Elijah E. Cummings Federal Employee Antidiscrimination Act of 2019

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 135) to amend the Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 to strengthen Federal antidiscrimination laws enforced by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and expand accountability within the Federal Government, and for other purposes.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 135.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, today I am very pleased to bring to the floor six bills from the Committee on Oversight and Reform. Each bill, I am very glad to say, enjoys bipartisan sponsorship. These measures will strengthen protections for Federal employees and for congressional interns and enhance accountability and improve the Federal procurement and grant processes.

The first measure we are bringing today is H.R. 135, the Federal Employee Antidiscrimination Act. This bill is essentially identical to legislation that has passed the House in each of the two previous Congresses. In the 114th Congress, the measure passed by a vote of 403- 0; and in the last Congress, it passed by voice vote.

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleagues--Representatives Meadows, Norton, Sensenbrenner, and Jackson Lee--for working with me on this measure.

I thank them for their leadership and their commitment for improving our Federal equal opportunity programs.

Let me also thank Tanya Ward Jordan, Paulette Taylor, and all the members of the Coalition 4 Change, known as C4C, for their work on this measure and for their years of perseverance as we have worked to try to get this measure enacted into law.

One of my highest priorities as chairman of the Oversight Committee is to protect the right of every single Federal employee, every Federal job applicant, and indeed of every citizen, to equality of opportunity. While the clear majority of Federal workplaces are in compliance with the standards for a model Equal Employment Opportunity program promulgated by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, sadly, some still are not. It is past time for these failures to be corrected.

During our committee's bipartisan investigations of several different agencies--including the Forest Service, the Park Service, and the Transportation Security Administration--we have seen firsthand the consequences that employees suffer when agencies fail to operate model EEO programs or when they do not handle complaints of harassment and discrimination in a fair, timely, consistent, and thorough manner.

We have also seen how employees who file complaints with their agencies' EEO programs can be victimized again if appropriate steps are not taken to prevent the disclosure of complainants' identities and personal information.

H.R. 135 would strengthen the management of Federal EEO programs by requiring that they operate independently of agencies' human resources and general counsel offices. H.R. 135 would require that the head of each agency EEO program report directly to the head of the agency. This policy is critical to ensuring that agencies prioritize their EEO programs at the highest levels and that their sole purpose is to ensure equal opportunity for all employees.

H.R. 135 would strengthen the accountability mechanisms that are central to effectiveness of the EEO process. The bill would also prohibit any forms, policies, or agreements that seek to prevent an employee from disclosing waste, fraud, or abuse to Congress, the Office of Special Counsel, or an Inspector General.

Madam Speaker, the provisions in this bill are very simple, and the entire House has repeatedly supported them on a bipartisan basis. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 135, and I urge the Senate to pass this bill as quickly as possible.

Let me be clear that while the measure before us is important to improving our Federal workplaces, many of those workplaces are shut down today, and they have been shut down longer than at any time in our great Nation's history. As the legislation before us proves, we can come together in a bipartisan manner to enact measures that will help the millions of Americans who work for the Federal Government.

As I have often said, our Federal employees do not want us, the government, to hurt them; they want us to help them. We ought to be able to come together on a bipartisan basis and take the simple step of reopening our government and ensuring that the programs and services on which our Nation depends are functioning and that the people who work for us get paid so they can take care of their families and take care of their bills, for they give their blood, their sweat, and their tears to keep our country together.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).

Madam Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia an additional 2 minutes.

Madam Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time remains?

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I just want to associate myself with the words of the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia. So often what we see is our Federal employees often being criticized when it came to trying to find money when we have budgetary problems. It seems that there is an effort to constantly go in to the Federal employees and make them pay. And they do all kinds of jobs. I agree with the gentlewoman. This bill does not solve the problem with the shutdown.

At least I hope that we are sending a message to them that we care about them and that we understand and we feel their pain.

I agree with the gentlewoman. In some kind of way, we ought to be able to move from where we are to getting folks back to work, an independent group looking at, perhaps, the issues that confront the compromisers--that is, looking at this wall--and deal with that at some other time. But we need to get people back to work.

