Eddie Johnson

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2646, the Helping Families in Mental Health Crisis Act. Thank you to Congressman Tim Murphy for hosting this important special order to discuss our country's current mental health system. For more than two years now, I have worked with Congressman Murphy on H.R. 2646, a bipartisan piece of legislation that has garnered support from patients, caregivers, psychiatrists, psychologists, law enforcement, and even editorial boards. As two of the few mental health providers serving in Congress, our bill reflects not only what we have learned in our own careers, but feedback from stakeholders, families, organizations, other members of Congress, and addresses many of the policies that we can change now to help patients struggling with severe mental illness and substance use disorders. An amended version of H.R. 2646 passed the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health in November of 2015. Since then, there has been no action. I have continued to talk with members of my community about mental health issues and they demand action. It is now April of 2016 and we must move forward on the issue of mental health. The American people expect, deserve, and demand it. H.R. 2646 takes a strong step forward in mental health reform. As days pass with no action, people are denied beds, denied care, and are floating through the pervasive cycle of mental illness without attention. Everyone deserves care. I truly hope that my colleagues will work with me to pass this bill for the sake of those who truly matter.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4742, the Promoting Women in Entrepreneurship Act and H.R. 4755, the Inspiring the Next Space Pioneers, Innovators, Researchers, and Explorers Women Act. These two bills would support entrepreneurship programs for women and encourage young girls and women to pursue STEM degrees and careers. Throughout my career in Congress and my time as the Ranking Member of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, I have been passionate about ensuring opportunities for women in STEM fields. More women are pursuing STEM degrees and careers overall, but they are still underrepresented in many STEM fields. This is especially true in STEM fields with high entrepreneurship rates, such as engineering and computer science. Along with STEM training, women face other barriers to entrepreneurship, including access to credit. Due to such barriers, it is important to support entrepreneurship programs focused on women. H.R. 4742 does that by supporting programs at the National Science Foundation that recruit and promote women who are looking to move beyond the laboratory and enter the commercial world. I want to thank my colleague, Representative Esty, for her work on this bill. H.R. 4755 would support existing programs at NASA that encourage young girls and women to study STEM fields and pursue careers in aerospace. These programs include NASA GIRLS, a virtual mentoring program; Aspire to Inspire, a program connecting young girls with women with STEM careers at NASA; and a summer institute program that increases awareness and exposes middle school girls to the STEM careers at NASA. Additionally, H.R. 4755 calls on NASA to submit a plan to Congress on how to best use their current and retired workforce to mentor female K- 12 students. Utilizing our retired STEM workforce can multiply the opportunities for mentorship, but I appreciate Mrs. Comstock's agreement to include current NASA employees, especially early career women at NASA. Seeing a young female scientist or engineer might be the best way to show young girls that STEM careers are possible for them. I would to thank my colleague, Representative Comstock, for her work on this bill and for working with me to broaden the scope of the plan. I strongly support both H.R. 4742 and H.R. 4755 and I encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to do the same.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, nearly 51 years ago the Voting Rights Act (VRA) was signed into law to prohibit racial discrimination in voting. It was a defining moment in our nation's history that would send a clear message that all voters should have free and fair access to the polls in the United States. The Voting Rights Act became a powerful tool of our democracy that protected voter participation of individuals from all backgrounds. It has given a voice to previously disenfranchised voters, particularly that of minorities who would otherwise be left out of the political process. Since the passage of the VRA, various groups and individuals have endeavored to reverse those protections. In 2013 the U.S., Supreme Court ultimately struck down a key enforcement component of the VRA as unconstitutional. This decision has enabled a number of states across the country to move forward with discriminatory voter laws, the effects of which have not yet been fully realized. Texas is one of 21 states that have implemented new restrictions on voting since the 2010 midterm election. Texas first passed two harsh voter mandates in 2012, which were ultimately blocked under Section 5 of the VRA. Texas re-implemented these laws requiring valid photo identification at the polls following the Supreme Court ruling--the first time a photo ID was required to vote in a federal election in 2014. The consequences in Texas alone have been dire and disproportionately impact minority voters. The U.S. Department of Justice originally estimated that the Texas law could prevent as many as 600,000 voters from casting their votes at the polls. The African American community has faced many barriers to voting throughout our history. During the height of the Civil Rights Movement, thousands of protesters marched across the Edmund Pettus Bridge from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama in order to protest the racial injustices in voting. The will of the people ultimately prevailed, resulting in the signing of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 just five short months after the final march. It was an important struggle that still serves as a lesson for us today. Voter disenfranchisement poses an incredible threat to the electoral process. The nationwide efforts to create barriers to voting have highlighted the importance of the protections afforded under the VRA. Voting is the principle means through which Americans can have a voice in the political process. It allows us to elect candidates who share a common vision for bettering our nation and advancing our social and economic progress. These efforts to disenfranchise voters stand contrary to our democratic principles as a nation and it is imperative that we fight to reinstate voter protections for all, which have only served to strengthen our democracy and engage voters in the political process.