Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, in my former life, I was a criminal court judge for 22 years and spent 8 years as a prosecutor in Texas.

Child abusers are the worst criminals in our society.

But too often the justice system ignores the victim.

So Congressman Jim Costa (D-CA) and I founded the Victims' Rights Caucus.

The VRC is currently focused on combating human trafficking.

This topic is of particular interest to me because my hometown of Houston, Texas is unfortunately a hub for this despicable crime.

Many are not aware that modern day slavery occurs right here in the United States.

The problem is very real, especially amongst vulnerable youth in the child welfare system.

This is Anna's story which Shared Hope International shared with me.

After Anna's family passed away, she was placed in the foster care system at the age of three.

She was shuffled from home to home until age 12 when she was finally adopted by a loving family.

But Anna began hanging out at the corner store without her family knowing.

There, she met a person whom she thought she could trust.

Little did she know that the person she met at the corner store was not actually a friend at all.

One day, when she got into a fight with her parents, she called her ``friend'' from the store, who promptly picked her up.

Anna didn't know that this call would change her life forever.

Her ``friend'' was actually a trafficker.

He was violent.

He beat her and sold her body.

The emotional, physical and sexual abuse continued.

He threatened her family's lives if she called the police.

She was told the police would arrest her.

And that's exactly what happened.

The police did arrest her.

She was treated like a criminal, not a victim.

Anna became convinced that her family no longer wanted her.

She felt helpless and scared.

After almost four years of this unspeakable abuse, Anna eventually escaped and was reunited with her family.

Through strength, a resilient spirit, and with the help of her mother, Anna vowed to make a difference one victim at a time.

She now has a ministry for sex trafficking survivors and runs an outreach program for at-risk youth.

Unfortunately, Anna's story is not unique.

The scars from the foster care system stayed with her and made her vulnerable to trafficking.

Many foster youth have experienced neglect, physical, emotional, and/ or sexual abuse.

These factors make children more susceptible to trafficking.

The child welfare system has tremendous problems and one major challenge is to not only put a roof over a child's head, but to instill values--like self-worth--in each child.

Child sex predators try to steal the soul of their victim when they are assaulted.

I will soon introduce the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act with Congresswoman Maloney. The companion will be offered by Senator Cornyn and Senator Wyden.

This bill will create a grant program to help State and local governments develop and implement comprehensive victim-centered programs.

The bill creates a ``Domestic Trafficking Victims' Fund'' at the Treasury, financed through fines on persons convicted of human trafficking and child exploitation crimes, which can be used to fund support programs for victims of human trafficking.

Criminals will literally pay for their crime and for the system they have created.

Included in the bill are a number of other provisions to ensure victims receive justice and traffickers and buyers are prosecuted.

In this country we have 5000 shelters . . .

For animals, according to the ASPCA.

These shelters are great.

I got my Dalmatians from a shelter.

But we have less than 300 beds for domestic minor sex trafficking victims according to a recent survey by Shared Hope International.

We must have facilities to rescue and restore these victims.

The Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act builds upon the End Sex Trafficking Act, that

I have already filed with Congresswoman Maloney. This bill will help combat human trafficking by targeting the criminals who purchase sexual acts and ensuring they are prosecuted as human traffickers.

This bill goes after the anonymous buyers of child sex slavery.

Target the demand in order to stop the sale of children.

The days of boys being boys are over and the long arm of the law must go after these consumers.

Justice demands it and justice is what we do in this country. And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the chairman for the inclusion of the provisions in the bill to help expedite environmental reviews and for the language that was requested by myself and Congressman Farenthold which would help increase private investment in our Nation's ports and expedite the completion of large critical projects.

One important project that is authorized in this bill is the deepening of the Sabine-Neches Waterway. I have been working on the authorization of this project since I was elected in 2004. My predecessors, Nick Lampson and Jack Brooks, worked on this project. Mr. Weber, who now represents this area, has been working on this project. In fact, the original Chief's Report for the Sabine-Neches Waterway was authorized to begin in 1997, 16 years ago. That was three Presidents ago. It was in the last century.

