[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 115 (Wednesday, July 13, 2022)]
[House]
[Pages H5993-H6001]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
ACTIVE SHOOTER ALERT ACT OF 2022
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1224, I call up
the bill (H.R. 6538) to create an Active Shooter Alert Communications
Network, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate
consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. DeSaulnier). Pursuant to House
Resolution 1224, the amendment in the nature of a substitute
recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary, printed in the bill, is
adopted and the bill, as amended, is considered read.
The text of the bill, as amended, 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 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).
[[Page H5994]]
(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. The bill, as amended, shall be debatable for
1 hour, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking
minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary or their respective
designees.
The gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler) and the gentleman from Ohio
(Mr. Jordan) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler).
General Leave
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and
include extraneous material on H.R. 6538.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New York?
There was no objection.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 6538, the Active Shooter Alert Act, is bipartisan
legislation that would improve the tools available to law enforcement
as they respond to the disturbingly frequent threat of active shooters
faced by our communities.
Far too many of our cities have experienced the threat of an active
shooter situation. Since we last voted on this very bill--only a few
weeks ago--Highland Park became the most recent city to face the terror
of a mass shooting, following Buffalo, Uvalde, and so many others.
In 2021, the FBI designated 61 situations as active shooter
incidents, a more than 50 percent increase compared to 2020, and nearly
double the number of such incidents just 4 years ago.
These incidents require law enforcement to make challenging decisions
about how best to keep the public safe, including when and how to
inform the public as a situation unfolds. FEMA, the FCC, and wireless
providers already have a system in place to send time-sensitive,
location-targeted alerts for weather emergencies, AMBER Alerts for
child abduction cases, and other public safety emergencies.
This bill simply enables law enforcement to use this system for
active shooter alerts, giving them an additional tool to save lives. It
is bipartisan legislation and should be completely uncontroversial.
Indeed, our colleagues overwhelmingly supported this legislation when
we last voted on it, but the opposition of a few Members prevented it
from garnering the two-thirds support it needed to pass under
suspension of the rules. Those Members in opposition have made absurd
claims about the bill--instead of examining what it actually does--but
we won't take the bait.
Instead, we are listening to our law enforcement and first responders
who have called for this legislation. Today, we are taking action to
save lives when tragedy strikes. We will continue to do much more to
actually prevent these tragedies, but the least we can do is to improve
the tools we give law enforcement to respond to a crisis. That is what
this bill does.
H.R. 6538, the Active Shooter Alert Act, directs the attorney general
to appoint a coordinator to work with Federal, State, local, and Tribal
Governments to better use our existing emergency alert system for
active shooter situations.
It directs the coordinator to establish an advisory panel, comprised
of law enforcement officers who have responded to active shooter
incidents, along with other public safety and emergency response
experts.
{time} 1245
The coordinator is also directed to establish best practices for
using emergency alerts for active shooter incidents, to promote the
adoption of those best practices, and to report to Congress on the
effectiveness of these alerts. This bipartisan legislation is endorsed
by a broad range of Federal, State, and local law enforcement
organizations.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Congressman Cicilline for his work in developing
this important legislation, I hope my colleagues will join me in
supporting it once again, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, we debated this exact bill 3 weeks ago, and it failed
with bipartisan opposition. That is right. Even Democrats voted against
it.
The Active Shooter Alert Act is an unnecessary gimmick to cede more
authority to the already highly politicized Biden Department of
Justice.
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,
IPAWS, 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 were more
than 1,400 alerting authorities across the country.
If the States are already using an alerting system to notify the
public about threats, what is this bill really doing?
This bill is creating a new Federal job at the Biden Justice
Department to encourage State and local governments to issue public
alerts any time a firearm is used anywhere. Don't take my word for it.
During the markup, Congressman Jones said 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 fearmongering that guns
are an ever-present threat and we cannot be safe until Big Government
rounds up every last one of them.
In fact, Congressman Jones went further, calling the committee to
consider another bill that would ban assault weapons. Chairman Nadler
followed by voicing his support.
It is no wonder Democrats want to push forward a bill that would
create a reminder about this threat of gun violence against us. They
want to create a culture of fear so they can achieve their ultimate
goal. If they really
[[Page H5995]]
wanted to improve emergency alerts for active shooters, we would be
moving a bill to improve the system that is already in place that are
sent to mobile devices.
In a recent report, GAO stated that the local alerting officials had
expressed concerns about the inability to target WEA alerts with
accuracy which made local officials reluctant to use the system at all.
For example, GAO found that one alerting authority sent an alert to a
specific geographic area to warn the recipients about a suspicious
package, but the alert was received by people located 4 miles outside
of the intended target area.
Another concern is that these alerts are one-way communication
systems so alerting officials have no way of knowing if the messages
are actually received by the public. GAO has also found that another
local alerting authority sent an evacuation order through an alert but
didn't know whether the intended recipients actually even received that
notice.
Utilizing these alerts for active shooter incidents could have tragic
consequences. This is yet another reason this legislation should not
have been rushed to the floor without going through regular committee
order. We could have had hearings, we could have received expert
testimony, and we could have been able to fully vet this initiative.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline), who is a member of the Judiciary
Committee and sponsor of the bill.
Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this bill that I
introduced with my colleague from Michigan (Mr. Upton), the bipartisan
Active Shooter Alert Act that we introduced along with 14 Democrats and
14 Republicans--fully bipartisan.
This bill is a commonsense piece of public safety legislation that
police have asked for over and over and over again and that we are past
due in delivering to them. It is so clear that they need it.
Between 2000 and 2020 there were close to 400 active shooter events
with 40 active shooter incidents in 2020 alone. Last year we saw 61
active shooter events.
We see what this looks like in our communities. This past April a
shooter gunned down 10 people in a New York City subway and then was on
the run for 29 hours. On July 4 another shooter gunned down parade
goers in Highland Park, Illinois, and evaded arrest for 8 hours. Those
are just two examples of the most recent ones.
This doesn't even include the shooters who were at large for hours
and hours in Midland and Odessa in 2019 and the Atlanta, Georgia, area
in 2021; Kalamazoo, Michigan, in 2016; and in too many other life-and-
death situations for our communities.
Active shooter emergencies have become so common that we barely even
register them anymore. We have become numb to them and starting to view
them as statistics. We cannot let this become normal. And law
enforcement can't and won't get used to these horrific incidents
because police are the ones who have to respond to every single
shooting. We left them to turn to platforms like Twitter and Facebook
to let the public know there is a shooter out there.
That is why law enforcement organizations from all across the country
are asking for this bill.
Enough is enough.
We want to talk about supporting our law enforcement?
Give them what they ask for.
Stop acting like you are experts about responding to active shooting.
They are. They risk their lives every day doing it.
This bill creates and makes available to local law enforcement an
AMBER Alert-like program for active shooter events. It will provide
departments with cutting-edge technology to send notifications to our
smartphones and let communities know if there is an active shooter in a
certain area.
In addition to this system, the bill calls for the development of
best practices so that departments know how to send alerts in the most
effective and safest way possible.
We already have this type of alert infrastructure available at the
Federal level. Let's maximize its potential to save lives and give
officers the tools they need to keep their communities safe.
Developing this kind of technology and infrastructure and identifying
best practices would be a massive undertaking for many local
departments and for some communities. They simply don't have the
resources to do it on their own.
And nothing--let me repeat--nothing in this bill is mandatory for law
enforcement agencies to adopt. So if a local department determines that
this program isn't a good fit for their community, they simply don't
have to use it. But for the officers out there who do want it, let's
deliver to them.
We have to give law enforcement every tool they need to neutralize
these threats and keep our communities safe. This bill helps do that in
a simple and effective way. It is not complicated. It simply adds a
tool to the tool belt of law enforcement all across the country
regardless of their size or location to be used voluntarily.
When there is an active shooter situation, law enforcement does all
they can to keep people in the surrounding area safe. They organize to
search for shooters posing the threat, they shut down streets and
buildings and provide first response to victims, and they go door to
door to either evacuate or tell people to shelter in place. But that
takes time--time that could cost lives.
In these stressful life-or-death situations, law enforcement are too
often relying on social media to warn people so that no one
accidentally walks into the line of fire or a crime scene. Law
enforcement deserves better than Twitter to communicate with the
community they serve.
I am proud this bill has the endorsement of law enforcement agencies
all across the country, including the Fraternal Order of Police, the
National Police Foundation, the National Sheriffs' Association, the
Major Cities Chiefs Association, the National Association of Police
Officers, and the National Association of District Attorneys, just to
name a few.
There has been resounding bipartisan support. I thank all of my
colleagues on both sides of the aisle who have supported this
commonsense measure. I thank, again, my friend and colleague, Mr.
Upton, for working on this bill. I encourage all of you to give law
enforcement the tools they need to keep themselves and communities
safe.
Do not listen to this nonsense about trying to take peoples' guns or
give the Biden Justice Department money. It has nothing to do with
that. It is about alerting people when there is a dangerous active
shooting happening in their community so we can save peoples' lives. It
is plain and simple.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for his leadership.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I would just add that the gentleman said it
has nothing to do with the Biden Justice Department. Well, it certainly
does. It gives $2 million to the Biden Justice Department to create a
program the States can already do. This is the same Biden Justice
Department that is the most political Justice Department we have ever
seen.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from the great State
of Florida (Mr. Gaetz).
Mr. GAETZ. Mr. Speaker, maybe someone should have sent an active
shooter alert to police in Uvalde. Wait. They had the alert. They were
in a school building with an active shooter and didn't take action.
America is at her best when she encourages her citizens to have safe,
responsible gun ownership. But under Democrats, instead, we have a
government that instead wants to stigmatize and scare people about
guns.
Mr. Speaker, imagine you are at a concert with 5,000 people and
everyone gets an alert on their phone ``active shooter'' because six
blocks away there was a gunfire that went off. Maybe it was an
accident. Maybe it was a tragedy.
Would that make the circumstance safer?
Of course not. It would lead to stampede, tragedy, hysteria, mistake,
perhaps even more death. This bill is like yelling ``fire'' in a movie
theater, except the fire is in another movie theater across the street.
The bill makes no mention of distance requirements.
[[Page H5996]]
Will we be notified of any active shootings within 1 mile, 5 miles,
10 miles?
What is an active shooter?
A drive-by in an inner city?
A spousal murder in a suburb?