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support H.R. 4084, the Nuclear Energy Innovation Capabilities Act, which I am very pleased to co-sponsor. Today, nuclear power plays a vital role in providing our country with clean, reliable energy. Nuclear power is currently the single largest carbon-free component of our electrical supply. One of my top priorities as a Member of Congress is preventing and mitigating the potentially devastating impacts of climate change. I believe that nuclear power can and should play a key role in our efforts to reduce the carbon footprint of our electricity sector. But there currently are technical, economic, and policy challenges that prevent nuclear energy from playing a larger role in enabling our clean energy future. The Nuclear Energy Innovation Capabilities Act takes several positive steps to address these challenges. Implementing the provisions in this bill will help accelerate the development of advanced nuclear energy technologies that are safer, less expensive, more efficient, and produce less waste than the current generation of nuclear reactors. While the results of this research will clearly benefit the American consumers, it is my hope that it will also help spur American industry. As the world collectively moves towards greenhouse gas reductions, we need to make sure that American industry is ready to supply the technologies to fuel the world's low carbon future. This bill will help ensure that American industry will lead the world in supplying next generation nuclear power. I would like to express my appreciation for the process we followed to put this bill together. Majority and Minority staff worked closely together, from engaging stakeholders through crafting and incorporating suggested changes to bill language. This is a great example of what we can achieve when we leave politics at the door and look for common ground to address the challenges facing our nation's research enterprise. Specifically, I'd like to thank my Texas colleague Mr. Weber for sponsoring this legislation, and my other Texas colleague Chairman Smith for working with the Minority to advance this bill. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, today I would like to recognize an important milestone for a dedicated member of the African American and Dallas Communities. On January 31st, 2016, Sister Zelma Brooks Washington was honored for her fifty years of membership in the Delta Sigma Sorority, an organization comprised of college- educated black women that provides community support throughout the world. The sorority has over 200,000 members, and was originally founded here in Washington DC at Howard University. Mrs. Washington is a graduate of Jarvis Christian College and the University of North Texas. She had a career dedicated to the greater public--she was a teacher and counselor here in the Dallas area for decades. In addition to her career as an educator, she has been active in her relationship with the Greater Golden Gate Church, working with the Deaconess, New Member Orientation, Mission, Women's Chorus, Church Program Committee and the Faith Walkers. In the greater Dallas community, she is involved with the Dallas Retired Teachers Association, AARP Volunteer Tax Preparer, Dallas Lincoln-James Madison Alumni Association, and the Jarvis Christian College National and Local Alumni Association. Mrs. Washington was honored at the Hyatt Regency in Dallas alongside the company of her husband and daughter. She and her sisters looked graceful and youthful as they received recognition to their commitment to this long-standing institution. Mrs. Washington joined the alumni chapter of the Delta Sigma Sorority in 1966, a time when education and opportunities were still denied to African Americans in Dallas. Mr. Speaker, for her dedication to an organization that promotes equality internationally, for her deep and rich commitment to the community, and for her selfless career as an educator, past National President of the Delta Sigma Sorority, Congresswoman Marcia Fudge, and I would like to join together in formally recognizing this wonderful woman and her impressive milestone here in Congress.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, today I would like to recognize the tremendous accomplishment of Dr. Aziz Sancar for winning the Nobel Prize in Chemistry. He and his team have been working for decades to understand human DNA more thoroughly, and have recently made a breakthrough in mapping DNA repair. Originally from Turkey, Dr. Sancar earned his Ph.D. in molecular and cell biology from the University of Texas at Dallas in 1977. It was during his time at UT-Dallas that Dr. Sancar successfully purified and described a bacterial enzyme called photolyase. This discovery was integral to his work that won him the Nobel Prize. Dr. Sancar was granted the status as a distinguished alumnus of UT-Dallas in 2009. His Nobel Prize is the icing atop the cake of his everlasting contribution to UT-Dallas and its doctoral program in molecular and cell biology. He is the first alumnus to win a Nobel Prize. Dr. Sancar is the Sarah Graham Kenan Professor of Biochemistry and Biophysics at the University of North Carolina School of Medicine. He has been there since 1982. The work he has done at his lab on mapping the cellular mechanisms that underlie DNA repair, which occurs every single minute of the day in response to damage caused by outside forces, such as ultraviolet radiation and other environmental factors, is the reason he won the Nobel Prize. In particular, Sancar mapped nucleotide excision repair, which is vital to DNA subjected to UV damage. His work will create a better system of identifying how cancer drugs target cancer cells, and will improve treatment. Mr. Speaker, as a Member of the U.S. Turkish Congressional Caucus, I want to express how much I value Turkish Americans' scientific, political, athletic and artistic contributions to America's rich mosaic. I congratulate Dr. Sancar for his hard work in mapping DNA repair, potential for advancements in cancer treatment, and pride he has brought UT-Dallas and the greater Dallas community in winning the Nobel Prize. And therefore, I want to formally recognize the brilliant Dr. Aziz Sancar in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, my colleague from Texas, the chairman of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, has stated many times that H.R. 3293 is consistent with the policy announced by NSF in January 2015. He also frequently cites a year old comment by NSF Director Dr. Cordova about this bill. However, it is one thing to use such vague statements in defense of this bill; it is quite another thing to look