[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 105 (Tuesday, June 21, 2022)]
[House]
[Pages H5701-H5707]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
ACTIVE SHOOTER ALERT ACT OF 2022
Mr. CICILLINE. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass
the bill (H.R. 6538) to create an Active Shooter Alert Communications
Network, and for other purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 6538
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Active Shooter Alert Act of
2022''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Active shooter.--The term ``active shooter'' means an
individual who is engaged in killing or attempting to kill
persons with a firearm in a populated area and who is
determined to pose an active, imminent threat to people in
that populated area.
(2) Administrator of fema.--The term ``Administrator of
FEMA'' means the Administrator of the Federal Emergency
Management Agency.
(3) Chairman of the fcc.--The term ``Chairman of the FCC''
means the Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission.
(4) Coordinator.--The term ``Coordinator'' means the Active
Shooter Alert Coordinator of the Department of Justice
designated under section 3(a).
(5) Network.--The term ``Network'' means the Active Shooter
Alert Communications Network, an interconnected system of
Federal, State, Tribal, and local governments that is
organized to provide information to the public, within
geographically relevant areas, on active shooter situations.
(6) Populated area.--The term ``populated area'' means a
location where one or more persons other than the active
shooter are present.
(7) State.--The term ``State'' means any of the 50 States,
the District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico,
the Northern Mariana Islands, the Virgin Islands of the
United States, and any other territory of the United States.
SEC. 3. NATIONAL COORDINATION OF ACTIVE SHOOTER ALERT
COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK.
(a) Coordination Within Department of Justice.--The
Attorney General shall assign an officer of the Department of
Justice to act as the national coordinator of the Active
Shooter Alert Communications Network regarding an emergency
involving an active shooter. The officer so designated shall
be known as the Active Shooter Alert Coordinator of the
Department of Justice.
(b) Duties.--The Coordinator shall--
(1) encourage Federal, State, Tribal, and local government
agencies to establish procedures to respond to an active
shooter, including active shooter procedures relating to
interstate or interjurisdictional travel (including airports
and border crossing areas and checkpoints), and focus on
governments that have not yet established such procedures;
and
(2) work with State, Tribal, and local governments to
encourage appropriate regional and interjurisdictional
coordination of various elements of the Network.
(c) Goals.--The Coordinator shall encourage the adoption of
best practices established under section 4(a) in State,
Tribal, and local governments for--
(1) the development of policies and procedures to guide the
use of mass alert systems, changeable message signs, or other
information systems
[[Page H5702]]
to notify local residents, motorists, travelers, and
individuals in the vicinity of an active shooter;
(2) the development of guidance or policies on the content
and format of alert messages to be conveyed on mass alert
systems, changeable message signs, or other information
systems relating to an active shooter;
(3) the coordination of State, Tribal, and local Active
Shooter Alert communications plans within a region for the
use of mass alert systems relating to an active shooter;
(4) the planning and designing of mass alert systems for
multilingual communication with local residents, motorists,
travelers, and individuals in the vicinity of an active
shooter, which system may include the capability for issuing
wide area alerts to local residents, motorists, travelers,
and individuals in the vicinity of an active shooter;
(5) the planning of systems and protocols to facilitate the
efficient issuance of active shooter alerts and other key
information to local residents, motorists, travelers, and
individuals in the vicinity of an active shooter during times
of day outside of normal business hours;
(6) the provision of training and guidance to
transportation authorities to facilitate the appropriate use
of mass alert systems and other information systems for the
notification of local residents, motorists, travelers, and
individuals in the vicinity of an active shooter; and
(7) the development of appropriate mass alert systems to
ensure that alerts sent to individuals in the immediate
vicinity of an active shooter do not alert the active shooter
to the location of individuals sheltering in place near the
active shooter.
(d) Integrated Public Alert and Warning System.--In
carrying out duties under subsection (b), the Coordinator
shall notify and coordinate with the Administrator of FEMA,
the Secretary of Transportation, and the Chairman of the FCC
on using the Integrated Public Alert and Warning System to
issue alerts for the Network.
(e) Report.--Not later than 18 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, and every 2 years thereafter until
such time as each of the State, Tribal, and local governments
have adopted an active shooter alert protocol, the
Coordinator, in consultation with the Administrator of FEMA,
Secretary of Transportation, and the Chairman of the FCC,
shall submit to Congress a report on the activities of the
Coordinator and the effectiveness and status of the Active
Shooter Alert communications plan of each State, Tribal, and
local government within each region that has implemented such
a plan.
SEC. 4. STANDARDS FOR ISSUANCE AND DISSEMINATION OF ALERTS
THROUGH ACTIVE SHOOTER ALERT COMMUNICATIONS
NETWORK.
(a) Establishment of Best Practices.--
(1) In general.--Subject to subsection (c), the
Coordinator, using the recommendations of the Advisory Panel
established under subsection (b) and in coordination with the
Administrator of FEMA, the Secretary of Transportation, the
Chairman of the FCC, local broadcasters, and Federal, State,
Tribal, and local law enforcement agencies, shall establish
best practices for--
(A) the issuance of alerts through the Network;
(B) the extent of the dissemination of alerts issued
through the Network; and
(C) the achievement of the goals described in section 3(c).
