Skip to main content

tv   U.S. House of Representatives Removing Confederate Other Statues from...  CSPAN  June 30, 2021 1:08am-2:43am EDT

1:08 am
television companies and more including charter communications. >> broadband is a force for empowerment and that is why charter has invested alien building infrastructure, upgrading technology, empowering opportunity in communities big and small. charter is connecting us. >> charter communications supports c-span as a public service along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> tuesday in the house, members debated a bill removing confederate statues from the u.s. capitol. specifically replacing a bust of supreme court justice roger with one of thurgood marshall. the first african-american appointed to the u.s. supreme court. this is 90 minutes. >> madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members be permitted to submit
1:09 am
extraneous material and to revise and extend remarks. >> without objection. >> i yield myself such time. i rise in support of this bill. it directs the joint committee to replace the bust of chief justice roger taney with a bust of thurgood marshall and it has the removal of individuals who served the confederacy and other white supremacists. the united states capitol is a beacon of democracy, freedom, and equality. visited by millions of people each year and before covid hit, and soon, we hope, to be visited by millions of people again. s a beacon of democracy, freedom and equality. visited by millions of people each year before covid hit and soon, we hope, to be visited by
1:10 am
millions of people again. what and who we choose to honor must refrequent our values. chief justice tawney declared the african-americans cowl never be citizens of the united states and had no constitutional rights does not meet this standard and neither do the white supremacists and confederates we continue to honor with statues today. justice tawney's decision continued and permitted the expansion of slavery. those who founded, served, and fought for the con federalcy were willing to spill american blood in defense of it. in his infamous cornerstone speech, confederate vice president alexander stevens said slavery and white supremacy were the cornerstone of the confederacy. there are no shortage of figures like justice thurgood marshall, the first african-american to serve on the supreme court, more
1:11 am
deserving of the honor of being displayed in our capitol. there are some who argue that this action is an attempt to erase and forget our history. nothing could be further from the truth. we must never forget our nation's shameful periods of slavery, segregation, racism. this is instead about who we choose to honor. who we choose to literally put on a pedestal and display as emblematic of our values. we're just months removed from january 6, when a mob of insurrectionists looking to violently overturn a presidential election stormed this very building. during that awful attack, the same confederate flag carried into battle against the united states in the 19th century was again carried into battle against the united states and into this very capitol. it is long past time to remove
1:12 am
from a place of honor in our nation's capitol the statues and busts of those who favored war against the united states in support of the so-called government founded on a cornerstone of racism and white supremacy. outside the old supreme court chamber, before you get to the tawney bust, you pass another sculpture which depicts the figures of history and justice. today we can demonstrate to the nation and the world that we have learned from our history and we continue to pursue justice. put another way, we can follow the advice of the great american poet and civil rights activist, maya angelo. this is what she said. do the best you can until you know better. then, when you know better, do better. let us now show ourselves and the world that we are who we claim to be. let us do better.
1:13 am
i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting h.r. 3005 and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california reserves. the chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia. mr. loudermilk: thank you, madam speaker. i thank my colleague, the chair of of the house administration committee, for the opportunity to be here today. i rise in opposition to h.r. 3005. not because of the goals that it attempts to achieve. many of us have been fighting for those same things, in fact, some of the comments that she made you'll find in my remarks about some of the people whose statues are here that i do not believe should be in this honored building and i have fought for a long time to remove those. but i am in opposition to the process of which we're trying to impose to do this. with that, i'd like to yield three minutes to my good friend, the gentlewoman from north
1:14 am
carolina. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, madam speaker. i thank the gentleman from georgia for yielding. madam speaker, republicans and democrats agree that racism, in any shape or form, is repugnant and must be denounced. i do intend to vote for this bill as i did last summer when congress considered a similar measure. it is interesting, however, that our colleagues across the aisle have only recently deemed the cause of removing statues worthy of immediate action. when you look at the facts, it's even more puzzling. since 1870, statues have been present in the united states capitol and democrats retained a majority in the house 40 times since then. they've had ample opportunities to remove the statues that members of their own party are
1:15 am
responsible for placing in the capitol in the first place, but have done nothing. again, the timing here is rather peculiar. after retaining the majority 40 times, one would think that if this were truly a pressing issue they would have acted sooner. for many years, i've advocated that north carolina's statues of charles acook and zebulin advance be removed based their ties to the confederacy. i suggested two statues of people that all north carolinians and all americans can be proud of be put in their place. i'm proud that the first republican majority in north carolina's legislature in 140 years voted in 2015 to replace the acook statue with the statue of reverend billy graham. yet this request has been
1:16 am
awaiting action by the democrat-chaired joint committee on the library for months. if they were truly concerned about removing these statues, they might be quicker to act on the request to replace some of the very same statues. i'll look past the times the north carolina democrat party used governor acook's name in fundraising materials. and the meetings they held in buildings that sported his name. maybe today's vote is to compensate for the decades of inaction under democrat-controlled house of representatives. we'll let the american people decide. republicans are always open for a spirited debate on this issue. and i'm confident that we can find common ground. while i plan to support this legislation and recognize its
1:17 am
underlying intent, this is an issue that is way past its due date. thank you, madam speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the chair -- ms. lofgren: before yielding to the gentleman from north carolina i would like to note, correct the record, that the joint committee on the library organized last wednesday and until last wednesday the joint committee was chaired by senator roy blunt of missouri, republican senator, and i have new been chair for six days and hope to act promptly on the north carolina matter. with that, i would yield four minutes to the distinguished chair of the elections subcommittee in the house administration committee, mr. g.k. butterfield. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. butterfield: let me first
1:18 am
thank the chair for her friendship and leadership on our committee an thank you for yielding time this afternoon. madam speaker, just a little bit of history. i want to take you back to 1860, president lincoln won the general election in 1860 by winning 18 of 29 states. madam speaker, the 11 states lincoln failed to carry were slaveholding states. these states were fearful that lincoln would find a way to end slavery and deprive slave owners of their free labor. 11 southern states immediately seceded from the uniforming the confederate states of america. they printed a currency and set up a military. at fort sumter on april 12, 1861, c.s.a. took military action against the united states of america. following -- for the following four years more than 600,000 americans lost their lives on the battlefield, including black union soldiers. this was not a war between the
1:19 am
states. it was a war against the united states by 11 southern states including my state. when the union finally won the war, both sides buried their dead, four million slaves were granted their freedom by the passage and ratification of the 13th amendment. in 1864, each state was granted the privilege to donate two statues of deceased persons to be displayed in this capitol that depict the history of their state. these statues are now known as the national statuary hall collection. approximately 10 of these depict men who volunteered to fight against the united states in the civil war. all of these statues were donated, many decades after the war. like many other statues around the country honoring members of the cop fed rat states of america, particularly those erected in the south, these were not donated and installed in the capitol until the 1900's. during the height of the jim
1:20 am
crow era. many americans see the timing of their placement to intimidate african-americans. we must not continue to honor these combatants by allowing their images to be displayed in this capitol. the bill before us today identifies several other statues for removal that are not part of the cleck including the bust of chief justice roger tawney who authored the 1857 supreme court decision of dred scott that said slaves couldn't be considered citizens and congress didn't have the ability to ban slavery. this is regarded as possibly the supreme court's worst decision of all time. and the 7-2 decision was a major exactor contributing to the civil war. another bust, and i'll conclude with this. another bust, not part of the statuary hall collection is for vice president. vice president john breckenridge, 1856 to 1859. in 186 0 he ran for president
1:21 am
on the southern democratic ticket and he lost. during the civil war, breckenridge served in the united states senate from kentucky. but became a traitor, became a traitor and enlisted in the confederate military and assigned to the army of mississippi achieving the rank of major general. and it gets worse. he was expelled from the united states senate. jefferson davis then appointed him as secretary of war. after the war, he fled the country. he fled the country for several years, madam speaker, this statue must also be removed. i asked my colleagues to answer the summonses of our time by voting to remove these statue fless capitol of the united states of america. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. loudermilk: thank you, again, ma'am chair. i yield myself as much time as i may consume.
