Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Banning the Use of Electronic Cigarettes on Airplanes Act of 2017. The bill prohibits the use of electronic cigarettes and vaping devices on commercial airplanes by including use of these devices within the definition of smoking. Smoking tobacco products on commercial airplanes has been banned for years, but with the increase in use of electronic cigarettes and vaping devices in their place, it is necessary to update our laws to reflect this new nuisance and health risk on airplanes. The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) issued a final rule in March 2016 banning the use of these devices on airplanes, but Congress should make a permanent, statutory change to include the use of these devices within the definition of ``smoking.'' Last Congress, my bill received bipartisan support from the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and was added as an amendment to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) reauthorization bill, the Aviation Innovation, Reform, and Reauthorization (AIRR) Act. The amendment was also included in the Senate's long-term FAA reauthorization bill.

Electronic cigarette use has increased over the last decade with the increased education of the general public about the dangers and public health threats caused by traditional cigarettes to smokers and nonsmokers alike. For example, between 2010 and 2011, e-cigarette use among adults doubled. Researchers and public health experts have voiced concerns over the use of electronic cigarettes because there are still so many unknowns about the chemicals these devices can produce. The American Lung Association (ALA) has cited many concerns about the lack of regulation of e-cigarettes because they are being marketed to the public while the potential harm from secondhand e-cigarette emissions is unknown. ALA has identified two studies that show formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, benzene, tobacco-specific nitrosamines, and other harmful irritants coming from e-cigarette emissions. In addition, the temperature of an e-cigarette can affect how harmful the chemicals are, but with no configuration standards, it is too difficult to uniformly assess the health effects of smoking e-cigarettes. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a proposed rule in 2014 that would extend new regulatory authority to e-cigarettes by subjecting e-cigarettes to registration and product listing requirements, restrictions on marketing products prior to FDA review, and a prohibition on providing free samples as with traditional tobacco products.

It has been over 25 years since legislation was passed banning smoking on domestic flights in the United States. In the 1960s, the U.S. Surgeon General identified smoking as a cause of increased mortality and by 1986, the U.S. Surgeon General had named secondhand smoke a serious health risk. The National Academy of Sciences, in its report ``The Airliner Cabin Environment: Air Quality and Safety,'' recommended a ban on smoking on all domestic commercial flights. The Association of Flight Attendants can be credited with urging the smoking ban due to the negative health impacts flights attendants suffered working in cramped, closed-off spaces when a third or more passengers smoked in-flight. Congress used this information to include an amendment authored by then-Representative Dick Durbin (D-IL) in the Federal Aviation Act that made domestic flights of two hours or less smoke-free. By 1990, this smoking ban was

extended to all domestic flights of six hours or less, and, in 2000, the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act made all flights to and from the United States smoke-free. All of this was done even in the face of the strong tobacco industry's opposition because of the undeniable health impacts of cigarettes and cigarette smoke. Many flyers do not remember a time without ``No Smoking'' signs located throughout a commercial airplane.

In 2016, DOT issued its final rule to prohibit the use of e- cigarettes on U.S. airplanes. Legislation is necessary to make this update applicable to all airlines, and permanent. Under current FAA policy, battery-powered electronic cigarettes, vaporizers, vape pens, atomizers, and electronic nicotine systems are prohibited in checked baggage, and the FAA recommends that such devices only be carried in the aircraft cabins because of safety issues.

The current statutory smoking ban applies to the smoking of tobacco products on all scheduled passenger flights and on scheduled passenger flight segments on foreign air carriers in the U.S. and between the U.S. and foreign countries, unless a waiver is granted based on bilateral negotiations. The Banning the Use of Electronic Cigarettes on Airplanes Act of 2017 will amend the statutory definition of smoking in 49 U.S.C. 41706 to include the use of electronic cigarettes, defined as ``a device that delivers nicotine or other substances to a user of the device in the form of a vapor that is inhaled to simulate the experience of smoking.''