If you live in or near Democrat-run cities, it sounds like your phone
will be buzzing off the hook. Some of our cities have shootings every
day where multiple people are injured, and often this happens in the
jurisdictions with the most intense and liberty-depriving gun control.
The bill states that an active shooter is defined as an individual
``determined to pose an active, imminent threat to people in a
populated area.'' That sounds like a sizable amount of the people
walking around the south side of Chicago every day.
Who is making this determination?
Is it in a millisecond?
By the time the alerts go out, it may be far too late to do any good.
This bill is useless and foolish. Working on police response times is,
of course, a worthy goal, a worthy goal for the States where the
Constitution resides the police power. But alerting thousands of people
to what may or may not have happened 30 minutes ago or 30 blocks away
is, in fact, dangerous.
So one has to ask: What is the true purpose of this bill?
Why do the Democrats want to use the power of government to bombard
your cellphone with active shooter alerts 24 hours a day, 7 days a
week?
It is because they want you to be afraid of the Second Amendment. It
is because they want you to be afraid of responsible gun ownership.
They hope that if they program you and bombard you long enough, that
you will hate your own Second Amendment rights, or you may tattle on
your neighbor who is lawfully and rightfully exercising theirs. The
American people should not fall for this.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, first of all, let me say that if the theater
across street were on fire, I would like to know about it. Fires
spread.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee), who is a member of the Judiciary Committee.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the chair very much for
yielding.
Let me acknowledge both my good friend, Mr. Cicilline, and my good
friend, Mr. Upton, for their thoughtfulness.
Let me provide a response and relief to my good friend from Florida.
First of all, I champion the heroes who run into burning buildings, law
enforcement that save persons who are under attack, and the outstanding
heroes of natural disasters and manmade disasters. They are valuable.
But I do want to answer the question that we have seen, i.e., Uvalde
a lot of good guys with guns and nothing happened. And so this active
shooter legislation is common sense. Let me dispel your fears. There is
modern-day technology that experts run by FEMA under the DOJ will, in
fact, be able in this active shooter legislation pinpoint where the
active shooter may be.
I have here a list of shootings that have gone on in Uvalde; Buffalo;
Boulder, Colorado; Atlanta; Dayton; El Paso; Virginia Beach; Thousand
Oaks; Pittsburgh; Parkland; Sutherland; Las Vegas; Orlando; Oregon;
Rosenberg; and Oak Creek.
I can assure you that the active shooter legislation would have been
effective.
{time} 1300
Individuals had gotten the guns legally, allegedly, but no one gave
notice to those people that a shooting was going on.
In recent weeks and months and years, we have mourned the loss of
life resulting from an ever-increasing number of active shooters.
Communities in every corner of this country are suffering.
For instance, eight people were killed roughly 30 miles apart in
three spas. No active shooter alert. If that had been done, someone
could have been prepared that an active shooter that had a propensity
to go into spas was killing people. He ran around creating havoc.
We know what happened in Uvalde, Texas--no notice that there was
havoc going on in Robb Elementary School. Tell that to the parents.
Highland Park, Illinois, a Fourth of July parade ended abruptly as
the shooting came. If we had had that, there might have been relief.
Please realize that we are here trying to save lives. In saving
lives, yes, we want a ban on the assault weapons, but we would hope
that you would join us on a bipartisan bill that will simply notify
people what is happening, not deny them their due process rights.
H.R. 6538 is an important bill that would authorize the Department of
Justice to coordinate an active shooter alert network. We will be
listening to law enforcement and those with technology to ensure that
the system works.
AMBER Alerts, for those of us in disaster territory and storm
territory, work.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the
gentlewoman from Texas.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I will not leave the floor without
trying my best to give the names from Uvalde: Makenna, Layla, Maranda,
Nevaeh, Jose, Xavier, Tess, Rojelio, Eliahna, Eliahna, Annabell,
Jackie, Uziyah, Jayce, Maite, Jailah, Irma, Eva, Amerie, Alexandria,
and Alithia; and those of this great community of Buffalo: Roberta,
Margus, Andre, Aaron, Geraldine, Celestine, Heyward, Katherine, Pearl,
and Ruth. These are people who have died. Highland will have their list
of names added to this.
Support the AMBER Alert that makes the difference in an active
shooting so that even though there are good guys out there, you can
tell the people to save their lives. For the little 2-year-old that we
will hear about soon, support the legislation.
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.
In May this year, as we all know, 19 fourth graders and two teachers
in Uvalde, Texas were slaughtered in a mass shooting that began when
the perpetrator shot his grandmother in the home they shared, drove
away, and crashed his vehicle outside Robb Elementary, where he entered
and committed unspeakable acts.
And just a week ago in Highland Park, Illinois, a Fourth of July
parade ended abruptly when a shooter opened fire on spectators, then
fled the scene, prompting a citywide search.
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.
We all saw the video of the band members in Highland Park who
continued to march along the parade route as shots rang out above their
heads. We saw the confused looks on the faces of the spectators as they
tried to determine if the loud bangs were gunshots or fireworks.
An Active Shooter Alert could have helped those people fully
ascertain the danger they were in and get to safety faster. An 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.
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.
[[Page H5997]]
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.
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
to mobile devices within their communities using the same system that
issues AMBER Alerts, severe storm and extreme weather events warnings,
and other emergency situations.