(2) Updating best practices.--The Coordinator shall review
the best practices established under paragraph (1) no less
frequently than every 5 years to ensure the best practices
are consistent with updated data and recommendations on
active shooter situations and technological advancements in
the Integrated Public Alert and Warning System or other
technologies. The Coordinator shall convene the Advisory
Panel as necessary to provide updated recommendations if the
best practices are to be updated.
(b) Advisory Panel.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Coordinator shall establish an
Advisory Panel to make recommendations with respect to the
establishment of best practices under subsection (a).
(2) Membership.--The Advisory Panel shall be comprised of
at least 9 members, including--
(A) at least 5 law enforcement officers, including at least
one nonsupervisory law enforcement officer, who have
responded to active shooter incidents and who represent
rural, suburban, and urban communities;
(B) at least 1 public safety expert who is not a law
enforcement officer and who has responded to an active
shooter incident;
(C) at least 1 emergency response official who is not a law
enforcement officer;
(D) at least 1 city planning expert; and
(E) at least 1 mental and behavioral health expert.
(3) Recommendations.--Not later than 15 months after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Advisory Panel shall
submit to Coordinator recommendations with respect to the
establishment of best practices under subsection (a).
(c) Limitations.--
(1) In general.--The best practices established under
subsection (a) shall--
(A) be adoptable on a voluntary basis only; and
(B) to the maximum extent practicable (as determined by the
Coordinator, in consultation with State, Tribal, and local
law enforcement agencies), provide that--
(i) appropriate information relating to an active shooter
response is disseminated to the appropriate law enforcement,
public health, communications, and other public officials;
and
(ii) the dissemination of an alert through the Network be
limited to the geographic areas most likely to be affected
by, or able to respond to, an active shooter situation.
(2) No interference.--In establishing best practices under
subsection (a), the Coordinator may not interfere with
systems of voluntary coordination between local broadcasters
and State, Tribal, and local law enforcement agencies for
improving and implementing the Network.
SEC. 5. COMPTROLLER GENERAL STUDY ON STATE RESPONSES TO
ACTIVE SHOOTER SITUATIONS REQUIRING THE
ISSUANCE OF PUBLIC ALERTS AND WARNINGS.
(a) Study.--The Comptroller General of the United States
shall conduct a study on State and local responses to active
shooters and situations requiring the issuance of a public
alert or warning. Such study shall address each of the
following:
(1) Differences between the definitions of the term
``active shooter'' used by different States.
(2) The amount of time it takes and the process in each
State to receive approval from the State alerting officials
after a local law enforcement agency requests the issuance of
a public alert or warning, such as an AMBER Alert, a Blue
Alert, or an Ashanti alert.
(3) A comparison of the timing and effectiveness of the
issuance of public alerts and warnings by State, Tribal, and
local alerting officials.
(b) Report to Congress.--Not later than 2 years after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the
United States shall submit to Congress a report containing
the findings of the study conducted under subsection (a).
SEC. 6. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) In General.--There is authorized to be appropriated to
the Attorney General to carry out this Act $2,000,000 for
fiscal year 2023.
(b) Availability of Funds.--Amounts appropriated under
subsection (a) shall remain available until expended.
SEC. 7. LIMITATION ON LIABILITY.
(a) In General.--Nothing in this Act may be construed to
provide that a participating agency, or an officer, employee,
or agent thereof, shall be liable for any act or omission
pertaining to the Network.
(b) State or Other Federal Law.-- Nothing in this section
may be construed to limit the application of any State or
other Federal law providing for liability for any act or
omission pertaining to the Network.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Jordan)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Rhode Island.
General Leave
Mr. CICILLINE. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and
include extraneous material on H.R. 6538.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Rhode Island?
There was no objection.
Mr. CICILLINE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this bill, H.R.
6538, the Active Shooter Alert Act, bipartisan legislation which I
introduced with Congressman Upton and 16 other original Republican and
Democratic cosponsors to help keep our communities safer in the event
of an active shooter.
Between 2000 and 2020, there were close to 400 active shooter events,
including 40 active shooter incidents in 2020 and 61 such incidents in
2021 alone.
In 2016, in Congressman Upton's backyard, we saw a Michigan Uber
driver go on a shooting rampage and then continue picking up
passengers.
In 2019, a shooter drove around a community in Texas, killing 7 and
wounding 25 people.
In 2021, a shooter traveled 30 miles, murdering eight people at
various Atlanta-area spas.
Just this past April, a shooter attacked a subway station full of
people in Brooklyn and was then on the run for 24 hours before police
finally detained him.
Such active shooters have become ubiquitous, so frequent that some of
these horrific events barely make headlines. This is not normal, and we
cannot let it become normalized. We cannot become numb to these events
or settle for the status quo. We need to act now to make our
communities safer, and that includes providing law enforcement with
every tool they need to do so.