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in congratulating Jerri Evans and her company, Turning Natural, Inc., this year's D.C. Small Business of the Year. This unique honor is part of our annual Small Business Fair, which we are holding today at the Walter E. Washington Convention Center.

This year, we are proud to honor Small Business of the Year Turning Natural, Inc., a juice bar located in the Southeast part of the city. Turning Natural has been a welcome fixture in the neighborhood for almost a decade. Growing up, Evans witnessed her family's difficulty accessing healthy foods. Neighborhoods where Evans grew up in Southeast were considered food deserts, and, sadly, many still are today. With the juice bar, Evans provides her neighbors a healthy alternative to fast food, carry-outs and corner stores. Today, she keeps things fresh with creative juice names like ``Green Latifah,'' ``Swizz Beets'' and ``Mi'Kale Jackson,'' and by adding a variety of new juice types to her menu, including the increasingly popular cold-press juices. Evans' mother, Annette Turner, founded Turning Natural after surviving a bout with Stage II breast cancer. Sadly, when the cancer returned in 2010, she lost that fight. Jerri continued the business and her mother's legacy, and, today, continues to run the company and to advocate for healthy living among Washingtonians.

This is the 20th time we are hosting our Small Business Fair to highlight the importance of small businesses in the District. The Fair provides critical information, counseling and resources to aspiring and current D.C. business owners. Small businesses are an essential lifeline in our local economy, and the District thrives because of their success. I thank the Washington Convention Center for hosting us again this year; the workshop experts who are providing valuable information and assistance to small businesses; and, of course, all of the small businesses who participate this year.

I ask the House of Representatives to join me in congratulating the D.C. Small Business of the Year, Turning Natural, Inc., as well as in celebrating our small businesses across the District. In the District and in districts around the country, we know the social, cultural and economic importance of small businesses.

Mr. Speaker, today I introduce the District of Columbia National Park Service Improvement Act, a bill that would clarify that D.C. has the authority to enter into cooperative management agreements (CMAs) with the National Park Service (NPS) to maintain and invest in NPS properties in the city. NPS is the steward for many of our country's most beautiful natural wonders, but they are uniquely responsible for most of the small, urban parks here in the District. Given NPS's

limited budget and resources, we should be encouraging local jurisdictions to work collaboratively with NPS to make sure that our national parks are being cared for. States have already explored these opportunities, but my bill would remove any doubt that the District has the same authority as the states to enter into CMAs with NPS.

The city already has plans to enter into a CMA with NPS to take over operational jurisdiction of Franklin Park, an NPS park in downtown D.C. that has seen better days. The city plans to work with the Downtown Business Improvement District to transform the park to its former glory by ensuring regular maintenance and providing amenities such as food, gardens, and other services. As the city's downtown core has grown to include more housing, businesses, and workers, the need for green space has also grown. The city's plans for Franklin Park are a model for what can be done when local jurisdictions get creative about protecting and improving our nation's parks.

My bill is uncontroversial and simply clarifies that the District can provide financial support. to NPS in order to maintain their property. This is a win for the city, the federal government, and all those who live in or visit the District and enjoy our NPS parks. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in honoring the R&B music group, the Dells. Mr. Verne Allison, the last surviving member of the Dells, was visiting Washington, D.C. over the last few days so I wanted to take this opportunity to recognize the group and their outstanding music.

Originally from Chicago, Illinois, the Dells formed out of a group of young men still in high school: Marvin Junior, Verne Allison, Johnny Funches, Chuck Barksdale and Mickey and Lucius McGill. They originally called themselves the El-Rays, but changed their name to The Dells once they signed with Vee Jay Records in 1955. It was at this record company where they released their hit recording, ``Oh What a Night,'' which, at one point, finished right behind Elvis' ``Don't Be Cruel'' on the music charts. By the early 1960s, with their reach growing, the Dells were able to tour with big artists like Dinah Washington and Ray Charles, opening for them and exposing themselves to much bigger audiences.

