Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to oppose efforts currently underway by the Standards Review Committee of the American Bar Association (ABA) that may unintentionally restrict access to legal education for students of color and negatively affect minority serving institutions.

Five years ago, a broad based, national coalition of groups that included all of the national bar associations of color helped craft the current ABA accreditation standard regarding bar passage. That standard balanced the need for quality assurances with the goal of maintaining access to law school for students of color. It required law schools to demonstrate that three out of their last five graduating classes got an ultimate pass rate of at least 75% or an average of 75% over five years.

Since then, as part of the ABA Council of Legal Education's application for re-recognition, the Department of Education as the accrediting agency for law schools, the Department reviewed this standard, did not find any problems with it, and renewed the Council's accrediting authority.

Now the Council's Standards Review Committee is proposing to change this standard to rigidly require schools to demonstrate that every one of its graduating classes achieved an ultimate pass rate of 75 percent in every year, regardless of the pass rates in the jurisdictions where the school's graduates sit for the exam, or else the school would face an immediate sanctions hearing, which is the first step in revoking a school's accreditation.

The SRC has acknowledged that it hasn't done a study and does not know the effects of its proposal. Instead of undertaking the work needed to justify raising its bar accreditation requirement, it has taken a shortcut. This shortcut will potentially limit enrollment for students of color, and affect many minority serving institutions, including law schools affiliated with historically black colleges and universities.

A wide-ranging coalition--over forty letters express opposition to this standard. Included among the groups opposing the change are the Society of American Law Teachers, Clinical Legal Education Association, ABA Council of Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the Educational Pipeline, Historically Black College and University Law School Deans, deans of other schools, the National Bar Association, Hispanic National Bar Association, National Asian Pacific American Bar Association, National Native American Bar Association, and the Congressional Black, Hispanic, Asian Pacific, and Progressive Caucuses.

People care about this issue because the Standards Review Committee proposal would create a perverse incentive for law schools to limit enrollment solely to students with high standardized test scores. When law schools face accreditation review, their only way to remedy perceived deficiencies is to reduce the chance that students will not pass the bar. The ranks of lawyers reflect a different reality. Many students enter law school with adequate but not stellar standardized test scores and prove through hard work an ability to succeed, graduate, pass the bar, find a job, and contribute meaningfully to the legal profession.

Another issue is not immediately evident, but equally damaging. The National Bar Association has posted in its SRC comments on the proposal, a study worth reading. The study shows that students of color tend to sit for the bar exam in state jurisdictions where the bar exam is harder, and bar passage rates are lower. Schools that graduate these students will fare worse under the proposal than schools with a higher percentage of students that remain in state and tend to have a higher percentage of Caucasian students. I note here that law schools affiliated with historically black colleges and universities have produced some of the most important African American leadership throughout the history of this nation. The proposal's potential effects warrant in-depth study to ensure they are fully understood.

This is one of the issues, raised by many of those who have written to the Standards Review Committee--that the committee is making policy without data. The Council of Legal Education controls the only available data on the ultimate pass rates of particular schools in particular jurisdictions, but despite repeated requests, it has not undertaken a careful impact study before moving forward on this fundamental policy change.

This is why we believe that the Standards Review Committee bears the burden of conducting a careful ultimate pass rate study of the pass rates achieved by particular schools in particular jurisdictions before moving forward on this proposal. To date, it risks unintentionally discriminating against schools that graduate large numbers of students of color.

Mr. Speaker, I will close by restating the American Bar Association's own arguments in support of diversity in the legal profession. The ABA has outlined four powerful rationales for why it must focus its energies on helping to diversify the legal profession:

The Democracy Rationale--that lawyers and judges play a unique role in our democratic institutions, and a more diverse judiciary and legal profession will create greater trust and confidence in the fairness of our mechanisms of government and in the rule of law.

