[Pages H5143-H5152]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

DOMESTIC TERRORISM PREVENTION ACT OF 2022

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1124, I call up
the bill (H.R. 350) to authorize dedicated domestic terrorism offices
within the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice,
and the Federal Bureau of Investigation to analyze and monitor domestic
terrorist activity and require the Federal Government to take steps to
prevent domestic terrorism and ask for its immediate consideration in
the House.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Espaillat). Pursuant to House Resolution
1124, the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the
Committee on the Judiciary, printed in the bill, modified by the
amendment printed in part A of House Report 117-333, is adopted and the
bill, as amended, is considered read.
The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

H.R. 350

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 ``Domestic Terrorism
Prevention Act of 2022''.

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

In this Act--
(1) the term ``Director'' means the Director of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation;
(2) the term ``domestic terrorism'' has the meaning given
the term in section 2331 of title 18, United States Code.
(3) the term ``Domestic Terrorism Executive Committee''
means the committee within the Department of Justice tasked
with assessing and sharing information about ongoing domestic
terrorism threats;
(4) the term ``hate crime incident'' means an act described
in section 241, 245, 247, or 249 of title 18, United States
Code, or in section 901 of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (42
U.S.C. 3631);
(5) the term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of Homeland
Security; and
(6) the term ``uniformed services'' has the meaning given
the term in section 101(a) of title 10, United States Code.

SEC. 3. OFFICES TO COMBAT DOMESTIC TERRORISM.

(a) Authorization of Offices to Monitor, Analyze,
Investigate, and Prosecute Domestic Terrorism.--
(1) Domestic terrorism unit.--There is authorized a
Domestic Terrorism Unit in the Office of Intelligence and
Analysis of the Department of Homeland Security, which shall
be responsible for monitoring and analyzing domestic
terrorism activity.
(2) Domestic terrorism office.--There is authorized a
Domestic Terrorism Office in the Counterterrorism Section of
the National Security Division of the Department of Justice--
(A) which shall be responsible for investigating and
prosecuting incidents of domestic terrorism;
(B) which shall be headed by the Domestic Terrorism
Counsel; and
(C) which shall coordinate with the Civil Rights Division
on domestic terrorism matters that may also be hate crime
incidents.
(3) Domestic terrorism section of the fbi.--There is
authorized a Domestic Terrorism Section within the
Counterterrorism Division of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, which shall be responsible for investigating
domestic terrorism activity.
(4) Staffing.--The Secretary, the Attorney General, and the
Director shall each ensure that each office authorized under
this section in their respective agencies shall--
(A) have an adequate number of employees to perform the
required duties;
(B) have not less than one employee dedicated to ensuring
compliance with civil rights and civil liberties laws and
regulations; and
(C) require that all employees undergo annual anti-bias
training.
(5) Sunset.--The offices authorized under this subsection
shall terminate on the date that is 10 years after the date
of enactment of this Act.

[[Page H5144]]

(b) Joint Report on Domestic Terrorism.--
(1) Biannual report required.--Not later than 180 days
after the date of enactment of this Act, and each 6 months
thereafter for the 10-year period beginning on the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security,
the Attorney General, and the Director of the Federal Bureau
of Investigation shall submit a joint report authored by the
domestic terrorism offices authorized under paragraphs (1),
(2), and (3) of subsection (a) to--
(A) the Committee on the Judiciary, the Committee on
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and the Select
Committee on Intelligence of the Senate; and
(B) the Committee on the Judiciary, the Committee on
Homeland Security, and the Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence of the House of Representatives.
(2) Contents.--Each report submitted under paragraph (1)
shall include--
(A) an assessment of the domestic terrorism threat posed by
White supremacists and neo-Nazis, including White supremacist
and neo-Nazi infiltration of Federal, State, and local law
enforcement agencies and the uniformed services; and
(B)(i) in the first report, an analysis of incidents or
attempted incidents of domestic terrorism that have occurred
in the United States since April 19, 1995, including any
White-supremacist-related incidents or attempted incidents;
and
(ii) in each subsequent report, an analysis of incidents or
attempted incidents of domestic terrorism that occurred in
the United States during the preceding 6 months, including
any White-supremacist-related incidents or attempted
incidents;
(C) a quantitative analysis of domestic terrorism for the
preceding 6 months, including--
(i) the number of--

(I) domestic terrorism related assessments initiated by the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, including the number of
assessments from each classification and subcategory, with a
specific classification or subcategory for those related to
White supremacism;
(II) domestic terrorism-related preliminary investigations
initiated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, including
the number of preliminary investigations from each
classification and subcategory, with a specific
classification or subcategory for those related to White
supremacism, and how many preliminary investigations resulted
from assessments;
(III) domestic terrorism-related full investigations
initiated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, including
the number of full investigations from each classification
and subcategory, with a specific classification or
subcategory for those related to White supremacism, and how
many full investigations resulted from preliminary
investigations and assessments;
(IV) domestic terrorism-related incidents, including the
number of incidents from each classification and subcategory,
with a specific classification or subcategory for those
related to White supremacism, the number of deaths and
injuries resulting from each incident, and a detailed
explanation of each incident;
(V) Federal domestic terrorism-related arrests, including
the number of arrests from each classification and
subcategory, with a specific classification or subcategory
for those related to White supremacism, and a detailed
explanation of each arrest;
(VI) Federal domestic terrorism-related indictments,
including the number of indictments from each classification
and subcategory, with a specific classification or
subcategory for those related to White supremacism, and a
detailed explanation of each indictment;
(VII) Federal domestic terrorism-related prosecutions,
including the number of incidents from each classification
and subcategory, with a specific classification or
subcategory for those related to White supremacism, and a
detailed explanation of each prosecution;
(VIII) Federal domestic terrorism-related convictions,
including the number of convictions from each classification
and subcategory, with a specific classification or
subcategory for those related to White supremacism, and a
detailed explanation of each conviction; and
(IX) Federal domestic terrorism-related weapons recoveries,
including the number of each type of weapon and the number of
weapons from each classification and subcategory, with a
specific classification or subcategory for those related to
White supremacism; and

(ii) an explanation of each individual case that progressed
through more than 1 of the stages described under clause
(i)--

(I) including the specific classification or subcategory
for each case; and
(II) not including personally identifiable information not
otherwise releasable to the public; and

(D) certification that each of the assessments and
investigations described under subparagraph (C) are in
compliance with all applicable civil rights and civil
liberties laws and regulations.
(3) Hate crimes.--In compiling a joint report under this
subsection, the domestic terrorism offices authorized under
paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of subsection (a) shall, in
consultation with the Civil Rights Division of the Department
of Justice and the Civil Rights Unit of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, review each Federal hate crime charge and
conviction during the preceding 6 months to determine whether
the incident also constitutes a domestic terrorism-related
incident.
(4) Classification and public release.--Each report
submitted under paragraph (1) shall be--
(A) unclassified, to the greatest extent possible, with a
classified annex only if necessary; and
(B) in the case of the unclassified portion of the report,
posted on the public websites of the Department of Homeland
Security, the Department of Justice, and the Federal Bureau
of Investigation.
(5) Nonduplication.--If two or more provisions of this
subsection or any other law impose requirements on an agency
to report or analyze information on domestic terrorism that
are substantially similar, the agency may produce one report
that complies with each such requirement as fully as
possible.
(c) Domestic Terrorism Executive Committee.--There is
authorized a Domestic Terrorism Executive Committee, which
shall meet on a regular basis, and not less regularly than 4
times each year, to coordinate with United States Attorneys
and other key public safety officials across the country to
promote information sharing and ensure an effective,
responsive, and organized joint effort to combat domestic
terrorism.
(d) Focus on Greatest Threats.--The domestic terrorism
offices authorized under paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of
subsection (a) shall focus their limited resources on the
most significant domestic terrorism threats, as determined by
the number of domestic terrorism-related incidents from each
category and subclassification in the joint report for the
preceding 6 months required under subsection (b).