1:22 am
as i stated earlier, you'll find that many, if not all, on this side of the aisle will agree with most of the comments, if not all the comments made by our colleagues on the other side of the aisle. i think we need to go back and look at where we've been as a nation and where we're going and a lot of what we put into this building should reflect not only our history but our values as a nation. that's why i in the past have advocated strongly for certain statues to be removed. i think it's important now that we have both parties looking at this. . it can't be overstated how this institution condemns slavery. i believe this nation has done that and continues to do that. in fact, when i was in the georgia legislature, i realized that georgia was the sole state
1:23 am
of the former confederacy that had not officially condemned the act of slavery nor had condemned its participation in slavery during the -- these dark periods of our nation. so i introduced legislation called the freedom resolution, which would formally acknowledge the ills and the hatred and this dark period of our nation that our government, our state government, the state that i love, was actually engaged in. that was a very painful time in our history, but we learned from that history. i don't think anyone wants to forget that time period. or we'll repeat that in some shape, form, or fashion. it's important the statue we have here reflect the values of this nation. in fact, i was very vocal many times in the past of georgia's one of two statue here,
1:24 am
alexander stevens. to say he was a racist was an understatement. as mentioned his cornerstone address. it is wrought with the ideas that all men are not created equal. in fact, he was very condemning of thomas jefferson and george washington. even went as far as illustrating they were insane because of our founding documents being built upon a false premise and that false premise was the idea that god created all of us equal because he went on to say that god didn't create us equal. he went on to say that white people were superior and that that is why we have the institution of slavery and it should be preserved. those are not ideas that are commensurate with what we believe in this nation. that it was -- but it was during a time period where many of the old south, democrat-led houses and senate and commissions were trying to hold on to those old ideas and principles.
1:25 am
that our party, party of emancipation, brought up, abraham lincoln, we had been opposed to these ideas and we totally wrapped our arms around this idea that all men are created equal. that we are all given equal opportunity. that all life is important. that everyone is created in the eyes of god. and that this government exists to protect those freedoms and those liberties. but there are those in the democrat-controlled southern states that wanted to hold onto the old ideas. those ideas that alexander stevensess spoused. so -- stevens espoused. so that's in georgia, democratic-led commission, wanted to poke their eyes in the federal government and they nominated or they placed as statues these people that held ideas different than what we hold. we hold as a party over here, we hold as a nation today. my opposition to this bill isn't because of the goal that we're trying to achieve. but it's the way that the
1:26 am
majority continues to skirt procedure in this body. for the second consecutive congress. this bill was rushed to the floor without a hearing and markup in the committee on house administration. i'm sure we'll hear from my colleagues on the other side say that republicans are insincere and our opposition to slavery and dragging our feet when it comes to removing these statues. in fact, it was a republican, a good friend of mine in the state legislature, scott turner, that introduced legislation that he knew i supported and i came out wanting to replace stevens' statue with the statute of martin luther king jr. we talk about north carolina has already taken action to remove their statue and replace them. but i'm very concerned over this committee. the joint committee on the library, the committee that is responsible for facilitating the removal of statue, was only
1:27 am
organized last week. this is six months from the start of the 117th congress. now, i believe i've been on the joint committee of library and i was very excited the first year i was appointed to the joint committee on the library because, as a fan of the library of congress, i thought this would be a great opportunity to participate in preserving history and heritage of this nation. but of the three terms that i have been on that committee, from my recollection, the committee has only met three times. that was an organizational meeting each time. so it's -- it's hard to do your work when you don't even get together to do the work. the lack of urgency to organize a committee is a concern. even as our failure to deal with replacement requests from state legislatures. the state of north carolina began the process of switching out the statue of charles
1:28 am
brantley acot with the reverend billy graham. this past, the north carolina house, 72-28, a bipartisan vote, in the senate, 44-0, unanimous vote in the north carolina house. but yet, we still have not taken action on approving that for a man who definitely had a very strong impact, not only on civil rights, but as our nation as a whole, who we so respect him his body laid in the rotunda not too long ago. yet, we still have not been able to move on getting that done. as well as several other states. i believe that we need to focus our efforts on changing this process, because i think it will mean a whole lot more, whole lot more to this body as well as to the american people if the states who originally put those statues in here were the ones who now ask they would be removed. i think that will be much more appropriate than this body
1:29 am
taking action. if we reformed our process to make it where the states could actually do it, it would mean a whole lot more to the future of our nation. with that, madam chair, i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from california. ms. lofgren: madam speaker, before yielding, i just want to note for purposes of clarifying the historical record, that the republicans in the 19th century and early 20th century bear almost no resemblance to the republican party today. the democratic party today bears no resimilar yens to the democratic -- resimilar ambulance to the democratic party of the 19th and 20th century. the republicans were generally the party of the northerners and the democrats were the party of the south. that has switched. at this point, i would be pleased to yield one minute to the gentlelady from california,
1:30 am
the speaker of the house. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes madam speaker from california her special minute. the speaker: thank you very much, madam speaker. i thank, madam chair, for yielding and for her leadership on this very important issue. and the point she makes is interesting because actually in terms of the 14th amendment when black americans were given the right to vote, it was the republicans who were the votes to make that happen and the democrats to a person voted against it. so your point is well taken. now we're in a fight to protect that right to vote. we'll have that conversation another day. today, we are here for a very specific purpose. madam speaker, this weekend we observe the birth of our nation, the fourth of july, when americans joyfully celebrate the birth of america's independence and the blessings of liberty.
