himself, but as well, the opportunity to be able to lead this country into safety.

Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson), and if I might say, the gentleman with the white jacket as a member of the great Divine Nine, the Kappas.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for those words of reminding us how forthright and direct Alcee Hastings was.

Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), distinguished majority leader of the House, who gave an eloquent portrayal this morning at our celebration service of his relationship with Congressman Hastings and his understanding of Congressman Hastings' contribution and value to all of us.

Madam Speaker, I thank the majority leader for that

personal tribute of the bond of love between his friend, Alcee Hastings, and himself. I thank him for that story and tribute.

Madam Speaker, it is now an honor to yield to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz), the co-chair of the Florida delegation, the cardinal of the Appropriations Committee, but I think this evening what she would most want to be known as, certainly a mentee of earlier years, but a very dear friend of Congressman Alcee Hastings.

Madam Speaker, it is certainly a privilege as well.

I thank Congresswoman Wasserman Schultz for the personal stories she has shared with us, and her friendship.

Madam Speaker, it is now my privilege to yield to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Bishop), known as an expert on all things agricultural; a civil rights leader; as well in this place, in this House, a cardinal himself. But I believe what he will share with us tonight is a personal relationship with Congressman Alcee Hastings, a Kappa. And, yes, Congressman Bishop is a Kappa.

Madam Speaker, I thank Congressman Bishop for letting us know that the world is a better place because of Alcee Hastings.

Now it is my privilege again to introduce another of Congressman Hastings' dear, dear friends, the chairwoman of the Science, Space, and Technology Committee as well as a proud member of the Divine Nine and a great Texan.

Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Johnson).

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Texas for her recognition of Alcee's complimentary words about Texas, but he was still our friend. I thank Congresswoman Johnson for that tribute.

Again, this is a very special tribute, and I might say special, special tribute to our friend, the late Alcee Lamar Hastings.

To provide another tribute is one of our members of the Congressional Black Caucus, a member of the leadership of the cochair of the Democratic Policy and Steering Committee, a cardinal on the Appropriations Committee, and it is known that often people say: Barbara Lee speaks for me.

The Honorable Congresswoman Barbara Lee is from California, a State that loves Texas as well.

Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).

We will be reminded of those colorful socks. That was his trademark, and that is very special. This is a special tribute to Congressman Alcee Hastings.

Our next tribute presenter is Gwen Moore from the great State of Wisconsin. Gwen Moore has been a fighter for the vulnerable and serves on the distinguished and powerful Ways and Means Committee. I thank my colleague and friend on the Helsinki Commission.

Madam Speaker, may I ask how much time I have remaining?

Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore).

Madam Speaker, let me thank the gentlewoman from Wisconsin for her kind words. Those were memorable times, and the historic nature of his leadership was not only national; it was international.

I am privileged again in this very special tribute to be able to yield to the gentlewoman from Georgia. States are quite close to each other, and of course, her passion matches the deep passion of Congressman Alcee Hastings. That is the obvious reason for her kinship to Congressman Hastings, but also the ability to have suffered in loss but stand up to fight for justice, and that is our friend and colleague, Lucy McBath, from Georgia.

Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Georgia (Mrs. McBath).

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for that sense of kinship, with her tribute and a reference to his kindness and his wisdom.

I hope everyone knows that we are telling a very special story this evening. To join us in that is a Floridian. I always like to pronounce it in a way that indicates the bonding of Floridians, but, certainly, Floridians of a certain kind, like Alcee Hastings with the distinguished former chief of police, Val Demings, a senior member of the Intelligence Committee, a member of the Judiciary Committee and Homeland Security Committee, and a Floridian with deep roots and a friend of Congressman Hastings.

I yield to the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Demings).

We are truly grateful for his life.

Madam Speaker, how much time is remaining?

Madam Speaker, I will bring this Special Order to a close, and I want to remind our colleagues of this very special Special Order led by Chairwoman Joyce Beatty. Then, we heard from Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Sanford Bishop, Bennie Thompson, Eddie Bernice Johnson, our Majority Leader Hoyer, Barbara Lee, and Gwen Moore. We heard from Lucy McBath and Val Demings, and we heard from others in their voices throughout the day and in their statements.

So let me try to summarize this life. This giant of a man was a Federal judge and a tireless fighter for justice and equality. He was the dean of the Florida delegation. He led an international organization never before led by an American, never before led by an African American.