Since that time, all four of my kids have finished high school, graduated from college, gotten married, and have given me 10 grandkids. The United States has fought two major wars. Sixteen years to do an authorization on a Federal project--something is wrong with this picture, Mr. Speaker.

This project was supposed to cost $300 million. Today, if it is authorized, it will be $1.1 billion. That is a 287 percent increase, and we still haven't moved any dirt. There is something wrong with this picture, Mr. Speaker.

That is why this WRRDA bill is so important. It makes critical structural improvements to the way the Corps of Engineers does business so we can end these absurd delays. It shouldn't take 20 years to complete a project, and I'm talking about authorization just to approve a project, like the Sabine-Neches Waterway.

The Sabine-Neches Waterway is critical to America's energy and national security. It was first authorized at 40 feet. This WRRDA bill will make the depth 48 feet, permitting deeper draft vessels to come through. Right now, tankers that come up the Sabine-Neches Waterway can't be full because they drag bottom. They have to offload part of their fuel before they come up the waterway. That is why this is important to the United States.

It is also vital to the United States military. The Sabine-Neches Waterway, actually is the home of the largest commercial military out- load port in America, and it is the second-largest military port in the world. The channel is home to two designated military strategic seaports: Beaumont and Port Arthur, Texas.

Additionally, 20 to 30 percent of the Nation's commercial jet fuel and a significant majority and classified amount of our military's jet fuel is produced on the Sabine-Neches Waterway.

This is the energy corridor of the United States. Refineries line this entire waterway. Delays by the Corps of Engineers have cost millions of dollars, all because they cannot make up their mind to approve the project.

Mr. Speaker, pick a horse and ride it. Either approve the project or deny the project, but make up your mind. These delays are absurd.

And that's just the way it is.

I thank the gentleman.

The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's

debt limit is a sign of leadership failure.

It is a sign that the U.S. Government cannot pay its own

bills. It is a sign that we depend on financial assistance

from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless

fiscal policy. Money that we have borrowed from the Social

Security trust fund, borrowed from China, borrowed from

Japan, borrowed from American taxpayers.

The rising debt is a hidden domestic enemy. Robbing our

cities and States of critical investments in infrastructure

like bridges, ports, and levees; robbing our families and our

children of critical investments in education and health care

reform; robbing our seniors of retirement and health security

they have counted on.

Every dollar we pay in interest is a dollar that is not

going to investment in America's priorities.

Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and

internationally. Washington is shifting the burden of bad

choices onto the backs of our children and our grandchildren.

Americans deserve better.

Driving up our national debt is irresponsible. It's

unpatriotic.

These are the words of Senator Barack Obama in 2006 and in 2008.

Madam Speaker, what was irresponsible and unpatriotic is all of a sudden responsible conduct? I think not.

We should be talking about cutting spending before we start raising America's debt ceiling.

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, I received the following email from a constituent who forwarded me comments from a former government worker:

As a former government employee, I have worked for the

government for over 40 years. During that time I became

familiar with requisitions, bidding, and awarding contracts.

It is time-consuming with bean counters and pencil neck

bureaucrats. A request takes months, not days or even hours.

In less than 8 hours of the shutdown, miraculously

professionally printed 3x4 signs--with logos--appeared all

over the country in the 1000s saying: ``This park facility

closed due to government shutdown.''

There has not been a government shutdown in 17 years. Signs

had to be designed, requisitioned, and bids had to go out,

approved and contracts signed; then the signs were made and

distributed. Either this is the most efficient thing the

Federal Government has ever done, or this quick shutdown was

planned and determined months ago.

Mr. Speaker, if the writer is accurate, this is an interesting and odd coincidence, don't you think?

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, the Mall and the memorials on the Mall are public places open 24 hours a day. The Park Service has closed them, using the excuse of the shutdown. But the Park Service discriminates who may exercise the First Amendment and who may not. It allowed a free speech immigration rally on the Mall but denies people access to the World War II Memorial. This is arbitrary action, thus constitutionally unlawful.

The Park Service forgets also that the First Amendment includes the right of the people to peaceably assemble. The Supreme Court sometimes limits the First Amendment by citing a compelling State interest, even though the First Amendment doesn't really give that exception.

