Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the chair and ranking member of the committee for bringing this bill forward at a time of national crisis in the workplace on sexual harassment.

When I chaired the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which was 15 years after the statute had been passed, sexual harassment had not even been defined as a form of workplace discrimination. We held hearings and so defined it, and the Supreme Court thereafter affirmed the EEOC guidelines.

Congress, nevertheless, exempted itself until 30 years later when in 1995--prompted by a controversy involving Members of the Congress-- brought Congress under 13 major civil rights and labor laws. But mysteriously--and I still can't understand why--Congress exempted itself from the easiest provision, the provision we bring forward today for posting and training. I will never understand that failure, but we are trying to move forward today.

There are other needed provisions, and I have introduced a bill to bring the comprehensive provisions that we now require of the legislative branch or the private sector forward, and I thank the Committee on House Administration for continuing to work on these issues, too.

Congress failed in 1964. Congress failed again in 1995. Now, in 2017, it is impossible to justify exempting congressional offices and Members of Congress from the comprehensive provisions Congress now requires of private employers and Federal agencies. We will never be respected until we are brought under the same laws as everybody else.

Congressional staff deserve the same civil and antidiscrimination protections afforded to other Federal employees. It is important that powerful figures who play an outsized role here in Congress be brought to the same level as other employers.

Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce a bill to permit commercial filming and photography on the grounds of the U.S. Capitol, east of Union Square, the only area where such filming is currently authorized. This bill would permit commercial filming and photography outside of the Capitol and congressional office buildings by permit, so long as both the House and Senate are not in session. In today' s world, where many societies are facing upheavals, our country should be the first to encourage commercial filming and photography of the Capitol, which symbolizes U.S.

democracy at work. Hollywood and other commercial filmmakers should not have to go to other or fake capitol buildings for movies and films about the U.S. Capitol. The current policy permitting filming near the United States Botanic Garden shows that the Capitol police can handle filmmaking on Capitol grounds, especially when Congress is not in session. However, filming from that vantage point captures the least familiar view of the Capitol. At a time when the reputation of Congress is particularly low, filming of the Capitol, a building that represents American democracy, could bolster its image. Keeping filmmakers from standing in front of the Capitol is neither business-friendly nor true to the nation's democratic traditions. Encouraging commercial filming and photography at the Capitol would help spread the story of our national legislature around the world. The time is overdue to allow commercial filming and photography of the exterior of the historic 19th century Capitol building.

There is no good reason why commercial filming and photography should be confined to Union Square. Specifically, my bill gives the Capitol Police the discretion, depending on the circumstances in and around the Capitol, to issue a permit authorizing commercial filming and photography under the same conditions as those in Union Square. Such areas might include, for example, Independence Avenue on the House side and Constitution Avenue on the Senate side. No policy or security reason exists to justify limiting commercial filming and photography of the Capitol complex to only one location, Union Square, particularly considering that permits are necessary. People are regularly seen on East Capitol Street (east of 2nd Street) taking pictures, where they get a full view of the Capitol building, demonstrating how arbitrary it is to limit commercial filming and photography to Union Square.

Capitol Police would also have authority to charge a fee to cover any costs incurred by the Architect of the Capitol as a result of the issuance of the permit, to be deposited into the Capitol Trust Account. The Capitol Trust Account was established to accept proceeds from any fees collected for commercial filming and photography permits for Union Square. Amounts in the Capitol Trust Account would be available without fiscal year limitation for such maintenance, improvements, and projects with respect to the Capitol grounds as the Architect of the Capitol considers appropriate, subject to the approval of the Appropriations Committees of the House and Senate.

Views of the U.S. Capitol are among America's most iconic. Limiting commercial filming and photography of the Capitol, an important vehicle for telling the nation's story, does not serve the American people. Indeed, most of the world knows our country and reveres our system of government largely through commercial films and photos of the Capitol, which symbolizes our democracy at work. Commercial films and photographs of the Capitol, the seat of our democracy, are perhaps the best modern vehicles for telling the nation's story and showcasing its democratic system of government. Republicans and Democrats alike revere the image as a symbol of patriotism. My bill would enable appropriate, permitted commercial filming and photography of the Capitol, and would create economic benefits for the nation, the city, and private business.

Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce the Reducing Long-Term Unemployment Act to address one of the lingering workforce tragedies in today's economy--our long-term unemployed--and to keep the economy growing. Although the overall unemployment rate has fallen to approximately four percent, Americans who have remained unemployed for longer than 27 weeks have not enjoyed a similar recovery. In October 2017, the number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more) was 1.6 million, which accounted for 24.8 percent of the total unemployed population.

To make matters even worse, the long-term unemployed now face employment discrimination as employers show reluctance to hire these job-seekers because of the length of their unemployment. Therefore, my bill provides a necessary incentive to hire the long-term unemployed--a $5,000 tax credit for employers against their payroll tax liability for each (net) new long-term unemployed person they hire. This tax credit is large enough to give employers an incentive to increase the hiring and wages of those who have been unjustifiably left behind, while ensuring that the economy benefits from their participation. The credit would be available to the broadest base of employers because every employer, including nonprofits, pays payroll taxes, and employers could claim the credit on a quarterly, rather than annual, basis. According to the independent, non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, the proposal would ``increase both output and employment'' through four mechanisms: (1) with lower employment costs, employers would reduce the costs of their products and services, which, in turn, would first

boost sales and then hiring and hours worked; (2) employers would pass on some of the tax savings to employees in the form of higher wages or other compensation, which, in turn, would increase employees' purchasing power; (3) higher profits would lead to higher stock prices for public companies, increasing shareholders' wealth and therefore their willingness to spend; and (4) with lower employment costs, employers would increase hiring. The bill has safeguards to prevent employers from gaming the system, including denying a credit to an employer that fires one employee and hires a replacement in order to take advantage of the incentive.

For some time, it has been clear that targeted policies are necessary to address today's stubborn long-term unemployment rates. Without significant targeting, the long-term unemployed are in danger of becoming permanently unemployed. This group of competent and experienced Americans deserves better.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing the District of Columbia- based Washington Photo Safari, which has just hosted the 35,000th participant in its amateur photographers training program.

Founded by professional architectural photographer E. David Luria, Washington Photo Safari was the first community-based field photography training program in the country. With 11 instructors, the program provides more than 40 photography skill sets in 140 different venues throughout the District.

Most of Washington Photo Safari's participants come from the D.C.- area. The `participants' skill levels range from people who have just bought their first camera to seasoned professional photographers who value Mr. Luria's knowledge of when, where and how to capture the best images in the District.

Averaging just six to seven participants per training session, the ``photo safaris'' take place at some of the District's most iconic landmarks, including the National Mall, Washington National Cathedral, Franciscan Monastery of the Holy Land in America, Tidal Basin, Capitol Hill, Cathedral of St. Matthew the Apostle, Smithsonian National Zoo, National Gallery of Art and National Museum of American History.

The Washington Photo Safari has received Trip Advisor's Certificate of Excellence Award for the past five years due to dozens of five-star reviews from its customers, solidifying its place on Trip Advisor's list of top 10 outdoor activities in the District. In addition, with its success, similar programs have been implemented in 20 other U.S. cities with guidance provided by Washington Photo Safari.

Therefore, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing Washington Photo Safari for its achievements and contributions to the District of Columbia tourism industry, as well as for serving as a member organization of Destination DC, Cultural Tourism of DC and the National Cherry Blossom Festival.

Mr. Speaker, a picture is worth a thousand words, so is a graph. Following the blue line, the tax scam works this way:

For average taxpayers, the blue line--the blue line is for blue and red States--shows taxes for individual taxpayers go down for one full year. Then look what begins to happen at 2019. They begin to go up. By 2020, they continue. Follow the blue line for average

taxpayers. Their taxes are continuing to go up, they reach a real high, and steeply go up for the entire 10-year period. For business tax credits, they go down, too. That means business taxes go down. And then they, too, go up.

So the scam shows both look like they are doing the same thing, but 2024 is a dividing line. Then business income taxes plummet, but income taxes for average Americans go up.

Who is paying for these business tax cuts? Individual taxpayers.

Defeat this Republican tax scam.

Mr. Speaker, it usually takes time to uncover a tax scam, but this graph tells the whole story of the Republican tax bill in a glance.

If the House bill passes, in 2018, taxes will probably go down, taxes for individuals; and that is the blue line. Income taxes will probably go down. So far so good.

But follow the blue line for average U.S. taxpayers after 2019 and you will see income taxes from 2020 to 2027, the end of the time frame for this bill, go up. In fact, from 2019 to 2027, we see tax increases for average taxpayers. There is the blue line, and we see these increases take off steeply for average taxpayers.