directly at the NSF policy issued by Dr. Cordova to see what it actually says. I will quote directly from NSF's January 2015 policy: The nontechnical component of the NSF award abstract must serve as a public justification for NSF funding by articulating how the project serves the national interest, as stated by NSF's mission, to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; and to secure national defense. As Dr. Holdren, the President's Science Adviser, said: According to the clear wording and intent of the 1950 act that created the National Science Foundation, promoting the progress of science through basic research is in the national interest. Likewise, Dr. Cordova, in describing what she means by ``national interest,'' points directly to the 1950 NSF mission statement. In her policy, there is no separate list defining national interest with criteria that, in fact, promotes more applied research, not basic research. While the words ``promoting the progress of science'' appear in the bill before us, they do so only as an afterthought, in dead last place and added only after many versions of this bill. Now that we all understand the National Science Foundation's actual policy, I can briefly explain my amendment. By tying the term ``national interest'' to the 1950 national statement, my amendment brings the bill truly in line with the National Science Foundation's own policy for transparency and accountability. My amendment also provides clarity to what we mean by the words ``worthy of Federal funding,'' by stating that anything that has passed the rigor of the National Science Foundation's peer-review process is ``worthy of Federal funding.'' In short, my amendment fixes the underlying bill by removing restrictions that may stifle high-risk basic research, and by taking decisions about grant funding out of the hands of politicians and putting it back in the hands of scientists, where it belongs. The National Science Foundation's 1950 mission statement, implemented through its gold standard merit-review process, has served science and this Nation so well. Let's leave it intact by passing my amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 3293, the Scientific Research in the National Interest Act. I oppose this bill because I believe that this bill will hurt the Nation's premier basic research agency, lead to less high reward research, and, ultimately, leave America less competitive. My Republican colleagues have a simple argument for their legislation: Shouldn't NSF research be in the national interest? That is a very good question, but one that can be easily answered. My answer is that NSF research is already in the national interest. It has been for more than 60 years. The Federal investment in basic research over the past 60 years has been the primary driver of our Nation's economic growth and innovation. In innumerable ways, our investments in basic research have paid back a wealth of dividends. This fact is widely recognized across academia and industry. The National Academies' ``Rising Above the Gathering Storm'' report made this point a decade ago. That panel, chaired by the former head of Lockheed-Martin, understood that investment in basic research was fundamentally in the national interest. When we passed the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 as part of the Democrats' innovation agenda, that bill was endorsed by hundreds of business and research organizations, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers. They all understood that investment in basic research is in the national interest. What is this bill really about? Is it really about enhancing our Nation's ability to innovate? No. Sadly, this bill continues the Republican majority's preoccupation with second-guessing America's best and brightest research scientists. For the past 3 years, the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology majority has been engaged in a relentless and pernicious campaign against research grants with silly or odd sounding titles. Republicans have used that time to carry out an unprecedented rifling through the 70 NSF grants reviews. After all this effort, did they find any evidence of wrongdoing? No. The only thing they found was what they already knew: each of the research grants had passed NSF's merit review process with flying colors. The majority may not like it and wish the results were different, but those are the facts. Let me be clear. Some of the greatest scientific achievements of the past 60 years were the result of funny sounding research, including research that was ridiculed in Congress as frivolous. There are scores of examples. One of my favorites is ``The Sex Life of the Screwworm,'' surely one of the silliest sounding titles for research there could possibly be. So silly, in fact, that in the 1970s, the grant was ridiculed as an example of government waste on the Senate floor. Sounds a lot like what the majority is doing here today. It turned out that the screwworm was costing the U.S. cattle industry a small fortune. As a direct result of this silly sounding research, the cattle industry saved approximately $20 billion in the U.S. and significantly reduced the cost of beef to U.S. consumers. At its core, this bill is about second-guessing our Nation's best and brightest scientists and the grant-making decisions they make. Perhaps this is not surprising when so many of my Republican colleagues openly question the validity of whole fields of established science, from the social sciences to climate science to evolutionary biology. Far from adding anything useful to the NSF's review process, H.R. 3293 would add more bureaucracy and paperwork. Yet, my biggest concern about these requirements is that they will push NSF reviewers to fund less high-risk research, which, by its very nature, entails the pursuit of scientific understanding without it necessarily having any particular or known benefit. We know that high-risk research tends to have the highest reward, something that we have seen throughout the history of the NSF. I am not alone in my concerns. The President's science adviser, Dr. John Holdren, noted: H.R. 3293 would create doubt at NSF and in the research community about Congress' real intent in calling into question the adequacy of NSF's gold standard merit-review process for applied as well as for basic research. This could easily have a chilling effect on the amount of basic research that scientists propose and that NSF chooses to fund, with detrimental consequences for this Nation's leadership in science, technology, and innovation alike. Mr. Chair, I choose to stand with the scientists when it comes to science. For that reason, I strongly oppose this legislation. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Ted Lieu).