The Government's compelling State interest here: lack of money. Does this mean any time the government claims it has no funds, it can shut down the First Amendment and deny the right to peaceably assemble? I think not.

This excuse is ludicrous, unlawful, arbitrary, and in practice, it discriminates. The First Amendment was written to prevent this very type of action by government.

Let the people assemble. Take the barricades of constitutional oppression down.

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, no one brings meaning to the phrase ``Don't mess with Texas'' more than our lawmen. Every once in awhile, when I have the chance to escape from the Devil City, I get together with what I call the ``Poe-leece''. The Poe-leece are a group of my friends in the Texas law enforcement community. I have been friends with most of them since my days on the bench. When we all get together we like to exchange ``war stories''. The most seasoned veteran of them all is a man named Tom Morgan.

Tom Morgan is the oldest active lawman in Texas. This year Tom turned 93 years young. I first met Tom 25 years ago at the North Harris County Criminal Justice Association breakfast meeting in Humble. This sprightly veteran still has the same passion for our country and our military that he did the day he enlisted. Tom served three tours of duty, but that is not the only remarkable part of his career.

Tom was born on September 20, 1920, in Bossier City, Louisiana, about twenty miles from the Texas border. He was a child of the Great Depression and grew up very poor. His town was very patriotic, especially since it was home to Barksdale Air Force Base.

When World War II began, Tom was just 21 years old. He answered his country's call of duty to serve and joined the U.S. Marines. During this time, the United States' first major offensive was launched against Japan in the Guadalcanal. Japan was trying to solidify its stronghold on the Island of Guadalcanal, because of its closeness to Australia. The Japanese had built an airfield and had about 8,500 men on the island. Tom's first tour was in Guadalcanal, in the Solomon Islands, in August 1942. Sergeant Tom Morgan and the Marine Corps-- members of the Greatest Generation--secured the airfield and killed half the Japanese force. But the fierce fighting took three months. Conditions were harsh for our warriors--thick jungle, heavy rainfall, swamps, mud, mountainous terrain and a determined enemy. The Japanese sent in reinforcements during the ``Tokyo Express''; 4,000 of the enemy reached land. However, by February 1943, the U.S. marines took control of the island. Tom's unit played a pivotal part in the Battle of Guadalcanal. Over 1,500 American warriors were killed in action and 4,000 injured; thousands contracted malaria--including Sergeant Tom Morgan. Tom later recalled that malaria had put him near death.

He rested as much as he could and took the little yellow pill, Atabrine, which doctors prescribed. In the summer of 1944, Tom was sent to fight in the Battle of Saipan. Marines go where others fear to tread, and they fight for all American freedoms. They landed on the beaches of Saipan with a goal of gaining a crucial air base from which they could launch B-29 bombers. The Battle of Saipan was fierce and bloody; the enemy put up barbed wire along beaches and dug trenches to trap and ambush the marines.

Our boys laid claim to the beachheads inch by bloody inch. Nearly 30,000 Japanese soldiers died trying to defend the island and 3,426 Americans were killed with 13,000 wounded. On July 8, 1944, the United States flag was raised in victory over Saipan, and Tom survived his second major battle.

Less than a year later, Tom was sent to fight in the Battle of Okinawa, referred to as Operation Iceberg. This battle was the first time that U.S. troops fought on Japanese soil and it would be the bloodiest. Tom and the Marines were on board a transport ship Easter Sunday morning, 1945, eating breakfast in the mess hall when an enemy plane hit the ship. Water began filling up the mess hall and Tom thought he was going to meet his maker. However, the man above had different plans for Tom. The hatch flew open and he was able to escape. The marines went on to land in Okinawa. The battle lasted 82 days and was referred to as ``typhoon of steel''. American casualties were the highest experienced in any campaign against the Japanese. Battle casualties for the Japanese were 49,151, of which 12,520 were killed or missing and 36,631 wounded. Marine losses, including those of the Tactical Air Force, were 2,938 killed and missing and 13,708 wounded. On June 22, 1945, the United States flag was raised in victory over Okinawa and Tom survived his third battle.

