Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Bernice Johnson Reagon. Not only was Bernice a music and civil rights icon, but she was also my longtime friend. After being expelled from Albany State University because of an arrest related to her activism, Bernice helped form the ``Freedom Singers,'' an a cappella group that was part of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC). I was deeply involved in SNCC. The Freedom Singers helped document SNCC's activities through music. Even in the darkest times, civil rights activists would raise their voices in song.

In 1973, while teaching a vocal workshop in the District of Columbia, Bernice founded the a cappella group ``Sweet Honey in the Rock,'' with which she performed until 2004. Since its inception, Sweet Honey in the Rock has expressed African American history through song, dance and sign language, earning three Grammy nominations.

In addition to performing, Bernice was also a music historian who held the title of Curator Emerita at the National Museum of American History. Bernice received a BA from Spelman College and a PhD in History from Howard University and was a professor at American University. In 1989, Bernice was awarded a MacArthur Fellowship. Bernice helped change the history of our country through song.

I ask the House of Representatives to join me in honoring the incredible life and legacy of Bernice Johnson Reagon.

Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce the Increased Transparency in 501(c)(4) Organizations Act of 2024. This bill would require the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to make publicly available the forms organizations that self-declare under Section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) file with the IRS. Americans have the right to know which organizations are operating under this section of the IRC.

To be eligible for tax-exempt status under 501(c)(4), organizations, often referred to as ``social welfare organizations,'' must be ``devoted exclusively to charitable, educational, or recreational purposes.'' They can apply for 501(c)(4) status, or they can self- declare. Previously, organizations seeking to self-declare were not required to notify the IRS of their existence. In 2015, however, the Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes Act of 2015 (PATH Act), which required an organization seeking to self-declare to file a notice with the IRS, was enacted into law. The PATH Act did not, however, make the filed notices, Form 8976, subject to public disclosure

The IRS has opined that Form 8976 cannot be made available under the Freedom of Information Act or other disclosure laws. This opinion creates a discrepancy between those organizations for which the IRS must make publicly available information--all Section

501(c)(3) organizations and 501(c)(4) organizations that applied for that status--and self-declared 501(c)(4) organizations. This discrepancy appears to have been inadvertently created by the PATH Act.

This bill would fix this discrepancy by requiring the IRS to publicly disclose any filed Form 8976 upon request, thus allowing the public to know which organizations operate under 501(c)(4), as they do with organizations that operate under 501(c)(3). In the aftermath of the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision, which allows unlimited expenditures in political campaigns by these ``social welfare'' organizations, greater transparency is needed.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the Nation's community supervision professionals, who are dedicated public servants and perform many vital roles in their work with justice-involved adults and juveniles. Community supervision professionals identify opportunities and services to help justice-involved individuals contribute to society, while holding them accountable for their actions. They remain mindful of their role in protecting public safety.

In honor of Pretrial, Probation and Parole Supervision Week 2024, we salute all those who have chosen this important career. In the District of Columbia, we especially thank the employees of the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency for the District of Columbia (CSOSA) and the Pretrial Services Agency for the District of Columbia (PSA) for their service. CSOSA and PSA are models of excellence in community supervision. The theme of Pretrial, Probation and Parole Supervision Week 2024 is ``Wellness Unveiled: Navigating the Journey.''

Community supervision agencies are valuable partners of other government agencies, nonprofits, neighborhood-based groups and all who strive to make our Nation safer and stronger. We extend out gratitude to community supervision professionals and encourage all people to recognize their many achievements as we proclaim July 21-27, 2024, as Pretrial, Probation and Parole Supervision Week 2024.

Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce the Major General David F. Wherley, Jr., District of Columbia National Guard Retention and College Access Program Act. This bill would permanently authorize funding for the Major General David F Wherley, Jr., District of Columbia National Guard Retention and College Access Program, which provides financial assistance for higher education to members of the D.C. National Guard, which is an exclusively federal entity.

This program and bill are named for Major General David F. Wherley, Jr., former Commanding General of the D.C. National Guard, who, along with his wife, Ann, and seven others were tragically killed when Metro trains collided on the Red Line on June 22, 2009. I named this bill for Major General Wherley because he worked tirelessly with me for many years to get funding for this program, and because of his devotion to D.C. youth and to the D.C. National Guard.

