Floor Statements

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 810. This bill authorizes construction of a bridge on property acquired for open space under section 404 of the Stafford Act.

Riverside Bridge in Christian County, Missouri, is a 100-year-old one-lane bridge that currently frequently closes due to flooding. Local transportation officials have agreed on a plan to replace the existing one-lane bridge with a wider bridge that has a larger footprint.

However, expanding the bridge involves building on land that has received FEMA disaster mitigation funds in the past.

After repeated flooding, FEMA provided funding to Christian County in 2009 to demolish a structure adjacent to the bridge, the Riverside Inn, and to purchase the land. As a condition of providing the funding, FEMA required that the land be maintained for open space, recreation, or wetland management. Unless Congress removes the restriction on construction on that site, the county cannot replace Riverside Bridge.

S. 810 provides that Christian County must ensure the bridge replacement project does not result in flood damage and is liable for any flood damage that occurs. No further disaster assistance from any Federal source may be provided for the property or the structure.

This bill provides a narrow exemption from existing FEMA rules that will allow Christian County, Missouri, to solve a transportation problem. I am not aware of any opposition to this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I urge its adoption, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing the achievements of Marcella Barnes, the CEO and founder of Pink Hardhat Construction, LLC.

Ms. Barnes, who was raised in New York, began her career immediately after she graduated from high school and went on to attend college in California. Once she moved to California, she had a dream to enlist in the military and make a difference in people's lives. Upon enlisting, she was then stationed in Maryland, which is also where she opened her first business, Pink Hardhat Construction, LLC. However, once her construction business started to gain traction, Ms. Barnes also noticed a need for providing housing to homeless veterans. As a veteran herself, she recognized and understood the challenges that homeless veterans face in obtaining quality, affordable housing. Ms. Barnes decided to do something about it and opened another business, Our Pink Doors, LLC, which provides shelter for homeless veterans. On July 9, 2017, she held a ribbon-cutting ceremony for the grand opening of her first veterans' home.

Ms. Barnes is also a member of the National Congress of Black Women and the Maryland Minority Contractors Association.

Therefore, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing Marcella Barnes for her work.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in honoring the 50th Anniversary of the Smithsonian's Anacostia Community Museum.

The Anacostia Community Museum, which opened in 1967, has been a staple of the District of Columbia community. Not only has the museum served as a major cultural institution, including in highlighting the important contributions made by African Americans to D.C. and the nation, but it has also served as a pillar of educational enrichment and achievement through its Museum Academy Program. In addition, the museum's Citizen Scientist Program brings high school students and Smithsonian educators, as well as scientists, together to engage in environmental stewardship and learn more about science, technology, engineering and mathematics initiatives.

The museum also continues to be a dominant force in terms of community engagement, creating a hands-on children's room and a youth advisory council. Additionally, the museum works on a number of events and projects that focus on community restoration within Anacostia. For example, the museum recently hosted a community forum with the National Park Service to illustrate the importance of volunteering within one's community and also partnered with WTTG Fox 5 to allow visitors to participate in an urban gardening project.

Aside from its community engagement and restoration, the Anacostia Community Museum showcases various exhibits that focus on the different issues that impact urban communities, both in D.C. and nationwide. Specifically, the museum works with D.C. residents, artists, community activists, scholars, local officials and other outside organizations to cultivate carefully crafted exhibits that challenge

museum visitors to think critically and enhance their museum experience.

Therefore, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in honoring the Anacostia Community Museum, an institution that continues to remain at the forefront of addressing social and political issues that affect individuals in D.C. and the nation, as it celebrates its 50th Anniversary.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment.

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

This amendment prohibits the District of Columbia from spending its local funds to carry out a local antidiscrimination law, the Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Amendment Act. Unlike the D.C. Council which passed this law, no Member of this Congress was elected to legislate on local D.C. matters, or is accountable to the voters of the District of Columbia.

This amendment gives employers the license to discriminate against employees, their spouses, and their dependents, based on their private, constitutionally protected reproductive decisions.