The Business Rationale--that businesses must be responsive to their increasingly diverse customers and clients, here and around the world, and lawyers who are culturally diverse can help businesses reach and better serve these diverse populations.

The Leadership Rationale--that lawyers often play leadership roles in our society, both in and out of politics, and a more broadly inclusive legal profession is essential to providing under-represented groups with access to these roles.

The Demographic Rationale--that by 2042 or sooner, America will be a country of color, in which a majority of her citizens will be people of color.

These arguments reflect the import of expanding access to the legal field, not making it harder.

Madam Speaker, I will take Mr. Sessions at his word, and I believe him to be sincere and genuine in his desire to see this problem fixed.

I would just remind Mr. Sessions and Congress that we don't have time to wait on this issue. Every day, there is a sale that is delayed or a sale that doesn't go through because the flood insurance is so high and the new purchaser doesn't want to pay for it. And every day, there is an owner short-selling a house because they have to get out of it, and they can't afford to wait.

So, when we talk about home ownership, we are talking about responsible Americans. We are talking about 1.7 million people in this country that saved up to participate in the bedrock of the American Dream. And now, government and FEMA and Congress are turning a piece of the American Dream into a government-made nightmare, and we have the ability here today to fix this.

Right now, we are not asking for politics. We are not trying to be overdramatic. We are just asking for a solution. We want to fix it. In fact, we are here today talking about a Republican bill that solves the problem. That is because, for me, this is not about politics. It is about people. It is about purpose. It is not about making sure that rich people who own riverfront, lakefront, or oceanfront property are taken

care of. It is about our seniors who want a home on Main Street or smack dab in our communities. They saved. They sacrificed. They did everything right. They played by all the rules. And now FEMA has come and decided they are going to create new flood maps.

The sad part about it is, if you are a community and you built levees and increased flood protection and you did it with your own money, FEMA does not even count it, because they didn't pay for it. So communities have saved money to help themselves, like we do in America. If we have a problem, we fix it. My community, which put up millions of dollars to build levees, doesn't even get that recognized because the government didn't pay for it.

Madam Speaker, I would just ask all my colleagues, let's do what is right. Let's help people, and let's put people over politics.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Staff Sergeant Joseph Emmanuel Anderson, a dedicated father and an active duty U.S. Army Sgt., who was cruelly taken from us by gun violence at the age of 31. He will be deeply missed by his family, friends, and all that knew him. I join with them today in grieving the loss of this special man and hope they find some comfort in celebrating his life and the knowledge that it serves as an example for all of us.

A loving father, brother, son, and friend, John Anderson was born and raised in Marrero, Louisiana. At the age of 20, he joined the Army so that he could take care of his family.

A devoted father to his three children, Sgt. Anderson worked hard to provide for them and loved them completely.

During his 12 years of service in the U.S. Army, Sgt. Anderson served our country through three deployments in Iraq. He also earned his Airborne Wings and was proud to follow in the footsteps of his grandfathers who both served in the Army.

The loss of Sgt. Anderson deeply saddens me and all those who care about our communities. While we mourn the loss of Sgt. Anderson, let us look to who he was and the life he led as inspiration. We should all strive to live our lives with the same overwhelming love for our families and dedication to our country that Joseph Anderson showed in his life. His vitality and love should be celebrated and honored. I am proud to stand here today to honor the life and legacy of an exemplary man, Staff Sergeant Joseph Anderson.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today along with my fellow colleagues Rep. Jim Clyburn (SC-06), Rep. Karen Bass (CA-37), Rep. Corrine Brown (FL-05), Rep. John Conyers (MI-13), Rep. Elijah Cummings (MD-07), Rep. Chris Collins (NY-27), Rep. Susan Davis (CA-53), Rep. Brian Higgins (NY-26), Rep. John Lewis (GA-05), Rep. Vance McAllister (LA-05), Rep. Gary Peters (MI-14), and Rep. Jon Runyan (NJ-03) to pay tribute to James ``Shack'' Harris, in this year marking the fiftieth anniversary of the March on Washington. Like such pioneers as Paul Robeson, Joe Louis, and Jackie Robinson, James Harris applied his brilliant talent and steadfast determination as an athlete to advance the cause of racial equality in America.