People are in pain. They are feeling it. Not only are the employees feeling it, but all the people who are coming into the various parks or whatever, who simply want to have a nice day, who simply want to have some reasonable entertainment that does not cost them a lot by going for a walk in the park; for getting the services that are needed; for making sure that our airplanes do not have folks on them carrying guns.

These folks who we saw in the airport over the weekend, they are the same ones who are coming in day after day and working for no pay. We are better than that, and I am praying that we will get this issue resolved.

The gentlewoman from the District of Columbia talked about the number of people who she has in her district who are Federal employees. We, in Maryland, have over 100,000 Federal employees, and we have so many people who work for the Federal Government through contracting. There must be a way to get this done.

I am going to close, but I will give the gentlewoman her opportunity, and then I will come back, Madam Speaker. Therefore, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I thank my colleagues who worked very hard on this bill: Congressman Meadows, Congresswoman Norton, Congressman Sensenbrenner, and Congresswoman Jackson Lee. All of them worked in a strong, bipartisan way to make this happen.

H.R. 135 is a simple, straightforward measure that would make a handful of changes to require the Federal agencies' equal employment opportunity programs conform to the model standards set forth by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and to strengthen accountability.

This bill has had overwhelming bipartisan support from the entire House of Representatives for years, and I urge the Senate to pass this measure as soon as possible.

As I close, I do not want to address extraneous issues that have previously arisen regarding this measure in the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. I want to be crystal clear that I believe that the supervisors who engage in discriminatory or retaliatory actions must be held accountable. However, this can be accomplished without curtailing any existing due process rights for Federal employees, and I will continue to oppose efforts to roll back due process rights.

Madam Speaker, I urge the House to vote in favor of this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Madam Speaker, I thank the distinguished chairman for yielding, and I particularly thank him for his remarks concerning this bill.

I am particularly pleased to rise in support of this bill as a former chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. This bill strengthens the protections Federal employees enjoy under the antidiscrimination laws of our country.

It reinforces the importance of this antidiscrimination provisions by requiring that the head of that program report directly to the agency head. It expands notification of findings of discrimination and any action that has been taken pursuant to those findings. Surely, we understand the importance of this section at a time when we have just recently passed the sexual harassment provisions, and, of course, we can see the deterrent effect of assuring any disciplinary action that has been taken is known to the public.

Finally, the bill bars agreements that would keep employees from disclosing any kind of Federal violation, as well as fraud, waste, and abuse. The latter provision is normally called a whistleblower provision.

Madam Speaker, I particularly appreciate that the chairman has brought this bill to the floor--I am sure it is noncontroversial--but he has brought it at a time when Federal employees are experiencing the longest shutdown in U.S. history. This bill cannot and does not purport to make up in any way for the effects of the shutdown. But this bill sends a message to Federal employees that they are particularly valued and, so far as I can tell, it sends it in a unanimous fashion, just as the shutdown should have a unanimous resolution.

It happens that around 62,000 Federal employees live in my own district, because this is the Capital of the United States--the 62,000, I should add, who are furloughed or working with no pay.

But I want to remind Members that each and every Member of this body has Federal employees who are at home desiring to work and are furloughed as I speak. Though I represent a large number, some Members from the far West States should know that they are among those who represent the largest number of Federal employees. That is how dependent they are far away from Washington on Federal employees.

Madam Speaker, the President seems to have moved a step away from claiming dictatorial powers to commandeer Federal funds to open the government. That is probably because somebody drew to his attention the extraordinary spectrum of constitutional, legal, political, and financial issues that would be raised, not to mention a court suit that is probably being prepared, just in case, as I speak.

But, Madam Speaker, I am coming to the floor as well to urge our committee--and the new Democratic majority of which I am a member--to use this crisis of Trump's making to carefully rethink the President's emergency powers, leaving him ample room to move in case of an actual emergency while giving Congress more latitude to contain executive excess.

Madam Speaker, in the meantime, I want to lay before the House the easiest of compromises. When I was a tenured professor of law at Georgetown University Law School, I taught negotiations. We usually worked with a number of issues in a negotiation at the same time. However, the easiest compromise to reach is one that involves a number. The number the President clings to is $5 billion. I can think of endless ways--and I am sure every Member can--to compromise that number.