Not many Americans fought in all three battles of Guadalcanal, Saipan and Okinawa. Tom remained in the Marines until 1946 and continued his service in the Reserves; he even served three months in the Korean War. After the war, Tom enrolled at the University of Louisiana to pursue his degree in mechanical engineering. During that same year, he decided to pay a visit to an old friend in Houston, Texas. It was there he met a Texas beauty; her friends called her Pat. Tom told me he fell in love with Pat at first sight. He immediately decided to move to Texas, transferred to the University of Houston, and married Pat the following year. He finished college, became a pipeline engineer and designer and began a family. He and his wife, Pat, raised three children in their home in Pasadena, Texas. He retired from Gulf Interstate Engineering in 1982, at the age of 62.

Now this is where I would normally say. ``And that's just the way it is.'' But, Tom's story is not over. Ten years after retirement, Tom decided to join the Harris County Sheriff's Office Reserve Command. At first, Pat was not too happy. He told Pat he was tired of following her around the grocery store and that he needed to be busy. So at the age of 72, he graduated from the Harris County Sheriff Office Academy and became the oldest rookie.

Today, Lieutenant Tom Morgan is assigned to the HCSO Marine Division where he patrols the waters of Lake Houston, San Jacinto River and the Ship Channel. Once a Marine, always a Marine. As a reserve deputy he works at least 500 hours a year. He conducts boat

safety inspections and boat stops to enforce all aspects of boating law.

For 21 years, he has put on the badge and a gun to protect and serve the people of Harris County that he loves. He patrols the Ship Channel, where he works closely with Homeland Security at the Port of Houston.

Retire? Not Tom. Again, let me remind you. Tom is 93 years old. Tom is the oldest lawman in Texas.

In 2008, Tom's Texas beauty, Pat, passed away. Tom and Pat were married for 61 years. It's been five years since her passing; Tom told me not a day goes by that he doesn't miss his Pat. He says it's good for him to stay busy: working, volunteering at his church, spending time with his three children who all live in the Houston area and enjoying his grandchildren and great grandchildren.

Ronald Reagan best summed it up when he said, ``Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem.'' And Tom definitely does not have that problem.

Soon, Sheriff Adrian Garcia of Harris County, Texas, will recognize Lieutenant Tom Morgan with the Lifetime Achievement Award. A fitting honor for a remarkable man. Semper Fi! Oooh Rah! Marine and Texas Lawman--Tom Morgan.

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, our current U.S. sugar policy maintains that sugar will not become a solely foreign-grown product for the United States. When we weaken our sugar and our sugar growers, it hurts America but it helps Brazil, it helps Mexico--the biggest competitors for the United States.

Brazil's yearly $2.5 billion subsidy has led them to controlling 50 percent of the global sugar exports.

Mexico has already unlimited access to the United States. And who is the biggest sugar producer and exporter in Mexico? The Mexican government. Mexico owns and operates 20 percent of the Mexican sugar industry. On top of that, Mexico already owes Texas 300,000 acre feet of water out of the Rio Grande. It is improperly taking that water out of the Rio Grande River--water that should go to Texas sugar growers, but it is not.

House Resolution 378 will weaken the U.S. sugar industry, giving advantage to Mexico and Brazil. By allowing more foreign sugar into the United States we create unnecessary and hurtful competition. We prefer, if we pass this legislation, foreign farmers over American farmers.

Weakening our sugar program is not reform; it is crippling. It is crippling to the United States market, to the 140,000 sugar industry jobs. Once again, it only leaves us dependent on other countries for our sugar.

Mr. Speaker, it is one thing to become dependent on foreign countries for our energy; it is another thing if we start moving into the area of becoming dependent on foreign countries for what we eat. I urge my colleagues to vote against this resolution.

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, we lost five warriors on the battlefield of Afghanistan recently. They were 25-year-old 1st Lt. Jennifer M. Moreno; 24-year-old Pfc. Cody J. Patterson; 24-year-old Special Agent Joseph M. Peters; 25-year-old Sgt. Patrick C. Hawkins; and 19-year-old Lance Cpl. Jeremiah M. Collins, Jr.

Unfortunately, their families were given the news not only that they had lost their loved ones, but they were also told that they would not be given the $100,000 in death benefits that they were entitled to receive within three days of the death of their loved ones.