1:31 am
as we do so, we solemnly recognize that those blessings have been denied to so many throughout our nation's history out of sheer bigotry and racism. this holiday, while a celebration, is also an opportunity to take steps to right the wrongs of history starting here, right here in the u.s. capitol. that is why today we're again passing legislation to remove statues of confederate officials and other advocacies of bigotry and removing them from the u.s. capitol. as i have said before, the halls of congress are the very heart of our democracy. the statues that are display should embrace our highest ideals as americans, expressing who we are and who we aspire to be as a nation. monuments to men or people who advocated cruelty and barbarrism
1:32 am
to achieve such a -- barbarism to achieve such a grotesque end is an affront to those ideals. they're homage to hate, not heritage. they must be removed. thank you to leader steny hoyer, who has been advocating this for a long time. it took charge and worked with whip jim clyburn, congressional black caucus chair joyce beatty, chair benny thompson, congresswoman barbara lee, congressman g.k. butterfield, whom we just heard from, and you, madam chair, you and others for your leadership. this action builds on action taken last juneteenth when using my authority as house speaker, i ordered the removal of four portraits of past speakers from the capitol who trait ousley served -- traitor ousley served among the confederacy. among those we are addressing today are jefferson davis and
1:33 am
alexander stevens, president and vice president of the confederacy. respectfully, both of whom were charged with treason against america. this legislation also removes from the old supreme court chamber in the capitol the bust of justice roger taney, a defender of slavery and author of the 1857 dread scott ruling, one of the most horrific stains on our nation and our court's history. mr. hoyer has been particularly in removing justice taney. removing these statues will not erase the stain and that of other racist acts in our history, nor will erase racism that exists in our country today. but it is an important and necessary step. how can we seek to end the scourge of racism, including the passing the george -- if we can
1:34 am
do so -- by passing the george floyd justice in policing act, which you have championed, madam speaker, when we allow the worst perpetrators of that racism should be lauded in the halls of congress? congress has the opportunity and the obligation to make meaningful change that must lead by example. the taney bust will be replaced by a tribute to u.s. supreme court justice thurgood marshall, an icon of equality and justice and champion of justice in america. i'm very proud of justice marshall's baltimore roots, as a native baltimorean, and i'm happy that our baltimore airport is named for him. his words -- justice thurgood marshall's words, uttered nearly 30 years ago, must be or inspiration. he said, america must get to work. we must descend from the
1:35 am
difference, apathy, we must descent from the fear, the hatred, the mistrust. he said, we must descent because america -- dissent because america can do better, because america has no choice but to do better. it is echoed by our baltimore brother, elijah cummings, who said we are better than this. we can do better for the children. i urge a strong bipartisan vote on this important step to do better, to do right the wrongs of history, and to move our nation toward a future of justice. and i do so with gratitude for all of the champions who have brought us to this important day. i urge a strong bipartisan vote and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california reserves. the chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia.
1:36 am
mr. loudermilk: thank you. i yield to the leader of the republicans here in the house, mr. mccarthy. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. mccarthy: thank you, madam chair. madam speaker, you've been a dear friend for a long time. you've been to my office. you sat on the couch, sat across the chair and you know the portrait that hangs in my office. portrait of abraham lincoln. i am proud he was the first republican president of the united states. i'm proud of the acts that he took during a defining time of our nation. the greatest challenge ever to our constitution was the civil war. long and by far. the bill we're voting on today we voted before. and i supported it. i support it now. but let me state a simple fact. all the statues being removed by this bill are statues of
1:37 am
democrats. madam speaker, as i heard the speaker talk earlier about removing other four portraits of speakers in the hall, same answer goes to that as well. they were all democrats. . the statues were sent to the house that were majority controlled of democrats accepting of these statues. i think the bill should go further. . maybe it's time the democrats change the name of their party. maybe desperate to pretend their party has progressed from their days of supporting slavery, pushing jim crow laws or supporting -- but let's be honest.