James Harris was born and raised in Monroe, Louisiana, during some of the harshest years of segregation when a policy of ``massive resistance'' against court rulings and federal laws denied equal rights for Black citizens. Racial inequality pervaded football fields as much as buses, hotels and lunch counters in the South.

But the Reverend Nashall Harris, James' father, gave his son an appropriate nickname: ``Shack,'' after the Old Testament's Meshach, one of the three ancient Jews who refused the

orders of a Babylonian tyrant to bow down and worship his golden idol. Like his namesake, James Harris would not submit to an unjust system.

From his early teens, he aspired to play quarterback in the National Football League--a position that no African American had ever been allowed to play for more than a handful of snaps. In setting this goal, Harris challenged bigotry, stereotypes and the status quo. At the time, it was taken as fact in both college and pro football that Black athletes did not possess the necessary intelligence, leadership, and character to play quarterback. Shack shattered the vile myth.

Inspired by the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s ``I Have A Dream'' speech, Harris persisted in pursuing his own dream. After a record- setting career at Carroll High School in Monroe, he went to Grambling State University and was coached by the legendary Eddie Robinson. Coach Robinson shared James Harris's goal of breaking the color barrier at quarterback in the NFL. And Robinson had recruited him for that very reason.

James Harris had an illustrious career at Grambling. He led the Tigers to three conference titles, set numerous passing records, was selected MVP of the 1967 Orange Blossom Classic, and was chosen the nation's outstanding player in 1968 by the Washington Pigskin Club. Despite these achievements, he was not invited to any post-season all- star games and he was not selected in the NFL draft until the eighth round.

James Harris did not give up. He would not be forced into changing positions to receiver or defensive back, as had so many promising African Americans before him. He was determined to play quarterback. Every night during training camp as a rookie, he called Eddie Robinson for advice and moral support.

He ultimately won the starting job, and opened the 1969 NFL season as the Buffalo Bills' starting quarterback. It was the first of many ``firsts'' in his career. During three pivotal years with the Los Angeles Rams in the mid-1970s, James Harris led the team twice to the NFC title game, led the conference twice in passing efficiency, was chosen MVP of the Pro Bowl, and was voted captain by his teammates.

From 1969 through 1977, Harris was virtually the only African American quarterback to be a starter. He endured hate mail and death threats. He also bore the hopes of an entire people. As Eddie Robinson had once told him: ``You have to make it. Otherwise, people will say you sent us your best and he wasn't good enough.''

By being much more than good enough, James Harris opened the door of opportunity for African American quarterbacks to follow, from Doug Williams and Warren Moon to Russell Wilson and Robert Griffin III.

But Harris' legacy did not end when he walked off the playing field. He went on to become a prominent NFL executive for the New York Jets, Baltimore Ravens, Jacksonville Jaguars, and currently the Detroit Lions. As such, Harris has helped to pave the way for other African American coaches and general managers whose success demonstrates the power and promise of diversity and inclusion.

So it is an honor to recognize and applaud the accomplishments of James Harris. Dr. King once called himself a ``drum major for freedom.'' We might call James Harris, the barrier-breaking quarterback, a field general for racial equality.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor fifty-six African- American students whose bravery and determination resulted in the University of New Orleans being the first university in the American South to open as a fully integrated institution of higher education. This year is the 55th anniversary of that historic moment in my district.

Established in 1956, The University of New Orleans was originally called Louisiana State University in New Orleans, or LSUNO. Classes began in September 1958 with a total of 1,460 students, all freshmen and double the number originally anticipated. Of that total, fifty-six African-American students registered to attend LSUNO that fall.