This amendment permits employers to fire a woman for having an abortion due to rape, or to decline to hire a woman for using in vitro fertilization, or to fire a man for using condoms, or to reduce the salary of a parent for buying birth control for his or her child.

Contrary to the sponsor's claim, the D.C. law does not require employers to provide insurance coverage for reproductive health decisions. Importantly, the law states expressly, here this language: ``This section shall not be construed to require an employer to provide insurance coverage related to a reproductive health decision.''

The D.C. law is valid under both the U.S. Constitution and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Indeed, the law has been in effect for more than 2 years. It is now law. And there appear to have been no lawsuits challenging it.

Under the U.S. Constitution, laws may limit religious exercise if they are neutral, generally applicable, and rationally related to a legitimate governmental interest. Under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, laws may substantially burden religious exercise only if they further a compelling governmental interest in the least restrictive means.

The D.C. law meets all of these requirements. That is why it has never been challenged. The D.C. law also protects religious liberty. The Constitution's narrow ministerial exception allows religious organizations to make employment decisions for ministers and ministerial employees for any reason whatsoever.

D.C. law permits religious and political organizations to make employment decisions based on religious and political views. Under the D.C. law, employees must be willing to carry out an employer's missions and directives.

I urge Members to vote ``no'' on this amendment in order to protect employees' reproductive health decisions, workplace equality, and D.C.'s own right to self-government.

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

Mr. Chair, may I inquire how much time I have remaining.

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette), one of the leaders of the right to privacy in this Congress.

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

Mr. Chair, I don't know what the District of Columbia can do to satisfy the ideologically driven Members on the other side. We protected religious liberty. There have been absolutely no challenges. Republicans persist in ignoring the plain wording on abortion, and, above all, they have ignored their own groundwork principle of local control.

This is a majority that yells local control for everybody except the residents of the District of Columbia. We have defeated this amendment before. We will defeat this amendment again, if not in this House, in the other Chamber, I assure you. It is law. It is going to remain law.

Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

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

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

Mr. Chairman, my amendment strikes the repeal of the District of Columbia's Local Budget Autonomy Act, which allows the District of Columbia to spend its local funds consisting solely of local taxes and fees after a 30-day congressional review period; and this is now law.

It is astonishing that my Republican colleagues are so at odds with a local jurisdiction spending its own local funds without the approval of a Federal body, U.S. Congress, and that the House will be voting for a third time since May 2016 to repeal this local law. The first two attempts were not enacted into law, and I expect this third attempt to fail, too.

In fact, I should not even have to offer this amendment. The bill's repeal of the Local Budget Autonomy Act violates the House rule against legislating on an appropriations bill. Of course, the special rule governing consideration of the bill prohibits me from raising a point of order against the repeal provision, which would be sustained by the Chair.

The Local Budget Autonomy Act is in effect. It is now law, I repeat. This year, the D.C. Council passed its second local budget under the Local Budget Autonomy Act.

Smart lawyers differed about the validity of the Local Budget Autonomy Act when D.C. enacted it. However, the Local Budget Autonomy Act has been litigated. The only court ruling in effect upheld it, the ruling was not appealed, and the court ordered D.C. officials to implement it.

Some House Republicans disguised their opposition to the Local Budget Autonomy Act with legalistic arguments until Speaker Ryan revealed last year the real reason the House passed the stand-alone bill repealing the Local Budget Autonomy Act. He said: ``There are real consequences. The D.C. government wants to use revenues to fund abortions in the District. House Republicans will not stand for that.''

The Speaker was wrong about the effect of the Local Budget Autonomy Act. Congress loses nothing under our budget autonomy law. Congress retains the authority to legislate on any D.C. matter, including its local budget, at any time. That is unfortunate, but that, too, is the law.

The Local Budget Autonomy Act is a modest attempt by the District to be able to implement its local budget soon after it is passed, like other jurisdictions, instead of having it caught up in congressional delays.

Indeed, the riders in the bill prohibiting D.C. from spending its local funds on marijuana commercialization and abortion services for low-income women were changed from those in prior appropriations bills to account for the Local Budget Autonomy Act. Still, that is not enough.