This program was recommended by Major General Wherley and his successor at the D.C. National Guard, Major General Errol Schwartz, to stem the troublesome loss of D.C. National Guard members to other units, including National Guards in surrounding states that offer financial assistance for higher education to their members. I am grateful that Congress has consistently provided funding for this program, most recently $600,000 in fiscal year 2024. Permanently authorizing this program will help ensure that members of the D.C. National Guard receive the same benefits as members of other National Guards and help the D.C. National Guard recruit and retain members.

This program not only benefits D.C. National Guard members, the great majority of whom live in Maryland or Virginia, but also helps the D.C. National Guard to maintain the force necessary to protect the federal presence in D C.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, today I introduce the Fairness in Federal Bureau of Prisons Medical Care Act of 2024. This bill would eliminate the copay the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) imposes on individuals in its custody when they visit a health care provider.

Under BOP rules, individuals in its custody are required to ``pay a fee for health services of $2.00 per health care visit.'' While $2 may seem insignificant, when such individuals earn only twelve to forty cents per hour on their work assignments, $2 is substantial. That money could better be used to pay for the cost of necessities. Moreover, while copays can reduce unnecessary appointments, we should be encouraging such individuals to seek medical care before their conditions become worse and more expensive for taxpayers. Early care is better for patients and much less expensive for the federal government than costly treatments that could have been avoided by a simple health care visit earlier in the process.

Under BOP rules, if an individual in BOP custody is found responsible through the Disciplinary Hearing Process of having caused an injury to another person in BOP custody that required a visit to a health care provider, the offending individual is required to pay the $2 copay for the injured individual's visit. That rule would not change under this bill.

Removing this unnecessary copay would encourage early treatment and would save the federal government money.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce the District of Columbia Government Accountability Office Home Rule Act. This bill would repeal the authority of the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) over the District of Columbia.

GAO, a federal agency that conducts investigations and audits for Congress, has the same authority over D.C. that it has over federal agencies. GAO's authorizing statute defines D.C. as a federal agency. In addition, GAO's authorizing statute and the D.C. Home Rule Act require GAO to engage in specific types of oversight of D.C.

D.C. is not a federal agency, and it should never be treated as such. D.C. already has a locally appointed auditor and inspector general, so GAO's authority over D.C. is both redundant and offensive. GAO does not have general authority over states and cities, and therefore should not have such authority over D.C. This bill is an important step to increase home rule for D.C.

Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce the REAL ID Gender Requirement Reform Act, which would remove the requirement from the REAL ID Act that REAL ID-compliant licenses include gender. Instead, the decision of whether to have gender on a state's REAL-ID-compliant licenses would be left to the states. I am pleased Representative Maxwell Frost is co-leading this bill.

This bill would require states that require gender designation for licenses to allow individuals wishing to change their gender designation on their license to do so through self-attestation. It would also require states that require gender designation on licenses to have a neutral or other designation gender field, in addition to male or female.

Under the REAL ID Act, gender must be included on a license. This can be problematic for transgender or nonbinary individuals. I recognize that some LGBTQ+ individuals do not want gender designations on licenses at all, while others do want gender designation so as to express their identity. I believe this bill strikes the middle ground, while showing Congress' support for LGBTQ+ individuals.

This is an important bill for equality. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce the Veterans Legal Support Act of 2024, which would allow the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to provide support to law school clinical programs that provide pro bono legal and support services to veterans, including assistance with disability claims and foreclosures. There are at least 22 law schools that have clinics devoted to veterans' legal needs, including the William & Mary Law School Veterans Benefits Clinic, which was the first recipient of a ``best practice'' certification from the VA. There are many other law schools, such as the University of the District of Columbia's David A. Clarke School of Law, that are interested in starting their own VA-certified clinics. More needs to be done to sustain and increase the number of these programs.

I was a tenured professor at the Georgetown University Law Center and continued to teach a seminar there after being elected to Congress. I saw the expert assistance that clinical programs provide their clients.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill, a concrete measure that would assist our veterans, who put their lives on the line for this country.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in celebrating the 32nd anniversary of the Giant National Capital Barbecue Battle. This District of Columbia summertime tradition takes place during the first full week of summer each year and brings together tens of thousands of families in the D.C. region and visitors to D.C. in the spirit of unity, community and celebration.

The Giant National Capital Barbecue Battle is returning once again to historic Pennsylvania Avenue on June 22, 2024, featuring the Giant National BBQ Championship, the National Pork BBQ Championship, the USO Military Chef Cook Off, the Roseda Best Beef Contest, the Smokin' with Smithfield Rib Contest, the Perdue Sizzlin' Chicken Contest, the Turkey Smoke BBQ Cooking Contest, the Bachan's Chefs Choice BBQ Contest and the Impossible Foods Barbecue Championship.