Four years after the Supreme Court struck down ``separate, but equal'' in the landmark Brown vs. Board of Education case, there were still some who would seek to deny these students admission to the public university. Civil rights activists led by Alexander Pierre Tureaud, an attorney for the New Orleans chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) during the civil rights movement, and Ernest V. ``Dutch'' Morial, who later became a two-term New Orleans mayor, brought suit in federal court to allow black students to attend LSUNO While the local branch of the NAACP sought to prepare the African-American students for their groundbreaking efforts, leaders of the White Citizens Council of Greater New Orleans worked to provide harassing and degrading conditions for the students on a daily basis. Some of the African- American students were not able to endure such conditions for many weeks, while others remained in place for a few semesters. One of them, Mrs. Louise Williams Arnolie, still managed to graduate within four years.

The students encouraged one another throughout the painful process. LSUNO's classrooms and campus were integrated, but its privately managed dining hall barred African-Americans. The students petitioned the LSUNO administration to end the cafeteria's contract. Following continued pressure from attorneys Tureaud and Morial, as well as student boycotts, Dean Homer Hitt gave the cafeteria's managers an ultimatum in the fall semester of 1960: Either serve all students or give up the lease. The company chose to give up the lease, and every part of the university was by then integrated.

Today, the University of New Orleans is ranked by U.S. News and World Report as the most ethnically diverse public university in the state. Let us never forget that this remarkable diversity did not come easily. I would like to acknowledge the names of those fifty-six brave and determined individuals who enrolled at the University of New Orleans in 1958: Brenda Holman Allen, Vincent A. Angeletta, Louise Williams Arnolie, Charles P. Breaux, Yvonne Buckles, Dorothy M. Caulfield, Janice E. Coleman-Sawyer, Laurence Crawford, Shirley M. Crawford, Claudine Curtis, Crystal M. Davis, Samuel Dugar, Josephine Eli, Wilson (Willison) Fleming, Harold L. Fontenette, Ferdinand J. Fortune III, Phillip L. Fortune, Geneva M. Gambrell, Jo Ann Gaskin, Charles S. Gibson, Peggy M.C. Jackson, Shirley M. Jennings, Alvin F. Johnson, Ervin C. Kinsey, Daniel J. Lewis, Sylvester Lyle Jr., Ernestine M. Lyons, Rosalee Mckinley, Rosemary J. McLean, Doris J. Mackey, Lucy Madere, Rose Mary Mays, Priscilla L. Metoyer, Phillip J. Mitchell, Joseph L. Narcisse, Gwendolyn A. Norman, Audrey M. Page, Walter L. Peck, Marilyn J. Phillips, Nelson J. Pierce, Samuel G. Poplus, Geraldine Reimonenq, William Ricks, Patricia R. Robinson, Ronald Shiloh, Charles W. Smith, Mildred T. Smith, Warren A. Smith, Jacquelyn M. Stansberry, Gloria Stokes, Angela A. Vaughn, Jennie F. Warmington, Algie V. Williams, Charles K. Williams, Joseph L. Williams, and Ellis Wilson.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of Larry McKinley, a New Orleans radio personality and music promoter who for decades tirelessly promoted our city's cherished Jazz music. Mr. McKinley recently passed away and while today I am saddened by his passing, I wish to pay tribute to Mr. McKinley and his passion towards a beautiful and beloved art form.

Born in Chicago, Illinois, Mr. McKinley attended the Columbia College of Broadcasting before moving to New Orleans in 1954. By the end of his first decade in New Orleans, he became one of the most influential deejays in the city. During the formative years of his illustrious career, he earned national notoriety for his distinguished musical taste. Atlantic Records' executives credit Mr. McKinley for the success of Ray Charles 1959 hit ``What'd I Say'' the label's best-performing song of the era.