Historically, D.C. riders applied only to funds included in appropriations bills, because only appropriations bills authorized D.C. spending. In this bill, as in fiscal year 2017, the riders apply to D.C. local funds available under any authority, including those in the local budget passed under the Local Budget Autonomy Act.

Local control over the dollars raised by local taxpayers is a principle much cited by my Republican colleagues, and it is, indeed, central to the American form of government. Beyond this core principle, budget autonomy has practical benefits for D.C., including lowering borrowing costs, more accurate revenue and expenditure forecasts, improved agency operations, and the removal of the threat of D.C. government shutdowns during Federal Government shutdowns. These are our concerns.

D.C.'s budget is larger than the budgets of 14 States, Mr. Chairman. The District raises $8 billion in local funds. While D.C. is in a better financial position than most cities and States in this country, with a rainy-day fund of over $2 billion on a total budget of $14 billion, budget autonomy makes the District even stronger, as it must be, because it has no State fallback.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in honoring the 50th anniversary of the Smithsonian's Anacostia Community Museum.

The Anacostia Community Museum, which opened in 1976, has been a staple of the District of Columbia community. Not only has the museum served as a major cultural institution, including in highlighting the important contributions made by African Americans to D.C. and the nation, but it has also served as a pillar of educational enrichment and achievement through its Museum Academy Program. In addition, the museum's Citizen Scientist Program brings high school students and Smithsonian educators, as well as scientists, together to engage in environmental stewardship and learn more about science, technology, engineering and mathematics initiatives.

The museum also continues to be a dominant force in terms of community engagement, creating a hands-on children's room and a youth advisory council. Additionally, the museum works on a number of events and projects that focus on community restoration within Anacostia. For example, the museum recently hosted a community forum with the National Park Service to illustrate the importance of volunteering within one's community and also partnered with WTTG Fox 5 to allow visitors to participate in an urban gardening project.

Aside from its community engagement and restoration, the Anacostia Community Museum showcases various exhibits that focus on the different issues that impact urban communities, both in D.C. and nationwide. Specifically, the museum works with D.C. residents, artists, community activists, scholars, local officials and other outside organizations to cultivate carefully crafted exhibits that challenge museum visitors to think critically and enhance their museum experience.

Therefore, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in honoring the Anacostia Community Museum, an institution that continues to remain at the forefront of addressing social and political issues that affect individuals in D.C. and the nation, as it celebrates its 50th Anniversary.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to reintroduce the United States Commission on an Open Society with Security Act, a bill as timely now as it was when I first began working on it. I saw the first signs in the closing of parts of our open society after the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995, and I saw it again after 9/11. This bill grows even more urgent as the country is ensnared in continuing wars that threaten our security, causing an increasing variety of security measures to proliferate throughout the country without due diligence and deep thinking about the effects on common freedoms and ordinary public access, and often without guidance from the government or bona fide security experts. For example, security in some federal buildings bar tourists here for Cherry Blossom season from even use of restrooms or cafeterias. The security for some federal buildings has for too long been unduly influenced by non-security experts, who happen to work for an agency but do not have the expertise to take into account actual threats.

The bill I reintroduce today would begin the systematic investigation the nation needs to fully take into account the importance of maintaining our democratic traditions while responding adequately to the real and substantial threat that terrorism poses. To accomplish its difficult mission, the bill authorizes a 21-member commission, with the president designating nine members and the House and Senate each designating six members, to investigate the balance that should be required between openness and security. The commission would be composed not only of military and security experts, but, for the first time at the same table, also experts from such fields as business, architecture, technology, law, city planning, art, engineering, philosophy, history, sociology and psychology. To date, questions of security most often have been left almost exclusively to security and military experts. They are indispensable participants, but these experts should not alone resolve all the new and unprecedented issues raised by terrorism in an open society. In order to strike the security/access balance required by our democratic traditions, a diverse group of experts needs to be at the same table.

For years, parts of our open society have gradually been closed down because of terrorism and the fear of terrorism, on an often ad hoc basis. Some federal buildings such as the U.S. Capitol have been able to deal with security issues, and continue their openness to the public. Others, like the new Department of Transportation headquarters, remain mostly inaccessible to the public. These examples, drawn from the nation's capital, are replicated in public buildings throughout the United States.