But let me tell you what I believe really meant something to Alcee's life. First, his beautiful wife, Patricia, and all of his family members who we pay tribute to for sharing him with us. But he was a Florida A&M man. He was a Fisk man. All over the country, I would hear Fiskites saying: ``Alcee Hastings went to Fisk.'' And Alcee Hastings would let you know he went Fisk University. He honored that university, and they honored him.

As a member of the National Bar Association myself, that is where I got to know Alcee Hastings. Oh, as a little, small pip of a lawyer myself, I looked up to Alcee Hastings and the words that he would say. In his own organization, he would be a guest speaker, a civil rights lawyer, as well as a civil rights fighter.

Yes, Alcee Hastings was born to a butler and a maid who left the South so that they could get money for him to go to school. And his dad said to him: ``Be your own boss.''

As I said, he ultimately went on to law school. But he also sat at the sit-in counters: Walgreens, where the individuals put ketchup and smashed eggs on him. Oh, Alcee could have turned around with vengeance, but he understood the message of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., that violence begets nothing, and he peacefully sat. But that didn't mean that he was going to allow them to get the best of Alcee Hastings.

He went on to be a civil rights lawyer. He went on to file lawsuits and desegregate the schools and the Cat's Meow restaurant that he had gone to.

Wasn't it poetic justice when he was named a circuit court judge and the investiture ceremony was at the high school that he had helped desegregate?

Yes, he was a Federal judge. Yes, of course, he did great things. He stopped the deportation of 76 Haitians, when they thought they were gone.

Then, in 1992, he made history again, becoming one of the first African Americans coming up to this great body from Florida since Reconstruction, joining Corrine Brown and Carrie Meek.

The Helsinki Commission was a special love for him. Can you imagine an international organization led for the first time--they had to vote for him. And that was a place where they raised up the issue of slavery. They raised up reparations. They raised up human rights. They raised up stopping hatred around the world. Alcee set that tone.

Then, of course, he continued to counsel, even in these times. I would come to him. Lucy McBath reminded me, as a cancer survivor, you would always check on him. But I tell you, he would walk in with those socks and those suits, and he would be having a pep in his step.

But let me leave you with this: Continuing to do nothing in the face of continued threats to our people and our way of life is hardly what America elected us to do.

So as I close, let me simply say: Deepest sympathy. But let me remind his family that those who die in the Lord--and I paraphrase--they will, in fact, rest from their labor, but their deeds will follow them. Alcee Hastings' deeds will follow him. A tribute to America, a Floridian, a son, and a great man, both of this Nation and as a freedom fighter.

General Leave

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the topic of this Special Order.

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

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Maryland for yielding. And I particularly thank the gentlewoman from Washington, D.C., the 51st State, the Honorable Eleanor Holmes Norton for her hard work.

Madam Speaker, breaking news: The people of Washington, D.C., pay taxes. Breaking news: They wear the uniform of the United States of America. And, breaking news: The legislation my friends on the other side of the aisle are proposing is to propose a dictation, as usual, from the United States Federal Government on the people of Washington,

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 490, ``DHS MORALE Act,'' which expands the duties of the Chief Human Capital Officer to address morale throughout the Department of Homeland Security.

The bill provides for:

1. leader development and employee engagement,

2. maintaining a catalogue of available employee development opportunities, and

3. issuing a DHS-wide employee engagement action plan.

The bill directs DHS to establish an employee engagement steering committee and authorizes it to establish an annual employee award program.

DHS is also required to report to the congressional homeland security committees the impacts of the lapse in appropriations between December 22, 2018 and January 25, 2019 on (1) DHS human resources operations; (2) DHS's ability to meet hiring benchmarks; and (3) retention, attrition, and morale of DHS personnel.

As a senior member of this committee I have long been troubled by the low morale, employee retention and job opportunities within the entire agency and what impact these issues have had on homeland security.

Over my service on this committee, from its inception, I have learned a great deal about the capacity and strength of the men and women who work at the Department of Homeland Security.

I hold them in the highest regard for their dedication and service to our country.

This nation depends on the men and women of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to protect citizens from those who wish to do them harm.

DHS is charged with protecting the nation from terrorism threats.

The agency also assists local, state, and federal law enforcement to prepare to meet those threats which are significantly different than what was seen on September 11, 2001.

Because of the dedication of DHS professionals, we are better prepared to face these challenges as one nation united against a common foe.

The Department of Homeland Security was not created to protect the nation from desperate people escaping violence and poverty, seeking asylum in our country or the ravages of a virus attacking and killing over half a million Americans.

