Gerald Connolly

Mr. CONNOLLY

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, could I inquire of the Chair the schedule on the amendments.

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Lawrence).

Mr. CONNOLLY. I thank the Chair for that clarification. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Raskin), who is a professor and a very able member of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, under H.R. 4182, the probationary period for all Federal employees is extended for an additional year, regardless of the job they are hired to do. All new employees are punished equally, and supervisors are given no new tools to improve their use of the existing probationary period. In February 2016, as I have mentioned before, the GAO reports studying the rules and trends relating to review and dismissal of employees for poor performance, suggests that the Office of Personnel Management look into whether there are certain occupations, due to the nature or complexity of the position, in which the probationary period should be extended beyond 1 year or not. We heard testimony before the Rules Committee from a number of colleagues who represent areas with big Federal concentration, Federal employee concentrations with specialized agencies, such as the weather service in Oklahoma and CDC in Atlanta where a 2-year probationary period may very well impede the ability to hire the skilled workers we need. The report goes on to say that it is something that should be looked into. It does not call for a government-wide extension of the probationary period. That is why I filed this amendment to require the GAO to conduct a study on the Department of Defense and other Federal agencies that have used this tool, a 2-year probationary period. A 2-year probationary period for civilian employees at DOD was enacted in 2016, and as the largest Federal agency, this extension would provide a good case study on the potential impacts: good, bad, and indifferent on the legislation before us. It is a study we ought to do before we adopt a bill. Some of my colleagues believe that since extending the probationary period has been working out so well, it ought to be extended across the entire Federal Government. There are a few things I need to point out for us. This policy only affected those who were hired after November 25, 2015, the day the law went into effect. Secondly, the former Under Secretary of Defense, as I mentioned in earlier statements, Peter Levine, testified before the Armed Services Committee that the Department has done little to take advantage of that legislation. That is his testimony. Therefore, there are only a small number of employees who have completed the 2-year probationary period, and it is too soon to declare it a success or failure. That is why my amendment would have the GAO give us guidance. How has it worked? Has it helped? Has it hurt? Are there some things we haven't anticipated that we need to address? The study would also look into whether extending the probationary period has any effect on the ability of an agency to recruit and retain. And, again, I pointed out 40 percent of the existing workforce is eligible for retirement now or in the next few years. That is a huge number of people. And we have got to worry about recruitment. Gathering the data is a necessary first step, not a last step or an afterthought, before deciding to change a law with such profound impact on Federal agencies. This bill, as I said to my friend from Kentucky (Mr. Comer), may yet prove to be a good idea, but we don't know. There remain a lot of questions about the efficacy of this proposal. It is risky, and it can have terrible negative consequences that we haven't even foreseen and some of which we can predict today. Two weeks ago, this body adopted a policy of evidence-based policymaking, so let's put it into implementation with this bill. Let's look for some evidence, empirical evidence, systematically done to justify the adoption of such a sweeping bill. Mr. Chairman, I call for the adoption of my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CONNOLLY. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to H.R. 4182, the Ensuring a Qualified Civil Service Act. This bill potentially weakens the Federal civil service by increasing the probationary period for career civil servants and those in the Senior Executive Service from 1 year to 2 years. I might add, almost no private sector company I know of would have a 2-year probationary period because they know it would make it hard to recruit talented employees. Unlike what has just been said in terms of protections that remain in place, during the probationary period, Federal employees have very little due process or appeal rights if disciplinary action is taken against them, and the action we would take today would be to extend those diluted rights instead of providing them with robust rights of every civil servant beyond the probationary period. They can be fired without notice. They have limited rights to an attorney or representative, and they generally may not appeal their removal. Due process protections are critical to ensuring the integrity of the Federal civil service. In fact, that is the very heart of having a professional civil service. These protections help prevent the politicalization of the workforce and protect whistleblowers from retaliation, which our committee, the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, has passionately documented as a very real danger in the past. The Ensuring a Qualified Civil Service Act is a solution in search of a problem. The Oversight and Government Reform Committee has not held one single hearing to determine whether extending the probationary period an additional year for every single Federal job in the competitive and Senior Executive Service is something that agencies need or want to help them better manage their workforce. Not a single hearing, and this would have a profound impact on every Federal agency. In February of 2016, the Government Accountability Office issued a report which my friend from Kentucky cited at the request of the chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. The request asked GAO to examine the rules and trends relating to the review and dismissal of employees for poor performance. Now supporters of this bill are using this report as a basis for extending the probationary periods of Federal civil service employees; however, nothing in this report calls for doing that. In fact, the title of the report is ``Improved Supervision and Better Use of Probationary Periods Are Needed to Address Substandard Employee Performance.'' The focus ought to be, the GAO says, on improving the supervision of the probationary period we have in place. In conducting its study, GAO found that supervisors do not always have the skills necessary to do that and help address employee performance issues during the probationary period. GAO also found that supervisors sometimes do not even use the probationary period to make performance-related decisions about an employee's ability to do their job and may not always know when the probationary period even ends. The report's recommendations were mainly focused on ensuring qualified supervisors have the training and skills they need to deal with poor