1:38 am
at anyplace, anytime, if those fundamentals rests somewhere, we cannot let them. . let's go through some of the words and actions of a few democrats. just a few years ago, then-vice president joe biden praised democrat senator robert byrd. he was the exalted head of the ku klux klan. in 4izz eulogy for byrd he said, for a lot of us he was a friend, a mentor and a guide. another leading democrat who praised byrd was speaker pelosi who called him a friend, a great person, a great american patriot. madam speaker, today, the democratic party doubled down on what i consider the shameful
1:39 am
history by replacing the racism of the past with the racism of the critical race theory. they continue to look at race as a primary means of judges a person's character. we saw this just last week. senate democrats voted to confirm one of president biden's appointees who said, let me quote, we must do everything in our collective power to realize dr. kennedy's vision for america. let me be clear about what that vision is. kennedy, the author of "how to be an anti-racist" proposed in his book that the solution to past discrimination is present discrimination. now that's what the person who is now in charge of the personnel of the entire federal government is endorsing. this division isn't confined to
1:40 am
just one person or department. the navy included kennedy's book on its official reading list for sailors in the department of education. has praised the debunked 1619 project. citing it as an example of what should be taught to our children. critical race theory is the governing ideology of a -- of the biden administration. by advocating for it, democrats can't to fuel hatred and division across the country. i agree with senator scott, america is not a racist country. america must reject critical race theory for the simple reason state-sponsored racism is wrong and always will be. it was wrong when it was segregated lunch counters of jim crow. it was wrong when it was
1:41 am
segregated class roovepls critical race theory. madam speaker, many times i wonder. what would america have looked like had abraham lincoln not been assassinated? malice toward none. but what would america have looked like had the agreement to remove the federal troops from the south because joseph rainey was elected to congress. jim crow laws were passed by democrat-controlled offices in the south. our nation was built on the unifying vision from the beginning. -- from the beginning. as lincoln said, we are conceived in liberty the dedicated proposition that we are all equal. i'll vote for this bill today just as i voted for it before. but madam speaker, if we have not learned anything we should
1:42 am
not divide our nation based on race. i applaud the democrats for standing up, removing democrat statues from democrat-controlled majorities sent to a democrat majority house who accepted them. it is about time. but madam speaker, to continue along in a critical race theory where you would teach an individual that they're right or wrong based on the color of their skin goes against everything we're voting on today. madam speaker, you know my heart. and i know yours. at times we might disagrea on philosophy. or how best to run a government. but we never disagreed about judging somebody by the color of their skin. and i hope we take this moment and this opportunity as we promised before to strive to be
1:43 am
a more perfect union. with that, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentlelady from california. ms. lofgren: madam speaker, we are so lucky to have as our whip someone who started his public service as a fighter for civil rights. like our colleague, the late john lewis, our whip put his life on the line for civil rights and for voting rights and i yield to him five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the majority whip. mr. clyburn: thank you, madam speaker. i thank the gentlelady for yielding me the time. i listened pretty intently to the minority leader. talking about theory.
1:44 am
a principal. -- a principle upon which a set of practices are made. that's what a theory is. we're not here today to talk about theory. today, we are talking about some actions. some practices that were made. we're talking about moving to make this nation more perfect. one of the ways to do that is by recognizing and admitting that we have a very spotty history when it comes to race. i met my late wife in jail. protesting practices that were based upon our skin color. racial inequities. that's what this is all about. one of the statues in this building, sent up here by my
1:45 am
state, south carolina, is a statue of john c. calhoun. john c. calhoun is not here because he defended the southern states. during the civil war. we talk about those generals, all over this place. john c. calhoun died in 1850. more than a decade before the civil war started. so why is he here? why is south carolina -- why did south carolina send this statue up here for us to honor. simply because he was this nation's foremost proponent of slavery. so much so until yale university from which he graduated took his name off the college that they
1:46 am
celebrated him with. princeton university, he was one of the founders of, took his name off of its honors college. charleston, south carolina, where he is buried, took his statue down overnight. people went to bed around 11:00 at night look at the statue and got up at 6:00 the next morning, it was gone. because south carolina has done everything they can to get beyond those principles advocated by john c. calhoun. but his statue is here. i want to thank the speaker for moving that statue someplace out of the eyesight of any school child coming up here. this hall, america's classroom. we ought to be teaching in this hall that which is wholesome
1:47 am
about this country. that is a great country. nobody denies that. i don't call this a racist country, i do say this country has on occasion, too often for my taste, tolerated racism. that's a fact. and nobody can deny that fact. last time this bill came before this body, over 70 of my republican friends voted for it. i would hope we could do a little better today. and let me close by reminding my friend, you know, most of us who study history, we know. when the republican party came into being. we know when the democratic party came into being. happens to be an older party than the republican party. but we also know that in 1948,
1:48 am
hubert humphries spoke at the 1948 democratic convention against segregation, strom thurmond, a democrat, left the party. came back in 1964, when democrats came together and decided that they were going to pass the civil rights act of 1964, strom thurmond, the democrat, left the democratic party, became a republican and took all of those segregationists with him into the south carolina republican party. south carolina republican party built itself on the confederate battle flag. those are facts of history. can't deny those facts, don't try to. we try to do whatever we can to do what george isn't aa in a admonished us to do. learn the history. and gather lessons from that
1:49 am
history. or we run the risk of repeating that history. what we should do today is relegate these statues to the dust bin of history. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. loudermilk: thank you, madam speaker. i appreciate the very passionate words we have heard here today. and as i said in the beginning, we on this side of the aisle not only agree but we have been advocating for these very things for quite some time. in fact, as georgia's statue, as i had advocated in times past for the removal of alexander stevens' statue, has been on several occasions that i've spoken about this and let me just share with you this one idea, this principle, that the criticism that he made of our
1:50 am
founders because he believed that our founding documents, the declaration of independence and the constitution, were inherently flawed. this is what stevens said. the prevailing ideas entertained by him, meaning jefferson, and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the constitution, talking about the constitution we had today because he was advocating for the confederate constitution, says with the enslavement of the african was in violation of the laws of nature, that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally and politically. we agree with that. what he's saying is the flaw of our founders was that they believed this idea that all men are created equal and put put that in our founding documents. the reason i bring that up today is because of something the minority leader said. is that under critical race theory, they are teaching that our founding documents were the opposite, that more, they were
1:51 am
what alexander stevens is saying they were. that they were flawed. that they teach racism. but stevens said they weren't teaching racism, that's why they're flawed. this is why i advo kayed far long time for the removal of stevens' statue. in fact, as i was speaking about this at one time >> i would like to yield four minutes of the gentleman from arkansas. >> the gentleman from arkansas is recognized. the gentlelady in her opening remarks quoted maya angelou earlier and since she spent her childhood in my district in arkansas, i would say i wholeheartedly agree with the words of maya angelou that we can do better. i'm not convinced h.r. 3005
1:52 am
is actually doing better. this bill would remove all statues from the u.s. capitol of individuals who voluntarily served in the confederate army or it appears who are now otherwise deemed by democrats as racist and unfit for any type of honor. one of the statues named for removal is james paul clark. a democrat from arkansas. who served as a u.s. senator and the 18th governor of arkansas. his statue was placed in the capitol by democrat majorities in both the arkansas house and senate. the speaker might be interested to learn, the arkansas -- the republican arkansas state legislature voted in 2019 to replace james paul clark and the statue that depicts uriah rose. last year on june 10, speaker pelosi sent a letter to the joint committee on the library
1:53 am
requesting it removed, 11 statues which depict confederate soldiers and officials which he said includes uriah rose. uriah rose was an arkansas attorney who was a founder and two-time president of the american bar association. uriah rose founded the rose law firm in little rock at which hillary clinton began her legal career and became the firm's first female partner. the speaker the speaker will be pleased to know that nor uriah rose nor james paul clarke was never part of the confederate army. clarke was 7 years old when it began. however, following procedures for placing statues in the capitol, arkansas has recognized racist beliefs held at least by the governor and senator james clarke and began replacing our
1:54 am
two statues with those who have made significant, meaningful contributions to arkansas and our nation. country music legend johnny cash and civil rights activist daisy base. madam speaker, every state can follow that process. many have and many are. daisy bates was a civil rights activist who was a nonstopable force during the desegregation of arkansas and i'm proud that arkansas chose her as one of the statues to replace john paul clarke and uriah rose. daisy bates was instrumental in securing safe entry into little rock central high school for the little rock nine in september, 1957. one of the first high schools in arkansas to integrate following the brown v. board of education. we have been working to replace these statues for 2 1/2 years. complying with every step in the process.