The $100,000 payment is being withheld from the families--two of them Army Rangers--and one Marine and the bodies of the five warriors will be returned to Dover Air Force Base today. Congress needs to act NOW to rectify this absurd and disgraceful situation.

This money helps the families by giving them an immediate source of cash to help get through the tough times surrounding the funeral of their loved ones.

The Pentagon says it has specific instructions from its budget office not to make payments for deaths that occurred after 11:59 p.m. on Sept. 30, 2013--the date of the start of the government shutdown.

Congress passed a bill last week which should have made it clear that the Pentagon had the authority to make these kinds of payments, however this Administration continues to play politics with this shutdown and has apparently directed DOD not to make these payments.

In order to make it ABUNDANTLY clear that DOD has the authority to make these payments, I thank the Speaker for quickly bringing this bill up to the floor.

It is my hope that the Senate quickly passes this bill, and the President signs it. There is no excuse that any other American hero's family is told that they will not get the death benefit they deserve.

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker:

The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the United States Government cannot pay its debts. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our government's reckless fiscal policies.

That was a statement by Senator Barack Obama in 2006.

Driving up our national debt from $5 trillion to $9 trillion is irresponsible. It is unpatriotic.

Once again, Senator Barack Obama in 2008:

Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices on to the backs of our children and our grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better. I, therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America's debt limit.

Senator Barack Obama, 2006.

But that was then; this is now. The President, last week, said, without an increase in the borrowing limit, ``the whole world will have problems.'' In other words, we are all going to die. The sky is going to fall unless the United States raises the debt limit.

He seems to be a little bit inconsistent on positions regarding the debt limit. Of course, now the debt limit is up to $17 trillion, double what he talked about several years ago of not raising.

So we find ourselves in a situation where the President's attitude seems to be: I will not negotiate, except with the Russians, the Syrians, the Iranians about what is going on overseas. But I will not negotiate, I will not talk to the House of Representatives about American issues.

It would seem to me, Mr. Speaker, that things that are happening in the United States are really just as important as what is happening in Russia, Syria, and Iran--but maybe not to the administration.

The administration would rather be in shutdown and lockdown for political reasons than to talk, to negotiate, to compromise, to even listen.

You know, Mr. Speaker, they say that Nero fiddled while Rome burned. It seems that the administration is in bunker mentality while the United States is in economic turmoil. And where are we? We are in a situation where there is no talking. And it seems to me, the administration says it is our fault. The President won't talk to us. The President has the habit, it seems, to blame others on bad things that happen and takes credit for things that are always good.

But, in any event, I reemphasize the President's own words about why we should not raise the debt limit: it is reckless; it is irresponsible; it is unpatriotic; it hurts us domestically and internationally; it is a failure of leadership, and Americans deserve better.

I agree with that.

So since the President seems to be somewhat inconsistent about his positions, why doesn't he just talk to us? Talk to us about the debt limit, the continuing resolution, about America's issues, America's policies, America's problems, and at least acknowledge that the House of Representatives exists.

So I would suggest, Mr. Speaker, when you get to talk to the President--because I don't get to talk to him--and suggest that he come out of the White House and meet with the people's House and quit fiddling around and start talking to us so we can solve this problem together.

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, as we continue to talk and discuss and debate the issues of the debt ceiling, of the continuing resolution, there are still things taking place in government. Some of them aren't so good.

Just to give a little background, which you are certainly aware of, we have our Constitution with the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights is a section in the Constitution that protects citizens from government abuses.

The First Amendment is first because it contains the most important rights. If those rights are abridged, the rest of the Bill of Rights-- to me--is meaningless, and we all know that two of those provisions have to do with the freedom of speech and the freedom of press. We traditionally honor those because they are so important.

Historically, the most controversial of all speech and press was political

speech and religious speech. Those are especially protected in the First Amendment, and there are historical reasons for that. The colonists, our forefathers, they were an ornery bunch, and they were constantly hammering, through the press and through speech, King George III, Great Britain, and their abuses on individuals in the Colonies-- and rightfully so.