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 would oversee establishment of the advisory panel; establish and
promote adoption of the best practices; and coordinate with FEMA, the
Department of Transportation, and the FCC 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 many agencies will elect to
participate based on the many endorsements received from law
enforcement agencies.
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.
Uvalde Shooting Victims
Makenna Lee Elrod, 10
Layla Salazar, 11
Maranda Mathis, 11
Nevaeh Bravo, 10
Jose Manuel Flores Jr., 10
Xavier Lopez, 10
Tess Marie Mata, 10
Rojelio Torres, 10
Eliahna ``Ellie'' Amyah Garcia, 9; who was just days from turning 10
years old
Eliahna A. Torres, 10
Annabell Guadalupe Rodriguez, 10; cousin and best friend to Jackie
Cazares, 9, another victim
Uziyah Garcia
Jayce Carmelo Luevanos, 10
Maite Yuleana Rodriguez, 10
Jailah Nicole Silguero, 10
Irma Garcia, 48; a teacher of over two decades
Eva Mireles, 44
Amerie Jo Garza, 10
Alexandria ``Lexi'' Aniyah Rubio, 10
Alithia Ramirez, 10
Buffalo Shooting Victims
Roberta A. Drury of Buffalo, N.Y.--age 32
Margus D. Morrison of Buffalo, N.Y.--age 52
Andre Mackneil of Auburn, N.Y.--age 53
Aaron Salter of Lockport, N.Y.--age 55
Geraldine Talley of Buffalo, N.Y.--age 62
Celestine Chaney of Buffalo, N.Y.--age 65
Heyward Patterson of Buffalo, N.Y.--age 67
Katherine Massey of Buffalo, N.Y.--age 72
Pearl Young of Buffalo, N.Y.--age 77
Ruth Whitfield of Buffalo, N.Y.--age 86
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Roy), my friend.
Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I associate myself with the remarks of my
friend from Florida (Mr. Gaetz) a few minutes ago with respect to his
position about what this bill will do in terms of fear and its purpose
of creating fear among the people. That is the reality. That is what we
are dealing with here.
Texas has an alert system. States have alert systems. That is where
this properly resides. That is where the police power resides, in the
States.
In fact, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee even acknowledged
this reality that, well, okay, States have this, but here is a Federal
program we are going to create with $2 million. You can use it if you
want.
This is another example of Washington creating another department,
another position, spending more money that we don't have in order to
have a policy objective of continuing to advance fear among the
American people.
Remember the COVID alerts? How many alerts do we need on our phones
to create fear in the minds of the American people?
Allow the States to make a decision about when there is something
that is meritorious, whether it is a tornado alert, whether it is an
AMBER Alert. Allow the local jurisdictions to make that decision, not
bureaucrats in Washington. That is the reality.
I think it would probably be a more advantageous use of our time to
develop a congressional stupidity alert system or a congressional harm
alert system. I mean, we do it every single day. That is what this body
is actually engaged in on a regular basis, harming the American people
through either nonaction or action.
As we speak, maybe we should have an alert about the inflation
running rampant around this country because of the rampant spending, as
evidenced by this very bill with another $2 million for a position in
the Department of Justice.
Maybe we need an alert system for the literal stream of people coming
across the border in Eagle Pass right now and the fentanyl pouring
across into our communities, endangering the American people,
empowering cartels at our peril.
Maybe, perhaps, we need an alert system for more COVID mandates, more
mask mandates, and more shutdowns in our schools where our children get
harmed and where they have mental health issues because of what this
body does.
Maybe we need an alert system for the wokeism and the vax mandates at
the Department of Defense that are damaging our ability to recruit.
Just now, on the floor this week, we are going to be taking up the
National Defense Authorization Act. We can't even attain 40 percent
recruiting standards right now in our United States Army because of
wokeism and because of vaccine mandates driving our personnel away from
the Department of Defense. Maybe we need an alert system for the
American people to know what is happening at the Department of Defense.
Maybe we need an alert on our failures to vote, our proxy voting in
this very body, and our virtual voting from boats by some of our
colleagues on the other side of the aisle.
We could have so many alert systems that we could be actually
educating the American people on what they are getting here in this
august body, the people's House. That would be a more valuable alert
system than carrying out the function of the State and local police
power that is inherent in our Constitution, which this body tramples
upon on a regular and daily basis.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton), one of the sponsors of the bill.
Mr. UPTON. Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding.
This morning, I saw the news that the North Carolina Little League
State championship was canceled. That is right. Why? An active shooter.
I saw the frantic video of a mom holding her handheld video of what
was going on. Frankly, it reminded me of the congressional baseball
practice in Alexandria a few years ago when our Republican whip,
Steve Scalise, was seriously injured and, frankly, lucky to still be
alive.
My son played on that field, which is walking distance from my home.
Some of my staff actually walked by that morning, not having a clue
what was going on.
This bill would change that. It would provide some resources--not an
arm or a leg, but maybe what it takes for a traffic safety study--to
provide an alert system across the country on your cell phone when an
active shooter might be close by.
It would work like an AMBER Alert system, just like I received when I
landed at O'Hare yesterday, coming back to Washington. My phone went
off, as others' did on my flight when it landed, looking for what may
have been a child predator.