1:55 am
h.r. 3005 also names other statues. it was mentioned charles brantley aycock, who did not serve in the confederate army, who north carolina was trying to replace with reverend billy graham since 2015. this bill naming statues that are in the process of being replaced is nothing more than what i believe is an attempt by democrats to prematurely thwart the authority of states in order to claim the moral high ground for themselves. if democrats were serious about cleansing the capitol, speaker pelosi would insist the joint committee on the library make a top priority to work with arkansas and north carolina with the replacement of these statues. i am glad to see that billy graham's statue will be quickly added. mr. loudermilk: i yield 30 seconds. mr. westerman: i'd like to do
1:56 am
the same -- ask she do the same for arkansas's statues of johnny and daisy. madam speaker, we don't need a do-nothing messaging bill from democrats. we don't need to tell states what we need to do. what we need is a get-something-done attitude and real leadership and these statues will be gone out of the capitol. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentlewoman from california is recognized. ms. lofgren: just a note of the process. in fact, arkansas is now selecting an artist to develop the little statue that has to be approved before we can proceed. meanwhile, even though they want to get rid of that statue, it stays here. if we pass this bill, the statue will be gone while arkansas per sues a replacement. and with that, i'd love to yield to the gentleman from maryland, a member of the house administration committee, and a
1:57 am
scholar and constitutional -- former constitutional law professor, my colleague, jamie raskin, one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from maryland. mr. raskin: thank you, madam speaker. thank you to the chair for your great leadership on this. it's one thing to remember the nation's confederate traitors. it's another thing to glorify them. it's time to stop glorifying white supremacists in black robes and confederate traitors that defected -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will suspend. the gentlewoman from california, how much time? ms. lofgren: one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman shall proceed. mr. raskin: thank you very much. it's time to stop glorifying white supremacists in black robes and confederate traitors who defected from the union and took up arms against the united states. the city of fedderic five years ago took down their statue of the man who wrote the dred scott
1:58 am
opinion, which found that an african-american could never be a citizen within the meaning of article 3 of the constitution. and in which he wrote, blacks have no rights which the white man have the bound to respect. in the name of original intent, justice taney disgraced the supreme court. it would take the civil war, the reconstruction amendments and the civil rights movement to dismantle the white supremacist constitution. we're going to replace him with a great marylander who has stood the test of time, justice thurgood marshall, who was one of the architects of the legal strategy to dismantle jim crow and to replace plessy vs. ferguson. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. ms. lofgren: i'd yield an additional 30 seconds. mr. raskin: justice marshall argued smith vs. allred. he argued brown vs. board. he became the first african-american supreme court justice. as for all the other federal
1:59 am
office holders who swore an oath to support our constitution but then defected to the confederacy and waged insurrection and rebellion against the united states, they were banned by section 3 of the 14th amendment from ever serving in public office again at the federal level, at the state level, or at the local level. why should they occupy a position of honor and reverence in this building? i yield back. ms. lofgren: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. loudermilk: madam chair, can i inquire how much time remains? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia has 11 1/2 minutes. the gentlewoman from california has 12 1/2 minutes. mr. loudermilk: thank you, madam speaker. you know, prior to the organizing of the current joint committee on the library, ranking member rodney davis and i sent a letter to the joint committee on the library to demand immediate action on north carolina's pending request to replace the statue of charles brantley aycock with the reverend billy graham. so far the request has been
2:00 am
ignored. i can only assume because it would impede the ability to do what we're doing here today. but i'm encouraged by the chair's commitment to act on that very quickly. i would also say that this is an isolated case. there are currently eight states with pending requests, including arkansas, florida, missouri, kansas, north carolina, nebraska, utah, and virginia. in fact, georgia has just introduced in this last session a new piece of legislation to remove stevens' statue with that of the late representative john lewis. which is receiving bipartisan support. in fact, the republican speaker of the house is the top co-sponsor of that legislation. with that, madam speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentleman from wisconsin, mr. grothman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. grothman: thank you. i will have to admit that when i
2:01 am
first got this job and walked through statutory hall, i was kind of surprised at some of the people who were honored there. in particular, alexander stevens was one that jumped out at me. right before the end of the civil war, abraham lincoln talked about malice towards noncharity for all and i think that charity for all was being a little bit abused from people like alexander hamilton got their statue down there. be that as it may, there is another part of the bill. dred scott decision. i will talk a bit about roe v. wade and history that people don't know about. i got this from an article put out by planned parenthood and in part from a book written by bob woodward. obviously roe v. wade could be described as the most significant court decision in that it legalized abortion and we have 60 million fewer
2:02 am
americans who would have if this decision would not happen. however, there were a little bit -- a change was made in that decision as they were debating it, upping that 60 million figure a little bit higher because a decision was made at the end to go from allowing abortion at three months to allowing abortion all the way until viability, late-term abortion. the author of that decision, justice blackman, was just going to go three months. he got a letter put out by thurgood marshall who wanted it to be much higher. i can't tell you exactly how many abortions in the past we had in this country buts probably over five million. that was because thurgood marshall was in the right, the wrong position, however you want to look at it, to go from three months to making america one of seven countries in the world
2:03 am
where they allow abortions so late. of those countries include north korea, vietnam, red china. not countries you want to be associated with. if this bill becomes law and we walk through there we'll see thurgood marshall. at least i will always look at him as the guy who weighed in and felt after abortion was largely -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. loudermilk: i yield another 30 seconds. mr. grothman: the guy who kind of put the foot on the gas and legalized late-term abortion, put the united states in with those other six countries. so for that reason, i'm going to vote against this bill today and hopefully someday america that decision, the roe v. wade decision, and putting the united states in position which even six or seven-month-old babies can have their lives taken away, hopefully that will eventually be changed. the speaker pro tempore: the
2:04 am