A soundtrack to the 1960s would not be complete without soulful melodies from groups like the Dells. At a time of constant political and social upheaval, a Washingtonian could turn on the radio and be serenaded with songs like the Dells' ``Give Your Baby a Standing Ovation'' and ``Stay in My Corner,'' a 1965 top 30 R&B hit. Decades passed and the Dells' music largely adapted. Members of the band remained largely stable. Their final work was the ``The Heart is a House for Love,'' part of a soundtrack for a movie in 1991. The Dells were inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 2004. Today, Verne Allison, one of the original members of the Dells, is the band's only surviving member.

While Mr. Allison was in my district, he worked closely with DC Legendary Musicians. This organization works to protect the legacy of D.C. area musicians, past and present, and promote the music of artists from Washington around the globe. Although Mr. Allison and the Dells are from Chicago, DC Legendary Musicians recognizes the impact that music from artists like the Dells--who have performed locally at the Howard Theater, Constitution Hall and the Kennedy Center--have had on D.C. and its own music scene and history. Their work is crucial to ensuring this essential part of D.C. culture stays intact. I thank DC Legendary Musicians for their contributions to the District.

I ask the House of Representatives to join me in honoring Mr. Verne Allison and the Dells. We celebrate their harmonious and soulful music that is part of the rich American tapestry that is Rhythm and Blues. I am very pleased we can still listen to it today.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution. I thank the Democratic and Republican leaders who introduced this resolution condemning the violence of the security detail at the Turkish Embassy here in the Nation's Capital.

I am not surprised at the bipartisan nature of this resolution coming from the top of Congress about the right to protest peacefully in our country. This was an assault, after all, not only on the protesters, but on one of our most important American values: the right to assemble and use the First Amendment to protest.

Mr. Speaker, we must persist because I do not recall a demonstration like this. It was witnessed by the chief of police himself, Peter Newsham, and he, himself, is an eyewitness who declared that these protesters were all peaceful. There were also videos of the nonviolent protesters being assaulted.

Now, the United States and the protesters deserve an appropriate response from the Turkish Government. Instead, we received a farfetched shifting of blame from Turkey. That makes it all the more important because the shifting of the blame will lead some to believe that we are responsible for what happened. Actually, we need to protest in the strongest terms because it turns out that this is part of a pattern.

A similar incident occurred about a half dozen years ago at the United Nations, same head of state, same thugs attacking peaceful protesters.

Last year--just this past year--there was an attack on journalists outside of The Brookings Institution.

So if we don't tell them it is time to stop when we have had the third attack, they will persist. That is for sure.

We know who these security details are. They couldn't have gotten into the country accompanying a head of state without telling us who they are. Moreover, two of them were arrested, so we have their names. I have written the Secretary of State, Mr. Tillerson, to ask him to bar the reentry of these security personnel; to hold them if they are still here; and to request information on whether they are entitled to immunity, and if they are, to have this immunity waived.

We will not let the Turkish thugs who took on our protesters unprovoked hide behind immunity. It can be waived if it is present. It should be waived. These security personnel should be charged and prosecuted under U.S. law. Imagine, we would have done precisely the same if some of our security had behaved in this fashion in Turkey.

There will be no justice to the citizens exercising their First Amendment rights who were stomped, kicked, and seriously injured until they and our country are vindicated with an appropriate response from the Turkish Government.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Sarbanes), my good friend.

Mr. Speaker, this has been painful not only for the protesters, it is painful for our country because Turkey is an ally. We have our differences with Turkey, but we are dependent on Turkey for security matters. If this had never happened before, perhaps we could say that Turkey just doesn't understand how we operate in this country. The fact that it was the third incident makes it particularly bothersome.