performers and making better use of the existing probation period for all new employees. Instead of focusing on addressing the gaps identified by GAO and encouraging agencies to implement the recommendations made in that report, Congress is now attacking Federal employees and the merit-based system. I am especially concerned about the bill's impact on recruiting the workforce of the future. Currently, 40 percent of the current Federal workforce is either eligible for retirement or soon will be--40 percent. Federal agencies need to be able to recruit their replacements and get the requisite skill sets we need for these challenging jobs, just like the private sector is challenged with that. Extending the probationary period to 2 years, governmentwide, creates a climate of more uncertainty, less protection, and diminishes, clearly, the attraction of Federal service for many people, especially those whom we want to be attracted to the civil service, especially millennials. Some of my colleagues have referenced the 2-year probationary period for Department of Defense civilian employees enacted in the NDAA, the National Defense Authorization Act of last fiscal year. They argue that it should serve as precedent for the rest of the Federal Government. There are a few things I need to point out about that. First, the Department of Defense did not request an extension of the probationary period or even indicate a need for it. Second, now that the 2-year probationary period for civilian defense employees has been enacted, the Department isn't even making use of this new authority. According to the former Acting Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, Peter Levine, who testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee in March of this year on civilian personnel reform, ``the Department has done little to take advantage of that legislation.'' Mr. Levine also warned that changing the law to address a small number of problem employees could hurt recruitment and retention and worker productivity. He stated: ``If legislation that is intended to address a problem with 1 percent of the workforce is perceived as threatening and hostile by the other 99 percent, it may undermine morale and reduce the Department's ability to attract and retain the capable employees that it needs. The civilian workforce will not become more productive if problems with a small number of poor performers is addressed with measures that are perceived as a declaration of war on all employees.'' In closing, 2 weeks ago, Congress passed legislation that would pave the way toward evidence-based policymaking, and we all supported that. For the sake of consistency, if nothing else, ought we not see the evidence of whether lengthening the probationary period is materially different and what impacts, both positive and negative, it would have for Federal agencies and employees? Absent such evidence and careful study, I certainly am not willing to take the risk that this bill will not do more harm to both agencies' ability to recruit and retain qualified employees and that it would not be used to arbitrarily punish hardworking Federal employees. However, if the GAO studies the impact of this policy at DOD and finds that this new policy has been wonderful for morale and has indeed improved employee performance and helps employee recruitment, then sign me up. But I do think we ought to rely on data and hearings before the requisite committee when making such a major change to how we manage our Federal workforce. I plan on offering an amendment, Mr. Chairman, that would arm us with the information we need to make an evidence-based decision regarding an extension of the probationary period of the Federal workforce, which is what we ought to be doing before consideration of this bill. Mr. Chairman, I include in the Record statements in opposition or expressing deep concern about this legislation from the American Federation of Government Employees; the International Federation of Professional & Technical Engineers; the National Treasury Employees Union; and a group of organizations, including the Government Accountability Project, the Liberty Coalition, the Project on Government Oversight, Public Citizen, and Taxpayers Protection Alliance. American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Washington, DC, November 28, 2017. Dear Representative: On behalf of the American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO (AFGE), which represents approximately 700,000 federal and District of Columbia employees, in more than 70 agencies across the nation, I strongly urge you to oppose H.R. 4182, the ``Ensuring a Qualified Civil Service Act of 2017,'' introduced by Representative James Comer (R-KY) when it comes to the floor this week. If enacted, this legislation would arbitrarily extend the probation period for a minimum of two years for newly hired federal employees. AFGE opposes this legislation as it does not address any issues surrounding employee performance evaluation or management's ability to properly evaluate employees during the probation period. Instead, all it will do is penalize federal workers and weaken their due process rights. The extension of probation periods for competitive service federal employees from one year to two years is unnecessary and damaging to due process and the merit system. Candidates for federal jobs are put through an extensive selection process prior to being hired and one year is sufficient time for a competent manager to determine if a new employee has the ability to accomplish the duties for which he or she was hired. Specifically, H.R. 4182 would extend the probation period to a minimum of two years after completion of a ``formal training'' program or after the date on which a required license is granted. Such a change could leave employees in probation limbo for many years. For example, government agencies require initial training for prolonged periods of time that could result in employees serving three to five year probation periods, or longer. Employees should not be subject to an almost perpetual state of probation because of comprehensive agency training, certification or licensing programs. Additionally, extending the probation period reduces the due process rights of employees. While on probation, employees have few civil service protections and almost no appeal rights in the event of an adverse action. Civil service protections and the merit system exist to protect the government from politicization. Without these rights, employees on probation will have little to no protection against discrimination and employer retaliation and more exposure to termination not based on cause, but rather arbitrary and unjust reasons. Extending the probation period does not solve any problems regarding poor performance. Supervisors should be responsible and held accountable for identifying and addressing issues of poor performance of new employees quickly and efficiently. Supervisors need better training to manage new employees. Extending the probation period does nothing to better train supervisors nor does it provide any accountability for supervisors to effectively manage new employees. Please Vote NO on H.R. 4182, ``Ensuring a Qualified Civil Service Act of 2017.'' Sincerely, Thomas S. Kahn, Director, Legislative Affairs.