The Giant National Capital Barbecue Battle has raised millions of dollars for D.C. charities and USO-Metro over the past 32 years and has donated food to numerous food banks.

The Giant National Capital Barbecue Battle has expanded to include a month of celebration in D.C. to promote D.C. and its unique culture, partnering with DC Water, Monumental Sports, Ben's Chili Bowl and the Anacostia Business Improvement District through Art to Go-Go.

The Giant National Capital Barbecue Battle draws some of D.C.'s and the nation's best barbecue talent, and those participants have the duty and the honor of representing D.C. wherever State Barbecue Cooking Championship winners are welcomed.

Mr. Speaker, again, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing the Giant National Capital Barbecue Battle.

Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce a bill that would make a small but respectful change to federal law by adding the Mayor of the District of Columbia to the list of named principals for whom the President shall order the U.S. flag be flown at half-staff. Current law states that the President shall make this order ``upon the death of principal figures of the United States Government and the Governor of a State, territory, or possession, as a mark of respect to their memory.'' Surely the D.C. Mayor should qualify as such a principal. My bill would add the D.C. Mayor, who has the same responsibilities as state and territory governors, to the current list of officials. This bill is part of a series of bills to ensure equal treatment for the nearly 700,000 residents of the District of Columbia. In the 116th Congress, the House Committee on the Judiciary passed this bill.

Congress has already acknowledged that D.C. is entitled to a place among the states for certain honors. For example, legislation we got enacted gave D.C. a coin after D.C. was omitted from legislation creating coins for the states and required the armed services to display the D.C. flag whenever the flags of the states are displayed. We got D.C.'s Frederick Douglass and Pierre L'Enfant statues placed in the Capitol, alongside the two statues from each state. We also successfully worked with the U.S. Postal Service to create a D.C. stamp, like the stamps for the states, and successfully worked with the National Park Service to add the D.C. flag alongside the state flags near Union Station.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce the Promoting National Service and Reducing Youth Unemployment Act to address one of the greatest workforce tragedies--our unemployed young people--while filling vacancies in the public sector. Youth unemployment is harming our young people and costing our country billions of dollars each year in lost productivity and tax revenue, among other costs. Although the total unemployment rate has reached a relative low (3.9 percent), the youth unemployment rate is 8.2 percent. These young people have not had a fair chance to use the high school or college education we strongly urged them to obtain.

By adding 500,000 new members to AmeriCorps, this bill would need no new administrative structure or bureaucracy, and would allow unemployed youth to earn a stipend, obtain work experience and develop a good work history to help secure future employment. This bill would significantly expand job opportunities for young people who have done what they could to get a job, but, despite their best efforts, remain unemployed. AmeriCorps participants receive a living allowance and are also eligible for an education award equal to the value of a Pell grant, school-loan forbearance, health care benefits and childcare assistance. By expanding AmeriCorps, we would reduce the number of unemployed young people, provide them work skills and experience and help understaffed state and local governments provide services.

This bill would also establish that the minimum wage for any AmeriCorps State and National member would be 200 percent of the federal poverty line, and would not allow for a decrease in that amount, as is allowed under current law. AmeriCorps members serve their country and gain skills, but we should increase the minimum wage for everybody, including national service members.

For some time, it has been clear that policies to address the most stubborn forms of unemployment need to be targeted in order to be effective. Without significant targeting, many young people will continue to face their first years as adults without jobs and with no way to acquire necessary work experience. They deserve a better start in life as adults.

I ask my colleagues to support this urgently needed, targeted assistance for our unemployed youth.

Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce the National Commission to Combat Workplace Sexual Harassment Act, which would establish a national commission to combat sexual harassment in the workplace. I have modeled this bill on bills Congress has passed to establish commissions to address other national problems. Specifically, this bill would establish a commission to carry out a comprehensive investigation and study of workplace sexual harassment in the United States.

A national commission would assure the American people that Congress takes sexual harassment seriously, beyond just the high-profile workplace instances. Most importantly, the commission would hear from a cross section of workers--from office and factory workers to retail and food service workers. The commission could travel or invite witnesses to the District of Columbia from throughout the country to recommend changes in laws or regulations and best practices to prevent, investigate, respond to and penalize sexual harassment in the private and public sectors.

Our constituents expect Congress to take on the problem of sexual harassment throughout our national economy. A national commission could help reach and reduce sexual harassment, a form of gender discrimination, where the average American works.