Now follow the red line for business income taxes. Business income taxes, like individual taxes, start off by going down, too. That means tax cuts. There they go. By 2020, business taxes, like individual income taxes, are still mostly level or going down.

Then at 2020, business income taxes increase--the same with individual income taxes. Both go up.

Then comes 2024. This is the divide line; the great divide between business income taxes and individual income taxes. Business income taxes turn abruptly down--there they go; there is the red line--while individual income taxes, just as abruptly, turn steeply up. There is the blue line. Individual tax increases.

The graph showing individual income taxes going up is this blue line, but it represents what is happening in blue States and red States alike.

The bottom line for individual taxpayers--less than half of taxpayers get anything approaching a permanent tax cut, and an additional one- third have their tax liability changed by $100 or less. That adds up for most Americans to tax increases.

Business taxes go down. Here is the red line. Individual taxes, your taxes, you pay more, they go up, your taxes and mine.

The Republican plan is a tax increase bill for average Americans. Defeat the Republican tax bill to keep taxes from going up for average Americans who pay taxes in our country today.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend from Illinois for yielding to me.

I would also like to thank Representative Hice, our own Chairman Gowdy, and Ranking Member Cummings for including in this bill, like the similar bill from the last Congress, an update to the Former Presidents Act to reflect the positively changed status of the District of Columbia government since the enactment of the Former Presidents Act of 1958. As it affects the District of Columbia, this bill provides an update to indeed reflect the law regarding the District of Columbia as it is now as opposed to how it was at the time the Former Presidents Act was originally passed in 1958.

In 1958, the District of Columbia had no elected local government. It didn't have any member of this body to draw this matter to the attention of the House. Instead, the D.C. government was run by three Presidentially appointed commissioners, and all locally raised D.C. funds were deposited in the U.S. Treasury--locally raised, but put right there in the Treasury--and the Federal Government paid the employer contribution of the pensions of D.C. government employees. You can see why D.C. thought of itself at that time as a colony of the United States of America.

We have changed all that. Thanks to the Home Rule Act and the work of this Congress, this bill would treat employment of former Presidents and the widows of former Presidents in the District government in the same manner as employment in other local and State governments.

The Former Presidents Act was intended to prevent former Presidents and widows of former Presidents from double-dipping in the Treasury by collecting a Federal pension during any period they were employed by the Federal Government or the D.C. government, just in case that happened. However, the Former Presidents Act became outdated with respect to the D.C. government after Congress passed the Home Rule Act of 1973, and it needs to be updated.

The Home Rule Act granted the District of Columbia a locally elected government. Under the Home Rule Act, D.C. local funds consisting of local taxes and fees are deposited in D.C. government accounts, not the U.S. Treasury. Also, because of the Home Rule Act, former Presidents and widows of former Presidents would not be double-dipping by collecting both a Federal pension and a salary from the D.C. government because they are funded by what is now different governments.

I am very grateful that the House passed this bill last year. This is, of course, leftover business from more than 40 years ago.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend for yielding me another minute.

While the District of Columbia struggles to become the 51st State, we certainly appreciate at least being recognized as an independent jurisdiction and no longer a ward of the Federal Government, as granted by the Home Rule Act of 1973.

I particularly appreciate my friends from the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, on which I serve, seeing to it that this bill came to the floor, and Congressman Hice as well, and I appreciate the leadership for placing this bill on this calendar.

Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge the adoption of this bill.

Mr. Speaker, Saturday is Veterans Day. That is the day we set aside to revere those who served in our Armed Forces, especially today, because all who serve are volunteers.

Only one group of taxpaying volunteers who serve in our Armed Forces serve without a vote, and they are the veterans who reside in the Nation's Capital. They have no final vote on this House floor, though, of course, I vote in committee. They are not fully recognized as American citizens, although the District of Columbia is one of the oldest jurisdictions in the United States.

D.C. veterans, therefore, are at the front of the line, demanding the vote in Congress and other rights granted only to residents of States.

I thank the Members of this body who have cosponsored my bill to make the District of Columbia the 51st State. Each year we have beat last year's record in cosponsors. Today I have introduced a statehood resolution in tribute to the District of Columbia's 30,000 veterans as Veterans Day approaches on Saturday.

