Floor Statements

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

(Ms. NORTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Madam Speaker, may I say that we will miss seeing you occasionally in that chair, and I know I speak for my colleagues on both sides of the aisle when I say we will especially miss you sitting in the chair as chair of Financial Services of the Appropriations Committee and as a Member of this body, which you have so graciously served.

I rise in support of this important legislation. H.R. 6364 establishes a commission to ensure the suitable observation of the centennial of World War I. It further provides for the designation of a memorial to the service of the members of the United States Armed Forces throughout the United States who participated in World War I, and it finally protects the District of Columbia World War I Memorial on The Mall.

This bill had to do three things, and I want to express my appreciation to all of the Members who were party to the agreement that finally resulted in this bill--my colleagues Mr. Poe of Texas, Mr. Cleaver of Missouri, Mr. Bishop of Utah and Mr. Grijalva of Arizona-- for working with me to preserve the District of Columbia World War I Memorial. In particular, the bill that is before us, Madam Speaker, is an example of what can be done when Members work together to achieve a resolution of their individual concerns.

Earlier in this Congress, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe) introduced H.R. 938. It would have, among other things, nationalized the DC war memorial by designating it as the District of Columbia and National World War I Memorial. We were all in agreement that there should be a suitable memorial on Federal land as we now approach this extraordinary anniversary in 2014; but of course, I had to oppose altering the integrity of the DC war memorial. That memorial was built with not one Federal dollar but, rather, with the blood and treasure of DC residents, including funds from school children. Of the more than 26,000 DC residents who served in World War I, the 499 who died--more than the number from three States--have their names individually carved on that memorial. Our memorial is deeply symbolic of the historic and continuing concerns of District residents, particularly of our veterans, who continue to serve without equal representation in the Congress, equal rights as citizens, and equal local government control.

I am very happy this afternoon to report that H.R. 6364 protects the integrity of the DC war memorial and goes further. It meets the concern for a World War I memorial here for all veterans, which is the concern that Mr. Poe spoke of; and it meets Mr. Cleaver's concern and the concern of Members from Missouri--like you, Madam Speaker--for a designation of that extraordinarily beautiful memorial there as a national World War I memorial.

The bill establishes a commission to ensure a suitable observance of the centennial of World War I, and it designates memorials to the service of members of the United States Armed Forces in World War I, including a national World War I Memorial.

H.R. 6364 protects the DC memorial because it complies with the provision of the Commemorative Works Act, which prohibits a new memorial from ``interfer[ing] with or encroach[ing] on, an existing commemorative work.'' The bill goes further by saying that the site of the national World War I Memorial on Federal land may not ``infringe upon or otherwise adversely impact the District of Columbia World War I Memorial.'' This preservation is, of course, critical to DC residents, who deserve to have a memorial dedicated to their veterans as, I might mention, every single State has as to its World War I veterans because, at that time, most Americans thought it preferable to have memorials in their own States, so each and every State has a World War I Memorial. Today, in contrast, people insist on memorials to their veterans on Federal land here.

It has always been our position that a national memorial dedicated to all Americans who served in World War I should be located in the Nation's Capital, and I have been committed and remain committed to working with my colleagues to find suitable locations in the District of Columbia for a national World War I Memorial. I am happy that H.R. 6364 allows for such a memorial, that it does not interfere with the DC war memorial, and that it appropriately commemorates the beautiful memorial in Missouri.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Cleaver), who has worked so hard on this bill and has been so creative and diligent and committed.

Madam Speaker, I am not only pleased with the outcome of this bill; I am proud of the way it was achieved. This bill about war dead, about war heroes, had emotional content. But the Members reasoned together and in a collegial fashion agreed upon an outcome that is satisfactory to all of us.

There are going to be three ways in which World War I heroes are remembered: for sure here in the District of Columbia with the existing memorial, and now in Kansas City with the majestic memorial that is there, and of course this bill authorizes a second memorial here in the District of Columbia, the Nation's Capital.

The Members cooperated and achieved the kind of resolution that we hope will, during this lame duck session, become a model for how to reach the ultimate agreement this year and start off next year.

Without any more speakers, Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 6364, the Frank Buckles World War I Memorial Act, as amended. I would like to thank my colleagues, Representatives Ted Poe, Emanuel Cleaver, Raul M. Grijalva, and Chairman Rob Bishop for working with me to preserve the District of Columbia War Memorial.

Earlier this Congress, Representative Ted Poe introduced H.R. 938, which would have nationalized the D.C. memorial by re-designating it as the ``District of Columbia and National World War I Memorial.'' While I very much support commemorating all of the service men and women who fought in World War I, I had to oppose altering the integrity of the D.C. memorial. The D.C. memorial was built with the blood and treasure of D.C. residents, including funds from school children. Of the more than 26,000 D.C. residents who served in World War I, the 499 who died, more than the number from three states, have their names engraved on the memorial. Our memorial is deeply symbolic of the historic and continuing concerns of District residents, particularly our veterans, who continue to serve without equal congressional representation, equal rights as citizens, and equal local government control.