A few years ago, six folks were shot and killed in Kalamazoo, in my
district, next to the campus of Western Michigan University, a campus
of some 20,000 students, at about midnight. No alert system was sent. I
believe that this legislation, had it been in place then, may have
saved some of those folks who were killed that night.
In the 1990s, two brave Capitol Hill police officers were shot and
killed just down the stairs from this Chamber as they tried to kill our
Republican whip, Tom DeLay. Then, as Members of Congress, we had no
such alert system. Today, we do.
[[Page H5998]]
In fact, just this morning, we each received two notices of police
activity on Capitol Hill, just as we did a couple of weeks ago on the
day that we had this legislation up when Independence Avenue was closed
because of a suspicious package outside the door of the Cannon
Building.
A week ago, on the Fourth of July, the Nation watched in horror the
mass shooting in Highland Park. The media reports the initial sounds
were thought to be fireworks. Wouldn't it have been nice to have had a
system that would have alerted the entire parade route to take cover?
Maybe some of those folks that were killed or wounded wouldn't have
been. It breaks our hearts.
Tragically, there are going to be more days like that, probably
today. Can't we take a small, bipartisan, commonsense measure to save a
life or two?
Yes, I believe in thoughts and prayers. I do. I also believe in
taking constructive steps to protect our communities.
Every single law enforcement agency supports this. It is way past
time to do something.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Sanchez). The time of the gentleman has
expired.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the
gentleman from Michigan.
Mr. UPTON. Sadly, I know that the Gun Owners of America opposes this
bill, but it does nothing to threaten the legal use of any gun. It only
protects humans that, in fact, may be the target.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
Kentucky (Mr. Massie), the co-chair of the Second Amendment Caucus.
Mr. MASSIE. Madam Speaker, before I talk about the substance of this
bill, or the lack thereof, I would like to put it in the context of the
other dozen or so unserious, unconstitutional, unnecessary, and unsafe
responses to gun shootings in this country that the Democrats have
offered and passed in this Chamber.
What have they done? Well, they passed a law to ban magazines with a
capacity of more than 15 rounds. The chairman of the Rules Committee
claimed that this would stop shootings like the one at Virginia Tech.
What he failed to mention is the shooter at Virginia Tech never used a
magazine that had more than 15 rounds. That is an example of an
unserious solution that has come from this body.
What else have they done? They have changed the definition of a gun
dealer so that any law-abiding individual who sells a firearm to
anybody and makes a profit off it now might be a gun dealer and,
therefore, prosecutable in a Federal crime.
What else have they done that is unserious or unconstitutional? Well,
they have passed a law to ban gun trafficking. The problem is that is
already illegal.
Who did they sweep up in this dragnet in this new law? Well, they
swept up domestic violence victims who might ask a neighbor for a
firearm. Now, they can be prosecuted. Not the neighbor, not just the
Good Samaritan, but also the domestic violence victim can be prosecuted
as a gun trafficker under a bill that they passed here.
Recognizing this flaw, I offered an amendment to fix it in the
Judiciary Committee. Every Democrat but one--one of them had a little
bit of common sense--voted against that amendment to fix their own
bill.
What else have they done? Well, they passed a bill that I am going to
call unconstitutional on arrival. It has already been ruled
unconstitutional if you read the D.C. v. Heller decision. The Supreme
Court Justices said that you can't force Mr. Dick Heller to keep his
gun unloaded and disassembled in his house because that violates the
Second Amendment. But that is exactly what one of their laws that came
through this Chamber in just the past couple of months does. It is
called the so-called safe storage act. It is already unconstitutional.
Who likes this bill more than anybody? Home invaders. Oh, my gosh,
wouldn't it be great to know that, by Federal law, everybody who has a
firearm now has to have it locked up and unattainable, inaccessible in
the amount of time that it would take to respond to a home invader?
What else have they done? A red flag bill that deprives citizens of
their due process and endangers police officers, who are going to be
required to respond in predawn raids of people who haven't had due
process, have never had their day in court, haven't even reached a
level of evidence that is sufficient. The red flag bill is bad.
What else have they done? They passed a bill to deprive 18-, 19-, and
20-year-olds of purchasing semiautomatic rifles and semiautomatic
shotguns. They are already deprived of their constitutional right to
buy a handgun, but now we are just going to sweep in all of these
things.
Are they going to then raise the draft age to 21 now that we are
saying Uncle Sam will give you a gun? Uncle Sam can conscript you to
the military, send you overseas to fight for a Constitution that
doesn't even protect you or your wife, who is at home taking care of
the kids, if you are 18-, 19-, or 20-year-olds.
They don't care. This one is also unconstitutional on arrival. The
Ninth Circuit, one of the most liberal circuits in the country, has
already ruled that.
Why is this so disturbing? We heard earlier today from one of my
colleagues in this debate that she wants to ban assault weapons. Well,
the House Democrat Twitter account tweeted that all semiautomatic
rifles are weapons of war. Really? There are a lot of people in
Kentucky who own Remington 750 deer rifles who are going to be shocked
to find out that they purchased a weapon of war. If you saw one of
these, I think you would all agree this is not a weapon of war.
It is an alarm to every American who is out there watching this
debate that they are coming after your guns.
Now, let's get to the substance of this bill, or the lack thereof.
Why are we here debating this bill? This is the second time we have
voted on it, the second time we debated it. Why are we here again?