It was created to prevent attacks against our nation such as the one carried out by foreign terrorists who used commercial planes as missiles to destroy the World Trade Center Towers, and a section of the west side of the Pentagon, and would have killed more if not for the heroic acts of the passengers on Flight 93 to stop the attackers from reaching their ultimate destination right here at our nation's Capitol.

On January 6, 2021, our nation was once again threatened, but it was from an enemy found on our own shores led by the former President of the United States to attack the Capitol building during the constitutionally mandated Joint Meeting of Congress to count the ballots cast by presidential electors and announce the results and the winner to the nation and the world.

Today, our nation faces multiple crisis at the same time that are challenging our way of life, values, and resolve; challenges the American people are, and will be, prepared to face and overcome.

As Americans we are best when we are true to the values we hold dear, beginning with fidelity to the Constitution and the laws of the United States.

The Department of Homeland Security has had low employee morale and low employee engagement since it began operations in 2003 and this must change.

In 2019, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report on DHS employee morale.

This report addressed:

1. drivers of employee engagement at DHS and

2. the extent that DHS has initiatives to improve employee engagement and ensures effective engagement action planning.

GAO analyzed employee trends within DHS, reviewed component employee engagement action plans and met with officials from DHS and component human capital offices as well as unions and employee groups.

I was at the Capitol on September 11, 2001, and I will never forget the Members who were there with me as we sang God Bless America on the steps of the Capitol.

In the days and weeks following the attacks, we were uncertain what threat might come and how many lives might be lost as we worked to put resources in place to deal with an enemy that might be among us.

Over the past nineteen years we have learned a great deal about homeland security, but we must learn more about making sure that agency professionals have what they need to excel.

We will be better prepared to face these challenges as one nation, united against a common foe, when morale issues within DHS have been effectively addressed.

I urge all members to join me in voting for H.R. 490, DHS MORALE Act.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 473, the ``Trusted Traveler Reconsideration and Restoration Act of 2021,'' which directs the Government Accountability Office to review Department of Homeland Security (DHS) trusted traveler programs, and DHS to extend the enrollment period where an individual's participation in a trusted traveler program was revoked in error.

The Trusted Traveler consists of several programs that include: Global Entry, TSA Pre, SENTRI, NEXUS, and FAST.

The Trusted Traveler Programs are risk-based programs to facilitate the entry of pre-approved travelers.

All applicants are vetted to ensure that they meet the qualifications for the program to which they are applying.

Receiving a ``Best Match'' or program recommendation based on eligibility or travel habits does not guarantee acceptance into any Trusted Traveler program.

We will be better prepared to face these challenges as one nation united against a common foe, when morale issues within DHS have been effectively addressed.

I urge all members to join me in voting for H.R. 473 the ``Trusted Traveler Reconsideration and Restoration Act of 2021.''

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 367, the ``Homeland Security Acquisition Professional Career Program Act,'' which establishes in the Department of Homeland Security an acquisition professional career program to develop a cadre of acquisition professionals.

Acquisition professionals work in one of six career fields, each of which plays a vital role in Department Acquisition.

The six Acquisition career fields include:

1. Contract Specialist,

2. Program Manager,

3. Logistician,

4. Systems Engineer,

5. Industrial Engineer/Cost Estimator, and

6. IT Acquisition Specialist.

Homeland Security Acquisition Professional Career Program participants are appointed to rotational assignments within department components to gain experience in a wide variety of work environments.

The program is three years, and upon successful completion participants are placed into a permanent full-time position at the GS- 12 grade.

Job applications to the Department of Homeland Security go through multiple levels of review.

Human Resources Specialists screen applications to determine whether basic eligibility requirements are met for the position and rate applications according to the additional qualifications listed in the job announcement.

If the application rates among the best qualified, it will be forwarded to the hiring manager who will make the final selection.

Selection procedures are subject to Federal Civil Service laws, which ensures that all applicants receive fair and equal treatment in the hiring process.

Acquisition Professionals are responsible for nearly $20 billion in annual purchases for the Department of Homeland Security.

The Management Directorate shall administer this essential program, including carrying out recruitment efforts and providing specialized acquisition training.

I ask my colleagues to join me in voting for passage of H.R. 367.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 408, the ``Department of Homeland Security Mentor-Protege Program Act of 2021,'' which provides statutory authority for the mentor-protege program of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) under which a mentor firm enters into an agreement with a protege firm to assist the latter to compete for prime contracts and subcontracts of DHS.