When we have faced unprecedented and perplexing issues in the past, we have had the good sense to investigate them deeply before moving to resolve them. Examples include the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also known as the 9/11 Commission), the Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction (also known as the Silberman-Robb Commission), and the Kerner Commission, which investigated the riots that swept American cities in the 1960s and 1970s. In the aftermath of the 2013 Navy Yard shooting, I wrote to then-President Barack Obama requesting the establishment of an independent panel to investigate issues raised by that tragedy and to evaluate how to secure federal employees who work in facilities like the Navy Yard that are a part of a residential or business community. However, this bill creates a commission that would act not in the wake of a tragedy but before a crisis and before erosion of basic freedoms takes hold and becomes entrenched. Because global terrorism is likely to be long lasting, we cannot afford to allow the proliferation of security measures that neither require nor are subject to civilian oversight or an analysis of alternatives and repercussions on freedom and commerce.

With no vehicles for leadership on issues of security and openness, we have been left to muddle through, using blunt, 19th-century approaches, such as crude blockades, unsightly barriers around beautiful monuments, and other signals that our society is closing down, all without appropriate exploration of possible alternatives. The threat of terrorism to an open society is too serious to be left to ad hoc problem-solving. Such approaches are often as inadequate as they are menacing.

We can do better, but only if we recognize and come to grips with the complexities associated with maintaining a society of free and open access in a world characterized by unprecedented terrorism. The place to begin is with a high-level commission of experts from a broad array of disciplines to help chart the new course that will be required to protect our people and our precious democratic institutions and traditions.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing Ron Armstead, the Executive Director of the Congressional Black Caucus Veterans Braintrust.

Mr. Armstead began his career in public service as the Executive Director of the Congressional Black Caucus Veterans Braintrust, a role he has served in since the program's inception. Since then, he has served under various members, including former Representative Charles Rangel and Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson. Currently, Mr. Armstead serves under Representative Sanford Bishop Jr. In addition, Mr. Armstead also served as a consultant to the late Secretary Jerry Brown's Veterans Affairs' Advisory Committee on Minority Veterans.

Mr. Armstead holds a Master's in City Planning with a concentration in Affordable Housing and Community Development from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and is also a licensed social worker in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Therefore, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing Ron Armstead for his hard work with the Congressional Black Caucus Veterans Braintrust.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing Delphine Metcalf-Foster, who is the National Commander of Disabled American Veterans (DAV).

Along with her position with DAV, Ms. Metcalf-Foster serves on the First Data Military Advisory Council, is a member of the DAV Department of California Claims and Service Committee, and has served as Chairman of the DAV Department of California Resolution Committee. In November 2015, she completed a four-year appointment as a member of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs' Advisory Committee on Women Veterans.

Ms. Metcalf-Foster has served in multiple tours and units. In 1991, she was injured while serving in Saudi Arabia as a part of Operation Desert Storm/Desert Shield. She has also served with the U.S. Army Reserve, 689th Quartermaster Unit, 6253rd Hospital Unit and 6211th Transportation Unit at the Letterman Army Medical Center. In 1996, Ms. Metcalf-Foster retired from the Army Reserves with the rank of first sergeant.

She is a graduate of Solano Community College and Sonoma State University, where she majored in psychology and liberal studies, respectively.

Therefore, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing and honoring Ms. Delphine Metcalf-Foster.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in honoring the life and legacy of Evelyn Sommers, who passed away on August 25, 2017.

During her tenure as Executive Director of the District of Columbia Nurses Association from 1980 to 2002, Evelyn Sommers touched many lives. After obtaining a journalism degree from the University of Texas at Austin, Ms. Sommers went on to obtain a Master of Business Administration from Southern Methodist University. During that time, Ms. Sommers recognized her passion for helping others, which led her to the District of Columbia Nurses Association.

