[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.

                          ____________________