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. DeSaulnier), who is a perspicacious member of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, someone who grasps these issues fundamentally, and is my good friend.

Mr. CONNOLLY. Did we act on evidence-based policymaking? Were there studies and data that showed how successful extending the probationary would be for all of these Federal agencies?

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

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Raskin).

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. CONNOLLY. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I have no further speakers at this time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, as indicated, I appreciate the intent of my friend from Montana, but this is a bad bill. We ought to be studying the effect of the existing pilot program at the Department of Defense to see how it works, and we ought to be adopting the GAO recommendation of better training for supervisors whom the GAO found, frankly, were ill-equipped to evaluate employees during a 1- or 2-year probationary period. We ought to have a hearing, and my friend from Montana might even agree with this, since he is the newest Member, one of the newest Members of our committee. Our committee is the locus for government- wide initiatives such as this. We have not had a single hearing on this bill, or, frankly, on this subject, and I think that is a huge mistake. We are putting the cart before the horse; so I think we ought to return to a more empirical- based policymaking, especially when it is a policy that will affect every future Federal employee, and those numbers are huge, given the baby boom bulge ready to retire. That is 40 percent of the workforce, and it has to be replaced. So while I very much appreciate the intent of my friend from Montana, it is in that context I rise in opposition. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CONNOLLY