Law enforcement has asked for ways to better alert their communities
when active shooter incidents arise. This legislation answers that
call.
The Active Shooter Alert Act creates an AMBER Alert-like program for
active shooter events. This bill will provide law enforcement with
cutting-edge technology to send notifications
[[Page H5703]]
to our smartphones and let communities know if there is an active
shooter in a certain area so they know to stay away.
The bill also instructs the Department of Justice to consult with
police safety experts, including officers who have responded to these
incidents, to develop best practices and protocols for sending out
these alerts. This will allow law enforcement to learn from each other
as they adapt this alert system to the needs of the communities, if
they so choose.
Developing this kind of technology and infrastructure, and
identifying best practices, would be a massive undertaking for many
local police departments. Some communities simply don't have the
resources to do it on their own. However, we already have these
resources at the Federal level.
This legislation simply gives every law enforcement agency across the
country the option to access the Federal alert system so they can send
alerts in their area.
Nothing in this bill is mandatory for law enforcement agencies to
adopt, but it will provide access to an important tool for law
enforcement departments across the country, regardless of their size or
location.
It is, sadly, becoming more and more necessary to have these
protocols in place. As we have seen time and time again, when there is
an active shooter situation, law enforcement does all they can to keep
people in the surrounding area safe, including going door to door to
either evacuate or tell people to shelter in place. But that takes
time, time that could cost lives.
More than anyone, law enforcement understands the strain an active
shooter puts on a community in an ongoing crisis. In these stressful,
life-or-death situations, law enforcement is too often, in many cases,
relying on social media to communicate with the surrounding community
so that no one accidentally walks into the line of fire, including
other members of law enforcement.
Law enforcement deserves the best tools available, certainly better
than Twitter, to communicate with their communities.
Now, if you look at the after-action reports in so many of these
active shooter incidents, they all recognize that it would have been so
helpful to have a way to quickly and safely communicate with other
members of law enforcement or the local community about an active
shooter.
I am proud that this bill has the endorsement of law enforcement
organizations across the country at the national, State, and local
levels and that it is a resoundingly bipartisan effort.
I thank all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle who have
supported this commonsense measure and Mr. Upton for leading this
effort with me. I encourage a ``yes'' vote.
Just to be clear, this is legislation endorsed by the National
Sheriffs' Association, the Fraternal Order of Police, the National
Police Foundation, the National Association of Police Organizations,
Major Cities Chiefs Association, National District Attorneys
Association, and many other local law enforcement agencies.
The men and women who are protecting our communities are saying they
need this. It is bipartisan. I urge everyone to vote for it.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The Active Shooter Alert Act is unnecessary. It gives more authority
to the Biden Justice Department, the most political Justice Department
in history.
States already utilize emergency alert systems to warn the public
about natural and human-made disasters, extreme weather events, active
shooter situations, and other emergencies. Federal, State, and local
officials already use the Integrated Public Alert and Warning System to
send emergency alerts to mobile devices and to alert media platforms.
According to a 2020 report from the Government Accountability Office,
every State has at least one alerting authority, and there are more
than 1,400 alerting authorities across the country.
If the States are already using an alerting system to notify the
public about imminent threats, what is this bill really doing? What is
this bill really about? This bill is creating a new Federal job at the
Biden DOJ to encourage State and local governments to issue public
alerts any time a firearm is used to threaten anyone anywhere.
Don't take my word for it. During the markup, Congressman Jones
admitted that:
This bill would be most effective at reminding us that the
threat of gun violence exists all around us, but it does
little to actually protect us from it.
That is right. This bill is about Democrat fear-mongering that guns
are ever-present threats, and we cannot be safe until Big Government
rounds up every last gun.
In fact, Congressman Jones went further and called on the committee
to consider another bill that would ban assault weapons. The Democrat
chair of the committee followed up by voicing his support for that very
concept.
No wonder the Democrats want to push forward a bill that will create
a reminder that ``the threat of gun violence exists all around us.''
They want to create a culture of fear so they can achieve their
ultimate goal, which is getting rid of the Second Amendment.
{time} 1530
If they really wanted to improve emergency alerts for active
shooters, we would be moving a bill to improve the IPAWS wireless
emergency alerts that are sent to mobile devices.
In a recent report, GAO stated that local alerting officials had
expressed concerns about the inability to target WEA alerts with
accuracy, which made local officials reluctant to even use the system
at all.
They have got a system out there. Let's improve the system and alert
people to emergencies, not have legislation that is about ultimately
undermining the Second Amendment.
We could have had hearings. We could have received expert testimony.
We could have been able to fully vet this initiative. This legislation
is simply another failed attempt by Democrats to ``do something'' about
the surge in violence and crime across the country.
If we need to do something, we should start by supporting law
enforcement and the rule of law instead of demonizing our police and
actively encouraging illegal entry into this country.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CICILLINE. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the
distinguished gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Dean), an important
member of the House Judiciary Committee.
Ms. DEAN. Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding time.
Like many of you, I am struggling as we see day after day, night
after night, more lives lost to gun violence in America.