After Ms. Sommers retired from the District of Columbia Nurses Association, she went on to volunteer for the YWCA National Capitol Area in a number of leadership capacities, including president, vice president, and as a member of the board of directors. Aside from her time spent as a volunteer with the YWCA, Ms. Sommers and her husband volunteered their time and talents to other organizations, such as the Mid-County United Food Bank, the Homeless Project Advisory Board and the Voluntary Action Center. Additionally, Ms. Sommers and her husband assisted with the construction of St. Bernard Secondary School in the village of South Kinangop, Kenya, after they had toured the country and fell in love with its culture. The school continues to graduate many students and have a significant positive impact on the village and its surrounding communities.

Ms. Sommers leaves behind her husband of 50 years, John Sommers; her brothers, Jack Dugan, Fred Sommers, Martin Sommers and James Sommers; and countless nieces and nephews, as well as their spouses.

I ask the House of Representatives to join me in honoring the life and legacy of Evelyn Sommers and remembering her selfless dedication to others.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me

in honoring Sarkis Tatigian, the longest serving federal civilian employee on record.

Currently, Sarkis Tatigian serves as the Associate Director of Small Business Programs for the Naval Sea Systems Command, the largest component of the U.S. Navy. While he was initially eligible for retirement in 1973, Mr. Tatigian has continued to provide decades of selfless service to our country. Mr. Tatigian began his naval career in 1942, when he enlisted in the U.S. Navy as a Junior Inspector of Radio at the Naval Aircraft Factory. Throughout his time with the U.S. Navy, Mr. Tatigian has served multiple tours; served in various units within the U.S. Navy, such as the Navy Bureau of Ordnance Experimental Unit and the Bureau of Naval Weapons; and worked as a Small Business Analyst for the Bureau of Ordinance. In addition, Mr. Tatigian has received numerous awards, including the U.S. Navy Meritorious Civilian Award, and has also had an award named after him for his role in small business, the Sarkis Tatigian Small Business Award.

On September 26, 2017, Mr. Tatigian will have served a total of 75 years of federal service.

Therefore, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in honoring the life and legacy of Sarkis Tatigian.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing the achievements of Major General Irene Trowell-Harris, who is currently the assistant to the director of the Air National Guard (ANG) for human resources readiness in the District of Columbia.

General Trowell-Harris began her career in public service in 1963 when she was commissioned to the New York National Guard. In this role, she served in a number of positions, including chief nurse, nurse administrator, flight nurse instructor and flight nurse examiner. In 1986, she was appointed commander of the 105th U.S. Air Force Clinic in New York, which made her the first nurse in ANG history to command a medical clinic. She then went on to serve as ANG advisor to the chief of the Air Force Nurse Corps and as ANG assistant to the director of medical readiness and nursing services in the Office of the Surgeon General at the United States Air Force headquarters in D.C.

General Trowell-Harris grew up in South Carolina as one of 11 children, working on a cotton field alongside members of her family. However, she always had big dreams and knew that she was destined to achieve something great. As a result, once she graduated from high school, General Trowell-Harris went on to obtain a Bachelor of Arts in Health Education from Jersey City State College in 1971. In 1973, she obtained her Master of Public Health from Yale University. But, General Trowell-Harris did not stop there--she went on to obtain a Doctor of Education in Health Education from Columbia University in 1983.

While General Trowell-Harris has completed her formal education, she continues to receive numerous degrees and honors for various achievements, including the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award and an honorary degree, Doctor of Humane Letters, from the Medical University of South Carolina. In addition, she is a member of multiple organizations, including the American Nurses Association and the Aerospace Medical Association, and was also the first woman in history to have a Tuskegee Airmen, Inc. chapter named in her honor, the Major General Trowell-Harris Chapter, located in New York.

Therefore, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing the achievements of Major General Irene Trowell-Harris.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support and recognition of National Recovery Month 2017. According to the Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality's 2015 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, an estimated 20.8 million individuals aged 12 or older were classified with a substance use disorder, while approximately 43.4 million Americans aged 18 or older had a diagnosed mental illness in 2015. Moreover, in 2015, more than 8.1 million U.S. adults aged 18 or older had co-occurring mental health and substance use disorders. These disorders often require long-term, high-quality treatment and support services.