I am happy to report that H.R. 6364 protects the integrity of the D.C. memorial, and I believe it identifies the desires of the other members involved. The bill establishes a commission to ensure a suitable observance of the centennial of World War I and designates memorials to the service of members of the United States Armed Forces in World War I, including a National World War I Memorial. H.R. 6364 protects the D.C. memorial because it complies with the provision of the Commemorative Works Act (40 U.S.C. Sec. 9505 (b)(2)) that prohibits a new memorial from ``interfere[ing] with, or encroach[ing] on, an existing commemorative work,'' and the bill goes further by saying that the site of the national World War I memorial on federal land may not ``infringe upon or adversely impact the District of Columbia War Memorial.'' This preservation is critical to D.C. residents, who deserve to have a memorial dedicated to their veterans.

It has always been my position that a national memorial dedicated to all Americans who served in World War I should be located in the Nation's capital, and I have been committed to working with my colleagues to suggest suitable locations in D.C. for a national World War I memorial. I am happy that H.R. 6364 allows for such a memorial while not interfering with the integrity of the D.C. memorial.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the House Amendment to H.R. 6364, the ``Frank Buckles World War I Memorial Act,'' which establishes the World War I Centennial Commission to oversee projects and programs which commemorates the centennial of World War I and to establish a commemorative work in the District of Columbia to serve as the National World War I Memorial.

As an experienced legislator representing the people of Houston I have fought hard to protect the honor and the rights of our veterans. I hold our men and women of the armed services in the highest regard. As one of the bloodiest wars of the 20th century, World War I represented the entrance of the United States onto the international stage as the champion of the West, western ideals such as security, liberty, and democracy.

We still mourn the loss of the 115,000 American soldiers who died during the war and extend our deepest gratitude to 205,000 who returned home with serious injuries. Frank Buckles was one of the fine men and women who survived the war.

Born on February 1st, 1901, Frank Woodruff Buckles was the last surviving American veteran of the First World War. In 1917, he enlisted in the Army and served with a detachment from Fort Riley. He drove ambulances and motorcycles near the front lines.

He served in both World War I and II. In World War II he became a prisoner of war (POW) and for 39 months was held captive in the Philippines.

Mr. Buckles was a quiet hero, he moved to West Virginia, married, and tended to his farm until the age of 105. In the twilight of his life, Mr. Buckles never forgot the men and women who served in World War I.

He became the honorary Chairman of the World War I Memorial Foundation. He strongly advocated for establishment of a World War I memorial in our Nation's Capital.

Mr. Buckles was World News Tonight's `Person of the Week' in 2009, in recognition for his efforts to establish the World War I memorial. This quiet hero became the oldest person to speak before Congress. On December 3, 2009, he implored Congress to honor the sacrifice of the brave men and women of World War I. He stated:

We still do not have a national memorial in Washington,

D.C. to honor the Americans who sacrificed with their lives

during World War 1 . . . I call upon the American people and

the world to help me in asking our elected officials to pass

the law for a memorial to World War I in our Nation's

capital. These are difficult times, and we are not asking for

anything elaborate. What is fitting and right is a memorial

that can take its place among those commemorating the other

great conflicts of the past century . . . it is time to move

forward with honor, gratitude, and resolve.

Frank Buckle asked this country to honor those who fought to protect our way of life. This bill, named in his honor, will serve to ensure that these men and women will never be forgotten and will continue to receive the respect and honor they deserve from future generations.

Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor to thank the House for recognizing that all veterans and members of the military must be recognized equally, not only some of them; and I have asked the Senate to do the same.

Imagine you are a parent. You go to a military ceremony, for example, the graduation from Navy boot camp. Applause comes with each graduate as his or her name is called, and the flag of the home State is raised. But your flag is not raised. Why? Because your son is from the District of Columbia or one of the Territories.

The House defense authorization bill recognizes the injustice of the discrimination against any of our veterans or members of the military. The Senate bill does not. We ask that the Senate follow the lead of the House.

In our country, no American--and especially no veteran or member of the military--is more equal than any other. If the military flies the flags, then fly them all.

Mr. Speaker, The National Park System Critical Authorities Act of 2012, which I introduce today, is a bill that I have worked on with the National Park Service (NPS), at its request, to create greater efficiency and to address three common-sense issues: (1) snow removal from federal agency property in the District of Columbia, (2) visitor and employee access to historic NPS property' in Virginia, and (3) uniform penalties for violations on NPS lands.

Section two of the bill amends a 1922 law by making federal agencies in the District responsible for the removal of snow and ice in public areas associated with their buildings. For years, agencies have taken this common-sense approach in the District and assumed this responsibility, but the law has never been updated to reflect the practice, leaving NPS with legal liability. This bill simply brings the law in line with current practice.