Now, we are aware how sensitive this matter is. You cannot deal with a foreign adversary who happens to be an ally at the same time as if he were simply the enemy or our opponent. We have to understand the sensibilities of operating in the international sphere. But it is clear that Turkey doesn't understand that.

I was particularly concerned that Mr. Erdogan was in his car the entire time. He could have gotten out of his car and called attention to his security detail. He could have asked a staff member to do the very same thing. Instead, he stayed in his car, got out after the security detail from the D.C. police department had calmed things, stood there and had nothing to say. If we let this third incident go by with no response or accept--or even seem to accept--the Turkish response, that will be a signal to keep it up.

So I am so pleased that my good friend on the other side and I are in unison on this. I am particularly pleased that this was not a resolution introduced by me or by my good friend, that this resolution was introduced by top leaders on the Republican and the Democratic side.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), who is the Democratic whip of the House.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing the D.C. students who submitted artwork for the annual D.C. Congressional Art Competition. I also seek recognition for the members of the committee who volunteered to make this event a success, as well as the competition jurors-- members of the community who judged the students' artwork. The competition will take place tomorrow, Saturday, June 3, 2017 at the Washington Center for Internships and Academic Seminars.

The Congressional Art Competition has taken place in all Congressional districts since 1982 to encourage students interested in participating in the arts. This year, my office received 120 submissions from students in grades 8-12 from public, charter, and private schools across the District.

The members of the D.C. Congressional Art Competition committee are from a variety of backgrounds in the community--academia, small business and local government. I am happy to recognize the following committee members for their tireless work in putting together this year's Congressional Art Competition:

Thomas Atkins, is a former member of my staff who has continued to serve as an advisor each year for this competition. We depend on Mr. Atkins because of his background and know-how in supervising our art competition when he was on our staff.

Yaida Ford, an attorney for Ford Law Pros P.C., has been a valued presence in our art competition in the past, and has come through yet again this year. She ensures that her firm can purchase valuable and useful gifts for the winners.

Tiffani Gomez, of Blick Art Materials, helps run art drives for the competition and gets the word out to students who may not have heard about the competition from our office. She was particularly helpful in getting out the word on social media.

Jennifer Littrell, Program Lead at Children's National Health System, is particularly helpful in getting the word out for the competition via creative flyers and other publications.

Patricia O. Mitchell is a Senior Systems Developer for Amtrak. I have known Patricia for many years and she has done essential work for the committee. Ms. Mitchell helps the committee reach out to food vendors for the reception.

Greg Scott is the Gallery & Exhibition Coordinator for the Children's National Health System. Our office partners with Children's National and they regularly hang the artwork of the student participants. Mr. Scott is also a curator and will be very helpful in the setup of the event.

Zoma Wallace, Art Bank Coordinator for the D.C. Commission on the Arts and Humanities, helps with day-to-day logistics for this event. Her work and input is so valued that she also serves as a juror. Ms. Wallace held this dual role last year, and we are happy to have her on both teams again.

The following individuals served as jurors--judging the students' artwork and selecting the winners. I am deeply grateful to have each of them, for bringing their unique perspectives and individual talents to the panel:

Iwan Bagus is a photographer and professor at the University of the District of Columbia and American University. We are fortunate that Mr. Bagus has been serving on this competition's jury for many years and also helps secure prizes for the winners.

Aaron Bryant, Mellon Curator of Photography at Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture, has been serving on the jury for the last two years. From his extensive work in the humanities, Mr. Bryant brings a wealth of knowledge as a judge this year.

Sarah Muse, Creative Coordinator for the Smithsonian American Art Museum, is a new member of the jury for 2017. We are happy to have her expertise on our judging panel this year.

Kevin Nunley is Vice-President of Student Affairs at The Washington Center. Our office enjoys a special partnership with The Washington Center, which has hosted the event for the last two years at their venue.