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal) for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, you can put all the lipstick you want on this pig, and it is still a pig. Let's be honest, this isn't tax reform. This is a cut on taxes for corporate America, the corporate friends and my friends on the other side of the aisle, and they had to squeeze all kinds of things in to justify it and pay for it. That is why the middle class is going to suffer. That is why their kids in college are going to start losing their ability to deduct interest on student loans, and they are going to pay taxes on waived tuition when they get a teaching assistant position or a benefit from the university. That is why your local municipalities are going to lose tax exemption for private activity bonds that fund tens of billions of dollars of public improvements all over the United States. That is why 8.8 million Americans are going to lose the ability to deduct medical costs. Good luck to families who have to put people in nursing homes for long-term care, patients suffering dementia. How will they work that financing out when they lose this deduction, and how will they feel when they know the reason they are losing this deduction is to finance a corporate tax rate? What about homeowners losing the ability to deduct mortgage interest or to have it capped artificially so corporate America can get the biggest tax cut in history? And, by the way, they get to continue to deduct State and local taxes and other kinds of financial interest-related expenses, but not you, not you the middle class. It adds $1.5 trillion, and that is with dynamic scoring. Dynamic scoring is another way of saying: We kind of fudged the real number. It is more than that, at least $200 billion more than that. I thought my friends on the other side of the aisle were fiscal hawks dedicated to making sure we didn't have deficits. This is an inconsistent bill. This is going to harm middle class America. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to defeat this bill, and let's start over in a bipartisan way.

Mr. CONNOLLY

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to commend the Fairfax County History Commission and to congratulate the recipients of the 2017 Achievement Awards. The Fairfax County History Commission was established in 1969 to help identify, document, record, and preserve the county's rich historic past. Fairfax County was founded in 1742 by Lord Thomas Fairfax and his cousin, William Fairfax and is celebrating its 275th anniversary. Earlier this year, the current Lord and Lady Fairfax traveled from the United Kingdom to participate in the celebration of this milestone. Each year the Commission bestows awards to local residents or organizations that have contributed to the preservation of our history. It is my honor to include in the Record the names of the following 2017 award recipients: The 2017 Distinguished Service Award is being presented to Melanie Manikas and Mary Ellen Zavaleta in recognition of their efforts in preserving, researching and maintaining the history of Burke, Virginia by involving the Cherry Run Elementary School fourth grade classes of 2015 in creating, composing and executing a video on this topic. The documentation and preservation of this information in an enlightening and entertaining video will be helpful for historians, students and the general citizenry of Fairfax County for generations to come. The Nan Netherton Achievement Award is being presented to Nathaniel Lee for his research, documentation, authoring and chronicling of the history of the Richmond, Fredericksburg and Potomac Railroad in his book, ``The Iron Road of Franconia''. This railroad connected the area of Franconia, Virginia to the remainder of Virginia and Washington. Its existence encouraged connections to multiple areas outside Northern Virginia--allowing the growth of commerce, dissemination of communication and passenger travel to points beyond Fairfax County. The Mary Fehringer Award is being presented to the Bull Run Civil War Round Table (BRCWRT) for their 25th Silver Anniversary Commemorative Publication. This fine catalogue documents their twenty-five years of educational contributions to Fairfax County and beyond via their monthly, well-attended (100+ guests) meetings. In addition, the Bull Run Civil War Round Table has been host to over 293 lectures and 128 tours, and has assisted in the placement of over 70 historical marker/ kiosk panels, which were supported by BRCWRT or authored by its membership. Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me in commending the Fairfax County History Commission for their extraordinary efforts to preserve and protect the history of Fairfax County and in congratulating the recipients of the 2017 achievement awards. Their dedication will ensure that the history of Fairfax County is available for generations to come.