Now in its 27th year, National Recovery Month is coordinated by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) every September to increase awareness of the importance of behavioral health conditions and to highlight the achievements of those who have reclaimed their lives in recovery. National Recovery Month also affords Americans the opportunity to leam more about effective prevention, treatment and recovery programs designed to assist those dealing with behavioral health challenges and to celebrate the dedicated service providers who make recovery possible.

The theme for this year's commemoration of National Recovery Month is ``Join the Voices for Recovery: Strengthen Families and Communities.'' The 2017 theme was selected in order to highlight the critical role families and communities play in supporting individuals throughout the recovery process, as well as to encourage individuals in recovery, their family members and their support networks to stay the course by reflecting upon their shared experiences, successes and achievements. I applaud this year's National Recovery Month theme for incorporating the importance of family and community resources in promoting a positive outcome.

Here in the District of Columbia, there are thousands of women and men working day in and day out on behalf of community-based organizations, nonprofit/advocacy associations, health care providers and both local and federal government agencies to support residents who are in recovery from mental and/or substance use disorders. Entities such as the D.C. Department of Behavioral Health, University Legal Services, D.C. Superior Court Mental Health Community Diversion Court, the Pretrial Services Agency for the District of Columbia and the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency (CSOSA) all offer specialized programming and services to help those confronting behavioral health challenges.

To mark this year's commemoration of National Recovery Month, CSOSA, along with other D.C. public safety partners, will sponsor a series of events, panel discussions and programs designed to increase awareness and understanding of mental and substance abuse disorders throughout the District and to promote people in recovery and those working in the field of recovery. For example, on September 12, 2017, CSOSA's Reentry and Sanctions Center will host an open house to educate the public about CSOSA's treatment services, as well as to promote the ideals and theme of National Recovery Month 2017.

With over 80 percent of CSOSA's entering population self-reporting a history of substance abuse and approximately 40 percent reporting a diagnosed mental illness, CSOSA places a priority on providing quality programming and treatment services. CSOSA provides clients in need of treatment with a variety of services, including detox and short- and long-term residential and aftercare. In addition, CSOSA's Reentry and Sanctions Center provides high-risk clients with intensive assessment and pre-treatment services as well as those with co-occurring substance use and behavioral health challenges.

Mental and/or substance use disorders affect all communities. Yet, with the proper professional help, support and treatment, we know that people suffering from these disorders can achieve healthy and productive lives in recovery. The annual commemoration of National Recovery Month is designed to celebrate the gains made by these individuals and to further educate the American public on the transformative nature of substance use treatment and mental health services.

Therefore, I ask the House of Representatives to join me and the millions of other American voices of recovery this September in support of National Recovery Month 2017.

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

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

My amendment prohibits the Federal Bureau of Prisons from using Federal funds to carry out a law that requires individuals in halfway houses or on home confinement to pay a subsistence fee.

Currently, the subsistence fee for residents of halfway houses is 25 percent of income. This criminal justice reform amendment would improve reentry and reduce recidivism among the Nation's returning citizens.

Out of prison and almost always without a job or ability to support themselves, returning citizens have no ability to pay counterproductive subsistence fees while in halfway houses or on home confinement any more than they could have paid for their subsistence while in prison.

For the limited time individuals spend in halfway houses--up to 12 months--or on home confinement--up to 6 months--the subsistence fee requirement is a substantial burden on them and de minimis on the BOP, witness that the Congressional Budget Office concluded that this amendment would have no budgetary effect.

If returning citizens are lucky enough to find work at all, it would almost certainly be in minimum wage jobs. So the loss of 25 percent of their paychecks to subsistence fees would be a significant hurdle to successful reentry--which is what we are after--

making it extremely difficult to pay rent, child support, or fines and fees associated with their conviction, such as restitution.

Far from promoting financial responsibility, subsistence fees, while in custody, actually prevent returning citizens from meeting their financial obligations. Congress surely did not mean to impose additional burdens on returning citizens, setting them up to fail. Jobs and affordable housing are crucial to reentry but rare for returning citizens. Charging subsistence fees is antithetical to these goals.