Jack Rasmussen is Director and Curator of the American University Museum at the Katzen Arts Center, and is also a new member of the 2017 jury. We are fortunate to have his expertise and insight as a judge this year.

Lissa Rosenthal-Yoffe is Executive Director at D.C. Arts and Humanities Education Collaborative and has been generous in serving on the jury for the last two years.

I ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing the committee members, jurors, participants and winners in this year's Congressional Art Competition.

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

You haven't heard any discussion of abuse of official time because there is no record of abuse of official time. My colleagues on the other side simply want to get rid of official time, as they have wanted to do for decades.

A little background: Federal employees have no right to strike, as they do in the private sector. In return, though, the time-honored right to organize and represent employees in their official capacity on matters relating to the workplace has always been in place under Republicans and Democrats alike.

Remember, there is also no requirement to join a union in the first place; yet unions must represent all workers, regardless of their membership or not.

The bill on the House floor, H.R. 1293, is unnecessary. Official time reports are already required. This is a redundant bill.

If my friend is worried that these reports haven't been timely, as he implied then he can do that administratively or do it in this bill. The reason he doesn't do it in this bill is this bill is a cover. It is a cover for two pending bills which are already out of committee. I expect them on the floor any minute now, although, notice the sequence.

Mr. Speaker, this seemingly vanilla bill, is going to be followed by the real bills that my colleagues are after. They are parallel bills. They essentially eliminate official time to represent workers.

Now, why is official time important? They are important for the operation of the Federal Government itself. And why is that? Because there are always going to be disputes and contention between management and labor. Official takes away time that would otherwise be wasted and allows the parties to go to the table and work matters out.

Mr. Speaker, these two bills are a frontal attack on official time, but they actually stab federal employees in the back. One bill would make it virtually impossible for union members to volunteer their time unless they wanted to give up parts of their retirement benefits.

What kind of quid pro quo is that? What do you want to do next? Reduce pay if a union rep uses official time?

The next bill designates employees who cannot represent other employees. This bill looks like something you would expect from countries where there is no right to organize.

This bill reduces the amount of dues unions can collect, even though they are collecting dues on their own time and not official time. This is a brazen attempt to eliminate the fair-share fee, non-union workers pay for being represented equally with union members, and allow free riders to be served free of charge. This is the beginning of an out- and-out assault on the freedom of workers to organize.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend for yielding me this time, and I am pleased to support this bipartisan bill, the Improving Support for Missing and Exploited Children Act.

I support it because it does exactly what its title says. It fills the gaps in our prior legislation on missing and exploited children. We need to look at such legislation very often because of what we are learning about missing and exploited children.

There are many parts of this bill I support, but I particularly support a provision that we didn't have nearly as much knowledge of during the passage of the last bill: to improve the protection of children in State care. These are often foster children or children without parents. These are the children who may be most susceptible to trafficking and other exploitation.

I certainly would appreciate the efforts of the committee in making sure that provisions of my bill that, I believe, got to you too late, are included in the final House and Senate bill because they are entirely consistent with the bill on the floor today. They come from recent experience of the District of Columbia.

The D.C. police began to do something, which I urge all of you to do, and that is to use social media to let people know when there are missing children. It unnerved residents of the District of Columbia until they recognized that the city didn't have any more missing children than any other jurisdiction. Still, I support what the District did in using social media. Still, we simply don't know enough.

My provisions would have the government collect subsets of data that it does not collect today. For example, we found in the District that there were more missing girls of color than boys. We ought to have known that from national statistics. You don't know it because there are no national statistics on the subsets of children.

My bill would collect and publish demographic characteristics that simply are not published today on race, gender, sexual orientation, and gender identity. If you think of those categories, you will understand why these may be the children in particular need of protection.

In addition, there is no current comprehensive count of missing children in the United States. So, we need more work on this bill. We need to break down to these subsets so that jurisdictions, like my own, will know where to focus when we are focusing on missing children.