Mr. CONNOLLY

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join my constituents in celebrating the 100th birthday of Mrs. Thelma Kouzes, a truly remarkable woman and a beloved member of the Northern Virginia community. Mrs. Kouzes was born Thelma Virginia Loss on July 26, 1917 in Audubon, Iowa. She proudly says she is a first-generation American, the daughter of immigrants whose parents came to the United States from Denmark. She grew up in Iowa, was raised by hardworking parents, and experienced the hardships of the Great Depression. She moved to Washington, D.C. in 1938 to work for President Roosevelt's Administration. There she met her late husband Thomas Kouzes--also a first-generation American whose parents came to the U.S. from Greece. Mrs. Kouzes has led an amazing life. Shortly after she moved to D.C., she experienced culture shock when she attended a segregated religious service. Because of experiences like this she became a proud and passionate civil rights activist. She remained steadfast in her commitment to justice and equality--including marching alongside Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.; in the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom in 1963--even when others in her community criticized her efforts. She was an active member of the American Field Service, UNICEF, the UN, the American Cancer Society, and American Mothers. She is proud to say that she helped to save the public schools in Virginia during the period of desegregation, along with hundreds of Northern Virginian mothers. She and her late husband hosted 174 international students from 34 different countries between 1960 and 2004. She also placed more than 400 international students with American families. After her husband died, she continued her devotion to hosting international students. Mrs. Kouzes was elected the 53rd National Mother by the American Mothers organization, chosen by a jury composed of representatives from local government as well as religious and educational leaders. These are just a few examples of the many accomplishments of her life. Mrs. Kouzes has been part of our great American story, lending her voice to the vibrancy of our community and offering her experience and wisdom to those around her. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking Mrs. Kouzes for her decades of contribution to the Northern Virginia area, and in wishing her a happy and healthy 100th birthday.

Mr. CONNOLLY

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to include in the Record an Op-Ed by Angel Cabrera, president of George Mason University, John J. DeGioia, president of Georgetown University, DeRionne P. Pollard, president of Montgomery College, and Scott Ralls, president of Northern Virginia Community College. I am proud to represent George Mason University and Northern Virginia Community College. This important and eloquent piece, titled ``College presidents: Protect our students, pass the Dream Act,'' was published in the Hill on October 16, 2017: ``One month ago, the lives of 800,000 young people around our nation were put in jeopardy, with the decision by the White House to rescind the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. This decision fails to understand the overwhelmingly positive impact that the DACA program has had for so many students, and the devastating consequences that rescinding it will have on them, their families, our schools, our communities and our country. We cannot set aside the invaluable contributions of these students and their passion and commitment to the work of our colleges and our country. We cannot forget the impact of their contributions to our economy--estimated at $460 billion over the next decade. We cannot ignore the joy they bring to our communities and the degree to which we are strengthened by their presence. We believe, as presidents of colleges and universities, it is imperative that we protect these young people through the passage of the Dream Act. They have grown up here in America. They've gone to grade school, middle school and high school with our children. They are student body presidents, medical students and doctoral candidates. Some serve in high school ROTC and volunteer in their churches. Others help single parents raising younger siblings and tutor their peers as they prepare for college. They are members of our communities. They have done all the things we expect of our young people, and for their efforts so many have been able to earn places on our college campuses. They want--and deserve-- the chance to continue learning and living in America without the constant fear of deportation. We have seen the contributions that these extraordinary young people make to our campuses and our communities. Colleges and universities are about opportunity and the pursuit of each and every student's version of the American dream. No matter who they are--or where they came from--every student deserves an equal shot at success. We take responsibility for fostering academic and social environments that give every student the means and opportunity to pursue a better future. Across our nation, our higher education community is coming together in support of our Dreamers. This week, the American Council on Education and colleges and universities around the country are contributing their voices to a national campaign: ``Higher Education Week'' in support of Protecting Dreamers. To launch this week, our institutions--which represent public and private as well as two- and four-year institutions in Virginia, Maryland and Washington, D.C.--have come together to reflect on the invaluable presence of these students on our campuses. Our region has approximately 23,000 DACA recipients and we know that almost half of all DACA recipients are in school or pursuing a college degree. These young people belong here. They have played by our rules since the day they arrived as minors with their parents. They have done everything we could expect of them. They have earned their places on our campuses. They are poised to contribute to the future of our nation. We have the capacity, and responsibility, as a nation to provide a permanent bipartisan legislative solution. We call upon Congress to pass the bipartisan DREAM Act so that these talented and hardworking students, brought here as children by parents who only wished for a better life, are able to get the shot at success and the American dream that they so rightfully deserve.'' Mr. Speaker, I agree wholeheartedly with Presidents Cabrera, DeGioia, Pollard, and Ralls. I invite my colleagues to read their thoughtful piece, and I urge them to take its message to heart.

Mr. CONNOLLY

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the Literacy Council of Northern Virginia (LCNV) and to congratulate the volunteers, instructors, students, community partners, and others who will be recognized at the 2017 LCNV Recognition Celebration. The mission of LCNV is to teach adults the basic skills of reading, writing, speaking, and understanding English in order to empower them to participate more fully and confidently in their communities. LCNV serves low-literacy and limited English language proficient adults with a selection of low-cost, moderately intensive courses to help them transition into the workforce or other educational opportunities. LCNV provides the crucial first steps of language and literacy learning for workplace, citizenship, and community integration to help adults make measurable improvements in their lives. Each year LCNV gathers at its Annandale headquarters to recognize students and members of the community who have achieved exceptional milestones. I am proud to include in the Record the following 2017 LCNV honorees. Community Partnership Awards: Accenture Consulting, Crestwood Elementary School, Paul M. Engell Family Foundation. Volunteers of the Year: Liz Castillo, Alexandra Roncal, Valerie Sutter. I would also like to give special recognition to Patricia Donnelly, who is retiring from her role as Executive Director of LCNV after leading the organization for more than 15 years. She has three decades of experience in the nonprofit sector, most of which has been in education and the performing arts. In addition to her role as Executive Director of LCNV, Patti serves on the Board of the Virginia Literacy Foundation, the Virginia Adult and Continuing Education Board and WETA's Community Advisory Council. Her selfless efforts on behalf of others were recognized when she received the 2007 Nancy Jiranek Award for Leadership Excellence in Literacy. Though she may be retiring from her role as Executive Director, I am confident that she will continue to be engaged in our community and in the causes that are dear to her. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking Patricia Donnelly for her service to our community and in congratulating each of the honorees of the 2017 LCNV Recognition Celebration. I wish all of them great success in all their future endeavors.

Mr. CONNOLLY

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the Annandale Christian Community for Action (ACCA) on the occasion of its 50th anniversary. In 1967, Fred and Emily Ruffing realized that there was a great need for childcare services for low-income and working poor families who did not qualify for subsidized daycare. They decided that they needed to take action to address this problem so they organized a meeting with representatives from eight local churches to set up a day care center and ACCA was born. Since 1967, ACCA has continued to grow not only in size but in the number of services provided. What began as a group of eight churches 50 years ago has grown to 26 member congregations. ACCA has also partnered with the Fairfax County Department of Neighborhood and Community Services (NCS) and its services and programs as well as the model of faith community and government partnership begun by ACCA has been replicated all throughout Fairfax County. ACCA gives back to the community in a variety of ways. The Child Development Center (CDC) provides both developmental childcare and early childhood education to over 200 toddlers, preschoolers and infants. The ACCA Pantry collects from churches, schools, community groups and local businesses and delivers food and other necessities on an emergency basis to area households. ACCA's Emergency Assistance program handles financial emergencies such as payment for rent, utilities, prescription drugs, and minor car repairs for low-income families who have few resources to fall back on in a time of crisis. The 26 partner ministries provide a safety net while the families recover stability. Furniture ministry volunteers collect and distribute gently used furniture to needy recipients, while volunteers from the Transportation ministry provide rides to medical appointments. Meals on Wheels volunteers deliver meals every weekday to elderly residents who cannot fend for themselves. ACCA volunteers also spend a Saturday in April repairing houses--more than 110 homes have been repaired or rehabilitated since 1990. With the exception of the CDC, all of these services are provided by volunteers. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking the staff and volunteers of ACCA and in congratulating them on this incredible milestone. Civic engagement is the foundation of a healthy community, and Fairfax County residents enjoy an exceptional quality of life due in part to the efforts of these individuals. Their contributions have been a great benefit to our community and truly merit our highest praise.

Mr. CONNOLLY

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize my good friend Daniel (Dan) Duncan as he steps down after serving for 10 years as President of the Northern Virginia Labor Federation, AFL-CIO (NoVA Labor.) As President of NoVA Labor, Dan led the largest labor council in the Commonwealth of Virginia and which represents nearly 70 unions and locals. In this role, he has been responsible for consolidating the missions and concerns of the various unions and their members into one unified voice while ensuring that all opinions are heard and respected. Dan has dedicated his life to improving the lives of working families. He is committed to the mission of NoVA Labor which is to bring economic justice to the workplace and social justice to our communities. He learned these values from an early age--his grandfather was a shop steward at a shipyard in Cleveland, Ohio and his father was a rank and file Machinist. Dan joined his first union, the Retail Clerks Union, in 1973 at the age of 17 while working for a grocery store in Tennessee. After graduating from the University of Chattanooga in 1978, Dan worked as a newspaper reporter. He later became director of the Fort Lauderdale senior employment program with the National Council of Senior Citizens (NCSC) which was formed in 1961 and evolved from the Senior Citizens for Kennedy organization. Working with the administration of President John F. Kennedy, the NCSC was instrumental in rallying support for comprehensive health insurance for senior citizens. These efforts bore fruit when President Lyndon B. Johnson signed Medicare into law in 1965. NCSC's efforts were instrumental in passing this landmark legislation and the organization, now known as the Alliance for Retired Americans continues its fight to protect and preserve Medicare and Social Security. Dan then accepted a position with the Seafarers International Union where he has served for 30 years in various positions. For the last six years, Dan has held the position of Executive Secretary-Treasurer of the Maritime Trades Department. In his roles with individual unions as well as with the Northeast Florida Central Labor Council, the Northern Virginia Central Labor Council, and the NoVA Labor Federation, Dan has worked tirelessly to advocate for working families and support state and federal legislation that would even the playing field for the backbone of our society--the middle and lower class who deserve a fair wage for honest work and other employer related benefits. I have personally known Dan Duncan and his wife Karen for many years and have thoroughly enjoyed our countless conversations and discussions on issues of importance. While we have on occasion disagreed, mainly on their terrible taste in baseball teams, but also occasionally on the best way to achieve a certain objective, we both know and understand that we share the same goals. These exchanges of ideas and opinions have been invaluable to both of us as we continue to represent and serve our constituencies. Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me in commending Dan Duncan for his efforts on behalf of the working men and women of our country and in thanking him for his service. Although he is stepping down from his position of President of NoVA Labor, I am confident that he will continue his efforts to strengthen and protect the rights and benefits of all and I wish him success in all of his future endeavors.

Mr. CONNOLLY

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the Asian-American Chamber of Commerce and the recipients of the 2017 Excellence Awards. The Asian-American Chamber of Commerce (AACC) is dedicated to improving economic development opportunities for Asian Pacific American-owned businesses in the Washington, DC, region. Northern Virginia has a robust international business community and is home to the largest concentration of minority-owned technology firms in the nation. The AACC and its members contribute greatly to our regional culture as well as to our economic strength and stability. In fact, Asian- American businesses generate more than 52 percent of total revenues generated by all minority owned businesses in this region. In Fairfax County, approximately 25,000 businesses are Asian-owned and generate approximately $9 billion in annual revenue, creating 54,000 jobs. Each year, the AACC recognizes individuals, businesses and non- profit organizations that have made extraordinary contributions to the Metropolitan Washington community and economy. I am pleased to include in the Record the names of the following recipients of the 2017 Excellence Awards: Member of the Year: Stephanie Shei. Business of the Year: University of North America, State Farm. Young Professional of the Year: Jhenileen Libongco. Citizen/Company of the Year: Jon Peterson, The Peterson Company. Non-Profit of the Year: AAPIVote. Asian-American Business Leader: Dr. James S.C. Chao, The Foremost Group. New Business of the Year: Logos Briosystems. Chamber Partner: Central Intelligence Agency, Corner Media, MGM. Mentorship Award: Dr. Gary Jones, Youth for Tomorrow. Community Leader: Christina Chang, Chiling Tong. Entrepreneurship of the Year: Terry Hsaio, Hook Mobile, Inc. Chairman and President's Award: Haiwen Mackleer, Capital Bank. Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me in congratulating the recipients of the 2017 Excellence Awards and in commending the AACC for its work to support all Asian-American owned businesses throughout our region.