On Sunday, a 15-year-old boy was killed and three other people shot
in a mass shooting 15 minutes from where we stand right now.
On Monday, just after midnight, a 21-year-old college student was
killed in a hail of gunfire that also wounded eight others in Harlem.
Last week, in the Judiciary Committee, I talked about the three young
men who were killed and 11 wounded in the single biggest shooting in
Philadelphia in 7 years. Are we safe anywhere in this country anymore?
Many of us are determined to fight for radical change to combat a
dangerous obsession with guns and gun violence.
In the Judiciary Committee, we voted for extreme risk protection
orders. Republicans in that committee voted ``no.'' We voted to raise
the age for purchase of semiautomatics to 21. Republicans said ``no.''
We voted to safely store guns. Republicans said ``no.'' We voted to get
rid of ghost guns. Republicans said ``no.'' We voted for background
checks. Republicans said ``no.''
Now, today, we are trying to pass text alerts--alerts--for active
shooters. I am thankful that this small measure has some bipartisan
support.
Yet, some Republicans in Congress support guns so much that they will
find a way to say ``no'' and hide behind the Second Amendment.
I am struggling, but determined, inspired by the overwhelming number
of
[[Page H5704]]
Americans who are demanding action: Republicans, Democrats, gun owners,
non-gun owners, independents. Demand action, not excuses.
This is a sad, yet important step. I thank the chairman for bringing
it forward. I urge my colleagues across the aisle to wake up. Our
children's lives are at stake every day.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I would point out, we are not trying to
hide behind the Second Amendment--we are trying to defend it. We are
defending it.
It is an important part of our Bill of Rights, an important part of
our Constitution.
Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr.
Massie), no better defender of the Second Amendment, and the co-chair
of the Second Amendment Caucus.
Mr. MASSIE. Madam Speaker, I thank Ranking Member Jim Jordan for
yielding the time.
You know, I find it interesting that all across the country,
Democrats are moving to defund the police. Here, today in Congress, we
have a bill called the Active Shooter Alert Act of 2022.
Well, if they defund the police, a more appropriate title for this
bill would be the you are on your own act of 2022. Yes, that is right.
We think you are in danger, but nobody is coming to help you because we
have defunded the police.
But what does this bill really do? You know, if it were anything
other than an attempt to demonize guns, to panic people, it would cover
things like stabbing, car violence. How come we never hear about car
violence? It would cover all violence, but they have chosen to single
out the Second Amendment and firearms.
The technology already exists to do this, and the States that want to
do it have already done it, and the campuses across the country that
want to do it have implemented this a decade ago.
So, why are we doing this at the Federal level? What is the purpose
to take what would have been good ideas at the State level, bring them
up here, launder them, and then go tell the States how they have to do
it, even though they are already doing it in many cases?
What good does a one-size-fits-all bill do when you dictate from
D.C.?
You know, rural Kentucky is not like urban Chicago. If you hear a gun
go off in rural Kentucky, your first instinct is not to panic.
Now, if your phone comes on and tells you that you need to panic, you
might be inclined to do that. But when you hear a gun go off in
Kentucky, you assume somebody is hunting. You assume they are target
practicing. They are doing something that is lawful.
In maybe 1 out of 10,000 cases that it is not, it is just somebody
poaching a deer, probably, but it ain't nothing to panic about. That is
what they want you to do.
You know, it is different when you hear a gun in Kentucky than when
you hear one in downtown Chicago, which gets me to the point: Can you
turn this system off in Chicago?
Is anybody going to be able to sleep in a Democrat-controlled city
where crime is rampant, where they are moving to defund the police? How
will you get to bed?
Every few hours, there is violence in Chicago, or pick your favorite
big city run by a big, liberal Democrat where they have the strongest
gun bans in the country. They have more violence than anywhere else.
So can you turn it off? That would be my first question for those
poor folks in Chicago that have to deal with the sort of public policy
that Democrats have advanced.
Now, one of the questions that came up in our committee that was
never answered: Is this going to tell you after the fact, after the
shooting has happened, or will it alert you to one that they think is
about to happen?
We asked, and I asked the bill's sponsor multiple times: Does it do
that, or does it just tell you after something has already happened? He
didn't know. He wouldn't answer. I doubt he will give us a straight
answer here today, if he chooses to answer.
So what good is it if it is going to tell you after it has already
happened?
So, you know, here is what you have to wonder. Every time there is a
bill in Congress, it has a great name. At first, it sounds like a great
idea. Then when you dig into it, well, somebody has already done it,
and it probably is already done at the State level.
So, for instance, there are a couple other bills that they passed a
couple weeks ago that are already being done. They passed a bill that
would ban gun trafficking. Well, the problem is, that is already
banned.
So what you have to do is dig down and say: Why are they passing
another bill? What does this bill do that the one that exists doesn't
already do?
Well, we found out it would prosecute domestic violence victims if
they acquire a firearm for their protection from a neighbor. Well, that
doesn't sound like a good idea to me, but the name of the bill sounded
pretty good until you dug down into it.