Therefore, when our Constitution was written and the Bill of Rights was written, we wanted to ensure that, under our philosophy and under our democracy in the United States, freedom of speech, and freedom of press were protected.

Over the years, the Supreme Court has ruled on free speech and press cases; but they have gradually limited speech, which is another issue. The prevailing rule is that, if there's a compelling State interest-- whatever that means--and we'll talk about that some other time--then speech can be prohibited. Never mind, Mr. Speaker, the First Amendment doesn't say anything about limiting speech when there's a compelling State interest.

But the Supreme Court said, if there's a compelling State interest, speech can be limited, and, of course, the Supreme Court decides what that compelling State interest is.

There are also two types of punishment for speech. One is censorship, which is the most egregious. That is to prevent someone from saying something or publishing something. Then there's the other type of punishment for speech, after the speech is made. Then there is punishment sometimes for what is said, such as a threat or yelling ``fire'' in a crowded theater. But the most egregious is preventing someone from saying something or printing something or publishing something. That is censorship.

So that brings us to what is taking place. We've all heard of Fast and Furious. That's the situation where our government sent guns to Mexico under the theory that they're going to track the guns. Americans were killed; Mexican nationals were killed. We're over in court because Eric Holder won't give us information about Fast and Furious. Now one of the ATF agents wants to publish a book, called, ``The Unarmed Truth,'' and it's about Fast and Furious. He is an agent in the ATF and whistleblower.

The ATF has a policy that says, Well, we, the ATF, decide whether someone in our organization is allowed to publish or have some type of outside employment, and we use our own discretion. It's just up to us. We don't have any policy rules. We just arbitrarily decide. And they have decided that because Dodson wants to publish this on his own time, not on company time, or government time--he went and tried to get permission--they said, You can't publish that book. Here's the reason he was given, Mr. Speaker. The reason given to him was, well, it might hurt the morale in the ATF.

Now, do you think that's a compelling State interest to prevent a person from printing something and violating his right of free speech because the government says it might hurt the morale in the ATF?

Absolutely not. You've got somebody that wants to tell the truth about the ATF, and it's a violation of his constitutional right not to be able to discuss openly what took place. It's a denial of the First Amendment freedom of speech. It is a denial of freedom of press.

These individuals of the ATF, censor police, ought to be furloughed. They ought to be sequestered, specifically those that are denying the freedom of press, the freedom of speech to someone who just wants to talk about what took place in the ATF. This ought not to be, but that's what has taken place by the ATF coverup squad. Unchain the freedom of speech and press.

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, October is National Breast Cancer Awareness Month. This month is devoted to raising awareness and educating individuals about breast cancer and honor the thousands of women across our nation who have been diagnosed, fighting or have survived breast cancer.

Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women in the United States. 1 in 8 women will develop breast cancer over the course of her lifetime, and it is estimated that this year more than 230,000 cases of breast cancer. In the great state of Texas, 13,856 women were diagnosed with breast cancer in 2010.

In the Second District of Texas, I am proud of our local hospitals, school districts, and non-profits who promote breast cancer awareness and prevention during this month. My own staffer and casework manager, Whitney Rahim, has been affected personally by this disease. Whitney's mother, Cynthia Bryant, is a 5 year breast cancer survivor and a community volunteer for the Houston Avon Walk for Breast Cancer and the Houston Susan G. Komen for the Cure. Whitney and her mother, along with friends and family, walk in both races to raise funds for breast cancer research, education, screening and treatment. Almost everyone we know has been touched by this disease.

Last year, my friend John Garza with the Houston Police Department, received news that his wife, Virginia had stage 2 breast cancer. Virginia, like her husband, is a lifetime member of what is referred to in my part of Texas as the Poe-leece. It is an informal organization made up of my longtime friends in the Texas law enforcement community. I first met Virginia in 1993 at the North Harris County Criminal Justice Association breakfast meeting in Humble; she was then an agent with the DEA (United States Drug Enforcement Administration). I knew then that Virginia was a fighter and survivor. Virginia is a highly trained federal and state narcotics investigator; she has worked for the DEA, Harris County, Texas Department of Public Safety, and Humble Police Department. When Virginia was first diagnosed, she had just started working as a Senior Investigator at the Harris County Attorney's Office and had very little sick time accumulated. While receiving chemo treatments for a course of six months, she never missed a day of work! Virginia and John have five children and four grandchildren. One of Virginia's biggest fears was not being present or helpful for the birth of their third grandchild, I am happy to report that Virginia courageously battled cancer and she is cancer free and she recently saw the birth of her fourth grandchild.