In 1959, Mr. McKinley founded Minit Records alongside Joe Banashak, a local record-business veteran. He also promoted local concerts by such musical superstars as James Brown, Sam Cooke, and the Jackson 5. Whenever possible, he shined a spotlight on the talented New Orleans musicians broadening their exposure and helping them ascend in the music business.

For these and countless other achievements Mr. McKinley was introduced into the Black Radio Hall of Fame, the Louisiana Music Hall of Fame, and awarded an OffBeat Magazine Best of the Beat Music Business Award. The passion and commitment Mr. McKinley dedicated to the national treasure that is R&B and Jazz Music inspires us all. I want to join his family, the people of New Orleans, and the music industry in celebrating the life of this exceptional citizen.

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

I rise in support of H.R. 1095, the TSA Loose Change Act. It is a straightforward bill with an admirable goal: take unclaimed money left behind at passenger screening checkpoints, often in the form of loose change, and put it to good use aiding our servicemembers and their families as they travel.

Under current law, unclaimed money left at passenger screening checkpoints is used to offset civil aviation security costs. In recent years, TSA has collected slightly less than $500,000 annually in unclaimed money at checkpoints. H.R. 1095 would amend current law by directing that these funds be transferred to a nonprofit organization, such as the United Service Organizations, to provide places of relaxation and recuperation at airports for members of the Armed Forces and their families.

I am pleased to lend my support for this legislation. I know that the chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee has been a champion of this legislation for several Congresses now, and I applaud him for his persistence on this issue.

Chairman Miller will be glad to know that this is not the first bill regarding servicemembers and veterans that the committee has seen moved during this Congress. Earlier this year, the Helping Heroes Fly Act, of which I was an original cosponsor, went on to become law. That legislation, introduced by my colleague on the Committee on Homeland Security, Representative Gabbard from Hawaii, requires TSA to provide expedited screening for severely injured servicemembers and veterans. Together, the Helping Heroes Fly Act and the TSA Loose Change Act display the committee's commitment to honoring our servicemembers and veterans.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, let me thank the chairman of the full Committee on Homeland Security, who is the chairman of the committee that I am ranking member on, and Mr. Miller for introducing this legislation and for working in such a bipartisan manner. Of course, let me thank my ranking member, Mr. Thompson, from the neighboring State of Mississippi.

This bill is a bipartisan effort, and it goes to show the American people that we do have good common sense here in Congress and that we do things that are right just because they are the right things to do.

I urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation, which will give resources to some of our most valuable citizens in the country-- the ones who put their lives on the line for us--so that we may help them in expediting and in making their travels more relaxed throughout the United States.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

I rise in strong support of H.R. 2719, the Transportation Security Acquisition Reform Act.

H.R. 2719 addresses longstanding concerns that I and other members of this committee have raised about the Transportation Security Administration's stewardship of taxpayer funds when pursuing, acquiring, and deploying security-related technologies. Importantly, the bill also seeks to address TSA's lackluster record of contracting with small businesses.

Earlier this year, the Subcommittee on Transportation Security, of which I am the ranking member, held a hearing with industry stakeholders. We heard from representatives of both small and large businesses on how to improve TSA's acquisition practices and on how the agency can engage with small businesses more effectively. Simply put, TSA's failure to meet its goals for prime contracting with small businesses is unacceptable. There are ample small, minority-owned and disadvantaged businesses that are ready, willing, and able to provide services and technologies to TSA that would enhance our security and likely reduce contracting costs. If TSA cannot identify such businesses, I would be happy to refer them to some.

The bill takes a significant step toward holding TSA more accountable for achieving its goals for contracting with small and disadvantaged businesses by requiring the agency to develop an action plan to accomplish its goals and report to Congress on how it plans to get there.

I thank the subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Hudson), for his willingness to have included small businesses in the discussion as we developed the legislation before the House today. Indeed, at every turn, this legislation was developed in a bipartisan fashion, and the final product is better for that.