The same thing for red flag laws. There is a version of involuntary
commitment in all 50 States that already exists, but the difference is
there is due process. So why are they doing a shooter alert bill here,
an active shooter alert bill?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the
gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Massie).
Mr. MASSIE. So why are they passing a law to do something that is
already being done? Well, they want to take Federal control, and then
what are they going to do with that Federal control? They want to panic
and scare the general public with their phones. Everybody has got one
today. You won't be able to turn it off.
Oh, no. Be afraid of a gun. Be afraid of a gun. Here is another
alert. Be afraid of a gun.
That is so they can advance their other agenda, their real agenda,
which is to ban all guns and to effectively repeal the Second
Amendment.
Mr. CICILLINE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I will make a couple of points quickly. This legislation has nothing
to do with limitations on the Second Amendment. It has nothing to do
with red flag laws. It has nothing to do with this claim of defunding
the police.
I have lots of material for the Record that shows police departments
have been cut in other communities led by Republican mayors and
Republican Governors. Let's not have that debate. This is about a
simple provision that will save lives.
With all due respect to my colleagues who claim they understand what
this legislation is about, I trust the judgment of the men and women
who are actually going into active shooter situations. I don't think
there is a single Member who has spoken who has been responsible for
responding to an active shooting incident. I think it is time we
respect the men and women who actually do that every day.
The men and women of law enforcement are pleading for this
legislation to help keep them safe, as well as the communities they
serve. I won't be so presumptuous, Madam Speaker, to think I have
better judgment on that question than they do. That is why they have
all endorsed this bill.
The third thing I will say: Mr. Massie said, Madam Speaker, that this
question wasn't answered. I will answer it again, the same way I
answered it in committee.
The standards are established by law enforcement. Active shooter
alerts already exist in some States and in some local communities.
There are a set of protocols.
Obviously, they don't wait until the shooting has concluded to notify
people. They use common sense, their own standards about when they see
a danger; someone with a gun that is expressing some intention to use
it or whatever standard they consider appropriate as members of law
enforcement to alert the community. This is common sense.
The problem is, there are a lot of small departments that don't have
the ability to access this system or to understand best practices or to
see the research about how it is used most effectively. This would
allow them to have access to that.
Not a single jurisdiction that doesn't want to use it is required to.
There is no Federal Government power here. It is making it available.
If you decide as a local law enforcement agency or State you don't want
to use it, you don't have to, but it is making it available. This will
save lives.
[[Page H5705]]
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, such irony. Democrats lecturing
Republicans on law enforcement and respect for law enforcement. This
from the party who spent an entire summer talking about defunding the
police, who had elected officials in this body, Democrats in this body,
raise money to bail out the rioters and looters who they called
peaceful protesters who were attacking police, and now he is going to
lecture Republicans on respect for law enforcement. I mean, you can't
make it up. This is how the Democrats operate today.
Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr.
Upton).
Mr. UPTON. Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Ohio for yielding
time.
You know, a few years ago in this building, the U.S. Capitol, we had
an active shooter. I was there. Tragically, he killed two brave Capitol
Police officers as the shooter tried to hunt down our Republican whip,
Tom DeLay.
We were in session. The shooter was just down the stairs. During that
rampage, the House adjourned for the end of the week. Like every week,
just like last week, a bunch of us bounded down those steps, got in our
cars, raced to the airport to get home to our districts. We had no clue
what was going on down the hall in the Capitol.
When I got to DCA, I was shocked to see how close the shooter got to,
really, all of us, particularly if he had just stood at the bottom of
the stairs and just sprayed us as we were coming down.
We had no clue what was going on. We also had no information from our
phones or from our beepers in terms of what was going on.
Well, times have changed. We have that capability today. Every major
law enforcement organization supports this bill. This helps an active
shooter alert system so that potential victims can be alerted when
there is an active shooter.
I would just note in the last 2 hours, all of us here got four
messages from the Capitol Police saying that there was a suspicious
package outside of the Cannon House Office Building.
Literally, Independence Avenue was shut down, closed to all traffic
because of the alerts that we were able to get. Shouldn't our
constituents enjoy the same technology that we have here in our own
Congress?
You know, Madam Speaker, this simple bill will support law
enforcement and keep our communities safe, period.
In 2016, in Kalamazoo, in my district, an Uber driver spent nearly 5
hours one night picking up riders, killing them, picking up another
rider, killing them, until he was finally apprehended.
When that rampage was over, more than six people died. Another two
were injured. There was no system like this that could inform the
citizens in downtown Kalamazoo about what was going on.
In after-action reports from mass shootings and others around the
country since Columbine in 1999, they have all recommended a system
like this, to create an Active Shooter Alert Act. This bill was the top
request from tens of thousands of police officers who attended Police
Week just a couple of weeks ago.
This bill has nothing to do with the Second Amendment; doesn't take
away guns, nor should it. It protects innocent people who might be
impacted by an active shooter, whether it be our kids, our loved ones,
or our fellow citizens.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CICILLINE. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Michigan for
his thoughtful words.