Because they tried to suspend the rules of this body and get it through
without following the rules of this House, and they failed. That is why
we are here again, to give it the debate it deserves.
The bill is called the Active Shooter Alert Act of 2022. In the
Democrat cities where they defunded the police, I think you should call
it the you are on your own act of 2022. Yes, that is right.
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 Kentucky.
Mr. MASSIE. They are going to tell you that you are on your own.
But can you turn this thing off in Chicago? How will you get any
sleep because you have a shooting literally every night in Chicago? If
they were serious about stopping crime or helping individuals, this
would have been called the active violence alert act.
Mr. MASSIE. Madam Speaker, what about violence committed with a car,
violence committed with a knife? No concern for that because the true
purpose of this bill passing here today is to scare people. It is to
scare people on their phones. They can't get away from their phones.
It is going to be popping up saying, be afraid, somebody's got a gun,
and they are going to try and condition the American public to ask to
repeal the Second Amendment, either explicitly or implicitly, here in
this Chamber.
Madam Speaker, I urge opposition to this bill.
{time} 1315
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Schneider).
Mr. SCHNEIDER. Madam Speaker, we are hearing a lot of arguments
today. My colleague on the other side talked about America at its best.
Let me tell you about America at its best.
Last Monday on July 4 in Highland Park, Illinois, thousands of people
gathered together. Families, parents, grandparents, and children lined
the road for a parade. Many of them came there year after year,
generation after generation, to celebrate the birth of our country, the
values of our Founders, and the belief that this is a Nation for us
all. I saw America at its best.
At 10:14 on July 4 last week, a shooter who had climbed a roof with
an AR-15 fired 83 bullets in less than a minute, killing seven people
and wounding dozens of others.
Thousands of people fled that parade, the best America has to offer,
not
[[Page H5999]]
knowing where to go, not knowing what to do. They heard there was a
shooter. Was it one? Was it two? It could have been many. Should they
go home, or should they go somewhere else? Nobody knew.
Imagine if on their phones they had been told of an active shooter at
the corner of Second and Central. Imagine if on their phones, they had
been told, go and seek safety in your home. For 8 hours, people
watched, people talked, rumors swirled. An entire community of 30,000
people was left to grieve and to fear.
That is what this bill is about. That is why we are here. We are here
to give the people of Highland Park or of the many communities around
our country that have experienced an active shooter, or will experience
an active shooter, a little bit of security.
According to the FBI, last year, there were 61 active shooting
incidents in the country. That was last year alone and double the year
before. We are seeing more violence in our country. We have to do
something about this violence.
I know the people who are arguing against this bill aren't willing to
do that. They are not willing to stand up and defend our communities,
to keep our children safe from this kind of violence. They are not even
willing to give our communities the information they need to seek
safety on their own.
We have to take action to stop these killings in our communities, but
that is not what this bill is about. This bill is about getting people
the critical, potentially lifesaving information in a quick and
efficient way in the event of a shooter. That is what this bill is
about. That is why I am asking people to vote for it.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
North Carolina (Mr. Bishop).
Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. So as others have said--and this is the
language that struck me--when this matter was in committee, before it
failed under suspension of the rules here, for good reason, this
paragraph struck me.
According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, ``imminent
threat alerts include natural or human-made disasters, extreme weather,
active shooters, and other threatening emergencies that are current or
emerging.'' So the existing IPAWS system explicitly covers this issue,
which again, takes you back to, then, what this debate has materialized
as.
The soon-to-retire gentleman from Michigan on the Republican side
recited an event in North Carolina where Little League teams withdrew
from a tournament because they heard shots. The police in Wilson say
that they had no evidence that there was an active shooter involved.
That incident had nothing to do with what we are talking about today,
and yet, the gentleman from Michigan offered it in support of this
bill.
The gentleman from Illinois or the gentleman who just spoke about the
Highland Park shooting in Illinois--by the way, according to the wisdom
of the majority and some Republican Senators, we passed support for red
flag laws--well, Illinois has a red flag law. That person had been
implicated in all circumstances that a red flag law ought to respond
to. It didn't work.
We have been doing gun control since 1968. Are you satisfied with the
trajectory? Does it salve your conscience to speak in a loud voice
about how outraged you are and do something else that has no capacity
to solve the problem?
Because you refuse to grapple with the problem. I have said that all
along. I am going to continue to say it. It is not the prevalence of
guns. It is but for causation, ladies and gentlemen.
We have always had guns in ample supply across this country. Always.
But until the 1960s, you never heard of a mass shooting, and they have
increased at a rapid rate in recent years. So it is not the guns that
have changed.
Let's look at what may have changed. We have changed the culture.
Could that be it? Could that be the reason that some reckless idiot in
an automobile leaving the area of that Little League tournament was
engaged in gun play, firing off a weapon? That never would have
happened at an earlier time in this country.
The same political forces that tried to change the culture and
succeeded is the side that wants to eliminate gun rights as the answer
to a problem they have created.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the
gentleman from North Carolina.
Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. So we see it over and over and over
again. Accountability would require you to point to the success of your
actions. You have engaged in--Mr. Massie detailed them--bill after bill
after bill after bill, slowly eroding people's gun rights away.
Yet, the problems that you have caused get worse every year. They get
worse every year in the cities that you control.