Again, I am pleased that the District turned out not to have any more missing children than the average jurisdiction, but I am also pleased that it got a rise out of people who never would have paid attention to this issue until the police department decided to go on social media.

We want to make sure that we cover all of our children and that we do what this bill does.

What are the gaps? Where do we need to fill in?

Mr. Speaker, this is the first bill on missing children in a number of years. We must make sure no children are left behind.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Flood Prevention Act of 2017. The bill would amend the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (CZMA) to include the nation's capital in the definition of ``coastal state.'' Our bill would correct an apparent oversight in the omission of the District of Columbia, and would make the District eligible to receive federal funding and provide oversight for federally issued permits/facilities/ actions that affect the coastal waters of the District. The District urgently needs the protection of the CZMA because of serious flood risks that currently affect both residents, businesses and federal assets, including the National Mall and the cluster of downtown federal agencies.

In an effort to reduce coastal flood risk, Congress has authorized a number of programs to help states and territories respond to floods and mitigate risk through resiliency projects. Among these programs, the CZMA provides planning and technical services to assist states in protecting, restoring and developing coastal communities and resources. Once the federal government approves a state's coastal management plan, the state becomes eligible for grants. Federal actions must be consistent with the state plans and vice versa.

Even though the District is located on two rivers and has suffered substantial coastal floods in the past, D.C. was omitted from the list of eligible states and territories in the CZMA. This oversight may have occurred because the CZMA was passed in 1972--before the District achieved home rule or had a Member of Congress. Under Section 304 of the CZMA, ``coastal state[s]'' include the states and the U.S. territories (Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the Trust Territories of the Pacific Islands, and American Samoa). Absent from this definition is the District, even though the District, including the federal complex, is under a serious threat from rising sea levels. Because the territories are included in the definition of ``coastal states,'' it appears that D.C.'s omission is a mistake, which only Congress can correct.

Scientists have predicted that the tides on the Atlantic Coast could rise two to four feet by the year 2100, causing property worth as much as $7 billion in the District to be routinely under threat by floodwaters. This damage not only includes private homes and businesses, but the National Mall, federal buildings, and three military bases located in the District. The Anacostia and Potomac rivers are both tidally influenced, showing tangible salt water effects (and fish) and are part of an ``intertidal-zone'' existing between high and low maritime tides. In addition, the Maryland and Virginia coastal zones each include the tidal Potomac River, with Maryland's zone ending at the District line. Because of these factors, the District should be eligible for CZMA grants just like the states and territories already listed in the CZMA.

I urge support for this bill.

Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce a bill that would make a small but significant change to federal law by adding the Mayor of the District of Columbia to the list of named principals for whom the President can 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 death of a cunent or former D.C. Mayor should qualify as a principal. My bill would add D.C. Mayors, who have many of the same responsibilities as state and territory governors, to the current list of officials. This bill is a continuation of our ``Free and Equal D.C.'' series to ensure fair recognition of the nearly 700,000 citizens of the District of Columbia.

Congress already acknowledges that D.C. deserves a place among the states for certain honors, and this addition is not as great as others Congress has already recognized. We have already won congressional recognition of D.C. in situations where the city was overlooked while honoring the states. For example, our legislation ensured that the District of Columbia War Memorial honored only District residents who served in World War I and that D.C.'s Frederick Douglass statue sits in the Capitol alongside statues from the 50 states. We also successfully worked with the U.S. Postal Service to create a D.C. stamp, like the stamps for the 50 states, and worked with the National Park Service to add the D.C. flag alongside the state flags across from Union Station.