gentleman's time has expired. mr. grothman: thank you. mr. loudermilk: reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentlewoman from california is recognized. ms. lofgren: madam speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from texas, mr. al green. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. green: thank you very much, madam speaker. and i thank the chairlady. madam speaker, the great thurgood marshall won 29 of 32 cases before the supreme court of the united states of america. he was imminently qualified now and is now and this is a proper thing for us to do. i will close with this. if judge taney and his co-horts had their -- cohorts had their way, there would be no person of color in this building today. if they had their way, madam speaker, you would not be at that podium. i stand with mr. hoyer. i'm grateful for what he's done. and i will vote for this
2:05 am
legislation. its time has long since come, and we are doing the right thing. and dr. king reminded us that time is always right to dothat which is right -- to do that which is right. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. loudermilk: madam chair, how much time do we have remaining? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has eight minutes left. mr. loudermilk: eight minutes. thank you, madam chair. it's refreshing to know there's so much we actually do agree on in this chamber. the things that my good friend from texas just said, we agree on, and we've agreed on since abraham lincoln was the president. i'd now like to yield five -- four minutes to the gentleman from illinois, my good friend, mr. davis, who is also the ranking member of the committee on house administration. mr. davis: well, thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois is recognized. mr. davis: thank you, madam speaker. thank you to my colleague and my friend on house administration committee for running this debate for our side. madam speaker, despite its
2:06 am
flaws, i intend to vote for the underlying bill. but nevertheless, i rise to highlight several points the majority has failed to address. it's been six years, six years since the people of north carolina, through their elected state legislature, requested on a bipartisan basis to replace the state statue of charles brantley aycock, a former democrat governor of that state, who supported segregation and white supremacy. the people of north carolina have requested to replace this statue with a sculpture of the late reverend billy graham, a late north carolinian, respected and beloved by millions. even the speaker of the house has had many kind words for reverend graham. only the fourth american ever to lie in honor in the u.s. capitol. in a press release dated february 21, 2018, the speaker said in part the following -- reverend graham's leadership and firm partnership with the reverend dr. martin luther king jr. were vital in the fight
2:07 am
for civil rights in the south. he counseled the u.s. president regardless of party, brought grace and humility into our politics. i ask unanimous consent that the entire release be entered in the record, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. davis: and madam speaker, i agree with the speaker's remarks. reverend graham was vital in the fight for civil rights in the south. . so today i ask, why are we still having this conversation six years later? why do the democrats continue to delay states' efforts like north carolina and like arkansas to replace statues in question that are currently at the capitol? why do democrats delay action keeping these statues of known racist democrats in this building? democrats have done nothing on any statue for the past six months, leaving statues of segregationists, known racists and other confederate democrats in our capitol. as an aside, we know this process shouldn't take this long. kansas, which has no statues in question in the underlying bill,
2:08 am
has been waiting 22 years to put a statue of amelia earhart in the capitol. and just yesterday the chair of the joint committee on library, a democrat, signed the paperwork in about 30 seconds when pressed on it, despite waiting over six months to organize the joint committee on library this congress. so it's clear that the democrats can move these requests along at any time but instead are actively continuing to delay the process. in an effort to speed up this process, i offered an amendment yesterday at the rules committee that very reasonably would have addressed these delays and would have required the joint committee on library to act within 30 days of receiving any actionable items on statue replacement. 30 days. come on. democrats ruled it out of order. i believe that's because they wanted to vote on this bill. each of the statues in question represents a known racist who was a democrat from the past. and the majority party is anxious to erase their
2:09 am
discriminatory history from the capitol with this action. so let's have the vote. let's have a vote on this democrat bill. intending to remove democrat statues. madam speaker, my constituent, abraham lincoln, who's buried in my district, 13th district of illinois, the first republican president of our great nation, i'm proud to represent that history. i stood on this floor debating and supporting this bill in the last congress. and i will support it again. but please, madam speaker, please, please encourage the democratic majority to help us reform this broken process that has delayed and delayed and kept , kept statues of known confederates, known racists, who happened to be democrats in the past, in this capitol. let's work together, let's get this done. let's stop playing games and let's actually open the capitol again. it's kind of interesting and
2:10 am
ironic, no one can see these statues right now because the capitol is closed. what are we doing to establish a plan to reopen our capitol for our nation to actually share in this history, to share in the history of abraham lincoln, to share in the history of our country, to share in the special building that we get a chance to walk in and work in while it remains closed? with that, madam speaker, i look forward to working in a bipartisan way to reform this broken process. thank you for the opportunity to speak today. i intend to vote for this bill and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentlewoman from california is recognized. ms. lofgren: may i ask how much time remains on both sides? the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady has 11 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentleman from georgia has three minutes remaining. ms. lofgren: thank you. i would be happy to yield two
2:11 am
minutes to the gentlelady from california, ms. karen bass. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. mr. bass: thank you, madam speaker. i -- ms. bass: thank you, mike:. i rise to support h.r. 3005, to remove statues from public displays in the u.s. capitol building. the people's house can never truly be for the people if it is lined with tributes to those who fought to continue the enslavement of black people in this country. my ancestors built this building. imagine how they would feel knowing that more than 100 years after slavery was abolished in this country, we still pay homage to the very people that betrayed this country in order to keep my ancestors enslaved, and imagine how i feel and other african-americans and people of color feel walking through statuary hall and knowing that there are monuments to people who supported, embraced and fought for the break-up of our
2:12 am
country. we are not trying to erase our history, we must confront our past when we talk about who we should honor in this building. should we honor the man who wrote the supreme court ruling that african-americans can't be citizens? or should we honor the man who got the supreme court to rule that separate but equal cannot be equal? should we honor a legal architect of slavery, or should we honor a legal architect of the civil rights movement? when i hear my colleagues on the other side of the aisle talk about the democratic party, i wonder if you are aware of the whole history of the civil rights movement, where black people and other people of color fought to enter the democratic party, and when people objected to our participation and when people objected to our right to vote, those people left the democratic party and joined the republican party. so we are extremely aware of our history of racism in the democratic party.