Let's grapple with the problem, and let's stop the alarmism and the
stigmatizing and the fearmongering that you believe to substitute for
policy. It does not.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green).
Mr. GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I thank Mr. Nadler and all of the
hands that have made this moment possible.
Madam Speaker, I have been here in this House when we have given our
thoughts and prayers to many persons who have died, many as a result of
an active shooter circumstance.
Thoughts and prayers are important. My grandfather was a preacher. He
talked about thoughts and prayers, but he also talked about doing God's
work. Thoughts and prayers are important, but thoughts and prayers are
not enough. Thoughts and prayers, unfortunately, are not saving lives
when we can make the difference.
`` . . . here on earth, God's work must truly be our own.'' These are
the words of John F. Kennedy. Thoughts and prayers are not enough.
There seems to be an argument today that we can give too much notice.
Too much notice. We already have a system that can do this. Too much
notice. Ask the loved ones of those who lost lives in the Atlanta,
Georgia, area. Ask those loved ones if there was too much notice.
I went there. I saw them. I saw the hurt and the pain. I saw them
pleading for additional help. Thoughts and prayers are not enough.
You can't give too much notice. Too much notice? Well, this shooter
in Atlanta went to three different spas over a 3-hour period. Three
different spas. I do believe this is an active shooter. Killed eight
people--eight people--three different spas over a 3-hour period. This
is an active shooter. Didn't have too much notice.
I believe that we have a duty, responsibility, and obligation to do
all that we can. When you can't do enough, you still have a
responsibility to do all that we can. This is an opportunity for us to
do more to save lives.
For edification purposes, since 1968--1968--more individuals in the
United States have died from gun violence than in battles during all
the wars the country has fought since its inception.
Since 1968, more individuals in the United States have died from gun
violence than in battle during all the wars since this country's
inception.
Too much is not enough. Too much notice is not enough, and we don't
have enough.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my friend, the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert).
Mr. GOHMERT. Madam Speaker, back in high school when I was a senior
at a pregame warm-up at Carthage, I had my hands under the center about
to take a snap, throw a pass--the manager had my helmet--I am looking
at the split end, and the manager yelled, Louie, and I looked up in
time to have my nose splattered all over my face.
That is what this warning will be. It is not going to stop violence.
It is just going to say, look, we have got more violence.
Let's talk about what it really is. The truth is, these cities with
the most violence in America--and there are already 1,400 warning
systems that will already take care of this, but, apparently, we need
more help in the big cities controlled by Democrats.
We are not going to lower the crime rate. I have spent much of my
adult life in courtrooms dealing with crime. I am familiar with what
causes it, what happens. My heart has gone out repeatedly to victims,
but you have got to reduce crime.
[[Page H6000]]
How can we do that? We have brought up repeatedly in committee over
the years, 17 and a half years I have been here, look, let's go to the
heart of what is causing the crime.
I saw a recent report that said fatherlessness definitely is
affecting the crime. It definitely is affecting the violence. It is
increasing the violence.
We have always had guns, but we haven't had mass shootings like this,
mass killings. The culture has changed. Then we see this administration
is going to help deal with problems around the world by giving grants
to groups that will promote atheism and humanism. As if we are not
doing enough damage. Because as Adam said, this Constitution was meant
for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the
governing of any other.
If we want to deal with shooters, don't take away guns from law-
abiding people. Look where the mass shootings are. They like to go
where there is nobody law-abiding that has a gun.
And what about the border? The border has drugs pouring across, drugs
that have added tens of billions a year to the drug cartels that engage
in violence and are now located in cities all over America.
So I would just submit, you know, this is going to be, if it is
passed--and the Democrats have the majority. They have the White House.
They have the Senate. If it passes, you know, it is going to be in the
big cities.
They are not going to reduce their crime. So I would suggest if they
are going to be going 24/7, at least get some nice music on there so
maybe that will be soothing. Maybe some good Paul Williams songs,
because it is not going to stop crime. Maybe some good music will make
people feel better.
{time} 1330
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished
gentlewoman from South Carolina (Ms. Mace).
Ms. MACE. Madam Speaker, in South Carolina, unfortunately, we are no
stranger to mass shootings.
Seven years ago in June, we had nine Black church members at Mother
Emanuel who were murdered in cold blood by a single killer.
On April 26 of this year, right adjacent to a little league baseball
game in the evening, in a parking lot, over 30 shots were fired. The
harrowing video of seeing young kids literally crawling off the
baseball field in tears, parents frightened, scared to death about
their children and this shooting had taken place just next door.
On Memorial Day of this year in Charleston, there were 13 people shot
that evening, including three law enforcement officers, to say nothing
of the hundreds of mass shootings that we have seen so far this year,
including over two dozen in our schools and Uvalde.
More recently Highland Park--and I will mention that my father's last
duty station in the military as a U.S. Army General was at Fort
Sheridan, Illinois. I spent a year of my life in Highland Park going to
Highland Park Middle School. I am very familiar with that community and
have been heartbroken by what they have been through over the last few
weeks.
And in Chicago, there are mass shootings every single weekend.
The beauty of H.R. 6538 is that I agree with both sides of the aisle
and what they are saying today. As someone who owns seven firearms, a
rifle, two shotguns, and four pistols, I support law-abiding citizens'
right to own firearms included in the Second Amendment. The beauty of
this bill is it is not requiring or demanding or mandating anything. It
is not taking away anyone's Second Amendment rights.