I strongly urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I strongly oppose this undemocratic, paternalistic bill.

This Congress, Republicans have introduced 22 bills to overturn the District of Columbia's election laws, yet Republicans have refused to make the one and only change to D.C. election laws that D.C. residents have requested, which is to be given voting representation in the House and Senate.

Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from the D.C. Council Chairman Phil Mendelson and D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb opposing H.R. 192.

May 22, 2024.

Hon. Mike Johnson,

Speaker of the House, House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Hon. Hakeem Jeffries,

Minority Leader, House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Dear Speaker Johnson and Leader Jeffries: We write today as

two of the District's top elected local officials to express

our opposition to H.R. 192, which will overturn the Local

Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2022 (Act). At its

core, H.R. 192 is undemocratic. The District of Columbia

should be allowed to govern itself without interference from

Congress. District residents pay more federal taxes per

capita than any state, serve in the military, and contribute

to the national welfare just the same as people everywhere

else. Yet, over the past two years, our residents have

repeatedly suffered the indignity of having politicians

elected elsewhere--politicians who aren't accountable to

District residents attempt to usurp the authority of our

elected officials.

Reasonable people can disagree about the merits of the Act.

But the District's democratically elected Council voted on it

and approved it. Regardless of our own views on the Act, we

stand united in our belief that Washingtonians should enjoy

the same right to self-determination and self-governance as

people in every other state. That includes the right to

determine who should participate in purely local--not

federal--elections. H.R. 192 would deny District residents

this fundamental right.

H.R. 192 is ill-conceived for another reason: if passed, it

could sow chaos and confusion in the District's elections

this year. In fact, early and mail-in voting is already

underway for the District's primary election.

Congress already attempted to overturn the Act, introducing

no fewer than four resolutions to repudiate the will of

District voters. Each time, the resolutions have failed. We

urge Congress to once against rebuff this undemocratic attack

on District residents, affirm our right to self-governance,

and reject H.R. 192.

Sincerely,

Brian L. Schwalb,

Attorney General for the District of Columbia.

Phil Mendelson,

Chairman, Council of the District of Columbia.

Madam Speaker, before I discuss the substance of H.R. 192, I will discuss democracy and the lack of it in D.C. The nearly 700,000 District residents have no voting representation in Congress, and Congress has the ultimate say, even on local D.C. matters.

My Republican colleagues are correct that Congress has the constitutional authority to legislate on local D.C. matters, but the majority is wrong that Congress has a constitutional duty to do so. Instead, legislating on local D.C. matters is a choice.

In Federalist No. 43, James Madison said of the residents of the future D.C.: ``As a municipal legislature for local purposes, derived from their own suffrages, will of course be allowed them. . . . ''

The Supreme Court held in 1953 that: `` . . . there is no constitutional barrier to the delegation by Congress to the District of Columbia of full legislative power.''

D.C.'s local legislature, the Council, has 13 members. The members are elected by D.C. residents. If D.C. residents do not like how the members vote, they can vote them out of office. That is called democracy.

Congress has 535 Members. The Members are elected by residents of their States. None are elected by D.C. residents. If D.C. residents do not like how the Members vote on local D.C. matters, they cannot vote them out of office. That is the antithesis of democracy.

The merits of H.R. 192 should be irrelevant since there is never justification for Congress legislating on local D.C. matters. However, I will discuss H.R. 192.

D.C.'s Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2022, allows D.C. residents who are noncitizens to vote only in local D.C. elections.

D.C.'s law is not unique. More than a dozen cities today allow noncitizens to vote in local elections. While the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act applies only to local D.C. elections, there is a long history in the United States, including before its founding, of allowing noncitizens to vote in State, local, territorial, and Federal elections. At various points, 40 States have allowed noncitizens to vote, including Texas, the home of the sponsor of H.R. 192.

Congress only first prohibited noncitizens from voting in Federal elections in 1996. The House passed the disapproval resolution on the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act in February 2023. The Senate did not vote on the disapproval resolution, and the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act became law in March 2023.

Voting, including by noncitizens, started earlier this month in D.C. primary elections. Why did Republicans wait to bring H.R. 192 to the floor until voting had already started? The majority did so to disrupt the elections.

The Revolutionary War was fought to give consent to the governed and to end taxation without representation. Yet D.C. residents cannot consent to any action taken by Congress, and they pay full Federal taxes while being denied voting representation in Congress. Indeed, D.C. pays more Federal taxes per capita than any State and more total Federal taxes than 20 States.