2:13 am
and part of our history of americans is that we criticize our country, we don't just honor the nice stories of our history, but we honor and embrace all of our history and we fight for a more perfect union. so fighting for a more perfect union for people of color meant fighting to enter the democratic party and it is my hope that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will go back to the history of the republican party that you honor and fight for the right for all americans to vote. thank you. i yield. ms. lofgren: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. loudermilk: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlelady from california is recognized. ms. lofgren: i am very pleased to -- that the majority leader is here with us this afternoon. and i would be honored to yield to mr. hoyer one minute.
2:14 am
the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognizes -- is recognized. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentlelady for yielding. i'm glad to be back. i've been out for two weeks with -- now that i have a new knee, i'm good for another 20 years. that's what they tell me. they guaranteed me that. madam speaker, when i brought this bill to the floor just about a year ago, i referred to our capitol building as a sacred space for democracy. a symbol around the world of democracy. the intervening months have shown us in ways we could not have imagined then just how true that statement was and is. sadly, we in this house, our
2:15 am
colleagues in the senate, all who work here, experienced on january 6 a wrenching reminder of how democracy demands our eternal defense and vigilance. we watched our temple of democracy defiled by a violent mob of insurrectionists. but many of us here -- for many of us here, that was a watershed moment. seeing such evils pervade the halls of the american capitol. however, madam speaker, for african-americans who have been serving here, working here and visiting here for many decades, that sense of defilement of this sacred space is all too familiar for them. our colleague, the former
2:16 am
speaker of the california assembly, karen bass, made that clear when she spoke. because the individuals like john calhoun and john paul clark , celebrated in stone and bronze in these hall, they are reminded that for so much of our history, the leaders and leading institutions of our government and our country did not view them as equal or, at times, even human. when they enter the solemn old supreme court chamber and stare into the cold marble eyes of roger brooke taney, they are reminded that at one time the highest court in our land, the highest court in our land, declared that black lives did not matter.
2:17 am
so, mr. speaker, we ought not be surprised when our fellow citizens of color raise signs that say, no, america, black lives do matter. that's somewhat what this debate is about. in the infamous 1857 dred scott decision, written by justice taney, a distinguished citizen of maryland, revered in his time, -- in his time for his intellect and his accomplishments, taney in this terrible decision quoted the declaration of independence, which all of us quote so often.
2:18 am
we hold these truths to be self-evident. that all men are created equal. today we would say all men and women are equal. irrespective of color. but this dred scott decision ought to teach us a lesson today. and it ought to humble us today. when people around us say, boy, that's the right decision, because it happens to be the decision of the moment, not a decision of history. beneath those lines taney wrote these. the general words, that is that all men are created equal, the general words above quoted would
2:19 am
seem, he said, to embrace the whole human family. hear me, colleagues. this is trainy speaking in a decision -- taney speaking in a decision that he was about to say black live it's do not matter -- lives do not matter. he said, however, that it would seem to embrace the whole human family. not divided by color or gender or nationality or religion, the whole human race. he went on to say, and if they were used in a similar instrument at this day would be so understood. i want you to think about that. i want you to think about it, colleagues, with humility. and, frankly, i want those who
2:20 am
argue for the originalist point of view to think of that. taney thought of that. and he thought in his day, in 1857, the whole human family would be covered by all men are created equal. but notwithstanding that belief, he did not so rule. because he was meyered in the past. -- mired in the past. and the progress of those some many years had alluded him because -- eluded him because he went on to say, but the enslaved african race were not intended to be included and formed no part of the people who framed and adopted this declaration.
2:21 am
an originalist. the founders were human. they were extraordinary human, but they were human -- humans, but they were human. and their environment shaped their thoughts as they do ours. taney's word were used by the confederacy during the civil war to justify the creation of a regime built to sustain the enslavement of african-americans in perpetuity. with no possibility of recognizing their humanity. even though taney said in 1857 that would have been the popular definition of all men are created equal. blacks and whites alike. it may have been used ever since
2:22 am
by bigots and white is you premmists to justify -- bhitewhithe is you premmists to justify -- white supremisists to justify big oit are -- bigotry. that's why i introduced this that's why i introduced this legislation with barbara lee and karen bass, james clyburn, beeney thompson from mississippi and representative butterfield. and the presence of the congressional plaque caucus. because this building, this sacred space, this temple of
2:23 am
democracy has been proud for too long. we ought not to forget history. we must learn from history. but aought not to honor that which defiled the principles for which we stand and for which i think we do stand. it's time, mr. speaker, to remove those symbols. slavery, sedition and segregation from these halls. how recently we saw the savage genocide in tulsa just a few weeks ago. justified in the minds of many
2:24 am
i'm sure that these were not men who were created equal. they were not children created in the image of god. and some have rationalized that the taking of their lives because after all, their lives did not matter. and therefore no one was pld. no one was held accountable. as i said, roger brooke taney was from my state of maryland. and i acknowledge as i was growing up as a kid in the late 1950's and in college in the 1960's, my party was the segregationist party. and my party decided we did not
2:25 am
want to be that party. and that there was not a home for segregationists in the democratic party. that is a decision we made knowing full well the cost and president johnson, when he said -- signed the civil rights bills. in our state capital of annapolis, we removed chief justice taney, the highest ranking member of maryland. it stood there and stood there when i was a member of the state senate and listened to governor agnew give his state of the union, it was in the sight of the roger brooke taney statue on
2:26 am
the east front of our capital. and if you turn and walk west through the capital of maryland, you will come out on a park. it is the thurgood marshall park , a testament to the progress and enlightenment that occurred from taney to marshall in our state. the decision to remove taney statue was long overdue. but as the gentleman from texas, martin luther king said, it is never too late to do the right thing. and this, today, is the right thing. it reflects our growth as a state, as we have conferred the difficult parts of our history and reflect our growth, as we
2:27 am
recognize it here as we did overwhelmingly when we passed this last year. over a third of my republican colleagues joining the democratic colleagues in saying black lives do, in fact, matter. those who say we shouldn't teach about slavery or sweep it under the rug do a disservice to our understanding of america's greatness. jim clyburn, our whip, civil rights hero in his right own right says, america's greatness is not that it always does the right thin. america's greatness is that it is willing to correct these wrongs. we are great because we approach our past with humility and openness and we are grateful
2:28 am
because we profess our democracy through more inclusion, more tolerance, more justice, more quality -- equality, that all men and women, irrespective of artificial distinctions or real distinctions, are equal in the eyes of our constitution and of our laws. that's why democrats and republicans came together earlier this month to make juneteenth a national holiday. overwhelmingly, but a handful voting against that. in arctic can you lation of our principles today, not yesterday, that was roger brooke's lameness. i believe we can take this important step together today.