So in the name of a mounting number of Americans who are beginning to feel the consequences of the shutdown, though they are not Federal employees--not to mention the Federal employees themselves--I am asking even for my side to make a more concerted effort to reach an agreeable number, even though the polls show that the American people are with the Democrats on this issue.

As a suggestion, I ask that the Democrats appoint a subcommittee and that the administration do the same to sit down and hammer out an acceptable compromise.

For more than two centuries now, we have operated under a separation- of-powers government to make tyrannical rule nearly impossible. Even Trump is hesitating to declare an emergency to get his border wall. That throws the ball in our camp, we who are Democrats who control this House. I ask that we accept it, use it, run with it, and settle this matter now.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Madam Speaker, due to a scheduled medical procedure, I was physically absent from the House of Representatives from January 10, 2019 to February 5, 2019. During that time, I missed 44 recorded votes. Had I been present for those votes, I would have voted: on Roll Call No. 22 on the Republican Motion to Recommit on H.R. 267, I would have voted ``Yea;'' on Roll Call No. 23 on the Passage of H.R. 267, I would have voted ``Nay;'' on Roll Call No. 24 on the Republican Motion to Recommit on H.R. 265, I would have voted ``Yea;'' on Roll Call No. 25 on the Passage of H.R. 265, I would have voted ``Nay;'' on Roll Call No. 26 on the Republican Motion to Recommit on H.R. 266, I would have voted ``Yea;'' on Roll Call No. 27 on the Passage of H.R. 266, I would have voted ``Nay;'' on Roll Call No. 28 on the Passage of S. 24, I would have voted ``Yea;'' on Roll Call No. 29 on the Passage of H.R. 221, I would have voted ``Yea;'' on Roll Call No. 30 on the Passage of H.R. 116, I would have voted ``Yea;'' on Roll Call No. 31 on the Passage of H.J. Res. 27, I would have voted ``Nay;'' on Roll Call No. 32 on the Passage of H. Res. 41, I would have voted ``Yea;'' on Roll Call No. 33 on the Passage of H.R. 135, I would have voted ``Yea;'' on Roll Call No. 34 on Ordering the Previous Question on H. Res. 43, I would have voted ``Nay;'' on Roll Call No. 35 on the Adoption of H. Res. 43, I would have voted ``Nay;'' on Roll Call No. 36 on the Passage of H.R. 190, I would have voted ``Yea;'' on Roll Call No. 37 on the Passage of Amendment No. 2 offered by Mr. McGovern (D- MA), I would have voted ``Nay;'' on Roll Call No. 38 on Ordering the Republican Motion to Recommit, I would have voted ``Yea;'' on Roll Call No. 39 on the Passage of H.R. 268, I would have voted ``Nay;'' on Roll Call No. 40 on the Adoption of H. Res. 52, I would have voted ``Nay;'' on Roll Call No. 41 on the Passage of H.R. 150, I would have voted ``Yea;'' on Roll Call No. 42 on the Passage of H.J. Res. 30, I would have voted ``Yea;'' on Roll Call No. 43 on Republican Motion to Recommit, I would have voted ``Yea;'' on Roll Call No. 44 on the Passage of H.R. 676, I would have voted ``Yea;'' on Roll Call No. 45 on the Passage of H.R. 328, I would have voted ``Yea;'' on Roll Call No. 46 on the Passage of H.J. Res 28, I would have voted ``Nay;'' on Roll Call No. 47 on the Passage of H. Res. 61, I would have voted ``Nay;'' on Roll Call No. 48 on the Republican Motion to Recommit, I would have voted ``Yea;'' on Roll Call No. 49 on the Passage of H.R. 648, I would have voted ``Nay;'' on Roll Call No. 50 on the Republican Motion to Recommit, I would have voted ``Yea;'' on Roll Call No. 51 on the Passage of H.J. Res. 31, I would have voted ``Nay;'' on Roll Call No. 52 on the Passage of H.R. 624, I would have voted ``Yea;'' on Roll Call No. 53 on the Passage of H.R. 502, I would have voted ``Yea;'' on Roll Call No. 54 on Approving of the Speaker's Journal, I would have voted ``Yea;'' on Roll Call No. 55 on the Motion to Adjourn, I would have voted ``Nay;'' on Roll Call No. 56 on the Passage of H.R. 428, I would have voted ``Yea;'' on Roll Call No. 57 on the Passage of H.R. 449, I would have voted ``Yea;'' on Roll Call No. 58 on the Passage of H.R. 769, I would have voted ``Yea;'' on Roll Call No. 59 on the Motion to Table the Motion to Reconsider H. Res. 77, I would have voted ``Nay;'' on Roll Call No. 60 on Ordering the Previous Question on H. Res. 87, I would have voted ``Nay;'' on Roll Call No. 61 on the Passage of H. Res. 87, I would have voted ``Yea;'' on Roll Call No. 62 on the Passage of Amendment No. 3 offered by Mrs. Trahan (D-MA), I would have voted ``Nay;'' on Roll Call No. 63 on the Republican Motion to Recommit, I would have voted ``Yea;'' on Roll Call No. 64 on the Passage of H.R. 790, I would have voted ``Nay;'' and on Roll Call No. 65 on the Passage of H. Res. 79, I would have voted ``Nay.''