Section three of the bill promotes greater efficiency and protection to NPS, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) by authorizing a small interagency land exchange near the George Washington Memorial Parkway. Currently, Colonial Farm Road provides public and staff access to Claude Moore Colonial Farm (the Farm), but also serves as an entrance road to the CIA's George Bush Center for Intelligence and the FHWA Turner Fairbanks Research Center. NPS and FHWA have a written agreement permitting visitor access to the Farm. However, the three agencies have discussed concerns over crossing property lines, the need to improve security and add perimeter fencing, and the need to have uninterrupted access to their properties. The agencies have identified parcels on their boundaries suitable for exchange that will provide access to the Farm, and provide the means to improve security for the CIA and FHWA facilities.

Section four of the bill eliminates inconsistencies in federal penalties for crimes committed in certain park units. The inclusion of a number of military and historic sites in the National Park System during the 1930s resulted in a disparity in criminal penalties, which undermines fair and effective law enforcement and criminal prosecution. The bill would remedy this problem by making violations subject to the same penalties.

I ask that my colleagues support this no-cost bill.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I come to the floor with other Delegates to make a plea for respect that we are pleased to say that the House has already honored. Mr. Speaker, this House has seen many disagreements on many issues, and that's what the American people expect. We believe and the House has shown that it believes that some matters, however, are beyond dispute. There are some matters where unity is to be expected. These matters go to basic respect for our members of the armed services.

The House, to its great credit, has already demonstrated that respect, and I want first to thank the Delegate whose provision, whose amendment, was chiefly responsible, Delegate Gregorio Sablan from the Mariana Islands, whose amendment has, I believe, twice been put in the House defense authorization bill that requires that when the flags of the 50 States are raised or honored by our Armed Forces that the flags of the Territories and of the District of Columbia also are honored.

I want to also thank House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon and Ranking Member Adam Smith for putting this provision in the defense authorization bill that is now pending. This bill will be considered, I suppose, in conference by the House and the Senate. It is in the House bill. We regret that it is not in the Senate bill, and so the Delegates and I have come to the floor to ask that the Senate follow the lead of the House on this matter of common courtesy and respect.

Delegate Sablan's provision in the House-passed bill simply requires that the flags of the Territories and of the District of Columbia be respected when the armed services choose to honor the flags of the 50 States. I have, in addition, written a letter to the President asking for a Presidential memorandum directing all Federal agencies including the Armed Services to do the same. I regret to report that the Army alone recognizes the D.C. flag and the flags of the Territories as a matter of policy. I

want to give one example that I think will make the House understand why this is so important to us. A mother wrote me of having attended the graduation of her son from the Naval Station Great Lakes. She had wanted this boy to go to college. He had gotten admitted to college. He wanted to go to the Navy and so they said, to the Navy you will go. As graduation day came at the Naval Station Great Lakes and they called the names of the graduates one by one and they got to one name, Jonathan Rucker, and they called his name, the flag of every other graduate had been raised when the name of the graduate was called, but this young man, graduating from boot camp induction into the Navy, had his name called but his flag was not raised, the flag of the District of Columbia.

His parents were heartbroken, as you might imagine, and as the mother wrote me. It was from that example that I understood how very important this was and understood how important my fellow Delegate's bill, now adopted by the House, is. It was personal disrespect for the young man as he became a member of the United States Navy. It was disrespect for the District of Columbia flag. It was disrespect for the residents of this city who have served and died in every war that our country has ever fought, including the war that created the United States of America.

To let you know how much this means to those of us who have no vote but whose constituents pay taxes the same as the rest who are Members of this House and go to war, you now see the huge disproportion, at least in my own district. You will find this disproportion in the districts of the other Delegates as well.

World War I, 635 casualties, more than three States.

World War II, 3,575 casualties, more than four States.

Korea, 547 casualties, more than eight States.

These are all District of Columbia residents.

And from the Vietnam war, 243 D.C. casualties, more than 10 States.

We are calling on our Senate colleagues to follow the example of the House and include the language requiring the Armed Forces to fly the D.C. flag and the flag of the Territories whenever the flags of the 50 States are raised.

Mr. Speaker, we think that is far from too much to ask in light of the young men and women we represent who are in the Armed Forces today and those who have given their lives for the United States of America.

It is my privilege to ask the sponsor of the successful amendment, Delegate Sablan from the Northern Mariana Islands, if he would speak at this time.

I thank you, Delegate Sablan, because you are the leader on this issue with your provision that you succeeded in getting included in the House Defense authorization bill.

May I inquire of the Speaker how much time we have remaining?

I thank you very much.

I did want to mention that Delegate Sablan indicated he had received these complaints from his constituents. That's how we know about this issue. The veterans, the members of the Armed Forces bring it to our attention. And he also mentioned that some commanders had the discretion as to whether or not to fly our flags. I note that Under Secretary of Defense Erin Conaton has indeed issued a memorandum to all parts of the armed services, and her word was that she ``encouraged'' but left to the ``discretion''--``encourage'' is her word, ``discretion'' are her words--of commanders whether to display the flags of the territories and the District of Columbia when the flags of the 50 States are displayed.