The bill tackles head-on the lack of transparency and accountability that has plagued TSA's acquisition practices since the agency's inception. Among TSA's most notable and costly acquisition missteps are the ``puffer machines,'' which did not work, and the whole body AIT machines, which could not be modified to protect passengers' privacy. While no legislation can guarantee that an agency will not falter when acquiring technologies, H.R. 2719 represents a significant step in the right direction.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would like to take this opportunity to thank the chairman of Homeland Security, Mr. McCaul, and the chairman of the subcommittee, Mr. Hudson, for the bipartisan manner in which they have handled not only this bill but all of the bills. It is typical of how we conduct ourselves on the committee. I especially thank my ranking member, Mr. Thompson from Mississippi, as we put the goals, the safety, and the value of the American public over partisanship.

This bill does four things that I am really excited about. It creates jobs through working with small businesses. It provides greater transparency with the acquisition process. It creates more efficiencies within the Department and saves the American taxpayers money. Last but certainly not least, it makes our traveling public safer.

With these goals that we have made a priority in crafting this legislation and in pushing it through, I am happy with the final product, and I would urge all of our Members to support it.

With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

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

I rise in support of H.R. 1204, the Aviation Security Stakeholder Participation Act.

Mr. Speaker, soliciting input from impacted stakeholders is critical to developing effective policies. H.R. 1204, introduced by the ranking member of the Committee on Homeland Security, Representative Thompson of Mississippi, codifies that sentiment by making permanent the Aviation Security Advisory Committee.

Soon after 9/11, industry representatives from all corners of the transportation sector gathered to support TSA's efforts to develop an efficient, effective, and workable security program. For a number of years, the advisory committee was a productive partner to TSA. Unfortunately, TSA allowed the advisory committee to become inactive by letting the charter lapse.

Although the Aviation Security Advisory Committee's charter was renewed in 2011, it was only in response to congressional pressure by Ranking Member Thompson in this committee and the repeated complaints about the lack of dialogue between TSA and the industry stakeholders. The advisory committee is a valuable asset to our Nation's aviation security because it helps ensure that the policies that TSA develops are responsive to security challenges and can be effectively integrated into security operations. Simply

put, the advisory committee is too valuable to Homeland Security to risk it becoming inactive again.

I applaud Ranking Member Thompson for introducing this legislation to make the Aviation Security Advisory Committee permanent, and I thank the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee for making sure that it moved through the process quickly, and both for seeing the wisdom of making this legislation law.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson), the ranking member of the Committee on Homeland Security.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank again the chairman of the full committee, Mr. McCaul; the chairman of the subcommittee, Mr. Hudson; and the ranking member of the full committee, Mr. Thompson, for moving this legislation, and thank Mr. Thompson for introducing it.

I once again urge my colleagues to support this legislation to codify the Aviation Security Advisory Committee so stakeholders have a permanent seat at the table when TSA develops policies that have a direct impact on our security and their operations.

Simply what it does is guarantees that policies won't be implemented solely by people relying on theory, but ensures that the stakeholders are at the table to talk about the reality of the policies that they implement.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I again urge my colleagues to support the legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of a special man, Rev. Theodore Judson ``T.J.'' Jemison, a long-time community leader and civil rights icon. Rev. Jemison dedicated his life to making the world a better place and, although we are saddened by his passing, the legacy that he leaves behind stands as a testament to his incredible life.

Born in Selma, Alabama, Rev. Jemison became pastor of Mount Zion First Baptist Church in Baton Rouge, Louisiana in 1949. He would remain there for the next 54 years. From early in his time as pastor, he was on the forefront of the civil rights movement. In 1953, Rev. Jemison helped organize and lead a boycott of the segregated buses in Baton Rouge. That action served as a blueprint for Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. when he led the boycott of buses in Montgomery two years later.