When I have spoken to law enforcement across not just the First
Congressional District, but across the entire State of South Carolina,
when I speak to sheriffs, when I speak to police chiefs, I realize and
understand that there is a patchwork of technology out there that some
are aware of, some are not.
So, for example, in one county in my State, we have something called
code red where residents can opt in. Another county has nothing,
another municipality or locality can do a reverse 911, but there is
nothing consistent. The beauty of this bill is it doesn't infringe on
anyone's Second Amendment rights.
It does do a study by the Comptroller General under section 5 to
understand what States are and aren't doing and what some of the best
practices are.
In section 4, we have an advisory panel that is created, their job--
and these are law enforcement officers, these are everyday first
responders, people who are in the thick of it every single day facing
these mass shootings--is putting together best practices so that the
coordinator, as defined in section 3, can provide this information.
This encourages States and localities and municipalities what the best
practices are, and helps provide that information to them and the tools
that they need so the next time--it is not a matter of ``if'' but a
matter of ``when''--the next mass shooting is, they can, if they want,
if they choose to voluntarily alert those in the community.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Arizona (Mr. Biggs).
Mr. BIGGS. Madam Speaker, I oppose H.R. 6538. Frankly, this bill is
unnecessary. Nothing prevents the States today from creating an alert
system for active shooter incidents. Every State has the capacity to
implement a warning system if they choose to.
In fact, in 2020, the GAO said there are more than 1,400 systems
already in place throughout the country that make this available. We
passed here, just 4 or 5 years ago, the Ashlynne Mike AMBER Alert in
Indian Country Act. That cleared up a lot of holes throughout the
country on these emergency alert systems. This really is duplicative,
and is, quite frankly, not necessary.
Contrary to the belief of many Members of this body, the solution to
every issue is not a Federal program. We should allow States, who have
the ability, to create systems for providing emergency notifications
for their citizens in a manner that is best for them.
What this does is by putting a Federal coordinator over there, it
actually lays in place the infrastructure for a soon-to-be-mandated
system that the States will have to fund, but it will be mandated by
the Federal Government. That is my prognostication here because that is
what always happens.
DOJ can already issue best practices and guidance related to public
safety alerts. So what is this? This is a bill designed to feel good.
This is a visceral bill, an emotional bill. This is not a bill designed
to make us safer, make Americans safer. We already have those
mechanisms and means in place.
We have spent a lot of time going over bills introduced by my
colleagues across the aisle regarding gun violence. Very few of them
are going to provide any kind of help and assistance. There are bills
that we have introduced that will not get a hearing that I believe will
actually provide help and safety for the American people.
This bill, however, by creating this Federal alert system--and it is
not a Federal alert system, but it will evolve into that--is to remind
us always that gun violence exists all around us, and it is to
basically prejudice people against lawful gun owners.
One of the best things you can have, regardless of what my colleagues
across the aisle say, is a trained good guy with a gun.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume
while I am waiting because I have one more speaker who would like to
weigh in.
As has been said, this bill is redundant. States can already do it if
they so choose. This bill is part of a series of legislation that the
Democrats have passed that attacks law-abiding citizens' Second
Amendment liberties.
We know what happened a few weeks ago with the red flag law that was
passed by this body. Someone doesn't like you, and they go to law
enforcement or they go to a judge. There is a hearing. You are not
allowed to be at the hearing. You are not allowed to have your lawyer
at the hearing. You are not allowed to confront your accuser. You
haven't been charged with a crime, but they can take your gun, take
your property, take away your Second Amendment right, and then
[[Page H6001]]
you have to go petition the court to get it back.
This bill gives $2 million to the Department of Justice. I mean,
giving more money to the Justice Department, the most politicized
Justice Department I have ever seen, the same Justice Department where
over a dozen whistleblowers have come to our office talking about
concerns they have with investigations that the FBI and the Justice
Department are doing, the same Justice Department that treated parents
as domestic terrorists for simply showing up at school board meetings
and voicing concerns about the curriculum being taught to their
children, that Justice Department, we are giving more money to do this
program?
The same Justice Department that, sad to say, has joined the effort
by the left to intimidate the Court, our highest Court in the land, we
are giving money to that Justice Department?
Make no mistake, this Justice Department has done that by their
failure to enforce the statute to protect our Supreme Court Justices.
When people are protesting at their home, trying to impact and
intimidate the Court, this Justice Department refused to deal with the
statute that is exactly on point. We are giving money to that Justice
Department.
So for all those reasons, we have real concerns with this
legislation, and I would urge opposition to the bill.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
There is a reason that this bipartisan legislation is endorsed by the
Major Cities Chiefs Association, the National Association of Police
Organizations, the Fraternal Order of Police, the National Policing
Institute, the National Sheriffs' Association, the National District
Attorneys Association, and several State and local law enforcement
organizations.
When tragedy strikes--and unfortunately we know that it will strike
again--we want our law enforcement and first responders to have all the
tools they need to keep our communities safe. We want our people to
have the warnings that they need, just as with the AMBER Alert system.
I urge my colleagues to stand with law enforcement and to support
this important legislation.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1224, the
previous question is ordered on the bill, as amended.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam 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 question
are postponed.
____________________