Legislation was also enacted to give D.C. a coin after it was omitted from legislation creating coins for the 50 states. Legislation was needed to require the armed services to display the District flag whenever the flags of the states are displayed. With this acknowledgement, it is not too much to ask Congress to add the Mayor to the list of principals who are recognized upon their deaths.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Pay Equity for All Act of 2017, a bill that will help eliminate the gender and racial pay gap by prohibiting employers from asking job applicants for their salary history before making a job or salary offer. Representatives Rosa Delauro, Jerrold Nadler, and Jackie Speier are original cosponsors of the bill. Even though many employers may not intentionally discriminate against applicants or employees based on gender, race or ethnicity, setting wages based on salary history can reinforce the wage gap. Members of historically disadvantaged groups often start out their careers with unfair and artificially low wages compared to their white male counterparts, and the disparities are compounded from job to job throughout their careers.

Our bill will ensure that applicants' salaries are based on their skills and merit, not on a potentially problematic salary history, by assessing penalties against employers who ask applicants for their salary history during the interview process or as a condition of employment. It would also provide job applicants and employees with a private right of action against employers who violate these provisions.

Although the wage gap has decreased for some women, it still persists for women and men of color with similar skill sets. There is much work to be done to address the wage gap for everyone, and our bill is just one step toward that goal.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

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

in honoring the service of Documented Original Tuskegee Airman (DOTA) Walter K. Robinson, Sr. Tomorrow, I will welcome Mr. Robinson and his family to my office to celebrate his extraordinary service.

Walter K. Robinson, Sr. was born in Baltimore, Maryland in 1920, the second son of Dr. John C. Robinson and Mrs. Clara Denning Robinson. In 1941, while attending Howard University in Washington, D.C., he volunteered for the Army Air Corps. He was sent to Camp Lee in Virginia, Keesler Field in Biloxi, Mississippi, and finally to Tuskegee Army Air Base in Tuskegee, Alabama. He began training at Tuskegee Institute for Basic Ground School, and after three months, continued in Pre-Flight, Primary, Basic, and Advanced Flight. During Primary Training, he had an accident in which he severed his Achilles tendon and was hospitalized for a year, enduring six operations and extensive physical therapy. When he was eventually able to return to full duty, he completed training, and while there, World War II ended. On November 8, 1945, Mr. Robinson returned to civilian life, a few years after marrying his high school sweetheart, Edmonia Bailey.

After his honorable discharge from the military, Mr. Robinson and his wife moved to Washington, D.C. in 1959. He worked for the U.S. Postal Service and retired after 35 years of service, rising through the ranks of the Post Office as Clerk, Station Manager and the second black Manager of Delivery and Collection for D.C. The Robinsons had one son, Walter K. Robinson, Jr. Sadly, Mr. Robinson's beloved wife, Edmonia Bailey Robinson, passed away in 2000, after 59 years of marriage. Today, Mr. Robinson still lives in Washington, D.C. and is a very active member of the East Coast Chapter of the Tuskegee Airmen (ECCTAI, Inc.). Members of ECCTAI and the Tuskegee Airmen were well-deserving of the Congressional Gold Medal they collectively received in March 2007. It is an honor to have a Tuskegee Airman still living in the District, and I very much look forward to meeting and welcoming him and his family to my office tomorrow.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the House to join me in honoring the service of Walter K. Robinson, Sr. and the extraordinary service and sacrifice also made by his brothers and sisters in World War II.

Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce the District of Columbia Federal Officials Residency Requirement Equality Act, a bill that would amend federal law to require certain federal officials who serve the District of Columbia to actually live within its boundaries. In nearly every other jurisdiction in the United States, federal district court judges, U.S. Attorneys, and U.S. Marshals are required by federal law to reside within the jurisdictions where they have been appointed--but these same officials appointed to serve the people of the District are not bound by these same requirements. Even in the territories that have such officials, the officials must live in those districts, other than the U.S. Attorney and U.S. Marshal appointed for the Northern Mariana Islands who at the same time are serving in the same capacity in another district. The only other exceptions exist for such officials appointed to the Southern District of New York and the Eastern District of New York, which are the only districts that serve different parts of the same city. My bill would put D.C. on equal footing with almost every other jurisdiction by ensuring that our Marshals, judges, and U.S. Attorney live among the residents they have been appointed to represent.