I also want to mention that some of my colleagues earlier in the
debate said creating this is going to create a fear of shooting. That
is what Democrats are really up to, and the 15 or 16 Republicans that
are the original co-sponsors of this bill.
Well, I would ask one question: When we created the AMBER Alert to
help families find a child who is lost, or the Silver Alert, it didn't
create any great fear. It effectively made sure when seniors were lost,
they were found. When children were lost, they were found. So that is a
specious argument.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
{time} 1545
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
North Carolina (Mr. Bishop), my friend.
Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, I often think it is
helpful to think about what Americans must be thinking as they watch
debates here on this floor.
In this instance, I am sure that Americans think, as Mr. Massie
suggested, and as I just have been thinking and was thinking in our
markup: Aren't we already doing this? Aren't there alert systems that
go out all the time for times when a child has been abducted, an
elderly person has gone missing, all sorts of things?
Sure enough, Federal, State, and local officials already use the
Integrated Public Alert and Warning System, IPAWS, to alert the public
to emergency situations. Government officials use the IPAWS Wireless
Emergency Alert, the WEA--a lot of acronyms, sure; it is government--to
send emergency alerts to mobile devices and use the Emergency Alert
System, EAS, to alert media platforms.
According to FEMA, ``Imminent threat alerts include natural or human-
made disasters, extreme weather, active shooters, and other threatening
emergencies that are current or emerging.''
So, wait a minute, active shooters are already specifically covered
by FEMA under the existing alert system? So, what is going on?
A hint emerged in our committee markup when the gentleman from
California (Mr. Issa) offered an amendment to broaden the name of the
bill, not just to cover active shooters. The gentleman from Rhode
Island (Mr. Cicilline) opposed the amendment--not only opposed it, but
he termed Mr. Issa's proposal offensive. Now, we are getting to it.
The gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Dean), who spoke a moment ago,
called it gun legislation. An alert system is gun legislation?
It comes down to another messaging opportunity--doesn't it?--the
yearning to sensationalize an admittedly awful problem. But I have to
say to my fellow Members of the House of Representatives,
sensationalizing this problem is not a solution to it.
The examples given by Ms. Dean on the floor today she herself said
reflected her desire for radical change, but all of her examples
avoided the topic at hand, this alerting system.
How would a redundant emergency alerting system of national scope
have impacted the Juneteenth day shooting on 14th Street here in the
District of Columbia or the shooting last week, a gang-related shooting
in Philly? How would an alerting system have changed that?
Here is what I would say to the Members on the other side: You are
still not grappling with the real issue. The Juneteenth shooting did
not occur because the existing public alerting systems were inadequate
nor because, in fact, guns are available or even prevalent, as they
have always been in the United States since its founding.
If you do not address what has changed, your efforts will only grow
government and reduce freedom.
Mr. Cicilline just said, well, small police departments don't have
the resources to access alerting systems or to learn about best
practices. Really? I was in the State legislature in North Carolina. I
know what resources we made available.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the
gentleman from North Carolina.
Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, we would never fail to
make available--and it is not beyond the resources of any State in this
Union--public alerting systems and to consider such issues as whether
or not we wish to activate vigilantes who might respond to such an
alert.
This makes no sense. You are not grappling with the issue. For that
reason, this is not the answer. It should be defeated.
Mr. CICILLINE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Speaker, I will respond briefly to the last speaker suggesting
that somehow this isn't going to solve all the problems of gun
violence. No one suggested it is.
[[Page H5706]]
This is a simple bill that is introduced to protect law enforcement
and members of the community when an active shooter happens. We can
continue to fight about how we should reduce gun violence, but when it
occurs, this will save lives. It is not intended to be the solution,
the big answer to everything. It is intended to save lives.
I will repeat again--with all due respect to my Republican colleagues
who think they are experts in policing, who think they know better than
law enforcement what they need when they run into danger--it is easy to
say that in the comfort of the House Chamber, where you are protected
by Capitol Police and you get alerts.
These are men and women who are running into bullets and communities
that are threatened. You raised what happened on 14th Street. A young
man who works for me received a notice 35 minutes after the scene was
cleared through his Ring security system in his building that there was
an active shooter. Had there been one in place, he would have been
notified and not walked into danger.
You have the National Sheriffs' Association, the FOP, and others
saying this will be very helpful. These are people who, admittedly,
actually are responsible for keeping communities safe, unlike anyone
who just spoke on the Republican side. They say it will help us keep
communities safe.
The CEO of the National Sheriffs' Association said: ``This alert
system will be another excellent tool for law enforcement to do its
job.''
Bryan Porter from the National District Attorneys Association: ``This
bipartisan legislation creates a new alert system for law enforcement
to alert the public when there are active shooters while also providing
resources as our members work to keep our communities safe.''
Jeri Williams, president of the Major Cities Chiefs Association: `` .
. . which will undoubtedly be a valuable tool and resource for law
enforcement agencies.''
Bill Johnson, the National Association of Police Organizations: ``The
Active Shooter Alert Act will assist law enforcement in alerting
citizens of an active shooter situation in their vicinity, keeping them
away from the incident and maintaining their safety.''