Unfortunately, this disease has hit home for another one of our very own from the Houston Police Department. Senior Police Officer Linda Reichert was diagnosed with breast cancer in December of 2011. Every year, she made her routine mammogram appointment and on that day in December, she never thought she would receive the news that she did. Stage 0 breast cancer. Zero was a small number in her mind but it wasn't until doctors discovered stage 2 cancer in her lymph nodes that she realized she couldn't take the small number for granted. It was an arduous road to recovery for her. However, after a double mastectomy, intense chemotherapy, and lymph nodes removal, she was able to return to a job that she is immeasurably passionate about. It was more than the medicine and surgeries that led her to becoming a breast cancer survivor. Officer Reichert exuded positive energy and happiness, even during her lowest moments. Hair loss and skin deterioration were part of her recovery, but with her support team of family, friends, coworkers and doctors at her side, she beat the odds that come along with this disease. Today, she feels top-notch with lots of energy and is back at work pushing her goal each and every day: making a difference in someone's life, even if it is just one person.

As a husband and father of three girls, I support funding for breast cancer research, screening, and treatment programs. I am an advocate for organizations that are dedicated to educating women about early detection by practicing regular self-breast exams and scheduling regular mammograms.

I would like to express my sincere admiration to the 2.8 million breast cancer survivors in our country, like Cynthia and Virginia, who have demonstrated courage in their personal fight against this disease. Their tireless work is an inspiration and a reminder that we must keep up the fight until there is a cure.

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, government secrecy is anathema to all people, and darkness by rulers can be trumped by the sunshine of a public and an independent judicial system. But, Mr. Speaker, secrecy by a judicial system is a threat to liberty of all free peoples.

in our country we have the Constitution; and, specifically, the amendments to the Constitution protect us as a free people against government--government intrusion and government violation of our privacy--because government really has no right; it has power. It has what we give it when we give up our liberty and our rights.

The amendments promote openness of government and protect individuals from government. There is the Sixth Amendment that talks about a public, speedy trial, where witnesses come forward and people are put on notice of the crime. Citizens are given a jury trial. But the most important part of that amendment is the right to a public trial.

The Seventh Amendment deals with jury trials in civil cases.

Of course, the Fifth Amendment talks about the fact that, in a trial, a person accused doesn't have to testify or produce any evidence against themselves.

And then the Fourth Amendment talks about how government is limited on how it can intrude into our homes and our papers. It limits government surveillance. And it's an inherent right that the government search be reasonable and based on probable cause, and that there must be a warrant drafted under oath describing the place to be searched, the persons and objects to be seized.

Now, this just didn't come out of our ancestors' minds because they thought it was a good idea. There are historical reasons for this. Maybe in our government public school system we ought to teach more about the history of liberty and why we do things the way we do under this Constitution. It goes all the way back to the 1500s in England when England invented this concept of the Star Chamber.

The idea was, well, we're going to be able to prosecute and go after nobles, certain people who are being able to get away with violations of the law. But the courts were made specifically to be secret courts where there were no witnesses, there was no indictment, and a person was forced to testify against themselves. So, obviously, it was abused. It was abused by the Kings of England, primarily Henry VIII, when he went after and fought his opponents by prosecuting them in those secret courts.

The United States doesn't have the Star Chamber, but we have the NSA--the National Spy Agency, as I call it--and the FISA courts, the 21st century descendants of the Star Chamber. The NSA and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act allows those courts under FISA to authorize searches of anyone. Those searches are not based on probable cause, and those areas are not specifically described to be searched. It is a general warrant concept that they used in England to search people in England that were political opponents of the government and of the King.

The spy courts in the United States started under the theory that we need to be safe from terrorists. But the NSA and the spy courts violate the Constitution in the name of security. Warrants under FISA are general warrants where NSA can seize phone records, NSA can seize credit card bills and utility bills. And we are learning now that they seize not only phone data but that NSA seizes bank records.

Also, the judges are far from being independent. They meet in secret--just like the Star Chamber did. They can't even keep the records of the proceeding. Those are turned back over to the government. There are no witnesses present--just like in the Star Chamber. There's no lawyers present for anybody--just like in the Star Chamber.

These FISA courts should be protecting American citizens and should be following the Constitution. They are supposed to act as the independent power between government and the people. But they're not doing that.

I call them the ``Spy, Search and Seizure Courts'' because they are operating in the darkness of tyranny. We don't know what they're doing. They allow the NSA to seize and violate the privacy of Americans in violation of the Constitution by seizing people's records under general warrants.

A general warrant is the idea that government knows there's a bad guy in the area, so the government wants to search the whole area of town for the bad guy. You can't do that. I used to be a judge. Government has to have probable cause. It has to give the address of the house, the specific area, state the probable cause. The warrant has got to be sworn to and be specific about the location and what government wants to search and what government wants to seize or it's a violation of the Constitution.

The spy courts--the NSA courts and the Star Chamber courts--need to be revisited. It's time to shine sunshine on the FISA courts and the spying of the NSA. The NSA and the FISA courts--the Star Chamber courts--have shut down the Constitution. Now it's time to shut down the unlawful surveillance and intelligence gathering by these courts on American citizens.

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, on September 11, 2001, Lieutenant Colonel Rolando Aguilar was already in the cockpit of his F-16 at Ellington Field in Houston, Texas. He was a member of the Texas Air National Guard.

He was in his cockpit when he heard the sound of scrambling horns alerting him to fly a mission. He and his wingman took off and they headed east, and they intercepted Air Force 1 over the Gulf of Mexico and protected the former guardsmen from their unit from any possible attack. They stayed guarding him and flying next to Air Force 1 until they were relieved. Yes, it was President Bush.

According to them, the Texas Air National Guard was the first to be in the air on September 11. The members of the Guard and Air Force Reserve--and, Mr. Speaker, I was a member of the Reserve at the same time President Bush was a guardsman, at the same base at Ellington Field--kept them flying, have served and are serving our Nation

honorably since their existence. They are on watch today in places around the world. That's why we need to fully fund the Air Force Reserve and National Guard like we do the regular military.

There should be no shutdown for these volunteers that protect American. Pass the National Guard and Air Force Reserve funding bill and keep Lieutenant Colonel Aguilar flying.

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, ObamaCare discriminates. It gives special treatment to special friends of the administration--1,200 waivers of special folks, but not waivers for everybody.

It also treats Big Business better than it does individual Americans. It delays ObamaCare 1 year for Big Business, but not individuals. That is discrimination.

Treat everybody the same. Waivers for all or no waivers for anyone. You've delayed implementation for 1 year for Big Business; delay it for individuals as well.

It's interesting. If ObamaCare is good for everybody, why isn't Obama under ObamaCare, and his staff, and the Cabinet?

Put everybody in ObamaCare. That is why we have this fight, because ObamaCare discriminates, and it's a fight worth having.

Defund it until everybody is treated fair. No discrimination.

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, where, oh where has the Senate gone? Where, oh where can they be? With time so short and issues so long, where, oh where has the Senate gone?

The House has offered a compromise. We have passed legislation to fund the government and postpone ObamaCare for a year, but the Senate and the President refuse to work with us, refuse to negotiate, refuse to compromise, even refuse to talk to us.

While we were here until nearly 1 a.m. Sunday morning, the Senate was gone. The President, according to the New York Times, played golf over the weekend. So the President will negotiate with the Iranians, the President will negotiate with the Russians about Syria, but the President and the Senate will not talk to the House. Aren't Americans as important as Syrians, Russians, and Iranians? I guess the Senate and the President have other priorities, but their inaction of talking to us will cause a shutdown.

Where, oh where has the Senate gone? Where, oh where can they be? With time so short and issues so long, where, oh where has the Senate gone?

And that's just the way it is.