Clearly, the idea that these federal officials ought to live in the jurisdictions they serve is a significant one--which is why the residency requirement for other jurisdictions is enshrined in federal law. Yet, D.C. was exempt from this requirement based on the now- outdated notion that the District is too congested and small to house these appointed officials. The District is a vibrant and bustling city with a diverse populace who deserve direct engagement on the part of its federal judges, U.S. attorney, and Marshals. My bill recognizes the fact that D.C. deserves the same type of community involvement by these federal officials as nearly every jurisdiction.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce the Low-Wage Federal Contractor Back Pay Act of 2017, to grant back pay to federally contracted retail, food, custodial and security service workers who may be furloughed if there is a federal government shutdown this fiscal year. The bill would apply to all three branches of the federal government. The idea for the bill was brought to my attention by federally contracted service workers, some of whom work here on the Capitol grounds providing Members of Congress and congressional staff with daily services, in 2013 when the federal government shut down.

Many federally contracted workers in federal agencies earn little more than the minimum wage with few, if any benefits, and while others are unionized with a little better wage, all are the lowest paid workers in the federal government and should not be punished because Congress fails to do its job and keep the government functioning. Congress has historically provided back pay to federal employees, who work in the same buildings as these low-wage service workers, furloughed during government shutdowns--but not low-wage contract workers. However, both groups of workers deserve to be made whole after these shutdowns. I recognize, of course, that contract workers are employees of contractors, but the distinction between federal workers and at least the lowest-paid service workers who serve the federal government and its employees and keep, for example, their premises clean, fails when it comes to a deliberate government shutdown. Unlike many other contractors, those who employ low-wage service workers have little latitude to help make up for lost wages. Low-wage federally contracted service workers could least afford the loss of pay during a shutdown, and should not have to go to work every day with everyone else in their federal buildings likely receiving back pay except for them.

The nation's capital is the high-profile home of the federal government's collusion with contractors that pay low wages through leases and contracts with federal agencies. At least this legislation would provide some parity to their low-wage federal contractor workers.

I strongly urge my colleagues to support the legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Missing Children's Assistance Amendment Act of 2017, along with Congressional Black Caucus Chair Cedric Richmond (D-LA), House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers (D-MI), Congressional Caucus on Black Women and Girls Co-Chair Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ), Yvette Clarke (D-NY), Karen Bass (D-CA), Grace Napolitano (D-CA), Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), Joyce Beatty (D-OH), Andre Carson (D-IN), Maxine Waters (D-CA), John Lewis (D-GA), Robert Brady (D-PA), Frederica Wilson (D-FL), and Pramila Jayapal (D-WA). The bill would require the U.S. Department of Justice's Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to collect and publish broad demographic characteristics, including race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation and gender identity, of missing children.

Congress has long recognized that missing children are a national problem. In 2013, Congress required OJJDP to conduct national incidence studies of missing children every three years instead of periodically. Such a study is now underway. However, my bill would require OJJDP to collect, break down, and publish demographic characteristics, including subgroups, of these missing children. It is critical that the public know if there is a disproportionate number of missing children of color, particularly missing girls of color, which may be an underreported national problem. Experts need to first measure the incidences, and then study whether children have been trafficked, abducted, are running away, or are missing for other reasons, and make recommendations.

The last national comprehensive study of missing children by OJJDP was based on a survey conducted in 1999, known as the National Incidence Studies of Missing, Abducted, Runaway, and Thrownaway Children (NISMART-2). Currently, OJJDP is conducting a new study, known as NISMART-3. However, there is no statutory requirement that the triennial study collect or publish demographic characteristics of missing children. For instance, while NISMART-2 published race and gender data, it did not publish any subgroups, such as the number of girls of color missing.

It is more important than ever to have reliable statistics on missing children. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.