Defense, Pentagon,

Washington, DC, August 28, 2012.

memorandum for secretaries of the military departments

Subject: Display of District of Columbia and United States

Territorial Flags during Official Ceremonies

Our Nation's Armed Forces are more diverse than ever, and

brave men and women from all our states and territories

continue to answer the Nation's call to duty. On these

occasions where you intend to display the flags of all 50

states, I am urging you also to display the flags of the

District of Columbia and United States (U.S.) territories. I

especially encourage this practice as our soldiers, sailors,

airmen, and marines graduate from entry level training.

This memorandum is not intended to affect the authority or

discretion of commanders. Rather, it encourages the

appropriate recognition of residents of the District of

Columbia and U.S. territories at official ceremonies.

Erin C. Conaton.

Under Secretary of Defense for

Personnel and Readiness.

Now, I would ask the Undersecretary of Defense, I would ask the President of the United States, I would ask the Secretary of Defense whether there would ever be discretion left to a commander whether to fly the flags of Virginia or Utah or North Carolina or Florida. That would be considered an insult to those States; we consider it no less.

I'm pleased to yield time as well to the delegate from the U.S. Virgin Islands, Congresswoman Christensen.

I thank the delegate for those very important remarks and certainly join her in those remarks.

We have another delegate who has come to the floor. I am pleased to invite Congressman Faleomavaega of American Samoa to step forward at this time.

(Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

You have heard movingly from three of my colleagues. I hope the Senate has been as moved as I was by hearing from them.

I want only to say now, Mr. Speaker, you've heard from all of us who are American citizens who represent American citizens and American citizens who fight and have fought for their country, who were pleased and continue to volunteer in disproportionate numbers into the Armed Forces, who are among the less than 1 percent, who carry all of us, who carry all of us on their shoulders. That's what the volunteer Army is all about today.

We've asked the Senate to do what we congratulate and commend and thank the House for having already done. Thank you, House of Representatives, for respecting our flags and for respecting us as representatives of the American people and of American veterans.

And I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce a bill to require the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (MWAA) to adopt the Federal Acquisition Regulations, the set of rules that govern all aspects of the acquisition process for virtually every federal executive branch agency. Significant failures in MWAA's contracting policies and practices point to a need for substantial reform in MWAA's acquisition process. However, despite being created by Congress, leasing federally owned land, and benefiting from significant federal taxpayer funds, MWAA is not subject to federal procurement laws or regulation. This oversight has left MWAA without ample guidance for its board members and employees. Many of the problems that have drawn criticism of MWAA could be eliminated if the Federal Acquisition Regulations were made applicable.

MWAA is an independent public body created by Congress under the Metropolitan Washington Airports Act of 1986 (Airports Act), which authorized a compact between the Commonwealth of Virginia and the District of Columbia. MWAA, with 1,400 employees, leases and manages Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport and Washington Dulles International Airport. In addition to managing airports, MWAA is responsible for the Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project, with an estimated cost of $5.8 billion, including $977 million in federal funds.

A recent Department of Transportation (DOT) Inspector General report, ``MWAA's Weak Policies and Procedures Have Led to Questionable Procurement Practices, Mismanagement, and a Lack of Overall Accountability'' (Report Number: AV-2013-006) (IG Report), found that ``MWAA's contracting policies and practices are insufficient to ensure compliance with the Airports Act and the lease agreement between DOT and MWAA.'' For example, the Airports Act and lease agreement require MWAA to award contracts over $200,000 competitively to the maximum extent practicable. However, the IG Report found that MWAA recently awarded two-thirds of its contracts exceeding $200,000 with limited competition. The IG Report also noted that MWAA awarded many contracts with no formal solicitation, and that MWAA's Contracting Manual does not require public notification of sole-source contracts over $200,000.

The lack of transparency and competition on MWAA contracts is inconsistent with continuing ownership of the airports by the federal government, MWAA's creation by Congress, and the significant federal taxpayer dollars for which MWAA is responsible. The IG Report's conclusion that current procurement procedures are inadequate requires a response that definitively settles the procurement issues surrounding MWAA. It makes no sense for MWAA to attempt to reinvent a new set of procurement procedures and ignore the very thorough and tested Federal Acquisition Regulations, which provides legal guidelines for every aspect of procurement and that maximizes fairness and transparency.

I urge my colleagues to support the bill. I will seek passage before the end of the lame duck.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in congratulating McGuire Funeral Service, Inc. (McGuire) on its 100th anniversary of service to the residents of the District of Columbia and the national capital region.

Founded in 1912 by Robert G. McGuire on H Street NE, McGuire has offered families in the national capital region burial and funeral arrangements for 100 years. McGuire has served over 25,000 decedents from all walks of life, and has arranged services for many public figures and notable residents in the District and the world over.

We appreciate the McGuire family's longstanding presence in the District and their continuing service to the families of our residents. The success of McGuire, Inc. can be attributed to always treating the families that call on them with dignity, honor, and respect, as well as to providing exemplary service to all.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in celebrating the 100th anniversary of McGuire Funeral Service, Inc.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in honoring Maya Wesby, the 2012 Congressional Black Caucus, CBC, Spouses Essay Contest winner. Maya, a native Washingtonian, is a dedicated student and burgeoning scholar at one of the District's top performing public schools, the Duke Ellington School for the Performing Arts. Her outstanding essay, ``Defeating the Barriers of Physical Activity,'' won first place at the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation's Annual Legislative Conference this year.

Each year, high school and college students from the districts of CBC members write essays on issues that affect the lives of African Americans for the CBC Spouses Essay Contest. This year's topic was ``How America's youth are moving us into a healthier tomorrow.'' Maya's essay documents childhood and adolescent obesity in our country and offers a solution for the staggering statistics. As an advocate for healthy living, Maya's thought-provoking work shows a young scholar who is getting the most from her education, is on top of the issues of the day, and has great promise as she prepares for college and for success in life.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in honoring Maya Wesby for winning the 2012 Congressional Black Caucus Spouses Essay Contest.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing the many accomplishments and contributions of Sonia Gutierrez, who for 40 years has served the residents of the District of Columbia with passion and dedication as one of this city's most productive and prominent education leaders and one of its most distinguished leaders. Mrs. Gutierrez, a talented institution builder, is best known as the founder and president of the Carlos Rosario

International Public Charter School. She also established the Council of Latino Organizations here, and together with others, helped establish the Mayor's Office on Latino Affairs.

Sonia built Carlos Rosario from a small non-profit teaching English to Latinos, into today's groundbreaking, comprehensive learning center offering support services, from English as a second language to citizenship and career services, to 2,500 residents. Her efforts are now spreading to a new site to be dedicated as the Sonia Gutierrez Campus. For her visionary leadership Mrs. Gutierrez earned the Ana G. Mendez Excellence in Education award and induction into the Washington Women's Hall of Fame, among many other awards for giving thousands of students an opportunity to change their lives.

I now ask the House to recognize Sonia Gutierrez for 40 years of tireless and selfless passion as an educator, organizer and advocate.

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

I want to thank the chairman for the bipartisan measures this bill contains, measures like the Integrated Public Alert and Warning System and a number of others.

I rise in support of H.R. 2903. This bipartisan measure reauthorizes the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA; authorizes an Integrated Public Alert and Warning System; and includes many provisions that were incorporated into similar legislation in past Congresses. I am pleased to see them, once again, come to the floor. Perhaps we can get them through the House and the Senate at some point in the near future, because these are not controversial matters.

Despite our broad support for this measure, we are disappointed in the authorized levels of funding for FEMA and the disaster assistance programs. Instead of evaluating the needs of the agency and its programs and then establishing the maximum amounts that would be appropriate, the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, through this bill, is essentially deferring to the Appropriations Committee to tell the authorizers how to do their jobs by only authorizing amounts equal to the last appropriated amounts.

Let me be clear, however. If we authorized the maximum that could be needed, the budget deficit would not be increased. The amount authorized merely specifies need while only the actual amounts appropriated can affect the amounts spent. It is the authorizers who are to speak to need. It is for the Members who, in fact, decide how to divide the funds, the appropriators, once the need is assessed, to decide how much the country can afford to spend. They need our expert guidance. They don't have it in this bill.

I would also like to call attention to a few important changes included in this legislation:

For example, H.R. 2903 improves many of FEMA's programs and activities, including codifying the debris removal program. The current debris removal program is based on a pilot program from several years ago. We have heard firsthand from local governments and emergency management professionals about the need to make this successful program--a program that we have already piloted--permanent to help local communities expedite recovery from disasters.

In addition, this bill addresses a long expressed concern of mine about the need to expedite FEMA's appeals process. Without firm timelines, the current appeals process has led to long and unnecessary delays in disaster closeouts. This, in turn, has prevented disaster funds obligated for a specific disaster from being deobligated and returned to the Disaster Relief Fund. Last fall, as the Disaster Relief Fund was on the brink of running out of funds, FEMA was actually able to close out several disaster accounts and find the necessary funds to finance disaster relief until Congress replenished the fund.

Moreover, timely resolution of these appeals will allow these funds to be used for infrastructure repair, which will assist the economic recovery for communities hard hit by disasters.

More than 12 years ago, Congress enacted the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, directing FEMA to begin using cost estimating for repair and reconstruction projects to expedite the recovery process and disaster closeout. Yet, today, FEMA still has not promulgated regulations to implement this provision. H.R. 2903 requires FEMA to promulgate these regulations and to implement cost estimating within 180 days of the passage of this act. We mean it this time.

This provision also will eliminate one of the most inefficient and ridiculous uses of Federal funds that I know of, one that has gotten on my last nerve, where FEMA pays not only for its own experts, but also for the States' experts, essentially encouraging the submission of competing estimates of cost repair, instead of each side deciding on a neutral party to, in fact, estimate those costs.

Finally, FEMA Administrator Fugate has requested that I note FEMA's support for section 210 of this bill, which would authorize Indian tribes to directly make a request to the President for a disaster or emergency declaration. This provision acknowledges tribal sovereignty, enhances FEMA's working relationship with the tribal governments, and improves emergency and disaster responsiveness throughout Indian Country. Numerous Indian tribes have expressed support for this provision, as has the National Congress of American Indians.

I want especially to thank the ranking member, Mr. Rahall, for his leadership on this and other issues in this bill.

Despite my concerns about the authorized amounts in this bill, H.R. 2903 is good public policy and is necessary to eliminate inefficient government actions and to expedite disaster recovery.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join in supporting this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Richardson).

I appreciate that Chairman Denham has brought this FEMA reauthorization bill to the floor.

Mr. Speaker, this bill has now gone over a couple of Congresses. The Democrats didn't get it done, and the Republicans didn't get it done. It's really too important. I hope that in the 113th Congress, this bill can be brought forward early because a lot of very good work has been done on the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I regret that as we sit and think about the 112th Congress, it will be impossible to think of a single major bill passed during these 2 years. In order to pass bills, both Houses have to get together and compromise. That seems to have been impossible, at least for this House.

We are about to leave town in September with a couple of months still to go without the middle class tax cuts just when the recovery needs a boost; in the midst of a drought, without the farm bill; and without the Violence Against Women Act, which passed with an overwhelming bipartisan vote in the Senate. What will it take to get something done? I hope the 113th Congress proves more productive.

This has been called a do-nothing Congress. I would say this Congress has done real harm. To call it a do-nothing Congress is to give it more credit than it deserves.

This is a Congress, at least in the House, that will be remembered for having voted to end Medicare as we know it and increase the cost of healthcare for seniors by $6,400. The 112th Congress will be remembered, all right, for tax breaks for the wealthy and for corporations that ship jobs overseas.

We, in the 112th Congress, have done something amazing when you consider that we have been in a recession unheard of since the Great Depression. We have left the economy entirely to the Federal Reserve Board, to monetary policy, by abandoning the job of Congress to enact fiscal policy. There has been none in the 112th Congress that has had any effect on the economy.

No wonder. We are here for only 8 days after the August recess. If our Republican majority could have phoned in the CR, I believe they would have done it, if you look at what is on our plate as we get ready to go home.

We are going home in September leaving, unthinkably, even the major business of sequestration, the ultimate bill that was passed to force us to get together and compromise. In leaving sequestration on the table, we are leaving a bill that could collapse the entire economy. It's a fitting end for a Congress that did nothing, but in fact, did harm.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing Sarkis Tatigian, who will celebrate 70 years of combined military and federal civil service on September 26, 2012. At the age of 90, Mr. Tatigian shows no signs of slowing down. Retirement eligible since 1973, he still finds work far more exciting than the prospect of retirement. As Associate Director of the Small Business Programs Office at Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) he is not only a champion for the Navy's mission critical work but also for providing opportunities for small business growth and development.

Mr. Tatigian has always been fascinated by the possibilities of the world around him. In fact, his hobby of radio communication led to his career in the Navy. In July 1942, he took the oath of office for a war service appointment as a Jr. Inspector of Radio at the Naval Aircraft Factory in the Philadelphia Navy Yard. In 1944, Mr. Tatigian arrived in Washington, D.C. to work as part of the Navy's BAT program which was developing an aircraft-launched air-to-surface radar-guided glide bomb being developed for use in the war. The BAT became operational in January 1945 as the first naval aircraft-launched guided weapon.

After leaving military service in 1946, Mr. Tatigian returned to the Navy as a civil service employee with the Bureau of Ordinance in Washington, D.C. He began his distinguished career as a small business analyst for the bureau. While in this position, Mr. Tatigian developed a Small Business Mobile Exhibit that traveled coast-to-coast visiting state capitals and cities with populations exceeding 400,000, and received congressional recognition for his organizational efforts on the exhibit.

In June 1979, he was appointed Associate Director of the Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization Office, the position he continues to hold today in the current NAVSEA Small Business Programs Office. The experience and technical background Mr. Tatigian gained from serving his country allow him to interface with the engineering and technical communities at NAVSEA with great ease and understanding, another benefit of his long and distinguished career. Mr. Tatigian has received numerous awards including the U.S. Navy's Meritorious Civilian Service Award.

Although an expert in business processes, he is still committed to finding innovative yet strategic ways to prepare his office for the future. When asked why he continues to work, Tatigian responds, ``If you love what you do, it's not really work.'' I ask the House to join me in commending Sarkis Tatigian for his outstanding accomplishments as a federal employee and his continued commitment to the work of the Navy.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the accomplishments of District of Columbia resident Dr. Neal A. Young, recipient of the 2012 Samuel J. Heyman Service to America Medal for Science and Environment. These prestigious awards, presented annually by the Partnership for Public Service, honor outstanding achievements by federal employees in nine categories.

Dr. Young is the Chief of the Hematology Branch, National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the director of the NIH Center for Human

Immunology, Autoimmunity and Inflammation. His pioneering laboratory and clinical research, together with his clinical practice and mentoring, has saved the lives of thousands of people throughout the world suffering from bone marrow failure syndromes, all while serving as a federal employee. During his federal service, Dr. Young has become the world's foremost expert in the difficult area of bone marrow failure, and the treatment protocols he developed for aplastic anemia are considered best practice. Currently, Dr. Young, who developed methods for testing for the B19 parvovirus, has a vaccine for the virus in clinical trials. He also has dedicated himself to training the next generation of hematology clinicians-researchers, and his students have gone on to lead departments throughout the world. We are particularly pleased and proud that a scientist with Dr. Young's accomplishments is a resident of our city, where his example will especially inspire the budding young scientists among our children.

At a time when many federal employees feel beleaguered, Dr. Young's award puts a face on the term ``federal employee.'' Earlier this year, I introduced H. Res. 682, which expresses the sense of the House of Representatives in support of our outstanding federal employees, who are the best educated and most highly qualified broadly based workforce in the country. Dr. Young is a distinguished representative of federal employees at every level, who give their best to their work for the American people. The residents of the District of Columbia, many of whom also are federal employees, join me in congratulating Dr. Young, a distinguished D.C. resident who exemplifies our high quality federal employees and is now honored by our nation as one of our most remarkable scientists.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the House to join me in honoring Dr. Neal Young for his outstanding accomplishments in science and for his continuous commitment to public service.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 6336, and to express my deep gratitude to Chairman Dan Lungren for introducing the bill, for consulting with me on it, and for bringing it to the House floor. I would also like to thank Senator Dick Durbin for including a provision in the Senate Appropriations Committee-passed fiscal year 2013 Financial Services and General Government Appropriations bill to place the Frederick Douglass statue in the U.S. Capitol and Senator Charles Schumer for introducing the Senate companion to H.R. 6336.

The District of Columbia government commissioned the Douglass statue, with the intention of giving it to the American people as a gift to be displayed in the Capitol. Douglass, an iconic leader for equal rights for African Americans and women and an internationally celebrated human rights advocate, spent much of his life as a D.C. resident and served as a local public official. His home in Southeast D.C., which is now the Frederick Douglass National Historic Site, sits only a few miles from the Capitol. Since the statue was completed in 2007, I have been pursuing legislation to have Congress accept the District's gift. When Congress built the Capitol Visitor Center, it named the main room ``Emancipation Hall'' in honor of the slaves who helped to build the Capitol. Nevertheless, the Capitol still has a long way to go in telling the nation's story, including the role of African Americans in U.S. history. Currently, there are 180 statues and busts in the Capitol, and the Douglass statue would only be the third portraying an African American.

The time has come for the Congress to accept the District of Columbia's gift. I urge the House to pass the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing Mark Johnson, the first African-American in history to capture both a World Flyweight and Super Flyweight championship twice in his career. Also known as ``Too Sharp,'' Mr. Johnson was a top pound-for-pound fighter during his sixteen-year career from 1990 to 2006. He perfected finesse, power, and speed. Attesting to his athleticism, his perseverance, and his well- developed skills, Johnson attained twenty-one knockouts before his matches made it to the fourth round.

Mr. Johnson had more than execution; he had an array of intangibles that set him apart from the rest of his profession. In his pursuits, Mr. Johnson left his natural division to take a Super Flyweight title and then go on to challenge bantamweights. While Mr. Johnson did not reach significant popularity due to his weight class and lack of defining fights, he went on to become one of the top pound-for-pound fighters in boxing for several years.

During his career, Mr. Johnson won forty-four professional boxing matches and lost only five. He had twenty-eight knockouts. During Mr. Johnson's amateur career, he won 125 boxing matches and lost only six. He won the first Junior World PentaContinental title in 1993. He held the International Boxing Federation Flyweight title from May 1996 to September 1998, the International Boxing Federation Super Flyweight title from April 1999 to November 1990, and the World Boxing Organization Junior Bantamweight title from August 2003 to September 2004. Mr. Johnson was the first African-American in history to capture both a World Flyweight and Super Flyweight boxing championship, and he did that not once, but twice.

Since 2008, after retiring from professional boxing in 2008, Mr. Johnson, along with his father and lifelong trainer, Abraham ``Ham'' Johnson, has been training underprivileged boys and girls in their gym located in Southeast Washington, D.C. Today, Mark Johnson is employed as a Roving Leader within the D.C. Department of Parks and Recreation, and in that capacity, he conducts home and school visits, and teaches at-risk children to read and write. He also is heavily involved in gang violence prevention. Mr. Johnson serves as a positive and accomplished role-model for troubled youth within the Washington, D.C. area.

Mr. Speaker, on June 10, 2012, Mark ``Too Sharp'' Johnson was the first Boxer from Washington, D.C. to be inducted into the Boxing Hall of Fame, and, at 40 years old, he is the youngest ever to have received such an honor. ``I have known Mark since he was 6; he deserves it and he's the best bantamweight ever,'' former world-champion Sugar Ray Leonard said of Mark Johnson's induction into the Hall of Fame. I ask the House to join me in commending Mark Johnson for his outstanding accomplishments as a boxing champion and his ongoing commitment to the youth of the District of Columbia.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing Saturday, August 4, 2012, the 108th birthday of native Washingtonian, Mrs. Lucy Speller.

Affectionately known as ``Aunt,'' and ``Sister,'' Mrs. Lucy Speller was born in 1904, was married for 76 years, and is a lifelong resident of the District of Columbia. As a Sunday school and Vacation Bible School teacher at Calvary Episcopal Church, Lucy Speller demonstrated her love of the District's children by touching their hearts and cultivating their minds. Students of Mrs. Speller often recall her kind-hearted nature and the guidance and support that she offered through the years. Many residents also celebrate Lucy Speller's work as a professional planner for weddings, anniversaries, birthdays, and numerous other functions. She even planned her own golden wedding anniversary.

I ask the House to join me in recognizing the 108th birthday of Mrs. Lucy Speller, a special lady, whose service to our community is greatly appreciated.

Mr. Speaker, sometimes schoolyard bullies pick on the wrong kid. Anti-choice forces thought they had found a cheap way to make a large point against the right of women in our country to reproductive health and choice by picking on the District of Columbia. Pick a fight with the District of Columbia--after all, the District of Columbia doesn't have a vote even if the bill is about only the District of Columbia. But in the process, they picked a fight with the women of the United States because this is still a pro-choice Nation.

Now, they didn't want to get women worked up in an election year, but they wanted a Federal imprimatur, a Federal label, so they thought that they could get the House to pass the bill that's coming to the floor today on suspension that women in the District of Columbia are not entitled to an abortion after 20 weeks. Mind you, everywhere else in the United States that right still would exist.

And while they're at it, they say, let's penalize women by allowing an injunction against an abortion by these women by, any health care provider who has had anything to do with the woman any time in her life--I guess the elementary school nurse could come in to seek an injunction. And, of course, penalize doctors--2 years in jail and a fine are possible. No health exception for the woman no matter her health nor fetal abnormality, rape or incest exceptions.

One of my constituents, Professor Christy Zink, had an abortion at 21 weeks, the earliest time her physicians would discover that she was carrying a fetus with half a brain. Had it been born alive, it would have had constant seizures. She would have had to carry that fetus to term.

Sometimes, bullies pick the wrong fight. Anti-choice forces have threatened the leadership here, particularly Republicans, saying they are going to score the vote. All that did was to bring out the really big boys and girls--Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice America-- who are going to score the bill as well.

They've been too clever by two-thirds. It'll take two-thirds to pass this bill. I'm hoping they won't get that kind of supermajority.

This is not the typical anti-home-rule bill that holds everyone else harmless except for D.C. residents and the D.C. government. This bill is a key element in a State-by-State campaign that seeks first to undermine and then to eliminate reproductive choice and health care for women across the United States.

They've miscalculated. They have reinvigorated the pro-choice movement, just as they did when they infiltrated Susan G. Komen for the Cure and forced Komen, which later reversed itself to stop giving to Planned Parenthood, just as they did when they failed to defund Planned Parenthood, just as they did when they caused a furor by women with the attack on contraceptives in health insurance policies.

Now women see this fight against reproductive choice for what it is, because it has ended with the constitutional right to abortion. Anti- choice Republicans have abandoned their own principles. If they feel so deeply, how could they introduce a bill that would affect only women and only fetuses in the District of Columbia?

The Supreme Court decided 39 years ago that a woman is entitled to an abortion. That's a constitutional right. It's not a constitutional right everywhere except the Nation's Capital. The differences in our country on choice are great, but they are differences we all must respect. And the Supreme Court has settled those differences with Roe v. Wade, which says pre-viability, that is a decision between a woman and her doctor. After viability, of course, there are some things that can be done, but the health and life of the mother always have to be protected.

This bill stretches beyond penalties doctors in our country would receive, and penalties on women, and it is the kind of bill that sends a message to women: this is not a House that is protecting your reproductive health. If this bill passes, it will cause the kind of uproar that we have not seen in almost 40 years.