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 135 the ``Federal Employee Anti-Discrimination Act of 2019,'' which will strengthen the policies governing federal agencies' management of Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) programs by amending the Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002.

Equal Employment Opportunity programs enable federal employees or applicants who believe they have been the victims of discrimination to file a complaint about the alleged discrimination.

I support this legislation because it works to expand accountability within the federal government as federal agencies take appropriate disciplinary action against federal employees who have been found to have committed discriminatory or retaliatory acts.

In 2012, federal employees and applicants for employment filed nearly 16,000 EEO complaints; most of which were handled accordingly, but some federal agencies still have not met the standards of a model EEO program set forth by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

This legislation would require each federal agency to ensure its EEO program is not under the control of the agency's human resources or general counsel offices and that the head of the program reports directly to the agency head.

Madam Speaker, this bill would also expand the notifications that agencies are required to provide when discrimination is found to have occurred, and it would require agencies to track and report whether necessary disciplinary action has been taken.

Additionally, H.R. 135 would prohibit policies, forms, or agreements that prohibit or restrict an employee from disclosing to Congress, the Office of Special Counsel, or any Inspector General any information that relates to any violation of any law, rule, or regulation or any instance of waste, fraud, or abuse.

Fighting discrimination is a commitment the federal government needs to make, beginning with their own employees at home and abroad.

Men, women, of every race and religion deserve the same representation and protection under the United States government, and in order to fulfill the requirements of their job to the best of their ability, their right to not be discriminated against needs to be upheld.

In 2013, Texas employers received almost 10 percent of the nation's federal employment discrimination, harassment and retaliation allegations, at about 9,000 total charges.

I support this legislation because I support the rights of federal employees to feel safe and represented in their working environments, and obtain the correct protection they desire and deserve.

For these reasons, I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 135 to strengthen the policies surrounding work place discrimination in the federal government.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 135, the Federal Employee Antidiscrimination Act. H.R. 135 amends the Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002, commonly referred to as the No-FEAR Act, to better identify and correct instances of discrimination throughout the Federal Government.

Specifically, H.R. 135 requires Federal agencies to establish a system to track Equal Employment Opportunity complaints from beginning to end. This system must also track any disciplinary action that resulted from a finding of a discriminatory act. If a disciplinary action is taken by an agency against an employee, both the disciplinary action and the reason for the action must be included in the employee's personnel record.

H.R. 135 implements notification and reporting requirements for instances of discrimination within Federal agencies. Agencies must post a notice on their website if the agency or Equal Employment Opportunity Commission finds that a discriminatory or retaliatory act has occurred.

The bill also requires agencies to submit a report to the EEOC if a discriminatory or retaliatory act is found to have occurred. The report must include any disciplinary action initiated against an employee for discrimination or retaliation against another employee.

Lastly, the bill bars agencies from using nondisclosure agreements or policies to restrict Federal employees from reporting waste, fraud, and abuse to Congress, the Office of Special Counsel, and Inspectors General.

Madam Speaker, I thank Mr. Cummings for his good work on this piece of legislation, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I would like to make the gentleman from Maryland aware that I have no further speakers, and I am prepared to close.

Madam Speaker, I urge adoption of the bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.