Finally, Patrick Yoes, the national president of the Fraternal Order
of Police: This bill will help ``improve the ways officers and agencies
communicate with the public about active threats.''
I could read 10 more quotes from people who actually do this work.
The North Carolina Association of Chiefs of Police has also endorsed
this bill, which I think should be important to Mr. Bishop, who just
spoke.
Look, these are men and women who do the job every day, and they are
saying they need this, that it will be useful. It doesn't solve all the
problems, but it works, and the notion that, ``Well, you can just do
it. It is redundant,'' it is just not true.
This bill has in it provisions that will provide for the development
of protocols, the sharing of best practices, a law enforcement advisory
group, things that will make sure the active shooter alert works even
better. It is made available to communities that may not have all those
resources to support the implementation of this system.
Can anyone say that every single American doesn't deserve to get this
information, and every member of law enforcement doesn't deserve to get
this information, so they don't go into a dangerous situation?
I know it is difficult because you somehow have it in your head that
Democrats are up to something. Fred Upton, Victoria Spartz, Peter
Meijer, Nancy Mace, Don Bacon, Andrew Garbarino, Jay Obernolte,
Jefferson Van Drew, Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon, Brian Fitzpatrick, John
Carter, Tom Rice, Michael McCaul, Kelly Armstrong, David
McKinley, and Julia Letlow are all Republican original cosponsors. Do
you think they are up to something, too? They are just trying to keep
their communities safe and give law enforcement the tools they need.
We can argue about the underlying cause of crime. I am happy to have
that debate. This bill is not about that. It is about protecting people
when an active shooter incident happens.
The final thing I would say is, if you look at the after-action
reports that are done after active shootings, almost without exception,
they all reference that it would have made a real difference if we had
a good communication system.
In the situation Mr. Upton talked about in Kalamazoo, in their after-
action report, they said neither the Kalamazoo Department of Public
Safety nor the Kalamazoo County Sheriff's Office ``had a strong social
media presence at the time of the shooting,'' which ``hampered the
departments' ability to update the community on the progression of the
incident, notify them when the arrest was made, and reassure them that
they were indeed safe from further violence.''
In the Columbine shooting, in the after-action report, they say: Our
schools' greatest vulnerabilities exist because of voids in basic
security policies and strategies, such as effective communications and
notification systems.
In the Broward County incident at the Hollywood airport in 2017, they
write in their after-action report: ``Review and budget for
improvements to public notification systems, including visual paging,
overhead announcements, and mass notification systems'' would be
helpful. It was noted during the event that airport patrons lost
personal items except one, their cellular phones. The ability to reach
every cell phone with messages enables law enforcement to provide
instant information directly to victims. It goes on and on and on.
Again, police are asking for this. The after-action reports
underscore the need for it.
Set aside the fact that the lead sponsor or the author is me. There
are 15 other Democrats, 15 other Republicans, very bipartisan, and I
haven't heard any argument why we shouldn't give law enforcement what
was identified as one of their top priorities during National Police
Week.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to address their
remarks to the Chair.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to
close.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''
First, as the gentleman from North Carolina said, this bill is
redundant. There are 1,400 alerting authorities across the country that
already alert citizens in those communities to an active shooter, so it
is redundant.
Second, it does seek to undermine the Second Amendment. Don't take my
word for it. Take one of the Democrat supporters of the legislation on
the Judiciary Committee. Here is what he said:
This bill would be most effective at reminding us that the
threat of gun violence exists all around us, but it does
little to actually protect us.
You have to view it in context. Remember, the last 4 weeks, all
Democrats have talked about is taking away people's Second Amendment
liberties.
We have this huge debate going on in the Senate right now, red flag
laws where you have no due process. Someone who doesn't like you comes
and says, ``We are going to take away so-and-so's firearm,'' and goes
to a judge or law enforcement to take away their firearm. There is a
hearing you are not allowed to be at. They take it away, and then you
have to go get it back. Your fundamental liberty, taking your property,
your rights from you, this is the context with which they bring this
legislation.
The third reason, I don't know who in their right mind would want to
give the Department of Justice more authority in light of what we have
seen from this Department of Justice. Frankly, I don't know why
you would give any Democrat-run Department of Justice more authority
after what we have seen from the Obama Justice Department and now what
we see from the Biden Justice Department.
The Obama Justice Department spied on Presidential campaigns. The
Biden Department of Justice is treating moms and dads as terrorists,
using domestic terrorism, counterterrorism measures, the PATRIOT Act,
against parents, for goodness sakes.
We know that because we have had multiple FBI agents come forward as
whistleblowers and tell us about the
[[Page H5707]]
over two dozen investigations into parents. One of those parents was
investigated simply because they owned a firearm. That is the context
and why we have concerns with this legislation.
I hope we vote ``no'' on this. More importantly, I hope the Senate
doesn't pass this package they are talking about, which would certainly
undermine liberties of law-abiding American citizens.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to
close.