The Mentor-Protege program is designed to motivate and encourage large business prime contractor firms to provide mutually beneficial developmental assistance to small business, veteran-owned small business, service-disabled veteran-owned small business, HUBZone small business, small disadvantaged business, and women-owned small business concerns.

The participating Mentor-Protege Companies, program is also designed to:

1. Improve the performance of contracts and subcontracts.

2. Foster the establishment of long-term business relationships between large prime contractors and small business subcontractors.

3. Strengthen subcontracting opportunities and accomplishments through three incentives.

Eligibility for Participation

All firms must be in good standing in the federal marketplace.

The program excludes firms that are on the Federal List of Debarred or Suspended Contractors.

A Mentor Firm is open to any large business firm that demonstrates the commitment and capability to assist in the development of small business proteges.

A Protege Firm can partner with all small businesses that meet the definition of small business concern at FAR 19.001, based on their primary NAICS code, are eligible to be protege firms.

This includes small business, veteran-owned small business, service- disabled veteran-owned small business, HUBZone small business, small disadvantaged business, and women-owned small business concerns.

Benefits for Mentors to participate in this program include for acquisitions that require for a subcontracting plan, mentors are eligible to receive credit in the source selection/evaluation criteria process for mentor-protege participation.

Additionally, a post-award incentive for subcontracting plan credit is available by recognizing costs incurred by a mentor firm in providing assistance to a protege firm and using this credit for purposes of determining whether the mentor firm attains a subcontracting plan participation goal applicable to the mentor firm under a Homeland Security contract.

The program benefits the Protege by allowing them to receive technical, managerial, financial, or any other mutually agreed upon benefit from mentors including work that flows from a government or commercial contract through subcontracting or teaming arrangements. The assistance could result in significant small business development.

The benefits to the Department of Homeland Security is the opportunity to move from the traditional large business prime contractor/small business subcontractor model to a mentor-protege relationship model based on mutual agreement, trust, and meaningful business development.

Additionally, mentor-protege arrangements may provide the Department of Homeland Security with greater assurance that a protege subcontractor will be able to perform under a contract than a similarly situated non-protege subcontractor.

Further, protege firms gain opportunities to seek and perform government and commercial contracts through the guidance and support of mentor firms that may not have been available to them without the mentor-protege program.

This type of program is working in the Department of Defense with great success. It is time to formalize the work of the mentor-protege program with DHS.

I ask that my colleagues join me in voting for H.R. 408.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R 1491, the ``Fair Debt Collection for Servicemembers Act,'' which addresses abusive debt collection practices affecting members of the military by amending the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCP A) by adding servicemember-specific provisions to Section 805 (covering prohibited communications in connection with debt collection) and 808 (defining unfair practices that constitute a violation of the Act).

H.R. 1491 specifically prohibits debt collectors from making threats of rank reduction, revocation of security clearance or prosecution under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Further, the bill requires the Government Accountability Office to report the impact of this act on military readiness and national security, including the extent covered members with security clearances would be impacted by uncollected debt.

While all Americans are covered by laws barring debt collectors from overly aggressive or deceptive tactics, military members and their families face particular financial challenges requiring extra protections: in service to their country, they relocate frequently, deploy overseas and are a prime target for scammers.

Military members are also more vulnerable to debt collectors in some instances, and debt collectors have taken advantage of this vulnerability by targeting members of the Armed Services through calling their superior officers, threatening reduction in rank and even courts-martial.

This past year has seen a rise in aggressive debt collections due to the impact of COVID-19, according to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (``CFPB'').

According to the CFPB, in the past year credit and consumer reporting complaints accounted for more than 58 percent of complaints received by the CFPB, followed by debt collection (15 percent), credit card (7 percent), checking or savings (6 percent), and mortgage complaints (5 percent).

Nearly 40 percent of complaints filed by servicemembers with the CFPB concern debt collection--as compared to only 26 percent by non- servicemembers.

This pandemic has been among the most disruptive long-term events we will see in our lifetimes, and it is not surprising that the shockwaves it sent across the planet were felt deeply in the consumer financial marketplace.

Our servicemen and servicewomen make extraordinary sacrifices on our behalf, and they should not be forced to confront aggressive and manipulative debt collectors who capitalize on the strains required of them in the course of their duties.

It is critical for the United States Congress to stand with the women and men who have served our country and remove the unethical methods debt collectors use to prey upon our servicemembers.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 1491, and address these abusive debt collection practices; the patriots serving our country deserve no less.