Ves. The speaker pro tempore pursuant to the order of the house of january 6 2015, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for the morning hour debate. The chair will alternate recognition between the parties with each party limited to one hour and each member other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip limited to five minutes but in no event shall debate continue beyond 11 50 a. M. The chair recognizes the gentlewoman from texas for five minutes. Ms. Jackson lee thank you very much, mr. Speaker. Today i rise with a question should america be brought to the brink of her own security and safety . With that question i can my friends on the other side of the aisle, the republicans, i ask the speaker to put on the floor of the house the full funding of the department of Homeland Security. Mr. Speaker, i had the tragic privilege of beginning my tenure on this committee in the aftermath of 9 11. Some of us who serv
Schools, where less than half of the kids that graduate. And those who graduate are nowhere near ready to go to college or go to work. We have seen across the state and across the country and in most states, Charter Schools public Charter Schools popping up. And giving parents hope, giving them a chance to get those kids out of failing schools. I said the other day in the rules committee, because it was so moving to me, i went to a Charter School in north minneapolis, 430 kids in that school, their parents are delighted with the education theyre getting now and thrilled to have gotten their kids out of failing schools and when i asked the principal and founder of the school if she could take more kids she said no, this is the right size for this school. They would like to replicate this school and thats what this bill allows and how successful is it . There are 1,000 kids 1,000 kids on the witnessing list to get into that Charter Schools because parents want to get out of failing schoo
The definition gets cloudier not more specific in my view. And in fact, you know, if we end somewhere like three out of the seven, that would be clear too, wouldnt it . Wouldnt it be just as clear to say navigable waters are waters that are navigable for interstate commerce and why wouldnt that be we have been the area that lacks clarity right now is not the issue of navigable waters. The Supreme Court actually spoke very definitively that navigable waters need to be looked at in a way that isnt the traditional definition. We havent been looking at navigable waters the same way. It is a recognition that navigable waters in their ability to provide the functions that we look for, are really severely impacted by the waters that flow into them. So the challenge we tried to face in the clean water rule was to take a look at how do we identify those rivers streams tributaries, wetlands that feed into those navigable waters that we need to understand and protect so that they wont degrade tho