SEC. 4. TRAINING TO COMBAT DOMESTIC TERRORISM.

(a) Required Training and Resources.--The Secretary, the
Attorney General, and the Director shall review the anti-
terrorism training and resource programs of their respective
agencies that are provided to Federal, State, local, and
Tribal law enforcement agencies, including the State and
Local Anti-Terrorism Program that is funded by the Bureau of
Justice Assistance of the Department of Justice, and ensure
that such programs include training and resources to assist
State, local, and Tribal law enforcement agencies in
understanding, detecting, deterring, and investigating acts
of domestic terrorism and White supremacist and neo-Nazi
infiltration of law enforcement and corrections agencies. The
Attorney General shall make training available to Department
prosecutors and to Assistant United States Attorneys on
countering and prosecuting domestic terrorism. The domestic-
terrorism training shall focus on the most significant
domestic terrorism threats, as determined by the quantitative
analysis in the joint report required under section 3(b).
(b) Requirement.--Any individual who provides domestic
terrorism training required under this section shall have--
(1) expertise in domestic terrorism; and
(2) relevant academic, law enforcement, or other community-
based experience in matters related to domestic terrorism.
(c) Report.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 6 months after the date of
enactment of this Act and twice each year thereafter, the
Secretary, the Attorney General, and the Director shall each
submit a biannual report to the committees of Congress
described in section 3(b)(1) on the domestic terrorism
training implemented by their respective agencies under this
section, which shall include copies of all training materials
used and the names and qualifications of the individuals who
provide the training.
(2) Classification and public release.--Each report
submitted under paragraph (1) shall--
(A) be unclassified, to the greatest extent possible, with
a classified annex only if necessary;
(B) in the case of the unclassified portion of each report,
be posted on the public website of the Department of Homeland
Security, the Department of Justice, and the Federal Bureau
of Investigation; and
(C) include the number of Federal incidents,
investigations, arrests, indictments, prosecutions, and
convictions with respect to a false report of domestic
terrorism or hate crime incident.

SEC. 5. INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE.

(a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Attorney General, the Director,
the Secretary, and the Secretary of Defense shall establish
an interagency task force to analyze and combat White
supremacist and neo-Nazi infiltration of the uniformed
services and Federal law enforcement agencies.
(b) Report.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the
interagency task force is established under subsection (a),
the Attorney General, the Secretary, and the Secretary of
Defense shall submit a joint report on the findings of the
task force and the response of the Attorney General, the
Secretary, and the Secretary of Defense to such findings,
to--
(A) the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate;
(B) the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs of the Senate;
(C) the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate;
(D) the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate;
(E) the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of
Representatives;
(F) the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives;
(G) the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the
House of Representatives; and
(H) the Committee on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives.
(2) Classification and public release.--The report
submitted under paragraph (1) shall be--
(A) submitted in unclassified form, to the greatest extent
possible, with a classified annex only if necessary; and
(B) in the case of the unclassified portion of the report,
posted on the public website of the Department of Defense,
the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of
Justice, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

[[Page H5145]]

SEC. 6. FEDERAL SUPPORT FOR ADDRESSING HATE CRIME INCIDENTS
WITH A NEXUS TO DOMESTIC TERRORISM.

(a) Community Relations Service.--The Community Relations
Service of the Department of Justice, authorized under
section 1001(a) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C.
2000g), may offer the support of the Service to communities
where the Department of Justice has brought charges in a hate
crime incident that has a nexus to domestic terrorism.
(b) Federal Bureau of Investigation.--Section 249 of title
18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(f) Federal Bureau of Investigation.--The Attorney
General, acting through the Director of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, shall assign a special agent or hate crimes
liaison to each field office of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation to investigate hate crimes incidents with a
nexus to domestic terrorism (as such term is defined in
section 2 of the Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of
2022).''.

SEC. 7. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.

Nothing in this Act, or any amendment made by this Act, may
be construed to authorize the infringement or violation of
any right protected under the First Amendment to the
Constitution of the United States or an applicable provision
of Federal law.

SEC. 8. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

There are authorized to be appropriated to the Department
of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the
Department of Homeland Security, and the Department of
Defense such sums as may be necessary to carry out this Act.

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
insert extraneous material on H.R. 350.
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, in 2018, a gunman shot and killed 11 worshippers
attending Shabbat services at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh.
In 2019, another gunman shot and killed 22 shoppers at an El Paso
Walmart. Over the weekend, yet another assailant allegedly shot and
killed 10 people at a supermarket in Buffalo, New York.
These are tragedies. I could cite many others. I could spend my time
here today talking about the scourge of gun violence, or the dramatic
rise in the number of hate crimes, or the obvious consequences of the
hate-filled rhetoric that fills our airways and has, sadly, been
adopted by some of our colleagues.
Instead, I will use my time to point out what these three cases have
in common: The gunman in each case was a White man, each angry about
so-called replacement theory, each traveling some distance to target a
minority community, each hoping to terrorize that community through
mass murder.
This is not right. This is not normal. This is not consistent with
who we are as a country. We must act. H.R. 350, the Domestic Terrorism
Prevention Act, which sits before us today, is the least we can do to
signal our opposition to white nationalism and this rising menace of
organized intolerance.
H.R. 350 creates three offices--one each within the Department of
Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, and the FBI--to monitor
and investigate cases of domestic terrorism.
These newly created offices would issue joint biannual reports to
Congress assessing the state of domestic terrorism threats, with a
specific focus on white supremacists, and would be required to focus
their resources based on the data collected and the most significant
threats.
Recent white supremacist attacks have reminded minority communities
across the country of a dark history we have not yet escaped. These
include the murder of six people of Asian descent at spas in Atlanta
last summer, five Jewish Americans being held hostage in their Texas
synagogue, numerous bomb threats phoned into historically Black
colleges and universities last February, and, of course, the violence
in Buffalo just days ago.
Because every part of the country deserves a responsive, well-trained
response to this kind of violence, H.R. 350 also requires DOJ and DHS
to provide training and resources to assist State and local law
enforcement agencies in understanding, detecting, and deterring acts of
domestic terrorism and violent white supremacy.
And because there should be no confusion that we are targeting
criminal activity, as opposed to the legitimate religious or political
activity of most citizens, the bill also includes an explicit
protection for First Amendment rights and other constitutionally
protected activity.
This legislation is a bipartisan solution to a serious and documented
problem facing our country. I thank Representative Brad Schneider for
all of his work in introducing it. The House stood together last
Congress to pass this legislation in a bipartisan fashion. I urge my
colleagues to do so once again, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I just want to read from the title of the bill.
``H.R. 350, 117th Congress, 2d Session. To authorize dedicated
domestic terrorism offices within the Department of Homeland Security,
the Department of Justice, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, to
analyze and monitor domestic terrorist activity and require the Federal
Government to take steps to prevent terrorism.''
Well, we already know what this looks like. We have already seen this
happen. The Department of Justice went after parents who showed up at
school board meetings to voice concerns about what was happening in
their child's school.