While the Montgomery bus boycott was an important chapter in American history, Rev. Jemison's role in the civil rights movement in Baton Rouge didn't end there. He also played an important part in a wide range of other victories for equal rights, including getting black Baton Rouge residents hired at department stores, black deputies hired at the Sheriff's Office, and even helping bring down the barrier to black college football players playing on formerly all-white teams. He would continue his tireless advocacy for equality for the rest of his life.

Rev. Jemison's dedication to righting wrongs in society was matched by his devotion to healing and helping his community. Those twin passions drove him to make life better for people everywhere. The work that Rev. Jemison did made the world a better place. Without the opportunities created through the effort of men and women like him, I would not be here today. So, if I can see any further, it is only because I stand on the shoulders of giants like Rev. T.J. Jemison.

I want to join his family, congregation, and the state of Louisiana in honoring the life and legacy of a special man.

Thank you, Mr. Boustany.

Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to welcome the newest member of the Louisiana delegation, the Representative of Louisiana's Fifth Congressional District, to Washington, D.C., and to this distinguished body. There is no doubt in my mind that he will be a welcome addition.

While he has never served in or held elective office, Mr. McAllister brings with him the value of the many experiences and accomplishments he has attained through his lifetime. Like Mr. Boustany said, he is a veteran, a successful businessman, and a devoted family man. He has committed himself to addressing the needs of the people of Louisiana and finding commonsense solutions to the problems that plague the Nation.

One thing that I have come to know as a Member who represents Louisiana

is that, historically, we have not had the luxury of being partisan because of the many needs of our State.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I congratulate our newest Member of the House and welcome him.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Black Men of Labor as they celebrate 20 years of service in preserving art and culture in the city of New Orleans.

The Black Men of Labor was established in 1993 by musicians Fred J. Johnson Jr., Benny Jones Sr., and Gregory Stafford. For the past twenty years, they have honored the contributions of African American men in the work place while promoting and preserving traditional jazz music.

Rooted in the historic neighborhood of Treme, America's oldest African American community, these men celebrate their West African heritage with yearly parades throughout the streets of New Orleans.

I want to commend the Black Men of Labor for their commitment to preserving the living, breathing birthright of the city of New Orleans, jazz music. Through our triumphs and tragedies, it is our rich legacy in the arts that keeps us grounded as a community. Organizations like the Black Men of Labor are at the core of this commitment.

On Sunday, October 20th, the streets once again came alive to the sound of music as the Black Men of Labor celebrated their 20th anniversary. I want to join the New Orleans community in celebrating their contributions.

In 1987, the United States Congress designated jazz as a rare and valuable national treasure to which we should devote our attention, support, and resources to make sure it is preserved, understood and promulgated. Today, I echo that sentiment and applaud these men for their dedication to empowering their communities through music and the arts.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of Reginald ``Reggie'' Lawson, Sr., a New Orleans resident who exemplified the true value of citizenship and worked every day to improve his community. Mr. Lawson recently passed away after a battle with cancer. While today I am saddened by his passing, I wish to pay tribute to Mr. Lawson and the inspiration he provided to all those who desire to improve their own corner of the world.

Mr. Lawson grew up in a single-parent household in public housing. He graduated from St. Augustine High School in New Orleans, where he played football and sang in the Glee Club, and was a proud Purple Knight alumnus. After studying at LSUNO and Straight Business School, he became a realtor in 1963. He remained in that trade for the rest of his life and developed a passion for helping those shut out of home ownership.

In 1993, an important event for both Mr. Lawson and the St. Roch neighborhood occurred: Mr. Lawson moved to a house across the street from St. Roch Park. His love for the neighborhood and his desire to improve it led him to found the Faubourg St. Roch Improvement Association in 1995. His hard work and determination made him a key figure and leading force in the drive to improve St. Roch.

Mr. Lawson's effect on the neighborhood can be seen in a wide variety of areas, including the physical improvements to the park, the development of youth sports teams, and the sponsorship of health and housing fairs by the Faubourg St. Roch Improvement Association. However, the best evidence of the great and positive influence he had comes from the testimony of those whose lives he touched. He was known throughout the city as ``the face of St. Roch.'' His hard work and dedication were widely noted and he served as an example of the good that a responsible member of a community can have on the lives of those around them.