Mr. Speaker, if I were a classroom teacher right now, I would say to
the gentleman from Ohio: Focus. Focus. Pay attention to what we are
talking about.
What we are talking about is an active shooter alert. We are not
talking about a red flag bill. We are not talking about any effort to
undermine the Second Amendment. We are not talking about education
policy. We are talking about one thing: Can we help keep people safe?
This is not redundant because while it is being used by 1,400 cities
and towns around the country, there are thousands and thousands who
have not used it because they can't access it because they don't have
the resources, the protocols, the best practices. This will allow them.
If we save one life, if because of the active shooter alert we save
one child, one police officer, it will have been worth it.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 6538. Give our brave law
enforcement men and women who keep our communities safe every tool they
need to keep themselves safe and keep the communities they serve safe.
Don't take my word for it; take theirs. They have all endorsed it. They
are asking for a ``yes.''
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6538, the
``Active Shooter Alert Act of 2022.''
In recent weeks, months, and years, we have mourned the loss of life
resulting from an ever-increasing number of active shooter incidents
where perpetrators committed mass shootings in multiple locations.
Communities in every corner of this country have been subjected to
the fear and uncertainty created by active shooters in their midst.
Last year, there were 61 active shooter incidents in the United
States. Approximately 27 of those incidents involved an active shooter
moving from one location to another.
For instance, 8 people were killed roughly 30 miles apart at three
spas in the metro Atlanta area last year. The gunman was later
apprehended some 150 miles south of Atlanta.
And we are all still reeling from the gruesome murder of 19 fourth
graders and two teachers in Uvalde, Texas that began when the
perpetrator shot his grandmother in the home they shared.
He then drove away, crashing his vehicle outside Robb Elementary. He
encountered several people before entering the school and committing
unspeakable acts on those helpless children and teachers.
While the actions of these individuals and other active shooters are
unacceptable and require Congress to enact measures to put an end to
such evil acts, we must also be prepared if these situations occur, and
do all we can to help law enforcement save more lives.
Law enforcement's response to an active shooter is a dynamic
situation--oftentimes chaotic--that involves many variables, requires
swift, consequential decision-making, and places great strain on law
enforcement command staff and their officers on the ground.
Their goal is to save the lives of victims and prevent others from
unknowingly entering the area or walking into the line of fire--at all
times focusing on containing, neutralizing, and apprehending the
shooter.
Centers of higher learning and primary education, businesses, local
jurisdictions, and law enforcement agencies have already implemented
some systems to alert students, employees, patrons, and community
members of the presence of an active shooter, and to help manage the
response, and provide updates about the ongoing crisis via text message
and/or social media.
Many of these systems face low enrollment and messaging delays that
sometimes contribute to confusion around the incident. In the case of
social media--insufficient account visibility means fewer people are
made aware of an existing threat to their safety.
Recently here in Washington, D.C. a sniper-style attacker set a rifle
on a tripod and fired randomly at passersby walking below his window.
D.C. Metro Police used their Twitter account to warn people to avoid
the area and shelter in place. But the tweets, or posts, received
minimal attention during the actual attack.
An Active Shooter Alert might have saved the life of the woman who
unknowingly walked directly into the line of fire of the Buffalo
shooter in the Tops parking lot.
Law enforcement needs a reliable method of communication to rapidly
notify as many people as possible within the vicinity of an ongoing
active shooter incident; provide instructions to avoid the area or
shelter in place; and announce when the area has been restored to
safety.
H.R. 6538, the Active Shooter Alert Act of 2022, would authorize the
Department of Justice to coordinate the creation of an Active Shooter
Alert Network, enabling law enforcement to send active shooter alerts
within their communities using the same system that issues AMBER
Alerts, severe storm and extreme weather events warnings, and other
emergency situations.
That system--the Integrated Public Alert and Warning System can send
alerts to mobile devices in locally targeted areas down to 1/10th of a
mile.
This legislation would ensure that an advisory panel--comprised of
law enforcement officers, public safety experts, and emergency response
officials experienced in responding to active shooter situations--has
input in the development of best practices for issuing alerts
effectively.
DOJ by way of an appointed Active Shooter Alert Coordinator would be
responsible for establishing the advisory panel; establishing and
promoting adoption of the best practices; and coordinating with FEMA,
the Department of Transportation, and the FCC on using the Integrated
Public Alert and Warning System to issue alerts for the network and to
provide a report to Congress on the effectiveness of the network.
Although this system would be available to law enforcement agencies
to use on a voluntary basis, I expect that many agencies would elect to
participate based on the numerous endorsements previously mentioned by
the Chairman.
I thank ACAL Subcommittee Chairman Cicilline for his leadership on
this lifesaving, bipartisan legislation that I am proud to cosponsor
along with Representatives Deutch, Spartz, Upton, Thompson, Meijer, and
Mace.
I ask my colleagues to support this bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Mrvan). The question is on the motion
offered by the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline) that the
House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 6538, as amended.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3(s) of House Resolution
8, the yeas and nays are ordered.
Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this motion
are postponed.
____________________