The residents of your Capital City have never hesitated to serve or give up their lives in war for their country. They have died for their country without a vote in disproportionate numbers.

World War I, more casualties than three States; World War II, more casualties than four States; Korean war, more casualties than eight States; the Vietnam war, more casualties than ten States of the Union.

There have been three votes to go to war since I have been a Member of Congress: the Gulf war, the Iraq war, the Afghanistan war.

I have gone to Arlington National Cemetery to comfort bereaved families from the District of Columbia who died in those wars. The tragedy of their sacrifice is deepened because these men died securing the vote for others in those nations, while they did not have the vote for themselves in their own nation.

The only remedy to make our veterans whole is to give statehood to their city. The special urgency of our demand for statehood this Veterans Day is particularly pointed up by the fact that, for years now, District of Columbia residents have been number one, per capita, in taxes paid to support the Government of the United States. Understand that, number one above all the other States in taxes paid, all without a vote. That outsize contribution, yet no vote on this House floor, no Senators in the other body.

That is not even a vote on D.C. matters. D.C. matters, some of them, have to come to this floor. The D.C. appropriation, even though D.C. residents raise more than $7 billion, not $1 of it is Federal money, yet the city's appropriation comes to this floor.

D.C. laws, sometimes on abortion or guns, are rather controversial matters, but we don't bother the States when they do the same thing, and we certainly should have nothing to say when the residents of the District pass laws of their own.

We almost got the vote on the House floor when we were paired with Utah, a Republican State. And the only reason we don't have that vote on the House floor now is that there was an attachment to the bill that tried to eliminate all the gun laws of the District of Columbia. Absurd. But we had to leave the bill on the table.

The Founders faced a unique situation when they created the District of Columbia as their Capital, but they tried an 18th century remedy that the country has long outgrown. The Nation's Capital must not be under the thumb of the national government, with citizens left without their equal rights.

We must erase the slander that the Framers of our country who went to war on the slogan of ``No Taxation Without Representation;'' that they would want to leave any Americans who paid taxes without equal representation in the United States, and especially on this floor and in the Senate.

We will bring our statehood bill to the floor as soon as it is allowed. On this Veterans Day, I ask that we bring our D.C. statehood bill to the floor. Do it for District residents. But on this Veterans Day, I ask that you do it for the 30,000 veterans who have served you, who have served their country, and who deserve equal rights in each and every respect.

Mr. Speaker, what happens if Congress goes nuts on tax cuts without paying for them?

Kansas, which did just that, has now had to raise State taxes back to where they were, providing a valuable object lesson for Congress right now: tax cuts about ideology, not economics, do not work.

Yet Republicans seem to be taking a page out of the Kansas tax cuts, authored by Governor Sam Brownback, that crushed that State's economy.

He promised tens of thousands of jobs to fund the State's schools. He guaranteed a progrowth economy that would pay for the tax cuts and then some.

Kansas did grow initially, but then lagged behind all the rest of the States. Now Brownback's tax cuts have produced new taxes for Kansas.

Let's learn from Kansas, not become Kansas 2.0.

Mr. Speaker, mass deportation of Temporary Protected Status recipients today would disrupt our country and theirs.

More than 32,000 Salvadorans live in the District of Columbia metro area; and Salvadorans, at 200,000, are the largest group of TPS holders in the country today.

TPS designation requires the Attorney General to find ``extraordinary and temporary conditions preventing returning to the state in safety.''

The most recent influx of Salvadorans, one-third of them unaccompanied minors, shows that these conditions have been met for TPS holders and others. With the breakdown of civil society in Central America today, forced return of anyone now would be inhumane.

Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce the Major General David F. Wherley, Jr., District of Columbia National Guard Retention and College Access Act (NGRCA). This bill is named for General Wherley, 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. The bill would permanently authorize funding for a program that provides grants for higher education to members of the D.C. National Guard, which is under the control of the federal, not District of Columbia, government. I renamed the bill after General Wherley because he worked tirelessly with me to get funding for the program for many years, and because of his devotion to the youth of the District and to the National Guard.