The Department of Justice itself has recommended eliminating this fee. A November 2016 DOJ memorandum recommended developing a plan to limit the use of ``counterproductive `subsistence' fees imposed on indigent residents.''

It further stated:

The Bureau of Prisons' process for collecting these

subsistence fees is costly and administratively burdensome on

both halfway houses and the Bureau. And these fees make it

difficult for residents who typically earn minimum wage, if

anything, to meet their other financial obligations,

including restitution fines and child support.

The BOP already eliminated subsistence fees for individuals on home confinement, but that is only by regulation. However it was a step in the right direction.

My amendment would continue this trend and eliminate the fees for those in halfway houses as well. My amendment provides a critical reform that would help improve reentry and reduce recidivism.

Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Chairman, my friend suggests that the BOP actually collects this $20 million. I would submit to him and challenge him to show me that the burden of trying to collect these fees does not outweigh any actual reimbursement. These people have no jobs. If they had jobs, they would almost surely be minimum wage jobs.

I want to ask my friend if he would rather the BOP be paid the de minimis cost to the government--which they hardly ever collect, I am almost sure--or would they rather this money go to child support, or go to pay subsistence fees?

This is a cruel burden for people getting out of prison at a time when the crime rate is low. It sends inmates back to the streets, which is the only recourse they have for gaining money.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R. 3440, the DREAM Act, to protect Ricardo, who arrived when he was 4 and is studying to be a prosecutor to help fight crime.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce a bill to instruct the Secretary of the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development to deem areas within the District of Columbia as empowerment zones. This bill would effectively reauthorize the tax incentives for business investment in the District, which expired in 2011, yet are timelier than ever today. These were the only tax incentives for a big city that were not extended, even though they were initially created by Republicans, with a few Democrats. The wisdom of these bipartisan, modest, targeted tax incentives has been amply and visibly demonstrated in the economic resurgence in many parts of the nation's capital. However, the D.C. tax incentives were cut off before the poorest neighborhoods were ready to make use of them.

Congress has recognized that the benefits of incentives for investment in economically

distressed communities outweigh their costs as it has continually extended the national empowerment zone program. The positive effects of the D.C. tax incentives are apparent throughout the city. Among the most visible are the vibrant area around the Verizon Center, which is now surrounded by offices, restaurants and nightlife, and the Penn Quarter neighborhood, which had limited residential, commercial, and retail spaces and is now a popular mixed-use neighborhood. Before the business tax incentives, the city found it difficult to retain, much less attract, businesses. However, one of the business tax incentives enabled the city government to issue more than $155 million in tax- exempt bonds on behalf of for-profit and non-profit entities for capital projects.

The federal government's decision to build facilities in the District's poorest ward, Ward 8, lays the groundwork for revitalization there. The new headquarters for the U.S. Coast Guard is now open in Southeast D.C. in the city's lowest income ward, the first in a complex of buildings Congress has authorized for the federally-owned West Campus of the St. Elizabeths Hospital. The tax incentives, particularly in areas where the federal government is expanding, as it did in NoMa, have demonstrated that they can revitalize such neighborhoods. Withdrawing the D.C. incentives, particularly after they had proven to be effective in other areas of the city, left the nation's capital with essentially half of a revival, and was tragically timed just as the lower-income parts of the District, which need the incentives most, are ready for redevelopment.

Except for having no representation in the Senate, there is no good reason why the D.C. tax incentives were not extended like those of similar cities. Like the fiscal health of many other cities, the District's overall fiscal health has improved since the tax incentives were established in 1997, but not in the poorest wards and in neighborhood pockets elsewhere. The incentives are particularly indispensable for ensuring that lower-income areas of the city are part of the city's economic progress. It would be tragic to continue to single out the nation's capital as the only empowerment zone not to be renewed just as the eastern, low-income sections of the city are about to develop. As essential as the federal incentives have been, their costs have been de minimis compared to the measurable benefits they have demonstrated they can generate.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill.