Date: 2016-07-11
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H

I thank the gentleman from Georgia for standing as the amendment was being called up. Mr. Chair. I am on the floor. This is the Jackson Lee amendment. I hope the RECORD reflects it and corrects that I am here. The RECORD should be corrected. This is an amendment that deals with homeland security. and it reflects my general debate statement that there are some restraints that this particular legislation has that are not well suited for the needs of the American people. In this instance. this particular amendment deals with homeland security and the agency rules and regulations that are issued by the Department of Homeland Security. As currently drafted. H.R. 4768 would shift the scope and authority of the judicial review of agency actions away from Federal agencies by amending section 706 of the APA to require that courts decide all relevant questions of law. including all questions of interpretation of constitutional statutory and regulatory provisions on a de novo basis without deference to the agency that promulgated the final rule. I am concerned about the ability of agencies to act in times of imminent need to protect citizens. in particular. dealing with homeland security and the very climate. Mr. Chair. that we are in as we speak. The Jackson Lee amendment is a simple. but necessary. revision that would remedy this concern by excluding from the bill cases with rules that are made by the Secretary of Homeland Security and that pertain to any matter of national security. Why can there not be a bipartisan assessment and accepting of this particular amendment that deals with the core of our responsibilities as President. as the executive. and then as Congress? We are destined to be able to secure the security of America. Our courts. particularly the Federal courts. are to uphold the constitutional authority that is given to the Federal Government under the Constitution. The instance. certainly. of national securitythe protecting of this Nationis one of those. The Constitution begins by saying that we have organized to create a more perfect Union. The Declaration of Independence. which is not part of the Constitution. indicates the inalienable rights of life. liberty. and the pursuit of happiness. Liberty is certainly part of security. and I am dismayed by this legislationthis onerous burden of having a de novo review of the Homeland Security rule to protect the American people. We should have learned our lesson after 9111 for those of us who were here in the United States Congress. This is no reflection on the good intent of my colleague from Texas. I know his intentions are well. but I was here during 9111. I was in this building. I was chased. if you will. by the horrors of those who were screaming "get out" of the Capitol of the United States with no knowledge. Yes. Mr. Chair. as I ran out with other colleagues. leaving shoes behind and literally running on one foot versus two feet. I could see the billowing smoke from the Pentagon. What was in the air was the question of: Is it the White House next? Is it the State Department next? Is it my hometown of Houstonthe energy capital. in essence. of the world? These are the questions of security that the American people realize are real. And certainly in the backdrop of these tragic mass shootings and the involvement of the Homeland Security Department. I can make the very strong point that the Jackson Lee amendment is an amendment that should be considered seriously because a de novo review on a Homeland Security regulation is a difficult process to take in light of the responsibilities of national security. My amendment would keep in place the appropriate and needed expertise and specialized abilities of the Department of Homeland Security to make the rules and regulations that are necessary for our Nations security. so I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment. Mr. Chair. I would like to thank Chairman SESSIONS and Ranking Member SLAUGHTER for making my amendment in order. The Jackson Lee Amendment Number 2 exempts from the bill rules issued by the Department of Homeland Security. H.R. 4768 purports to address constitutional and statutory deficiencies in the judicial review of agency rulemaking. As currently drafted H.R. 4768 would shift the scope and authority of judicial review of agency actions away from federal agencies by amending Section 706 of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) to "require that courts decide all relevant questions of law. including all questions of interpretation of constitutional. statutory. and regulatory provisions. on a de novo basis without deference to the agency that promulgated the final rule". Effectively. H.R. 4768 would abolish judicial deference to agencies statutory interpretations in federal rulemaking and create harmful and costly burdens to the administrative process. Mr. Chair. I am concerned about the ability for agencies to act in times of imminent need to protect citizens. In particular. H.R. 4768 would make sweeping and dangerous changes that would jeopardize the ability of the Department of Homeland Security to protect our nation in times of urgent and imminent need. The Jackson Lee Amendment Number 2 is a simple but necessary revision that would remedy this concern by excluding from the bill cases with rules made by the Secretary of Homeland Security and pertaining to any matter of national security. As a Senior Member of the Homeland Security Committee. I understand the many challenges the Department of the Homeland Security (DHS) already faces and its critically important role in preventing terror threats and keeping Americans safe. The Department is the first line of defense in protecting the nation and leading recovery efforts from allhazards and threats which include everything from weapons of mass destruction to natural disasters. We do not need to be reminded of the heightened state of security we are now in and the everincreasing demands imposed upon our government agencies tasked with keeping our borders and citizens safe. Now is not the time to undermine or slow the ability of DHS and its ability to address growing threats and active acts of terrorism. For the past 70 years the APA has served and guided administrative agencies and the affected public in a manner that is flexible enough to accommodate the variety of agencies operating under it inclusive of changes through time. The overall mission of DHS is too critical and its functions indispensably essential. such that it would be impugned to do anything that will slow down the process that allows DHS to do its job. The Jackson Lee Amendment Number 2 would keep in place the appropriate and needed expertise and specialized abilities of the Department of Homeland Security to make rules and regulations necessary for our nations security. I urge my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee Amendment Number 2.