Never forget what they did. They put in place this apparatus to
report, to snitch, on parents.
The timeline here, I think, is so important. September 29, last fall,
the leftwing political organization National School Boards Association
writes a letter to the Biden administration asking exactly what this
bill does. It says: Use domestic terrorism/counterterrorism measures
against parents.
And guess what. Five days later, the Attorney General of the United
States writes a memorandum that does just that, again, what this bill
would codify and put into practice. He sends out a memo to every single
U.S. Attorney around the country. In that memo, he says: Set up a
dedicated line for threat reporting, a snitch line on parents.
And guess what happens after that. Sixteen days after that, the FBI
sends out an email to agents all across the country saying: When you
investigate these parents, when you are doing this, parents who
reported on the snitch line the Attorney General established, put this
designation, this threat tag label, on their name. All of that
happened, and we know it happened, because whistleblowers came forward
and told us about two dozen cases where this took place.
This bill is going to codify exactly what they have been doing. That
is why this bill is so harmful.
One of the situations, one of the cases, a mom who showed up at a
school board meeting was reported, and the person who filed the
complaint said: Well, she is in the group Moms for Liberty, and she
owned a firearm. Imagine that, a mom who cares about freedom and
actually exercises her Second Amendment liberties.
Now, what happened in Buffalo we know is as wrong as wrong can be,
but this legislation wouldn't prevent the terrible crime that took
place there. This bill is the same bad bill that Democrats pulled 2
weeks ago because a few of them actually had concerns about First
Amendment protected activity and what this legislation could do. Again,
specifically, it says it wants to create new offices to investigate
folks in our armed services, in our military, and in our law
enforcement for the possibility of infiltration by white nationalism.

{time} 1815

But, of course, it says nothing about threats from the left, threats
like antifa. We know what happened the summer of 2020. It says nothing
about that.
This bill is dangerous because we have already seen the weaponization
of government. We saw it in the IRS a few years ago. We have seen it in
the FBI,

[[Page H5146]]

as I just pointed out, most recently the Department of Justice working
with the FBI to go after parents. This bill formalizes what we have
already seen. That is why it is so dangerous.
I urge a ``no'' vote on the legislation, and I reserve the balance of
my time.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, the Anti-Defamation League reported after a
study last year that 80 percent of racist violence was from white
supremacists--80 percent. Mr. Jordan should take heed of that.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
Schneider), the sponsor of this bill.
Mr. SCHNEIDER. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise in support of H.R.
350, the Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2022. I thank the Speaker
of the House and House leadership for their support in taking action to
address the very real and present threat of domestic terrorism and,
specifically, racially motivated violent extremism.
I am grateful for the leadership of my colleague and friend,
Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, in helping to bring forth
this bill, and my fellow Illinoisan, Senator Dick Durbin, who has been
my partner in shepherding this legislation since 2017.
Our Nation is reeling. Just this weekend, in California, a true hero,
as well as being a father, husband, and physician, a true hero saved
countless lives by sacrificing himself to wrestle down a hate-driven
gunman inside a church. In Buffalo, 10 people were murdered by a
deranged white supremacist whose hate was fueled by the racist, anti-
Semitic great replacement conspiracy theory.
I can't go back in time and stop past events. There will be more
Buffalos; there will be more El Pasos; and there will be more Tree of
Life synagogue-type shootings. Though the shooters may have acted
alone, these tragedies past are a harbinger of what is to follow.
As Amy Spitalnick with Integrity First for America has put it, each
attack inspires the next one. Whether it is a live-streamed assault or
a screed posted on the dark web, the goal is not just to kill fellow
Americans but to inspire like-minded haters to act in kind.
We cannot sit idly by while domestic violence extremism spreads
across our country. We must give Federal law enforcement the resources
and the tools they need to actively identify threats and to
preemptively act to stop violence before it happens.
To my colleagues considering voting against this bill, especially
those who supported this very same legislation in the last Congress, I
ask them: If not this bill, then what? And if not now, then when?
Their inaction only gives cover to the next domestic terrorist
planning an attack.
Let me be clear: This legislation does not create any new statute or
establish any new penalties. It doesn't threaten civil liberties. In
fact, it further protects First Amendment rights, and it helps the FBI,
DOJ, and DHS do their job.
In testimony this February before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on
Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security, Seth Jones of CSIS noted there
were 73 terrorist plots and attacks in the U.S. just last year,
spanning 18 States and the District of Columbia. He stated:
``Government, military, and police locations and personnel were the
most frequently targeted by domestic terrorist attacks regardless of
perpetrator orientation.''
He continued: ``These perpetrators identified with a range of
ideologies and movements, including the QAnon conspiracy, the sovereign
citizen movement, militia groups, anarchism, antifascism,
environmentalism, and other antigovernment and antiauthority
philosophies.''
And he continued: ``In addition, white supremacists and other like-
minded extremists have targeted individuals because of their racial,
ethnic, religious, or political makeup, such as African Americans,
immigrants, Muslims, and Jews.''
FBI Director Christopher Wray, in testimony before the Senate last
year, stated that: ``The top threat we face from DVEs,'' domestic
violent extremists, ``continues to be those we identify as racially or
ethnically motivated violent extremists, RMVEs, specifically those who
advocate for the superiority of the White race, and who were the
primary source of ideologically motivated lethal incidents and violence
in 2018 and 2019.''
Mr. Speaker, the Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act we are voting on
today is the right bill for this specific moment. The threat is real.
It is growing, and if we don't act, more people--people praying in
their houses of worship, children playing in their schoolyards, police
officers serving in our communities--will die.
We must pass this bill because the American people deserve to feel
secure in their schools, in their supermarkets, and in their churches,
synagogues, temples, and mosques.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, we don't give cover to anything. White nationalism is
wrong. We have always said so. Everyone knows that.
But I tell you who does give cover, when the chairman of the
Judiciary Committee says that antifa is a myth, that is giving cover.
That is a statement made by the chairman of the House Judiciary
Committee after we had testimony from FBI Director Wray talking about
the dangers of antifa, after Attorney General Barr told us that antifa
was involved in instigating and participating in violent activity. Talk
about giving cover. Give me a break.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr.
Gaetz), my friend and colleague.
Mr. GAETZ. Mr. Speaker, this bill is ostensibly to fight extremism,
which wouldn't be so objectionable if the people it empowered weren't
so damn extreme.

They are so extreme, they would chill speech at school board meetings
by targeting parents as domestic terrorists. Obey, accept the mandates,
accept the requirements, the CRT, or you will be punished at the hands
of your own government.
They are so extreme, they would leak a Supreme Court draft opinion so
that they could gaslight violence and intimidation against the Court,
all so that the law would abandon those unborn lives and beating
hearts.
They are so extreme, they would weaponize the Department of Justice
against a sitting President over an election that Hillary Clinton lost.
It was the Russians, they told us, and we were extreme if we said it
was them all along. Now we know it was.
The last press secretary thought that COVID discussions on Facebook,
rooted in science, were so extreme that Mark Zuckerberg had to
deplatform these people, take them away from the digital world. This
press secretary wrongly tweeted that FOX News is racist. I wonder if
she thinks all of FOX's viewers are dangers to the American people.
Are you a domestic extremist? This bill is about whether or not you
want the Department of Homeland Security looking over your shoulder at
the shows you watch, the websites you visit, some politically incorrect
meme you liked, some joke you forwarded, and any bad association you
might have had. If you are not a racist, maybe your neighbor is, and
you weren't antiracist enough to disallow it.
These things aren't criminal, of course. They are bad politics, at
worst, in most cases, which is exactly the point of this bill. They are
trying to deploy criminal, even antiterrorism, authorities against what
they deem is bad politics.
How long until mainstream Christianity is deemed domestic extremism?
All the domestic extremists, they declare their pronouns. So if you
don't declare your pronouns, maybe you are a domestic extremist, too.
Under this bill, how long until Facebook jail means a government file
on you, a higher interest rate on your home loan, or your spouse fired
from their job?
At first, I was a critic of the disinformation board, but it might go
down as one of the most efficient government entities in all of
history. It took only one action, and it actually shut down
disinformation by pausing its own activities.
The worst part of this bill is how it puts a target on the back of
every one of our military servicemembers. This bill will sic the FBI on
our military, not to prevent or investigate crimes, but to prosecute
thought crimes.
The problem with our military is wokeness at the Pentagon, not white

[[Page H5147]]

supremacy in the ranks. Even the much-maligned Lloyd Austin admitted
that 99 percent are doing the right thing. A recent DOD report showed
that less than 100 people in the force of 2 million were problematic in
any way.
We seem so intent on a neo-Nazi witch hunt in our own battalions
while we freely send $40 billion, much of which will end up in the
hands of the Azov Battalion, without much inquiry.
I am sincerely worried about domestic extremism, but from my vantage
point, it is coming from America's political left. You should really
think about that, how domestic extremism is truly in the eye of the
beholder, perhaps the beholder of power, and power is about to change
hands. Who will be the domestic extremists then?
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I don't understand how you can look at the
devastation in Buffalo and the manifesto left behind by the terrorist
and not take this issue seriously.
I now yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from South
Carolina (Mr. Clyburn), the whip.
Mr. CLYBURN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the
Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act.
It is heartbreaking to stand here today, just days after 10 innocent
lives were taken in a Buffalo, New York, grocery store by a gunman
espousing white supremacist views and hatred toward African Americans.
This devastating massacre took me back to June 17, 2015, when another
white supremacist gunned down nine parishioners at Charleston's
historic Emanuel AME Church.
In the intervening years, we have witnessed far too many other acts
of domestic terrorism: from a counterprotest in Charlottesville,
Virginia; to a synagogue in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; to a Walmart in
El Paso, Texas; to a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wisconsin; and to an
Asian-owned nail salon in Atlanta, Georgia. All told, over 200 mass
shootings this year.
To be sure, all of these shootings have not been racially motivated
or motivated by hate, but all of them share one thing in common: They
have been committed in a country too tolerant of irresponsible
regulations of weapons of war and a proliferation of firearms of mass
destruction.
This legislation is long overdue. It would enable the Justice
Department, the Department of Homeland Security, and the FBI to
prevent, investigate, and prosecute cases of domestic terrorism more
effectively.
I, and many others in this body, know what it is to experience acts
of racial hatred and witness events of domestic terrorism. We cannot
continue to turn a blind eye to white supremacist vigilantes.
It impacts all of us. While the gunman in Buffalo was aiming for
people who looked like me, others who did not look like me fell victim
to his evil act.
Shortly after my first meeting with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., back
in 1960, I met with one of my professors, Mrs. Rosa Harris, to share
the Saul to Paul transformation I was experiencing. Two days later,
Mrs. Harris handed me a copy of Dr. King's 1958 book, ``Stride Toward
Freedom.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the
gentleman from South Carolina.
Mr. CLYBURN. To share one passage from that book, I quote, ``True
peace is not merely the absence of tension; it is the presence of
justice.''
Mr. Speaker, this legislation will provide Federal agencies with
necessary tools to ensure that peace and justice prevail. I urge a
``yes'' vote from all Members of this august body.

{time} 1830

Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman
from Georgia (Mrs. Greene).
Mrs. GREENE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this
bill.
I find it shocking to hear language coming from my colleagues across
the aisle accusing Republicans of the horrific shooting in Buffalo,
when in fact, the shooter's manifesto itself stated he acted as a lone
wolf. No Republican had anything to do with that.
I also find it shocking to hear these accusations coming from the
party that supported BLM riots that caused over $2 billion in damages
in cities and communities across the country.
Now, when we are talking about identity politics, we should remind
one another that there were 6 people murdered and 62 others injured by
a Black American who drove his car through a Christmas parade in
Waukesha. There was also a Black American that shot and injured 23
people on a New York City subway. I am not hearing any of those
examples as domestic terrorism from my colleagues across the aisle, and
I don't understand why. I think these acts should be blamed on the
people that are doing them, not on people's identity and their skin
color.
Another thing that is wrong with this bill is it provides unlimited
money to profile Americans that the Department of Justice says are
white supremacists. That is why Democrats want to pursue every single
conservative in America, simply because they want to choose who is a
white supremacist and not.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the
gentlewoman.
Mrs. GREENE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, the Speaker, herself, has called
Republicans enemies of the State.
If the Speaker does not like Republicans' politics and considers us
enemies of the State, we all know what domestic terrorists will mean to
Democrats. That will mean anyone who stands in their way in their
lustful quest for power. This would be parents that are trying to hold
people accountable with their tax dollars for how their children are
taught, or anyone else that they want to blame for something they want
to use for politics.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline), a member of the Committee on the
Judiciary.
Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Domestic
Terrorism Prevention Act of 2021.
We are at an important crossroads in this country. With white
supremacy on the rise and violent extremists fueling each other's
bigotry and hate, we are seeing an alarming increase in domestic
terrorism fueled by this hatred.
A recent analysis from the Center for Strategic and International
Studies showed that in 2020, domestic terrorism in America was at its
highest level since information started being collected nearly 30 years
ago.
In 2019, Michael McGarrity, Assistant Director for the
Counterterrorism Division of the FBI stated that, ``racially motivated
violent extremists are responsible for the majority of lethal attacks
and fatalities perpetrated by domestic terrorists since 2000.''
Mr. Speaker, we are talking about the safety and security of every
American, and the targeting of already marginalized groups.
We also witnessed this just days ago in Buffalo, when a self-
proclaimed white supremacist, fascist, and anti-Semite targeted the
Black community, murdering ten victims in a supermarket.
We saw this last year in Atlanta when a gunman attacked Asian women
in spas.
We saw it in the bomb threats at HBCUs and Jewish synagogues, and as
terrorists have attacked Black churches, synagogues, and Sikh temples.
We keep seeing it over and over again. Congress needs to act.
We can start today by passing the bipartisan Domestic Terrorism
Prevention Act. This legislation will create offices at the DOJ, FBI,
and DHS to monitor, investigate, and prosecute cases of domestic
terrorism, a long-overdue update to not only help prevent these
horrific crimes, but to also bring perpetrators to justice.
This bill would also improve and streamline information-sharing and
training systems between different law enforcement agencies, including
at the local and State level, to better our understanding of and
response to incidents of domestic terrorism and white supremacy.
And finally, it would establish an interagency task force to combat
white supremacist infiltration of our military and Federal law
enforcement--a terrifying trend that we need to combat now before it
gets any worse.
I thank Representative Schneider for introducing this desperately
needed legislation. I am proud to be an original cosponsor. I thank
Chairman Nadler for his leadership, and I urge all

[[Page H5148]]

my colleagues to support this important bill. It should be a strong
bipartisan vote. Say ``no'' to white supremacy and domestic terrorism
in America.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Roy).
Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Ohio for yielding.
Here we sit on the floor of the House of Representatives, and we are
talking about allegedly crime. But we are not talking about, of the
17,000 homicides last year, the 800 homicides in Chicago, the 562
homicides in Philadelphia, the 89 homicides in Austin, Texas--blowing
away the former record of 59 homicides. In the 12 major cities that
broke their homicide records in 2021, all have Democratic mayors.
We are seeing it across the country. We are seeing the absolute
destruction of law and order across the United States of America
through the defunding of police, through the attack on police, as we
sit here on National Police Week, undermining the ability to prosecute
bad guys.

Nobody in this Chamber would say we shouldn't prosecute bad guys. As
a former Federal prosecutor, sign me up. Let's prosecute bad guys. I am
all for it.
But we understand what this is actually about. We understand what
propping up a domestic terrorism unit in this FBI, in this
administration's Federal Government, what it is all about because we
saw it in naked display last fall.
We see, through all of the information we are getting from
whistleblowers, we see it in the information that we are getting on
tags targeting parents. We see it in the empowerment of the FBI to
focus and target parents in collusion with the National Association of
School Boards, in active coordination with the National Association of
School Boards, we are seeing the targeting of parents.
And this isn't made up. Scott Smith is an actual father. He is an
actual man in Loudoun County, Virginia, who had his face put up as the
poster child for an extremist activity by the FBI to target parents in
coordination with that National Association of School Boards.
If you go back and look at the video and you hear Scott Smith's wife
crying that her husband was being targeted, her husband was being
targeted in the school board meeting because he dared to question the
school board when his daughter had been sexually assaulted in a
bathroom at a school he pays taxes for her to attend.
And then this administration had the audacity to make him the poster
child to target parents with the power of the FBI. We know this
happened. We got the information from the school board association. We
got the whistleblower's account of the tags being used by the FBI to do
it.
So as my colleague from Florida pointed out about what this is really
about, it is about empowerment of the Federal bureaucracy to target
Americans. That is what it is about. It is questioning that you don't
think right. It is the extension of thought crimes that is pervasive in
this body that will allow the government to target us for what we
believe, inherently undermining our fundamental rights as Americans to
free speech, to freedom of association, to be able to engage, to be
able to talk with each other without having our government target us.
If a bad actor carries out bad acts, prosecute him, prosecute her.
But you have to do that with police that are funded. You have to do it
with district attorneys who will prosecute the crimes. And you have to
be honest about saying we need to target criminals for criminal acts
and not thought crimes. This is nothing more than empowering the
Federal Government to police thought and speech in the United States of
America, and we should oppose it roundly.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, my colleagues across the aisle seem to want
to talk about everything but the subject matter of this bill, domestic
terrorism.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from
North Carolina (Ms. Manning), to talk about domestic terrorism.
Ms. MANNING. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Domestic
Terrorism Prevention Act. Over the weekend, we witnessed one of the
deadliest racial attacks in recent memory. A man consumed by hateful
conspiracy theories targeted the Black community in Buffalo, killing
ten innocent people in a grocery store.
He posted a manifesto that was filled with hateful conspiracies and
anti-Semitic propaganda, including the racist great replacement
conspiracy theory promoted by white supremacists. White supremacy and
anti-Semitism are poison to our society.
Today, with these forces on the rise, they are turbocharged by social
media which spreads these dangerous ideologies to more people around
the world, creating a toxic blend of misinformation and hate.
We can't afford to look the other way when individuals are inspired
by hateful ideologies to attack our fellow Americans. That is why we
must immediately pass the Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act to empower
our government to confront the threat of domestic violent extremism
head-on.
I thank my friend, Representative Schneider, for his tenacity in
pursuing this important bill, which I am proud to cosponsor.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this
critical legislation to combat anti-Semitism, white supremacy, and all
forms of hateful violence which threaten all of our communities.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Clyde).
Mr. CLYDE. Mr. Speaker, the Democrats' so-called Domestic Terrorism
Prevention Act opens the door for the Biden administration to continue
its assault on Americans' protected political speech.
Since President Biden stepped foot into the White House, he has
blatantly targeted conservatives for exercising their First Amendment
rights. Whether it is labeling parents protesting COVID-19 mandates and
racist curriculum in schools as domestic terrorists, holding nonviolent
January 6 protestors in pretrial detention for over a year, or creating
a radical ministry of truth to monitor supposed disinformation, the
Biden administration has repeatedly taken aim at political dissent from
the right.
And while the Disinformation Governance Board is reportedly paused--
what a hallelujah moment for the Constitution--just the idea alone that
the Biden administration would institute such a board under the
Department of Homeland Security should concern every solitary American
citizen. And keep in mind that this administration has completely
ignored the legitimate threats posed by dangerous extremist groups,
such as Antifa on the left.
Just this week, Biden's Department of Homeland Security claimed law
enforcement agencies are investigating violent threats by pro-abortion
extremists threatening to murder Supreme Court Justices or burn down
the Supreme Court building--but added, ``. . . generalized philosophic
embrace of violent tactics does not constitute domestic violent
extremism or illegal activity. . . .''

Really? Hey, DHS, why don't you apply the same standard to January 6
protestors? The glaring hypocrisy is blinding.
Make no mistake, this legislation is a blatant attempt to further
transform the Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security
into political weapons, greenlighting additional abuse by the Biden
administration against the American people.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to vote against H.R. 350, and
thereby protect Americans' First Amendment rights and block the Biden
administration from targeting, monitoring, and labeling Americans they
fundamentally disagree with as domestic terrorists.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the distinguished majority leader of the House.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, before I start making my remarks, the gentleman who just
spoke is a member of the Republican Party. The Republican National
Committee passed a resolution telling the American people--and they
passed it overwhelmingly--that what they saw on January 6 was
legitimate political discourse.
A couple of law enforcement officers lost their lives, people were
injured,

[[Page H5149]]

people in the hallways yelling to hang the Vice President of the United
States and to kill the Speaker of the House.
Legitimate political discourse.

{time} 1845

Mr. JORDAN. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, is it legitimate political discourse what is
going on in front of the Supreme Court Justices' homes all last week,
maybe even as we speak? Was it legitimate political discourse what took
place over 100 days straight in Portland, Oregon, where antifa attacked
a Federal court building? Was that legitimate political discourse as
well?
Mr. HOYER. It was not, when they attacked anything.
You ought to visit the Speaker's home. She has protestors in front of
her home all the time. All the time, Mr. Speaker.
Legitimate political discourse is demonstration; it is speaking out.
And as a matter of fact, as the gentleman knows, we had this bill that
raised questions by those very concerned--meaning all of us--about the
legitimate exercising of First Amendment rights by all Americans; left,
right, and in between. The fact of the matter is that we worked hard to
make sure that what the gentleman who previously spoke asserted is not
true.
Secondly, Mr. Speaker, I will guarantee you that our side of the
aisle does not condone violence by either the left or the right.
Violence in and of itself should be rejected.
Now, Mr. Speaker, on January 6 we saw what happens when extremist
ideology disseminated online, in the media, and even by elected
officials is allowed to fester into violent action. And I repeat,
whether that happens from the right or the left is irrelevant. What is
relevant is the violence and the danger that it presents to individuals
as well as to property, I would tell my friend from Ohio.
Mr. Speaker, we see far too much these days of ideology being
transformed into violence, which is never acceptable and must not be
met with silence or acquiescence, or--I would tell the gentleman from
Ohio--rationalization.
Legitimate political discourse on January 6. Absurd.
In recent days, Mr. Speaker, we have watched families mourn those
killed in horrific acts of hatred in Buffalo, New York, where someone
who espoused white supremacy committed a mass shooting targeting
African Americans.
We have also seen this terror in places like Atlanta and Laguna
Woods, California, where members of the Asian-American community were
targeted with deadly violence. We saw it in El Paso in 2019 against the
Latino community and in Pittsburgh in 2018 against Jewish Americans.
This resolution does not condemn extremism on the right or the left.
It condemns extremism which leads to violence against people on the
right or people on the left or people who are neither right nor left
and are not politically identified as such.
Indeed, in the aftermath of these events, and particularly this week,
Americans have been learning more about the kind of violence-promoting
and twisted ideologies of hate that pose a clear and present danger to
our democracy, to the safety of our communities, and to the social
fabric of our country.
I condemn violence from the left, from the middle, and from the
right. And I would hope my colleagues on the other side of the aisle
would condemn, as vigorously, violence from whichever quarter it is
proposed. One of the worst of these, which is known as the ``great
replacement theory,'' is no more than a centuries-old form of prejudice
and bigotry which holds that minorities are conspiring to replace White
people.
This vile and false narrative is, sadly, not restricted to the dark
and distant corners of the internet where extremists lurk. It has found
a foothold in mass media and, shockingly, even among elected officials
and Representatives in this House.
Many in this House who have had the opportunity to condemn this
theory and those who espouse it have chosen silence. That kind of
silence, Mr. Speaker. Many in this House condemn violence from
whichever source, as I just said.
It is from that same kind of silence that the seeds of
dehumanization, persecution, and horrific violence were planted in
Germany in the 1930s. We know where that kind of rhetoric leads, and we
must not allow our Nation to go down that path.
This is one of the most pernicious forms of hatred that fuels
domestic terrorism in our day. It is incumbent upon us as the
Representatives of the American people and the guardians of our
democracy to ensure that those who espouse violent, extremist views
have no place in our government, our military, or any position of
public trust.
We have seen published by Members of this House images of violence,
of threats, of killings of one of our Members.
Hopefully, this bipartisan legislation will do that and will also
equip law enforcement with the tools needed to identify and stop
domestic terrorists--the head of the FBI says that our greatest danger
in America today is domestic terrorism, the head of the FBI--including
white supremacists, neo-Nazis, and other racially motivated extremists;
and do so proactively.
So everybody on this floor knows, I condemn unequivocally, of
whatever ideological bent there is, people using violence to promote
their political ideas, left or right.
This legislation also commissions numerous reports on the rising
threat to domestic extremism that will help guide future policymaking
on this issue.
Mr. Speaker, to stop these purveyors of evil from tearing our country
apart, we must act decisively, and we must act now.
I thank Representative Brad Schneider and Chairman Jerry Nadler for
their leadership on this very important issue.
I know, as I believe every Member of this House knows, that extremist
violence can reach anyone, anytime, anywhere, whether it be a place of
worship, a grocery store, or as we learned last year, this very Hall.

That is why, Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues of whatever
political persuasion--this does not adopt a political persuasion, but
it adopts the premise that the use of violence and hate and bigotry
should be shunned by all of us.
Our Constitution provides protection for almost any speech that one
can pursue--almost. Not all, if we place others in danger. Not all, but
almost any speech you can give. We are unique in the world in that
regard. We protect that, and we call it the First Amendment, one of our
most important amendments. It makes our country what it has been: a
free and open Nation for discussion and debate. It must not devolve
into the use of violence, the result of death, and the tearing apart of
our Nation.
Mr. Speaker, I urge each Member to support that premise and support
this resolution.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, the majority leader of the House just said
we don't condone violence by anyone. That statement is just not
accurate.
The entire summer of 2020, folks in the Democratic Party said rioters
and looters were peaceful protestors. Republicans have condemned
violence every time it happened. When it happened on January 6, we said
it was wrong. When it happened in the summer of 2020, we said it was
wrong, but they didn't.
The Democratic chair of the Financial Services Committee said to the
rioters and looters that summer ``get more confrontational.'' The Vice
President of the United States supported the effort to raise money to
bail those rioters and looters out of jail.
We should condemn all violence, and we should prosecute people who
commit crimes. We shouldn't be raising bail money to get them out of
jail, and we shouldn't be encouraging with the comments people make as
happened all that summer from the Democrats and from the left.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Texas (Ms. Escobar), a member of the Judiciary Committee.
Ms. ESCOBAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 350,
the Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act.
Here we are again, reeling from another horrific domestic terrorist
attack. This week a racially motivated

[[Page H5150]]

shooting in Buffalo, New York, perpetrated by an avowed white
supremacist.
In 2018, it was the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh. In April of
2019, it was a synagogue in Poway, California. On August 3, 2019, it
was my community of El Paso, Texas.
After every attack on minority communities by radicalized and heavily
armed young men who have embraced white supremacy, our media and even
some of our colleagues, leaders in this country, refuse to call this
violence what it is: domestic terrorism.
H.R. 350 calls on the Department of Justice and the Department of
Homeland Security to dedicate resources specifically to track and
combat the growing threat of white supremacy and neo-Nazism in the
United States.
H.R. 350 will give communities like mine a fighting chance the next
time an angry racist shares a deranged screed online and decides to
drive hours to attack vulnerable and innocent people at our grocery
stores or our houses of worship.
The Anti-Defamation League has tracked 450 murders over the last
decade committed by these terrorists. Rightwing extremists are
responsible for over 75 percent of these horrific attacks, and 50
percent of these horrific attacks are by white supremacists.
Mr. Speaker, America has a racism problem. America has a hate
problem. America has a domestic terrorism problem. We must address it.
The Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act is a crucial step in the right
direction.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina
(Mr. Bishop) to control the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from North Carolina (Mr.
Bishop) will control the time.
Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, this bill, or a bill
substantially like it, has come up before, and it enjoyed substantial
bipartisan support, and now that has changed. Why is that? It is
because it has become evident that the majority seeks, for political
reasons, to conflate the extraordinarily serious issue of domestic
terrorism with half of the country with their political opposition.
It is evident that the administration has pursued a concocted attack
on the credibility on the First Amendment activity of parents who were
engaging in First Amendment-protected activism in school boards. The
administration has engaged in a deceitful refusal to account for that
activity, and whistleblower accounts have now revealed that, indeed,
FBI agents went to interrogate parents over their activism.
When Members of the majority recite events in every one of their
comments today, they are selective and mischaracterized.

{time} 1900

They do not mention the Brooklyn subway shooter. They do not mention
the Wisconsin fire bombing. They do not mention Waukesha, Wisconsin.
They do not mention Boulder, Colorado. Why do they not? Why is it so
consistent that those are not mentioned?
It is exactly the same issue in which there is always a focus on a
particular type of hate--white supremacy. Let me tell you something. I
have no hesitancy to say that the twisted butcher in Buffalo, New York,
was a white supremacist. More than that, it is evident that he was
mentally ill.
That does not mean that Republicans writ large are domestic
terrorists or white supremacists. It is a smear, and it is deliberate.
Worst of all, this preoccupation, to the exclusion of all else, that
smears the right, smears people center right, as racists, white
supremacists, is a device, a demagogic device to distract from abysmal
policy disasters led and created by advocacy and policy of Democrats.
The defund police debacle that led to a 30 percent increase in
homicides--not as tragic as 10 or 20 killings of people by domestic
terrorists on occasions--but 5,000 additional homicides a year. Do you
know what? Sixty-five percent of those are suffered by Black Americans.
There were 3,250 additional killings in 2020 and more in 2021.
The abandonment of the southern border that has resulted in a flood
of fentanyl into the country so that you see mass killings by exposure
to drugs laced with fentanyl; poison coming in and killing. The figure
of 100,000, they tell me, is not current. It is not even getting at the
essence of the problem.
Under those circumstances, and having committed that sort of policy
malpractice upon the American people with those abysmal results,
Democrats would bring a partisan bill to the floor and conflate the
egregious evil of domestic terrorism with some kind of a political
smear of your political opposition. What would it take to do that?
This bill should be bipartisan because it is promoted, it is brought,
it is worked out with the political opposition. This problem is too
significant to be cheapened as a political stunt.
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. BISHOP of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time
as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, it is hard to overstate how concerning the problem is
that has so invaded our politics. We have seen in so many ways
institutional norms be trampled underfoot in this Congress. The metal
detectors at the door are one example, but they go on and on and on.
The hearing in the Judiciary Committee today aimed at intimidating
the United States Supreme Court while it is in the midst of a
particular decision is another one. Concepts about packing the Court,
ideas by Democrats to pack the Court by the chairman of the Judiciary
Committee, and they go on and on and on. This one might be the worst.
You wonder what in the world the majority may be thinking to turn the
issue of terrorism--any form of terrorism--into a partisan cudgel. It
is beyond belief. If this issue returned to a nonpartisan posture, you
would find that Republicans would be pleased to join it. It has been
grossly distorted and turned into a political weapon that should never
happen. It should never happen in this country. It should never happen
in this Congress. This bill should be defeated.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, the problem is not that the Republican Party is
racist, except the Republican Party won't call out the racists in its
midst. They won't call the insurrection on January 6 of last year what
it is: an insurrection. They call it legitimate public discourse.
It is not legitimate public discourse when police officers are
attacked, when the Members of this House are attacked, when the Members
of the Senate are attacked. That is domestic terrorism.
Madam Speaker, too many Americans have felt the pain and horror of
domestic terrorism striking in their communities. Many of these attacks
are fueled by white supremacy and hatred targeted at racial and ethnic
minorities. We cannot bury our heads in the sand and pretend that this
problem does not exist. We must confront this challenge head on.
That is why I strongly support the Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act,
which would identify the greatest domestic terror threats and would
concentrate law enforcement resources to addressing those threats.
I appreciated the Republicans supporting this last year. Why they
won't support this--because they decided that terrorism doesn't have to
be addressed--I don't know. That is terrible.
Madam Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support this important
legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 350, the
``Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2022.'' I am proudly supporting
this critical measure and encourage my colleagues to do so, as well.
On this past Saturday, 13 people were shot and 10 were killed going
about their daily lives at a supermarket in Buffalo, New York.
of those lost souls were Black.
We know from the racist, xenophobic screeds posted online by the
perpetrator of this attack that this particular supermarket was
targeted because it was located in a predominantly Black residential
neighborhood.
Then, on Sunday, one person was killed and four people were
critically injured at a church in Laguna Woods, California. It appears
this attack was motivated by political hatred directed at the Taiwanese
community.

[[Page H5151]]

We must respond to these brazen attacks because this country--our
country--cannot continue down this hateful pathway.
H.R. 350, the bipartisan Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act, of which
I am a cosponsor, will strengthen the federal government's efforts to
respond to domestic terrorism, focusing primarily on the threat of
white supremacy.
It is a necessary response to the elevated threat of violence posed
by domestic violent extremists, as declared by the FBI--which we must
not allow to continue.
Each component of this bill has been carefully tailored to address
the inadequacies of our current approach to fighting domestic terrorism
and white supremacy.
First, it would authorize the creation of dedicated offices within
the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, and the
FBI to analyze, investigate, monitor, and prosecute domestic terrorism
jointly; promote information sharing among federal law enforcement
agencies; and take preventative measures, focusing federal resources on
the most significant threats based on the data collected.
Second, DOJ, FBI, and DHS would be required to provide critical
training and resources to help state, local, and tribal law enforcement
agencies focus on understanding, detecting, preventing, and preempting
domestic terrorism.
Third, the bill would also require establishment of an interagency
task force to address the chronic infiltration of Federal law
enforcement agencies and the military by white supremacists and neo-
Nazis and biannual reporting on the state of domestic terrorism
threats.
Fourth, this bill does not create new criminal offenses, new lists of
designated domestic terrorist groups, or new investigative powers for
law enforcement.
And because the fight against terrorism should not encroach upon
Constitutional protections, the bill makes clear that no provisions
shall be construed to infringe upon rights protected by the First
Amendment and requires that each report must include a certification
that all civil rights and civil liberties laws and regulations were
followed when conducting assessments and investigations.
We must better equip law enforcement in all communities, on the local
and federal level, to collaborate effectively to identify domestic
terror threats and thwart these cowardly attacks before they happen.
In the last decade, every ethnic group in the United States has been
touched by the increase in domestic terrorism.
These tragedies and their circumstances are all too familiar--the
shooting spree at a Walmart in El Paso, Texas which left twenty-two
dead and twenty-four injured; the rampage at Pittsburgh's Tree of Life
synagogue where eleven people were killed; the racist attack on the
Sikh Temple of Wisconsin which left six people dead; the brutal murder
of nine worshippers at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church
in Charleston, South Carolina; three Muslim college students executed
in Chapel Hill, North Carolina supposedly over parking but tinged with
hostility for the young people's ``look''; the spa shooter in Atlanta
who killed eight people, including six women of Asian descent; and bomb
threats repeatedly called into historically black colleges,
universities, and places of worship during Black History Month this
year.
This bill addresses a real problem that we can no longer ignore.
Thoughts and prayers are not enough. It is time we do more to help root
out domestic terrorism and white supremacy.
I would like to thank Representative Brad Schneider for his
dedication to crafting this bill in a thoughtful, responsive manner.
I urge all members on both sides of the aisle to support this
important legislation just as they did last Congress.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R.
350--Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2022, a bill that will
counter domestic terrorism.
I am a cosponsor of H.R. 350, and I thank Chairman Thompson for his
leadership of the Committee on Homeland Security and his efforts to
prioritize the issue of domestic terrorism.
H.R. 350 would authorize a dedicated domestic terrorism office within
the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) responsible for identifying
and analyzing domestic terrorism activity in keeping with existing
authorities and would codify in statute the establishment of dedicated
offices within the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau
of Investigation (FBI) to investigate and prosecute domestic terrorism.
Domestic terrorism has posed a growing threat over the past decade.
FBI Director Wray, when testifying before the House Committees on
Homeland Security and Judiciary warned about this escalating threat,
including in congressional testimony.
In 2017, Director Wray characterized domestic terrorism as a ``very
serious'' issue and noted that the FBI had approximately 1,000 open
domestic terrorism investigations, approximately the same as the number
of FBI's investigations into U.S.-based individuals inspired by foreign
terrorist organizations.
In 2018, Director Wray warned that ``law enforcement, racial
minorities, and the U.S. Government will continue to be significant
targets for many domestic extremist movements.''
In 2021, Director Wray stated that the domestic terrorism threat is
``metastasizing across the country.''
In response to the Biden Administration's direction to produce a
comprehensive assessment of domestic terrorism threats, the
Intelligence Community and law enforcement concluded in March 2021 that
domestic violent extremists ``pose an elevated threat to the
Homeland.''
No matter what other challenges might emerge we must never forget
that one of our nation's greatest threats comes from our struggle
against violent extremism that began on September 11, 2001 and has
extended to violent extremist living among us who use political
affiliation as a justification for acts of terror.
September 11, 2001 remains a tragedy that defines our nation's
history, but the final chapter will be written by those who are charged
with keeping our nation and its people safe while preserving the way of
life that terrorists sought to change.
I was at the September 11, 2021 commemoration held in New York last
year and reflected on the twenty years since that day of the attacks.
Since September 11, 2001, it has been a priority of this nation to
prevent terrorists, or those who would do American's harm, from
boarding flights whether they are domestic or international.
Over the nearly twenty years since enactment of the Homeland Security
Act, the mission of the Department of Homeland Security has expanded to
include cyber defense of civilian agency and private sector networks;
protecting critical infrastructure in the form of the nation's electric
grid, water delivery systems, transportation networks and federal
election systems; and most recently managing the question of essential
workers during this pandemic.
Annually the Committee on Homeland Security has held a hearing on the
topic of Worldwide Threats to Homeland Security, which have covered a
range of topics from terrorist organizations like Al Qaeda and ISIS, to
home grown involving Lone Wolves and White Supremacists.
The mission of the Committee on Homeland Security has been and will
continue to be on the nearly 3,000 people who died on September 11,
2001, and whom we owe a debt to do all that we can to prevent another
attack on United States soil.
The escalation in violent domestic attacks since the January 6 attack
has particularly been felt by our nation's law enforcement officers,
but others as well in the rise in murder and assaults across the
nation.
Today, we find ourselves in a nation where the terrorism landscape is
more complex and it is imperative that we recognize the unorthodox
nature of the terrorism threat we face today.
The current terrorism threat landscape has three major drivers of
heightened threat:
(1) the convergence of extremist ideologies;
(2) the speed at which individuals who ascribe to extremist
ideologies escalate to violence;
(3) and the enormous growth of misinformation, disinformation, and
mal-information.
The fringe ideologies that have adherents that move from group to
group complicates the work of counterterrorism investigations,
operations, and policy making because the focus would be on means and
methods, understanding the hagiarchy of an organization, then moving to
nullify threats before they manifest into acts of physical violence.
Research shows that ``over the past roughly 15 years, the average
time span of radicalization in the U.S. has shrunk from 18 months to 7
months.''
As Director Wray said in a hearing before the Committee in September
2020, domestic violent extremists ``can go from radicalization to
mobilization in weeks, if not days.''
The speed and ease of the proliferation of misinformation,
disinformation mal-information is unprecedented joined with the mass
invitation to willing minds to commit acts of violence based on
information is unprecedented.
Misinformation, disinformation, and mal-information proliferate on
the internet and build bridges between conspiracy theory and violent
extremism.
According to research by the Soufan Group, ``algorithms employed by
social media companies to generate continued engagement with platforms
are partly responsible for radicalizing individuals to support QAnon,''
with anti-Semitism serving as a bridge between QAnon and white
supremacy extremism.
The non-profit research group Tech Against Terrorism issued a report
finding that ``terrorist

[[Page H5152]]

and violent extremist operated websites from across the ideological
spectrum . . . pose one of the most significant threats to global
efforts in tackling terrorist use of the internet by governments, the
tech sector, law enforcement and NGOs.
While mis-, dis-, or mal-information may not in and of itself
constitute terrorist content, conspiracy theories in such information
may propel terrorists and violent extremists to action.
Misinformation, disinformation, and mal-information undermine
homeland security and law enforcement efforts to combat violent
extremism.
Misinformation and false narratives in political discourse, news
media, and online have increased support for political violence.
The availability of extremist content online means that today,
``everyone is just a few clicks away from an ever-expanding series of
rabbit holes that offer up whole worlds of disinformation and hate.''
In January 2021, President Biden initiated a 100-day comprehensive
review of Federal efforts to address domestic terrorism.
The review found that racially or ethnically motivated violent
extremists who advocate for the superiority of the white race and anti-
government or anti-authority violent extremists are the two most lethal
elements of today's terrorism threat, and as a result of that review,
in June 2021 the Biden Administration released the first-ever National
Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism.
It is a comprehensive strategy for addressing the threat posed by
domestic violent extremists and recognizes that online narratives
promoting attacks on U.S. citizens, institutions, and critical
infrastructure are a key factor driving radicalization and mobilization
to violence.
Under the Strategy, DHS is responsible for preventing terrorism and I
targeted violence, including through threat assessments, grants, and
community-based prevention programs; enhancing public awareness;
assessing, evaluating, and mitigating the 'risk of violence inspired by
violent extremist narratives, including those narratives shared via
online platforms; and establishing partnerships with nongovernmental
organizations.
In May 2021, DHS announced the establishment of the Center for
Prevention Programs and Partnerships (CP3), which would help the
Department combat terrorism and targeted violence.
The City of Houston's Mayor's Office of Public Safety and Homeland
Security (MOPSHS) is a recipient of $603,855.00 and has used the funds
to reengage the cities community partners to form a coalition that will
share information, assess threats, and be a resource to the community.
The city will work with the Texas Educational Service Center to
develop a curriculum to educate students about radicalization to
violence, media literacy, and bias.
According to CSIS, White supremacists, extremist militia members, and
other violent far-right extremists were responsible for 66 percent of
domestic terrorist attacks and plots in 2020.
On June 7, Harry H. Rogers--a self-proclaimed leader of the Ku Klux
Klan--intentionally drove his pick-up truck into a crowd of Black Lives
Matter demonstrators in Henrico, Virginia. One protester was injured,
and Rogers received a six-year prison sentence.
In another case a Nevada man used an armored truck to block traffic
on the Hoover Dam Bypass Bridge and held up signs--then he fled to
Arizona where he was arrested.
At the time of his arrest he referenced QAnon conspiracy theories and
discussed related conspiratorial beliefs.
No matter what other challenges might emerge, we must never forget
that one of our nation's greatest threats comes from our struggle
against violent extremism that began on September 11, 2001 and has
extended to violent extremists living among us who use political
affiliation as a justification for acts of terror.
I ask fellow members of the House to join me in voting in favor of
H.R. 350.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Castor of Florida). All time for debate
has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 1124, 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. BISHOP of North Carolina. 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.

____________________