If House Republicans cared about elections or D.C. residents, Republicans would bring to the floor the D.C. statehood bill, H.R. 51, the Washington, D.C. Admission Act.

The act would give D.C. residents voting representation in Congress and full local self-government. Congress has the constitutional

authority to admit the State of Washington, D.C. It simply lacks the will. D.C. residents, a majority of whom are Black and Brown, are worthy and capable of self-government.

Madam Speaker, I urge Members to vote ``no'' on H.R. 192.

Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce the Household Goods Shipping Consumer Protection Act. This bill would give the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) more authority to protect consumers from fraud in the interstate transportation of household goods. Specifically, this bill would give FMCSA the authority to assess civil penalties against unregistered shippers and against entities that hold consumers' personal goods hostage, give FMCSA the express authority to reimburse states for enforcing federal consumer protection laws related to the transportation of household goods and establish requirements to ensure that motor carriers, brokers and freight forwarders that seek registration are operating legitimate businesses. Representative Mike Ezell is co-leading this bill with me.

FMCSA receives thousands of complaints every year from Americans who are the victims of fraud in the shipment of household goods. Fraudsters have launched moving companies with fake 5-star online reviews to draw in customers, intending to overcharge customers or to hold their personal goods hostage until an additional fee is paid. After receiving negative reviews, fraudsters open a new moving company under a new name and a new FMCSA license. FMCSA lacks the authority to prevent and punish these types of fraud.

In 2019, a Department of Transportation Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) ruled that FMCSA lacks authority to assess civil penalties for violations of commercial regulations and registration requirements, including unauthorized brokerage and for failure to return household goods to consumers. Under current law, as interpreted by the ALJ's decision and final agency order, FMCSA may not assess civil penalties for violations of commercial regulations. Instead, the Department of Justice must initiate an action in federal court. This bill would reverse the ALJ's decision and provide explicit authority for FMCSA to adjudicate and assess civil penalties for unfair business practices and consumer protection violations, as well as give FMCSA authority to enforce roadway safety regulations against fraudsters.

This bill would also provide explicit authority to FMCSA to withhold registration from any applicant that fails to provide a valid principal place of business or disclose common ownership with any other registered entities at the time of registration. Household goods carriers, brokers and freight forwarders have registered

with addresses where no legitimate operations take place, often designating their official address as a retail package store, vacant parking lot or business address unrelated to the registered entity. FMCSA already requires motor carriers to designate a principal place of business and disclose common ownership. However, FMCSA may only take enforcement action after the entity is already registered and refuses to cooperate with investigations at the designated address.

This bill would also permit states to use Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program and High Priority program funding to conduct commercial regulatory and consumer protection standard reviews and enforcement actions against household goods motor carriers, brokers and freight forwarders. It would also clarify that states may retain the penalties and fines imposed in proceedings relating to violations of household goods statutes and regulations. These provisions would support states in their efforts to protect the American people from predatory practices.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce the District of Columbia Public Defender Service Technical Correction Act, which would fix a drafting error in the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024. Unless fixed, this error will force the D.C. Public Defender Service (PDS) to close one day per week beginning in mid-June through the rest of the current fiscal year. I very much appreciate that Senator Chris Van Hollen will be introducing the bill in the Senate. I also appreciate that he filed an amendment on the Senate floor to the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 to fix this error, but am disappointed that the Senate did not take it up.

PDS is independent of the D.C. government, is exclusively funded by the federal government and its employees are deemed federal employees for purposes of federal benefits. The Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024 provides PDS $53,629,000 in fiscal year 2024, the same funding level PDS received in fiscal year 2023. However, the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024 requires PDS to spend $3 million of its appropriation on office relocation expenses, even though PDS had already relocated offices before the bill was enacted. PDS needs the authority to spend that $3 million on salaries, or it will be forced to close one day per week. My bill would give PDS the authority to spend that $3 million on salaries.

The drafting error will not only harm PDS employees, who will not be paid when PDS is closed, it will also harm the local criminal justice system in D.C. On the days that PDS is closed, PDS attorneys will not appear in any matter before the D.C. Superior Court, the D.C. Court of Appeals, the U.S. Parole Commission or other administrative or adjudicative body. The local D.C. court system is already facing a backlog of cases because of a shortage of judges, who are appointed by the president, subject to Senate confirmation. The PDS furloughs will only exacerbate this problem. This is simply an unacceptable result, especially when it will have been caused by what everyone acknowledges is a drafting error, and not a deliberate cut to PDS's funding.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill.