Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 447, the National Apprenticeship Act of 2021, which I introduced with Congressman Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania.

Registered Apprenticeships are this nation's most successful federally funded workforce development initiative.

Each year, hundreds of thousands of workers count on Registered Apprenticeships to learn in-demand skills, earn wages that grow along with those skills, and receive nationally recognized credentials that lead to rewarding careers.

Registered Apprenticeships are so successful that 94 percent of apprentices are employed upon completion and earn an average starting wage of more than $70,000 a year.

Investing in Registered Apprenticeships not only benefits workers; it also strengthens our economy and helps employers build pipelines of talented and dedicated workers.

Increased funding for high-quality workforce development programs is precisely what we need to help workers get back on their feet during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Millions of people are still without work, and at least 7 million of the jobs lost during the COVID-19 pandemic may never come back.

Yet, Congress has not reauthorized the National Apprenticeship Act since it was first passed in 1937.

Simply put, we have left our nation's best workforce development initiative under-resourced at a time when we need it most.

In response, the National Apprenticeship Act of 2021:

invests $3.5 billion in our national apprenticeship system;

ensures consistency and quality across apprenticeship programs;

increases opportunities for diverse groups of workers who have not traditionally been included in the apprenticeship system; and,

expands Registered Apprenticeships in emerging sectors, such as health care, manufacturing, finance, and technology.

This investment, alone, will create an additional 1 million apprenticeship opportunities. And it will yield more than $10 billion in benefits to taxpayers through higher tax revenue and decreased spending on social safety net programs.

Construction trades and their industry partners have long proven that the Registered Apprenticeship model works. In my district, the Norfolk Naval Shipyard's Apprentice Program and the Newport News Shipbuilding Apprentice School have been operating successfully for more than a century. We should expand this model so that more workers and employers can experience the benefits.

That is why, last Congress, Committee Democrats and Republicans held four bipartisan hearings and conducted months of intensive negotiations to produce a bipartisan proposal that expands access to high-quality apprenticeships. Last November, the House passed this legislation in a bipartisan vote of 246 to 140.

Now, we have the chance to, once again, come together and pass the National Apprenticeship Act of 2021 so that workers across the country, and across industries, can benefit from Registered Apprenticeship opportunities. Lastly, I would be remiss if I did not recognize Representative Pocan of Wisconsin who sponsored the Leveraging Effective Apprenticeships to Rebuild National Skills Act or the LEARNS Act, Representative Bonamici of Oregon who authored the PARTNERS Act, and former Representative Susan Davis of California who shepherded this bill in the 116th Congress, for their significant contributions to this legislation.

I urge support for this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the budget resolution. The COVID-19 pandemic is continuing to inflict widespread harm across our communities. In addition to the thousands of people who are dying every day from this virus, millions of workers remain unemployed, students are falling further behind, and an unprecedented number of American families are facing hunger and homelessness. Anyone who doubts the need for urgent and immediate COVID-19 relief is not paying attention to the multiple ongoing crises affecting people across the country.

We will continue working with our Republican colleagues to find areas of agreement so that we can provide our constituents with the support they desperately need, but we can't put the label of bipartisanship ahead of the urgent needs of our communities. Our constituents don't want us to say that we could have provided relief checks in the amount of $1,400, but we needed to work with the Republicans, and now they are only $1,000.

The upcoming COVID-19 rescue package must extend assistance for the unemployed Americans, protect all workers from COVID-19 infections, and support frontline workers who have cared for our loved ones and kept food on the table during the pandemic.

The rescue package must also provide schools the necessary resources to open safely, to help institutions of higher education cope with severe financial strain, and to keep childcare providers afloat. We must also expand nutrition assistance to ensure that our children and families do not go hungry.

Finally, the COVID-19 rescue package must help close the massive State and local budget shortfalls, which will inevitably force painful cuts to education and other public services if left unaddressed.

Mr. Speaker, we are at a critical moment in the fight against COVID- 19. We have the responsibility to do everything in our power to meet the basic needs of the American people. This budget resolution gives Congress an additional tool to pass a COVID rescue package that will confront the pandemic and deliver the immediate relief that our constituents deserve.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the resolution.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 24, impeaching Donald John Trump, President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.

When we consider impeachment, the first question to consider is not ``what is an impeachable offense?'' but ``why is impeachment in the Constitution?'' If it is necessary to have an elected official removed from office, the normal process is to vote him out of office at his next election and have him leave when his term expires. But there are times when it is absolutely not feasible to wait until a term expires. That is why impeachment is in the Constitution.

The Constitution says the President ``shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.'' When a President is committing treason, it is obviously not feasible to wait until the next election and the expiration of his term. If a President is seeking, taking or giving bribes, it is not feasible to wait. As for ``other high crimes or misdemeanors,'' the important word is ``other,'' because it suggests offenses that have the same effect on the nation as treason or bribery. The phrase ``high crimes and misdemeanors'' is intentionally vague, but the meaning is clear--behavior that creates a situation, as in cases of treason and bribery, where it is not feasible to wait until the next election and the expiration of the President's term. Impeachment is not in the Constitution primarily as a punishment, but as a mechanism to protect our democracy when it is not feasible to wait until January 20th.

In that light, we evaluate the President's recent behavior.

Shortly before noon on Wednesday, January 6, 2021, President Trump addressed thousands of his supporters, who specifically came to Washington at his urging. This event was called the ``March to Save America.'' The President's words and actions at this rally, and arguably the lies he spread weeks before, incited a violent insurrection. Soon after the President's speech, a violent mob overwhelmed the U.S. Capitol with the intent of disrupting the counting of the Electoral College votes--the final official step in the election of the next President of the United States. These individuals harbored delusions fostered by the President that, but for the grace of God, could have resulted in the death or injury of the Vice President and many members of Congress. During most of this insurrection, the absence of the National Guard and other military units was conspicuous, especially when compared to the overwhelming police and military presence last summer during racial justice protests in the nation's capital.

The facts are not in dispute. According to Rep. Liz Cheney, the third highest ranking Republican in the House of Representatives, ``The President of the United States summoned this mob, assembled the mob, and lit the flame of this attack. Everything that followed was his doing. None of this would have happened without the President . . . There has never been a greater betrayal by a President of the United States of his office and his oath to the Constitution.''

Last weekend, the Washington Post published audio recordings revealing a conversation in which the President encourages and attempts to pressure Georgia election officials to ``find'' over 11,780 votes to reverse the certified results of the November 3rd election. This hour long recording further supports previous reports of the President actively attempting to overturn the will of the voters in other states he clearly and fairly lost.

Additionally, the President has used presidential powers to pardon numerous criminals, many of whom were convicted of offenses that could have been part of coverups to protect the President himself. He should not continue to hold this power while insurrectionists are being arrested and charged across the country. And it is also being reported that he is actively considering additional questionable pardons, including for himself and his immediate family.

Notwithstanding his oath to faithfully execute the laws, the President is doing nothing to address the COVID-19 pandemic, even though more than 125,000 deaths have occurred since the election. There has been a complete abdication of responsibility demonstrated by his failure to develop a testing and contact tracing strategy, his refusal to encourage the use of masks to stop the spread of this deadly virus, and now a complete mismanagement of vaccine distribution. Furthermore, his execution of the laws has been compromised by the wholesale resignations of senior federal officials across the executive branch.

The President has gone to extraordinary lengths to disrupt the transition from his administration to President-elect Biden, undermining our national security. Our nation is facing economic distress, a raging pandemic, the disastrous consequences of climate change, a reckoning with racial injustice, and a historic cyber intrusion. While our country is facing these challenges, the President has chosen to jeopardize our national security by refusing the incoming administration customary intelligence briefings, refusing to concede the election, and falsely claiming election fraud ultimately disrupting the peaceful transition of power and undermining the incoming administration's ability to manage these crises.

And there have been ongoing violations of the Constitution's emoluments clause, as foreign governments have paid money to Trump businesses since his inauguration four years ago.

Each of these behaviors alone would constitute impeachable offenses, so the analysis moves to whether or not any or all of them

create the crisis envisioned in the impeachment clause where it is not feasible to wait until January 20th to have him removed from office. I believe the evidence is overwhelming and that we have no choice but to act expeditiously to impeach.

The attack on the Capitol clearly puts us in a situation where it is not feasible to wait until the President's term expires at noon on January 20, 2021. He has shown no remorse for the loss of life and the blatant attack he incited on one of the greatest symbols of our democracy. There has also been no credible explanation why the Capitol Police were left stranded without the support of the National Guard or other law enforcement agencies nor any credible explanation why the Attorney General nor the Director of the F.B.I. have attended any public briefings on what happened on January 6, 2021 or what is being done to make sure that it does not happen again under the President's leadership. And when a person is found unfit to control a Twitter account, it is hard to imagine how he is fit to control the nuclear codes. He is also not fit to control the security of the Capitol for the upcoming inauguration or from other attacks at the Capitol that, according to some public reports, are being planned.

Tragically, tens of thousands of people will continue to die unnecessarily because of his incompetence and inaction in dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic. This self-serving use of the presidential pardon power cannot continue, and if he is removed from office, a process can be put in place to seamlessly transition powers to the Biden Administration without gaps in National Security.

For these reasons it is imperative that he be removed from office now.

Once impeached, it is true that he may not be convicted in the Senate. In fact, an impeachment trial may never take place. But the fact that a quick trial and conviction could take place should deter problematic behavior by the President during his last few days in office. For example, if Majority Leader McConnell received a distressed call from the Secretary of Defense explaining that the President had issued a bizarre military order, Leader McConnell could quickly summon the Chief Justice, reconvene the Senate and vote to remove the President within hours of the call. Knowing that this could take place would hopefully deter the President from issuing such an order or granting inappropriate pardons.

The President will be encouraged to resign, and the Vice President and a majority of the cabinet secretaries could activate the 25th amendment. But all the House of Representatives can control is impeachment. The House has an obligation to do just that. Our action should not be guided by politics or grievance, but should reflect the fact that the future of our Democracy is our first priority.

Madam Speaker, we do not want to look up on January 20th and see that security at the inauguration was mismanaged with disastrous results; or witness a blanket pardon to all of those involved in the insurrection; or suffer as tens of thousands die unnecessarily due to the President's continued mismanagement of the pandemic; or witness any other disastrous situation resulting from the abusive use of presidential powers. And if any of that happens because he was not impeached by the House and convicted and removed by the Senate, we cannot say we did not see it coming.

Mr. Speaker, we are considering the Raise the Wage Act later this week. That proposal will gradually increase the Federal minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2025, and after that, adjust for inflation.

I thank the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Horsford) for convening this Special Order to discuss the minimum wage on behalf of the Congressional Black Caucus, because this gives us an opportunity to explore the historic and continuing intersection between race and the Federal minimum wage.

When the Federal minimum wage was established under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, it purposely excluded many African American workers. Agriculture and most service workers, who are predominantly African American, were exempted from labor law protections.

From 1930 to 1940, the share of Southern Blacks who worked in agriculture, in domestic service was over 40 percent. At the same time, the practice of tipping, which had originally enabled American employers to avoid paying wages to newly freed Black workers, was in effect.

And the law also treated disabled workers as inferior and permanently codified some forms of labor as lower than minimum wage work. Those exclusions lowered labor standards in the South by excluding a large share of its workforce and denied African American workers access to basic labor protections.

But in 1966, Congress finally amended the Fair Labor Standards Act to expand coverage to agriculture, restaurants, nursing homes, and other service workers. The benefits of that act were particularly strong for Black workers. Nearly one-third of Black workers gained protection under the Fair Labor Standards Act compared to only 18 percent of Whites.

The size of that minimum wage increase in finally protecting a larger share of African Americans closed 20 percent of the Black-White earnings and income gap. Estimates based on the differential impact of the 1966 amendments by industry and wage levels within industry give a clear indication of how important the minimum wage protection was, because it established a Federal minimum wage.

We know how effective it was because Black workers in industries that were not protected by the Fair Labor Standards Act were paid significantly lower than the minimum wage. After increases in minimum wage increased earnings by an average of 34 percent, studies found modest to positive job gains as a direct result of the increase in the minimum wage in the industries that came under the Fair Labor Standards Act protection.

The poverty rate for African American children fell from a staggering 65 percent in 1965 to 39 percent in 1969 after the minimum wage expansion in coverage and increase to its highest value in real terms. That caused a rapid decline in childhood poverty amongst African Americans. Fifty

years later, the Raise the Wage Act would have a similarly strong impact on African American workers.

This past June marked the longest time in the history of the minimum wage where there was no increase in the minimum wage. Just about half of African American workers live in the 21 States where the minimum wage has not been increased over $7.25 an hour.

Most of the States, in fact, have not waited for the Federal Government; they went ahead and increased it. But half of the African American population lives in the 21 States stuck at $7.25.

To make matters worse, factoring for inflation, these minimum wage workers have actually suffered a cut over the last decade. So, as a result, millions of Americans who are working full-time still find themselves in poverty. In fact, one recent study showed that there is no city or county in America where a minimum wage worker working 40 hours a week can afford a modest two-bedroom apartment.

So, for nearly a third of Black workers, this is important legislation. One-third of Black workers would get a raise if Congress passes the Raise the Wage Act.

We have a responsibility and an opportunity to restore the value of the minimum wage, lift millions of hardworking people out of poverty, and boost the wages for African American families across the country.

There is nothing more that we can do to actually reduce the wage and income gaps, the wealth gaps, that we have in America today than raise the minimum wage.

So, this week, we must pass the Raise the Wage Act and restore President Roosevelt's promise of a fair day's pay for a fair day's work.

Mr. Chair, I rise today in opposition to Amendment No. 47, which directs the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to reclassify public safety telecommunications officers, also called 911 dispatchers, as a protective service occupation in the U.S. Government's Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) system. This Amendment would have no direct effect on these workers' wages, benefits, or other resources; proponents of this reclassification have stated that ``the benefit of reclassification is recognition and respect.''

The SOC classification system is a federal statistical standard used across agencies in data collection. According to OMB, ``[t]he SOC is designed exclusively for statistical purposes.'' Changes to the codes affect multiple data sources frequently used by policymakers, researchers, and employers, including the American Community Survey, the nation's largest household survey; the Current Population Survey (CPS), the key source of our monthly employment numbers; and the Occupational Employment Statistics (OES), the authoritative source of employment and wage information by occupation.

A standing committee at OMB, the SOC Policy Committee (SOCPC), is responsible maintaining the accuracy of these codes using well-defined principles. The SOCPC undertakes a routine revision of the codes roughly once per decade; the process spans multiple years and ``involves extensive background research, periods of public comment, review of comments, and implementation of revisions.'' During its latest revision, which began in early 2012 and was finalized in 2018, OMB specifically rejected comments requesting it reclassify 911 dispatchers as directed in Amendment No. 47. In its response to public comments presented in the May 2014 Federal Register, the Obama Administration's OMB explained it ``did not accept these recommendations based on Classification Principle 2, which states that workers are coded according to the work performed. The work performed is that of a dispatcher, not a first responder.'' In 2016, the previous administration's OMB declined a similar request for reclassification. Based on the principles OMB's policy committee applies to determine SOC codes, 911 telephone dispatchers are already properly and accurately classified.

Furthermore, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), in a written communication with the Education and Labor Committee on April 26, 2019, reported that the change made by H.R. 1629, a bill identical to Amendment No. 47, would ``impact computer systems, training, documentation, and other processes'' and that ``[s]uch unplanned changes require time and resources to implement and could adversely affect other survey activities.'' Moreover, changes outside of the routine revision process would undermine the goal of data continuity, limiting data sources' usefulness for their key purpose of statistical analysis; create precedent for disrupting the standard SOC revision process; and undermine the SOCPC's authority as experts to apply the classification principles to determine what accuracy requires.

Public safety telecommunications officers perform critical, challenging work. They deserve our honor and gratitude for their efforts. However, considering the many alternative ways policymakers could confer ``recognition and respect,'' as the proponents are seeking, there is little policy justification for this Amendment's approach to achieving that goal. In conclusion, mandating a change to a statistical code would not affect these workers' wages, benefits, or other resources--but it would disrupt data series continuity; require significant additional work for government agencies, researchers, employers, and others; and intervene in an official, routine government data-collection and statistical process.

Communications of April 26, 2019 From the Bureau of Labor Statistics to

the Committee on Education and Labor Regarding H.R. 1629 (Same as

Amendment No. 47)

Questions related to H.R. 1629

1. How will H.R. 1629 impact the current population survey

and occupational employment statistics?

2. H.R. 1629 would require the Office of Management and

Budget (OMB) to implement a change in the Standard

Occupational Classification (SOC) system regarding public

safety telecommunicators. This requirement would alter the

existing process for periodically reviewing and updating the

SOC, which involves extensive background research, periods of

public comment, review of comments, and implementation of

revisions.

Federal statistical agencies, including the Bureau of Labor

Statistics (BLS) are currently in various stages of

implementing the 2018 revisions to the SOC (https:// www.bls.gov/soc/socimp.htm), which the Office of Management

and Budget released in a November 28, 2017 Federal Register

notice (https://www.bls.gov/soc/2018/soc2018final.pdf). In

particular, the Current Population Survey (CPS) and the

Occupational Employment Statistics (OES) program are actively

using the 2018 SOC and any changes to the SOC structure would

impact computer systems, training, and documentation as well

as the systems of federal and other data users downstream,

such as the BLS Employment Projections (EP) program and the

Employment and Training Administration's Occupational

Information Network (O*NET).

The CPS is a monthly survey with a sample of 60,000

households. CPS occupational and industry data are coded

according to the most detailed level of the relevant

classification system possible, accounting for factors such

as disclosure concerns for small occupations and the ability

to code occupations based on the detail provided by household

respondents. This CPS occupational coding system closely

aligns with the SOC, but provides data on about 530

occupations, compared with 820 in the full SOC. The Census

Bureau is responsible for applying occupational codes. An

overview of how they are implementing the 2018 SOC is

outlined here https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/ library/working-papers/2019/demo/sehsdwp2019-19.pdf.

Therefore, there is no guarantee that even if this change

were to occur, the Census Bureau would code at that level of

detail.

The OES program could make the needed changes. The data

would show changes in the employment and wages for major

groups affected by the change in classification.

2. Will this bill have an impact on wage class service

contracts?

BLS is not involved in wage setting for service contracts.

To the extent that any published BLS data are used in such

wage setting, any changes to those data could impact wages.

3. Will implementing H.R. 1629 be difficult for the BLS to

do?

BLS uses the SOC in several surveys. Any changes to the SOC

structure would impact computer systems, training,

documentation, and other processes. Such unplanned changes

require time and resources to implement and could adversely

affect other survey activities.

4. Are there plans for a revision of occupational

classifications?

The SOC is revised periodically, with the interagency SOC

Policy Committee making recommendations to OMB for changes.

OMB has not officially stated when the next SOC revision will

occur, although some indications are that the next SOC will

be for the year 2028. If they follow past practices, OMB is

likely to publish an initial Federal Register notice

soliciting public comment around 2024. Detailed information

on the revision process for 2018 is made available here,

including a document called ``Revising the Standard

Occupational Classification'' which provided detailed history

on the revision process and guidance on submission of

suggestions for changes for the 2018 SOC revision.

5. What other consequences are there if H.R. 1629 is

implemented?

Implementation of H.R. 1629 would alter the existing

process for periodically reviewing and updating the SOC,

which involves extensive background research, periods of

public comment, review of comments, and implementation of

revisions.

The revision process includes solicitations of public

comment in the form of Federal Register notices. During the

lengthy and comprehensive SOC revision process, the SOC

Policy Committee establishes interagency workgroups charged

with reviewing comments received in response to Federal

Register notices and providing recommendations to the SOC

Policy Committee. Guided by the SOC classification principles

and coding guidelines, the SOC Policy Committee reviews the

recommendations from the workgroups and reaches decisions by

consensus. This work process is established to ensure that

the review is conducted in alignment with the 2018 SOC

classification principles and coding guidelines, which are

available starting on page 10 of the 2018 SOC User Guide

(https://www.bls.gov/soc/2018/soc_2018_user_guide.pdf).

In response to the May 22, 2014, Federal Register notice,

the SOC Policy Committee received and reviewed six comments

regarding 9-1-1 dispatchers. These dockets were reviewed

simultaneously by the SOC Policy Committee and grouped under

docket 1-0199 Dispatchers, Public Safety Telecommunicators.

The full SOC Policy Committee response to docket 1-0199 is

available at: https://www.bls.gov/soc/2018/ soc_responses_May_2014.htm.

In response to the July 22, 2016, Federal Register notice,

the SOC Policy Committee received and reviewed over 4,000

comments regarding 9-1-1 dispatchers. The full list of

comments is available here. For comments related only to 9-1-

1 dispatchers, filter the subject column for ``Police, Fire,

and Ambulance Dispatchers.'' The Office of Management and

Budget (OMB) makes public comments available from https:// www.regulations.gov/document?D=OMB-2016-0006-0001.

During the revision process for 2018, a guiding

classification principle was added to emphasize the

importance of maintaining time series continuity, to the

maximum extent possible. Modifications to the structure in

intervening years may be inconsistent with this principle.

Madam Chair, I rise in support of my amendment to H.R. 2500, which would require the Secretary of Defense to submit a report to Congress regarding the Department's progress implementing the 91 priority recommendations from the Comptroller General of the United States. I would like to thank my colleague Congresswoman Barbara Lee for cosponsoring this amendment. I would also like to thank Chairman Smith and the House Armed Services Committee for their work on this important legislation.

The 91 priority recommendations in GAO-19-366SP report was sent to the Department of Defense to address major challenges in nine key areas: Acquisitions and Contract Management, Readiness, Building Capacity to Drive Enterprise-Wide Business Reform, Defense Headquarters, Health care, Cybersecurity, Infrastructure, Financial Management, and Preventing Sexual Harassment. These recommendations address challenges that affect the Department's ability to accomplish its mission.

Every Congressional Black Caucus alternative budget for the past decade has made implementing GAO's recommendations a priority to encourage DoD to save taxpayer dollars and to be more prudent with the enormous amount of resources they are provided to defend our country. As we work to strengthen our nation's Armed Forces to counter threats from our adversaries, we must ensure that DoD roots out waste, fraud, and abuse within the agency. While DoD has successfully implemented some of the recommendations made by the GAO, there is more work to be done.

Today, DoD faces new challenges in our national security with the rise of cyber crimes, international terrorism and nuclear threats. Our military has been stretched and exhausted from being involved in two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. We should be doing everything we can to ensure that DoD funds are used to strengthen our national security.

Each fiscal year, the Department is appropriated hundreds of billions of dollars and is the largest employer in the federal government. It is critical that DOD accounts for every dollar. The GAO report has 17 recommendations for financial management. GAO reports that DoD has failed to properly produce correct financial information. This is a serious problem for a Department that receives such a significant share of federal taxpayer dollars. Auditing the Pentagon and encouraging DoD to continue to implement the remaining GAO recommendations would lead to tens of billions in cost savings for taxpayers by bringing a culture of financial accountability to the Pentagon.

Madam Chair, it is imperative that DoD address and implement the GAO's remaining priority recommendations. If cost is the issue that is preventing the implementation, the required report to Congress will outline the estimated funding needed to assist DOD with the implementation.

I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting this important amendment to ensure DoD's efficient use of taxpayer dollars.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the achievements of Margaret ``Peg'' Seminario, who has made the health and safety of American workers her life's work and is retiring after 42 years of tireless advocacy. Through her more than four decades of work at the AFL-CIO, Peg has been instrumental in securing the health and lives of millions of workers.

Peg began her work at the AFL-CIO in 1977 during the early years of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). She worked with many of the authors of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to develop the policies, win the court decisions, and build the infrastructure that have helped millions of American workers realize their right to safe workplaces.

She worked closely with the labor leaders who fought to pass the Occupational Safety and Health Act and the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act--George Taylor, Tony Mazzocchi, Jack Sheehan and many others.

She played a major role in assembling the evidence, preparing comments, testifying at hearings, and assisting allies in passing almost every OSHA safety and health standard over the past 42 years including: silica, beryllium, asbestos, lead, noise, ergonomics, machine guarding, methylene chloride, lockout-tagout, and workers' Right-to-Know. These standards prevented countless injuries, deaths and occupational diseases.

She led the effort to protect working people from occupational exposure to anthrax, bird flu, SARS, workplace violence, and tuberculosis.

She led the fight to win passage of the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act that provided health care and compensation for the first responders who got sick after they responded to the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001.

Peg served on numerous National Academy of Sciences and federal advisory committees, providing her expertise on a wide range of workplace safety and health issues, including the extent and nature of work-related injuries, illnesses, and deaths occurring in the United States.

Peg was also one of the first professional women to work at the AFL- CIO, blazing the path for those who followed, and she served as a mentor for generations of women labor leaders.

She advised those inside and outside the labor movement on practical strategies to move forward on seemingly insoluble issues. As she kept workers' goals in mind, her feet were always planted in practical politics. She approached the toughest political challenges by asking a simple, familiar question: ``What makes sense?''

Working with the business community and other traditional foes of labor were part of her strategic arsenal when that approach ``made sense'' to accomplish the goals of working people.

With an advanced degree in industrial hygiene from the Harvard School of Public Health, she served as a trusted advisor to almost every Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA--Democrat and Republican--over the last 40 years.

Finally, she understood the role that worker empowerment and labor unions play in ensuring the safety of working women and men.

``Let's call Peg'' was the first thing out of the mouth of generations of members of Congress and congressional staff. She testified before numerous congressional committees and provided valuable information and advice to lawmakers on every budget, every piece of legislation designed to strengthen worker protections, and every response to legislative efforts to weaken or dismantle OSHA, the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) or the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH).

Madam Speaker, there are men and women across the county who are alive today because of her work. They may not know who she is. She will not receive their gratitude. But they owe their health, their limbs and their lives to the work she has done over 42 year long career. I thank Peg for all that she has done for America's workers.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the 100th Anniversary of The Apprentice School in Newport News, Virginia, which was founded in 1919 at Newport News Shipbuilding.

The Apprentice School has been continually recognized locally, regionally, nationally, and globally as an extraordinary apprentice program. It is a leading example of how apprentice programs have been redesigned to teach a wide array of skilled trades, while also offering an educational program rich in academic instruction, craft training, leadership, and extracurricular activities.

In its 100 year history, the Apprentice School has graduated more than 10,800 apprentices, with approximately 800 young men and women currently enrolled in 28 different, four-, five-, and eight-year apprenticeship programs. The Apprentice School provides an academic curriculum that includes studies in Mathematics, Physics, Strength of Materials, Drafting, Marine Engineering, Shipbuilding Operations, and Technical Communications, among other disciplines, leading to a strong technical education foundation.

The Apprentice School has contributed significantly to Newport News Shipbuilding's reputation, tradition and success, producing complex sea-faring vessels and passenger ships to nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers with the craftsmanship of highly skilled graduates.

Representing 13 percent of Newport News Shipbuilding's total current workforce, graduates of The Apprentice School comprise 60 percent of today's general foremen and 45 percent of the production management team. More than 70 percent of graduates are still with the company 15 years after graduation, and graduates are found at all levels of the organization, and all levels of management with more than 3,000 graduates currently employed in more than 230 different occupations.

To ensure that apprentices have many education and employment opportunities, The Apprentice School partners with local community colleges and universities to deliver the related academic component of these apprenticeships, which culminates in associate and bachelor's degrees. In addition, the school has established articulation agreements with 10 colleges and universities, providing a seamless transfer of credits and continuing education opportunities for graduates.

The Apprentice School is accredited by the Commission of the Council on Occupational Education. Their apprenticeship programs are also recognized by and registered with the Virginia Apprenticeship Council, allowing apprentices the opportunity to earn college credit, receive competitive pay and benefits, learn a trade, and foster the development of craftsmanship, scholarship and leadership.

Over its 100-year history, The Apprentice School at Newport News Shipbuilding has proven its commitment to establishing robust training and development programs intended to develop and leverage the full potential of the future workforce, and provide high-quality opportunities for its students and the community.

Madam Speaker, The Apprentice School and Newport News Shipbuilding will gather for a celebration this weekend to commemorate this important milestone for the school. So as they look back on the last 100 years, I know that The Apprentice School and its graduates will continue to make important contributions to our nation's shipbuilding industry over the next 100 years.

Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my amendment to H.R. 3055, which would provide funding for the 400 Years of African- American History Commission. I would like to thank my colleagues, Representatives John Lewis, Barbara Lee, and Rashida Tlaib for cosponsoring this amendment which would provide an additional $500,000 to support the work of this important commission. I would also like to thank Chairwoman Lowey, Chairwoman McCollum and the Appropriations Committee for working with me to include funding in the underlying bill and their support for this amendment.

The 400 Years of African American History Commission is charged with planning programs and activities to commemorate the arrival of the ``twenty and odd'' enslaved Africans who arrived at Point Comfort, Virginia 400 years ago this August and to recognize the influence and contributions of Africans in America in the 400 years since.

Unfortunately, that August day in 1619 was not the last time men, women, and children arrived to our country as slaves or were born into bondage here. The history of our nation cannot be fully understood or appreciated without knowing and acknowledging their stories and understanding the ramifications of slavery. We must not ever allow ourselves to forget that this country, including our nation's Capitol, was built through the forced labor of enslaved Africans and their descendents.

More than a stain on our nation's past, racism in America did not end with emancipation nor the end of Jim Crow. We must recognize how it continues to impact our communities and our nation today as we address issues of environmental justice, voting rights, mass incarceration, police brutality, and inequity in education and housing. Only then can we begin to move forward together as a country.

In the past 400 years, African Americans have struggled and triumphed, making important strides and innovations in science, medicine, business, politics, law, the arts, and more. As we remember, mourn, reflect, and study horrific parts of our nation's history and work to address systemic racism today, the Commission is also intended to celebrate the many accomplishments of African Americans.

This body has a history of funding the work of similar commemorative commissions and I trust that our support for the work of this commission will be no different. I remember fondly the many celebrations surrounding the 400th anniversary of the Jamestown Settlement in 2007, just a few miles up the James River from historic Point Comfort. As we look forward to the 100th anniversary of the 19th Amendment next year, I am grateful for the Women's Suffrage Centennial Commission and the funding they have received to support their important work. I am also grateful for this body's generous support of the United States Semiquincentennial Commissioners as we prepare to celebrate the 250th anniversary of American independence in 2026.

It was the successes of those previous commemorative commissions that Senator Tim Kaine had in mind when he initially developed the concept for this commission and asked me to introduce his bill in the House of Representatives. Each of these commissions received generous federal appropriations.

While we were successful in getting our bill enacted and the commission established, Congress has yet to appropriate any federal funds to support the work of the 400 Years of African American History Commission. That changes with the Fiscal Year 2020 Interior bill, which already included $500,000 for the commission. The additional $500,000 of funding provided in my amendment will ensure that there are sufficient opportunities for the American people to gather, to study, to reflect, and to fully appreciate the story of African Americans, their contributions to the fabric of our nation, and their resilience over the last 400 years.

Mr. Chair, while it is imperative that we observe this year, 2019, as the 400th year since the arrival of the first enslaved Africans in the English colonies with reverence, it is equally important that we celebrate all that our communities have achieved throughout those 400 years.

I hope that my colleagues will join me in marking this occasion, as this body has so many other anniversaries, by fully supporting the Commission's ongoing work. Their efforts to preserve history and invite all Americans to reflect and remember is essential as we continue to work towards creating a more perfect union.

Ms. MOORE, Mr. Chair, I rise to thank the chair and ranking member for including my amendment to increase funding to help low-income households replace lead pipes in this en bloc amendment.

Even with the plus-ups in this bill for a number of programs within the EPA's State and Tribal Assistance Grant account, and I thank the subcommittee and full committee for their work there, the amount of resources we are providing pales considerable in comparison to the need to address water infrastructure needs.

Let's just look at this program that I am amending today. The program is authorized at $60 million. Even after the subcommittee provided a $5 million boost (and I thank the chairwoman for that), it still is only funded at a third of the authorized level.

This is a critical program because grantees are able to provide aid to low-income homeowners to replace lead service lines. Unfortunately, those households most affected by this problem often have the fewest resources to replace the pipes.

Recent media reports indicate that the EPA may be finally closer to issuing its new lead in drinking water regulations.

And while better and stronger regulations help, we won't regulate our way out of the lead poisoning crisis that is afflicting our communities.

We must put our funding where our mouths are. We must help get the lead pipes out of the ground and help homeowners get them out of their homes. We must ensure children get tested and treated, if they need it. We must ensure that homes with lead paint get remediated. And all of that takes funding--there is no substitute for that funding.

Just this past weekend, the city of Milwaukee had the honor of hosting the Great Lakes Governors and Premiers, the chief executives of what would be the third largest world economy if you added up the GDP of the individual states and provinces.

At the top of their agenda was addressing how to provide clean drinking water for the over 105 million residents of the Great Lakes region on both sides of the international border. According to the Governors and Premiers, the Great Lakes region contains the highest concentrations of lead service lines in the United States.

I want to echo the call of the Great Lakes Governors & Premiers for the federal governments ``of both the U.S. and Canada to provide appropriate resources . . . to support the accelerated replacement of Lead Service Lines.'' They also called for a comprehensive approach that leverages ``a variety of funding sources and flexibility to match the right tool with each project.''

This bill moves us forward--no question. The THUD bill that we are tackling later this week also provides increased funding for HUD's housing lead control programs. But we need to start taking much bigger steps if we are ever going to get to the point where all children will be safe from this scourge.

That's the goal of this amendment. And I thank the chairwoman for her support.

Madam Chairwoman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chairwoman, I rise in support of this amendment. It is a straightforward amendment transferring $13 million from the Federal Prisoner Detention

account to support local delinquency prevention grants authorized under the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act.

Last Congress, I was honored to work with my colleague, the gentlewoman from North Carolina, then chair, now Ranking Member Virginia Foxx, to reauthorize JJDPA, and it passed without opposition and was signed by the President last year.

Included in that bill was an overhaul of title V of the act which authorizes grants for local delinquency prevention. That overhaul included provisions of the Youth PROMISE Act which I first introduced in 2007.

The Youth PROMISE Act model is based on what we all know, and that is, that evidence-based prevention and intervention programs can stop young people from heading down the wrong path and instead, keep them on the right track, usually saving more money in the long run than the programs cost. I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chairwoman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx).

Madam Chairwoman, investments in prevention can avoid the necessity for incarceration.

Texas found this out several years ago when their appropriations committee was told that they needed to come up with $2 billion--one State--$2 billion in prison construction to deal with their increasing prison population. They, instead, invested about 10 percent of that in prevention, early intervention, and rehabilitation effectively, and found that after that investment, they didn't need to build any new prisons at all.

That is the focus of the Youth PROMISE Act. I hope we can adopt the amendment's focus on prevention, early intervention, and rehabilitation rather than just mass incarceration.

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

Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk made available by the rule.

Mr. Chair, I rise in support of this amendment to protect construction and shipyard workers from exposure to beryllium, an ultra-toxic metal. When beryllium dust is inhaled, it can trigger chronic beryllium disease, an irreversible lung disease that suffocates victims and often leads to a painful death. Beryllium is also a known human carcinogen.

For decades the Federal Government has relied on an arbitrary standard created in 1948 to limit workers' exposure to beryllium.

In January 2017, after almost 20 years of consideration, OSHA issued a standard that cut permissible worker exposure levels by 90 percent for general industry, construction, and maritime workers, and improved early detection of beryllium-related health effects through medical monitoring. But this victory was short-lived. Less than a year later OSHA moved to weaken protections against exposure to beryllium for 11,500 maritime and construction workers.

This is the first time in its nearly 50-year history that OSHA has proposed to roll back an existing worker health protection for a substance known to cause cancer. While keeping lower exposure limits, the new OSHA proposal would eliminate vital ancillary provisions that protect workers from beryllium.

If this proposal is finalized, workers would have no way of knowing if they are being exposed to harmful levels of airborne beryllium. Worse still, workers would have no way of knowing if they or their employers need to take measures to address a beryllium-related disease or adverse health effect.

OSHA's unprecedented move ignores scientific evidence showing that, even with the 90 percent reduction in the exposure limits, there remains a significant risk to worker health from beryllium, and when a significant health risk remains, the courts have affirmed that OSHA should maintain ancillary requirements.

Furthermore, OSHA has presented no evidence that construction and maritime workers are at any less risk of beryllium-related diseases than general industry workers. Nonetheless, the agency's proposal would discriminate against construction and maritime workers by leaving them with inferior protections compared to general industry workers.

Finally, OSHA's unprecedented action was not based on science or evidence that the ancillary requirements were not feasible. Construction companies and shipyards across the country already implement other OSHA standards with ancillary provisions for toxic metals such as chromium, cadmium, and arsenic.

Mr. Chair, I urge a ``yes'' vote on this amendment to protect construction and maritime workers, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).

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

Mr. Chairman, OSHA did not originally propose to cover shipyards or construction, but asked about coverage in its proposal, it was extensively discussed during the comment period, and those comments are noted in the Federal Register, Volume 80, Number 152, page 47569.

I would hope that we would protect the shipyard and construction workers

from beryllium, also the people who are nearby, bystanders and everybody else who are protected by this new standard. In order to protect those workers we need to pass this amendment.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Providence United Church of Christ in Chesapeake, Virginia on its 165th anniversary.

Providence Church began as an informal group of slaves and freed blacks coming together to worship. In the beginning, they gathered for worship in parishioners' homes and in public spaces. This time together was important for African-Americans because it provided spiritual support and a sense of community.

In 1854, Providence Church was officially organized by Reverend Scott. Under his leadership, the congregation met every Sunday and grew in size. As the number of parishioners increased, the church was able to purchase property on Railroad Road and build a church. The church was built in 1872 and was located in the city of South Norfolk, Virginia. South Norfolk later became Chesapeake, Virginia in 1963.

Providence Church was renamed Providence United Church of Christ in 1957 when they joined the United Church of Christ family. Twenty years after joining the denomination and more than 100 years after the church's founding, Providence United Church of Christ expanded again in 1978. They were fortunate to build another addition in the form of an educational wing in 2003. Today many of their ministries take place in this new space.

Over the last 165 years, Providence United Church of Christ has continued to be a leader in the Hampton Roads community. The church serves the community through several ministries including the Christian Education Ministry, Senior Citizens Ministry and the Foodbank Ministry. Annual events include vacation bible schools, Kwanza celebrations, community confitmation classes, youth revivals and senior citizen celebrations. A unique feature of the church is that its congregation is divided into 12 tribes. These tribes provide a way for Providence United Church of Christ to reach different parts of the community.

It is impossible to commemorate the 165th anniversary of Providence United Church of Christ without recognizing its former pastors who helped build and grow this historic church--Reverends Scott, J. Jones, A. Harris, G.T. Hall, A.B. Jones, J.J. Faulk, J.R. Alston, R.R. Briggs, Ben E. Cox, V. Chambers, Clifton Thomas, Dr. Isaac McDonald, Dr. Samuel Varner, Dr. Alexander Jamison, Sr. and currently Dr. A. Jerome Danage, Sr.

Madam Speaker, as Providence United Church of Christ celebrates this historic milestone this weekend, its congregation can take pride in an inspiring 165 years of fellowship, worship and service. I would like to congratulate Reverend Dr. A. Jerome Danage, Sr. and all the members of the church's congregation on this joyous occasion, and I wish them many more years full of growth, prosperity and service to our community.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I rise in support of the SECURE Act, a bipartisan proposal to address our Nation's retirement security crisis. Several of the bill's provisions are under the jurisdiction of the Committee on Education and Labor, and I would like to discuss two of them.

First, the SECURE Act makes it easier for small businesses to band together to form multiple employer plans. This is expected to increase workers' access to retirement savings programs with potentially lower cost investment options.

Second, the SECURE Act includes a carefully and narrowly tailored safe harbor for the selection of an annuity provider for 401(k) plans. This limited safe harbor is intended to ease employers' concerns about their fiduciary liability and to expand workers' access to annuities and other lifetime income options.

I thank Chairman Neal and Ranking Member Brady for their leadership, and I urge my colleagues to support the SECURE Act.

Madam Speaker, I thank Dr. Schrier and Mr. Comer for sponsoring this important legislation.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the Stronger Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, or Stronger CAPTA.

Congress has a vital role in helping States protect children from physical injury and emotional trauma associated with child abuse and neglect.

Stronger CAPTA will fulfill that role by increasing investment in both treatment of child abuse and neglect, and programs designed to prevent maltreatment from happening in the first place.

Specifically, this bill would provide States with resources to strengthen prevention programs, invest in child protective service agencies, and streamline communication between those agencies across this country. It would also build upon the bipartisan commitment to keep families together when it is in the best interests of the child.

Last Saturday, May 18, was the 1-year anniversary of the tragic death of Heaven Watkins, an 11-year-old girl in my community who lost her life because of child abuse. Had the reforms in this bill been in place, Heaven's death could have been prevented.

Specifically, investing in prevention strategies and improving the collection and sharing of vital information can help children like Heaven from slipping through the cracks.

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank, again, Dr. Schrier and Mr. Comer for their leadership, as well as Ms. Bonamici, Mrs. Trahan, Mr. Johnson, Ms. Stefanik, and, of course, the ranking member, Dr. Foxx, for their work in bringing this bill to the floor.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support Stronger CAPTA.

Madam Speaker, today is a historic day. Sixty- five years ago today, the Supreme Court ruled in Brown v. Board of Education that racially segregated schools were inherently unequal and, therefore, unconstitutional.

Today is also a historic day for the LGBTQ community, because today the House of Representatives will pass the Equality Act.

Over the last decade, we have made progress in securing rights for the LGBT community, including marriage equality and the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. However, many legal barriers still remain.

Only a handful of States have explicit laws barring discrimination based on sexual orientation in employment, housing, and public accommodations, and even fewer have protections for gender identity.

The inconsistent patchwork of State laws leaves many people vulnerable to discrimination at work, at school, and in many other parts of their daily lives.

As chairman, I was proud to hold a hearing on this important civil rights legislation in the Committee on Education and Labor. Witnesses testified that all too many Americans are experiencing discrimination in their everyday lives, especially the workplace, and even in the educational system, where many of them are experiencing discrimination, even in elementary school. This is not acceptable.

This bill also ensures that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the RFRA, cannot be used as a free pass to discriminate.

RFRA was originally enacted as a shield to serve as a safeguard for religious freedom, but recently it has been used as a sword to cut down the civil rights of too many individuals.

Freedom from discrimination is a core American value.

Madam Speaker, passage of this bill is long overdue. We must affirm that all Americans are equally protected from discrimination under the law. I, therefore, urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to commemorate a historic neighborhood in the Hampton Roads region of Virginia. The Historic Truxtun Community in Portsmouth, Virginia will celebrate its centennial on May 18, 2019. To mark the occasion, I would like to take a moment to highlight the history of this neighborhood and recognize its contributions to our community.

The community of Truxtun was named after Thomas Truxtun, a Revolutionary War sailor who was known for successfully capturing British ships during the Revolutionary War. He went on to captain the USS Constellation and the USS President. There have been six United States Navy ships named in his honor.

The Truxtun community sits on 43 acres of land within walking distance of the Norfolk Naval Shipyard in Portsmouth, Virginia. It was constructed in 1918 as a project of the U.S. Housing Corporation to address the housing shortage for shipbuilders employed at the Norfolk Naval Shipyard. At the time, the United States had just entered World War I and the newly developed Naval Operating Base was gearing up to assist with the war effort.

Truxtun stands out in United States history as the first government housing project developed for African-Americans. The neighborhood had 250 lots consisting of duplexes and five-bedroom single family homes. The homes in Truxtun had a distinguished style--exposed rafter ends, jerkinhead roofs, and central chimneys. Truxtun homes also offered indoor plumbing and electricity at a time where many people, especially African Americans, did not have access to such amenities. Despite the modern architecture and amenities in Truxtun, it was still a segregated community. Because of the Supreme Court's 1896 decision in Plessy v. Ferguson, Jim Crow segregation laws forced blacks to reside in Truxtun while whites lived in their own nearby government housing project called Cradock.

Those who relocated to Truxtun considered the community tightknit and vibrant. Rents were affordable and started at $17.50 per month. Southern black workers were happy to abandon their agricultural lives and start fresh with higher wages and improved working conditions. Truxtun helped transformed the Hampton Roads region and the region benefitted economically, socially and culturally.

The Truxtun community was developed with a ``new urbanism'' style and had everything a town needed to thrive. From its own convenience store, school and church to civic leagues and sporting events, this town provided residents a place to live, play and shop within an easy commute to the shipyard. The neighborhood had four policemen, a town manager and even a townhouse to do official work. Since Truxtun was formed as an independent township within what was then Norfolk county, its locally elected town manager could levy taxes and provide public services. That is, until Portsmouth acquired the community in 1923.

100 years after its founding, Truxtun is experiencing a revival that places it as one of Portsmouth's most prized cultural centers. In 1982, Truxtun was listed on the National Register of Historic Places. It was one of the first out of about 100 federally financed housing projects during World War I, and it remains a national model for communities that are looking to plan and build inclusive, pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods.

Madam Speaker, I congratulate the residents of Truxtun on their centennial celebration and for helping to make Portsmouth a great place to live and raise a family.