I want to join his family, the people of the St. Roch neighborhood, and the city of New Orleans in celebrating the life of an exceptional citizen.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Lake Forest Charter Elementary School, an outstanding school from my district, for being selected as a 2013 National Blue Ribbon School.

Lake Forest Charter is a special school in a special city. After the 2005 disasters of Hurricane Katrina and the levee failures left the school and the area devastated, current CEO Mardele Early, dedicated teachers, and devoted families banded together to rebuild and reopen the school. That effort illustrates vividly the commitment of the faculty and staff and the level of parental involvement that are the foundation of Lake Forest's success.

Lake Forest Charter's Blue Ribbon Schools selection is in the ``Exemplary High Performing'' category. This award is given to some of the highest performing schools across the nation, and I am proud that Lake Forest is receiving national recognition for the outstanding education it provides to local school children. With more than 80 percent of its students qualifying for free or reduced lunches, Lake Forest Charter has consistently been one of the top schools in Louisiana. It is one of only two schools in the state that are National Title I Distinguished Schools for Exceptional Performance and repeatedly has had every one of its 4th and 8th graders pass the required statewide tests.

Every child in this nation deserves a quality education and it is schools like Lake Forest Charter Elementary School that bring us closer to making that a reality. I commend the faculty, staff, parents, and students for all their hard work and congratulate them on this prestigious award.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, let me start with congratulating both the chairman of the committee and the ranking member for including commonsense reforms in this WRRDA bill of this Congress; and with those commonsense reforms, I have just one to add.

Right now, when the Corps of Engineers does their cost-benefit analysis, they only look at the brick and mortar of the property that they are looking to protect. Well, that just doesn't make sense when we are talking about things that affect our economy.

For example, you can't just look at the bricks and mortars of the Port of New York. The Port of New York pays about $3.7 billion in taxes to the Federal Government every year. So if you only looked at the cost of the port, to rebuild the Port of New York, you would certainly miss the billions and billions of dollars' worth of impact.

There is an example in Louisiana where the port is thinking about building a levee. It includes not only the port, but it also includes our refineries, where we know that if those residents are forced to evacuate, like in Isaac, the cost of gas went up 7 cents around the country for 5 days. So you can't just look at the cost of those homes, when we know that that keeps the price of gas down and would affect the national economy.

So this is just one more of those commonsense reforms, Mr. Chairman; and I would hope that we look at this and make sure that everyone who has a port understands that the value of the port is not in the bricks and mortar, but in the goods and services that come through in the commodities.

With that, Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to my colleague from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise).

Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. Chairman, also what we included in here, which I think is very important, and all of my colleagues should understand, is that when the Corps right now would evaluate a farm, they would just look at rebuilding the farmhouse, as opposed to the fact that you have millions and millions or hundreds of acres that produce goods every day for the Nation.

So we don't want the Corps to just look at brick and mortar when, for example, you may have an interstate smack dab in the area that they are thinking about protecting, and that interstate may be an evacuation route. It may be Interstate 10, which our goods and services come down.

All we are saying is that the Corps should use common sense when they do their cost-benefit analysis and not just look at bricks and mortar because, to do a true economic impact or a cost-benefit analysis, you have to get into the complexities of what the building, what the area has to offer.

So we would say that our refineries, our Port of South Louisiana, our Port of New Orleans are those types of things that you absolutely must protect, and you have to factor in the fact that they send billions and billions of dollars to the Federal Government every year in taxes.

So we would not just lose the bricks and mortar, but the Federal Government would lose billions and billions of dollars. And we are saying to the Corps of Engineers that they should take that into account when they are doing their cost-benefit analysis.

With that, Mr. Chairman, I would just urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' for the amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.