The NGRCA authorizes an education incentive program, recommended by the late General Wherley and his successor, Major General Errol Schwartz, to stem the troublesome loss of D.C. Guard members to other units, including National Guards in surrounding states that offer such educational benefits to their Guards. I am grateful that Congress has provided funds for the program at our request, most recently $450,000 in fiscal year 2017. Permanently authorizing the program is necessary, however, to ensure that D.C. Guard members receive the same treatment and benefits as other National Guard members, particularly those in neighboring states that compete with the District for members and provide these higher education benefits. Today, the Guard for the nation's capital has a diminished ability to compete for regional residents if membership in the Maryland or Virginia Guards is more economically beneficial. A competitive tuition assistance program for the D.C. Guard would provide a significant and much-needed incentive to help maintain enrollment and level the field of competition. The federal government supports D.C. Guard functions and understands it should support this small benefit as well, because the appropriators have always funded the D.C. Guard program, even without authorization. However, depending on appropriations alone leaves the D.C. Guard program in a tenuous condition at odds with the tuition programs in nearby states. Because the program is not controversial, there is no reason not to permanently authorize funding for these D.C. National Guard grants.

I appreciate that the appropriators and ultimately Congress have not hesitated to fund the education benefits for the D.C. National Guard, arguing strongly for permanent authorization. These small education incentives have not only encouraged high-quality recruits, but have helped the D.C. Guard to maintain the force necessary to protect the federal presence here, including the possibility of a natural disaster or terrorist attack. I am pleased to introduce the bill based on the advice of Guard personnel, who best know what is necessary.

I urge my colleagues to support the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I am introducing the Congress Leads by Example Act, which would subject Congress and the rest of the legislative branch to the federal whistleblower and anti-discrimination laws that now protect employees in the private sector and the executive branch. Now more than ever, especially given ongoing reports of sexual harassment and other workplace abuses in the legislative branch, Congress should abide by the laws it imposes on the American people, American businesses, and others. Congress has already acknowledged the importance of accountability in the legislative branch when it passed the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (CAA).

The CAA was an important first step in making the legislative branch accountable for its employment practices, but it did not finish the job. The CAA did bring the legislative branch under 13 major civil rights, labor and workplace safety and health laws, but it exempted the legislative branch from important notice and training provisions, and altogether omitted important substantive and administrative protections. In its annual report for fiscal year 2016, the Office of Compliance (OOC), which was established through the CAA, identified additional provisions of federal workplace laws and standards that should be applicable to the legislative branch. OOC's recommendations include mandatory anti-discrimination and anti-retaliation training, providing whistleblowers with protection from retaliation by making the Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 applicable to the legislative branch, and urging Congress to approve regulations that provide additional protections under the Family and Medical Leave Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. This bill takes into account the OOC report, and seeks to both apply the standard of fairness to employees in the legislative branch that Congress requires for other employees and to provide a safer work environment for Congress, Capitol Hill employees, and visitors by bringing the legislative branch in line with the legal requirements of private sector employers and the executive branch.

My bill is a necessary companion to the CAA, particularly in light of recent news reports of appalling behavior on the part of Members of Congress and staff in positions of authority in Member offices and committees. Former and current staffers spoke out on social media during the #MeToo campaign, which originated after the Harvey Weinstein sexual assault and harassment allegations, sharing horrifying stories of workplace harassment, including groping, inappropriate emails and text messages, and predatory behavior on the part of both Members and staff. But many legislative branch employees who have been victims of workplace harassment or worse have not felt empowered to report it since they are not protected from retaliation. My bill provides general whistleblower protections, anti-retaliation measures, and makes additional Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) provisions applicables to the legislative branch, including providing subpoena authority to OOC to conduct inspections and investigations into OSHA violations.

This bill also furthers the CAA's mission to prevent discrimination in legislative branch offices by prohibiting the legislative branch from making adverse employment decisions on the basis of an employee's wage garnishment or involvement in bankruptcy proceedings pursuant to the Consumer Credit Protection Act and Chapter 11 of the bankruptcy code. This bill requires legislative branch employers to provide their employees with notice of their rights and remedies under the CAA anti- discrimination provisions through the placement of signage in offices highlighting relevant anti-discrimination laws, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. This bill also requires legislative branch offices to provide training to employees about their CAA rights and remedies. Finally, this bill bolsters the CAA's recordkeeping requirements. It extends to the legislative branch the obligation to maintain accurate records of safety information and employee injuries, as otherwise required by OSHA, as well as employee records necessary to administer anti-discrimination laws.

By passing this bill, Congress will help restore the public trust in this institution by redoubling our efforts to exercise leadership by example. I urge bipartisan support for this important measure.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing the Catalogue for Philanthropy: Greater Washington for its contributions to the District of Columbia and the region on the occasion of its 15th anniversary.

The Catalogue for Philanthropy: Greater Washington was founded in 2003 by Barbara Harman, who recognized the need to identity and highlight the best community-based nonprofits in the region.

It has built the foundation of its success based on a rigorous vetting process that is implemented by local experts to ensure excellence in the programming, finances and impact of selected nonprofits. In addition, the organization raises the visibility and resources of these nonprofits, connects them with philanthropic dollars that fuel their growth and works to create a movement for social good in the D.C. region.

The organization also has a tradition of advocating for and supporting nonprofits through capacity-building programs designed to strengthen them in the face of rapid change.

Since it began, the Catalogue for Philanthropy: Greater Washington has demonstrated its impact by raising over $40 million for charities in its network, including 200 organizations that operate in the District.

Therefore, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing the leaders of the Catalogue for Philanthropy: Greater Washington and their commitment to create a stronger, more resilient, more hopeful community that is a better place to live for everyone.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing the Washington Informer Newspaper Co. Inc. for its 53 years of service in the District of Columbia metropolitan area.

The Washington Informer Newspaper Co. Inc. (Washington Informer), a multimedia organization, was founded on October 16, 1964, by Dr. Calvin Rolark, who was assisted by his wife, the late Attorney Wilhelmina Rolark, who served on the Council of the District of Columbia for 16 years representing Ward 8 residents. Both recognized the need to identify and highlight the achievements and contributions of African Americans in the District of Columbia metropolitan area.

The Washington Informer's award-winning newspaper has a tradition of tackling key issues that impact the African American community in the District, including financial literacy, homeownership and sustainability. Since 1994, the paper has been published by Denise Rolark Barnes, Dr. Calvin Rolark's daughter. Today, the Washington Informer has an average of 50,000 weekly readers and more than 7,500 weekly email newsletter subscribers.

The Washington Informer is a member of several associations as well, including the National Newspaper Publishers Association, where Denise Rolark Barnes serves as chair. In addition, the organization sponsors an annual spelling bee for District children in grades three through eight, and an African American Heritage Tour and an annual Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Holiday Peace Walk and Parade. The Washington Informer also provides internship opportunities for high school and college students interested in pursuing careers in journalism and media through its charitable organization, Washington Informer Charities.

Therefore, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing the Washington Informer, its founders and its current publisher for their 53 years of service to the District of Columbia metropolitan area and for continuously upholding the Washington Informer's mission, to educate, empower and inform through the production of quality news content that focuses on African Americans and particularly their positive contributions to the communities in which they live and work.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 378, the Bonuses for Cost- Cutters Act, as reported by the committee. This legislation enhances the existing award program for Federal employees whose identification of waste, fraud, and abuse results in cost savings to an agency.

Every day, Federal employees across the country provide vital services to the American people. They ensure that our veterans receive the benefits to which they are entitled. They work to keep our air safe to breathe and our water safe to drink. They spend long hours and put their lives at risk to safeguard our national and homeland security. And Federal employees are on the front lines in ensuring that these important missions are carried out as effectively and efficiently as possible.

I think we can all agree that no one benefits when taxpayer dollars are wasted. This bill aims to increase government efficiency and save taxpayer dollars by providing incentives to Federal employees to identify wasteful spending. The legislation allows an agency head to award an employee a bonus for the identification of wasteful expenses that result in agency cost savings.

The bill also doubles the amount that an inspector general may award an employee for disclosures of waste, fraud, and abuse that result in cost savings from $10,000 to $20,000.

In addition, the bill contains several accountability measures so that Congress and the American people can determine whether the legislation is working as intended. First, agencies must include information on disclosures of wasteful spending and awards distributed under this legislation in their annual, publicly available, performance report.

The bill also includes a requirement that the director of the Office of Management and Budget submit a report to Congress each year certifying that each agency's cash award program complies with the bill.

In addition, the bill requires a GAO report on the operation of awards program within 3 years, including any recommendations for legislative changes. Democratic members of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee raised concerns about prior versions of this bill, and I want to thank Chairman Gowdy for working with us to address those concerns. The bill we have before us today reflects bipartisan concerns.

We must support Federal employees who identify ways to increase efficiency and reduce waste. I believe this bill does that, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

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

Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I yield back the balance of my time.