2:29 am
so, mr. speaker, i ask the house once again to join me in passing this legislation to remove these stat tus of chief justice taney from the capitol. not to forget them or not part of history, but they are not deserving of our honor. not because we want to erase history, but because we are determined to confront it. and as a marylander, proud of steps we have taken in annapolis, i believe justice thurgood marshall would be a far better ambassador for the democracy and state of maryland than roger brooke taney. where taney represents the worst, thurgood marshall represents the best of american justice and deserves to be honored in his dedication to
2:30 am
civil rights and equal justice for all. i hope all of my colleagues, not as republicans and democrats, but as americans who believe we are an exceptional country, because we lift up the individual and we protect the one against the 99 if the one is right. that is the essence of america. and even though they did not live it out perfectly, they articulated the perfection of all men are created equal and endowed not just by the con stution or the laws of congress, not by the majority, endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. that's what this vote is about today. i urge my colleagues to vote yes for america. vote yes for its principles that
2:31 am
are so respected properly around the world. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlelady from california reserves. the chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia. mr. loudermilk: thank you to the chair and gentlelady. i am prepared to close if you are. ms. lofgren: the other speakers we are expecting are in a long appropriations markup. we are prepared to close and you may proceed. mr. loudermilk: thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. loudermilk: i ask unanimous consent to enter into a record a member from the members of the north carolina delegation that was written to the joint committee of library encouraging them to replace the akock statue
2:32 am
with billy graham. and the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. loudermilk: this process was established in the omnibus and requires coordination between state, the architect of the capitol and joint committee of the library. this would begin in state legislatures and communicated to the architect of the capitol and requires approval. i ask unanimous consent to enter into the record the charter of every state's request that is in the process of getting the statue replaced. i ask unanimous consent to enter a time line on the joint committee organization of this congress and minutes of the first organizing meeting. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. loudermilk: and i ask unanimous consent to enter into
2:33 am
the record a letter to the joint committee on the library chair lofgren requesting organization of north carolina statue and reopening of the u.s. botanic garden. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. loudermilk: i ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a readout from the house rules meeting recorded june 28 at which time joint committee on library lofgren announced her approval of kansas to update their -- to be a statue of emilia airhart. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. loudermilk: i ask unanimous consent to enter into the record the official collection of correspondence from the state of kansas to the architect of the capitol and 10-step replacement process and that process began at 22 years ago in 1999.
2:34 am
and i thank you for your in dullingens with that. there is much that was said here today that we are in agreement with, something that the esteemed majority leader said that needs to be re-emphasized and reason why i have fought to replace the statue, georgia statue of alexander stevens because of his criticism of our founders and his criticism was that they truly believed those ideas that were written in our declaration of independence, that all men are created equal and he said that that was the flaw of our nation. that's why they rebeled against this nation, that we should go back to those original principles and have people here that honor the idea that god in his infinite ability created all of us and created us with equal value regardless of skin color,
2:35 am
regardless of age, regardless of any other factor that we are created in his divine wisdom and given life and life can be so abundant if we hold on to those ideals and principles and those of us should reflect those values and i can think of no one that reflects those values than reverend billy graham. madam speaker, one more to enter into the record is the house bill from north carolina requesting that the statues be replaced. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. loudermilk: with that, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia yields. the gentlelady from california
2:36 am
is recognized. ms. lofgren: i yield myself. just a couple of clarifications where it may be confusing to the general public hearing about what is a rather arcane states to add and remove statues. the joint committee on the library ultimately approves it but the process is driven by the states, the architect of the capitol, looking at the statues and making sure that it meets the engineering requirements and the like, i would like to note that are until last wednesday senator roy blunt was chair of the joint committee on the library and i have been chair for six days. in that time, i actually have approved the reopening of the botanical gardens.
2:37 am
i have approved the replacement of the can sasse statue that i received a letter friday and i hope i just received the information on north carolina and i plan to work on that very hard very promptly and get a decision. so i don't think that speaks to undue delay in the six days that i have been chair of the joint library committee. . . i do think it's important that we take the step to remove these confederates and segregationists from our statuary hall. in some cases states either started the steps to remove them, but while that process is ongoing, these individuals are on a pedestal. and we cannot forget our history , but we don't have to put segregationists and pro-slavery
2:38 am
historical figures on a pedestal. we don't honor them. although we do remember them. and so let's adopt this measure to deal with those statues, but there's another thing. there are situations such as the statue of justice taney that were not sent here by any state and only we can remove them expeditiously. you know, we've said and we've heard from people morelle consequent than i about -- more eloquent than i about why justice taney should not be honored. in 1865, a few years before the taney bust was ultimately commissioned, the senate debated it. they debated whether to commission the bust of justice taney for the supreme court room. and during that debate, senator charles sumner of massachusetts said this. quote, i object to that.
2:39 am
that now an emancipated country should make a bust to the author of the dred scott decision? judgment is beginning now, and an emancipated country will fasten upon him the sigma which he deserves. now -- stigma which he deserves. now, it may have taken longer than sumner envisioned in fact 156 years, to attach the stigma that belongs to justice taney, but we will attach that stigma today if we pass this bill. in closing, i just want to say, you know, all of us are here for a few years, some longer, some shorter. but we're just here for a little slice of history. and i feel fortunate that my little slice of history allowed me to be here the same time as the late john lewis. i can almost imagine him standing here on the floor, how
2:40 am
fortunate i am to have served with him. and how fortunate i am to serve with our majority whip, mr. clyburn, who put his body on the line to fight against segregation and to fight for voting rights. they are leaders of our country. i'm proud to serve with them. let's show how much we honor them by voting for
2:41 am
2:42 am


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on