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chair, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Tonko).

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Beyer).

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to point out that this grant was mentioned earlier in remarks. In defense of their misguided efforts, some of our colleagues like to pick certain grants and make fun of them--just as has just been said-- and then say they are not worth funding. One of the grants that my colleagues like to pick on is a grant entitled, ``Ecosystems Resilience to Human Impacts: Ecological Consequences of Early Human-Set Fires in New Zealand.'' It may be easy for some of my colleagues to question why the Federal Government should spend money on studying fires that were set in a foreign country hundreds of years ago. Apparently, it is harder for them to spend 5 minutes reading the abstract. It turns out that those early settlers in New Zealand caused the loss of more than 40 percent of the forests in just decades. By studying the long-term effect on the ecosystem impacts of those long-ago fires, we can gain knowledge to help natural resource managers make smarter decisions about how to mitigate, prepare for, and respond to massive wildfires in our own country. It is right in the public interest. Just to put an economic figure to this, in 2012, the United States spent $2 billion to suppress over 65,000 wildland fires that burned over 9 million acres. It sounds like this is of national interest to study the long term impact of fires that were set so many years ago. I choose to stand with the scientists when it comes to science. For that reason, I really uphold this misguided bill. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chair, I have no further requests for time. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, once again, I stand with the scientists. I also stand with the President's potential statement. If this bill is presented to the President, scientists have recommended that he veto it. I stand with the scientists again and ask the people to vote against this bill. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, this does not do any more than what was intended under the law. It leaves it in the hands of the peer review board and not the politicians. It does nothing to make this bill worse. In fact, it improves it so that it can meet the charter of this Congress in doing its work. Every grant that goes out of the National Science Foundation is peer- reviewed in a system that was set up 60 years ago. It has worked well. We have gained great research. I don't think that making sure that the politicians have something to say about it makes it any better. It makes it worse. I ask for the adoption of my amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to call our attention to Russia's unprovoked aggression against a friend and NATO ally of the United States. As you may know, in recent months, the Republic of Turkey has reported several incidents of Russian incursion of Turkish airspace. As my colleagues will remember, in November 2015, the Turkish military was forced to shoot down a Russian warplane that entered its airspace. That action was condemned by the Russian Federation, but Turkish officials have repeatedly disclosed that they provided significant warnings to those pilots, as well as allowed ample time for the plane to correct its course. This shows the Russian incursion into Turkish airspace was no incursion. This weekend, the Pentagon confirmed another such incident of a Russian fighter jet entering Turkish airspace without authorization. While this incident did not result in any violence or loss of life, it is disappointing to see continued disrespect from Russia towards the Turkish boundary. The Department of Defense released a statement calling on the Russians ``to respect Turkish airspace and cease activities that risk further heightening instability in the region.'' Mr. Speaker, I applaud the Pentagon and the Obama Administration for standing with Turkey and the rest of our NATO allies in condemning Russia's unprovoked aggression. The world is most stable when the United States acts in conjunction with its partners around the world in standing up to those who would do them harm. I urge the Administration to continue to stand strong with our friends in Turkey as well as with our NATO allies around the world in condemning this unprovoked encroachment and protecting allies' borders.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise to publicly applaud and praise the exceptional work of one of Dallas's finest residents, Ms. Molly H. Bogen. For over forty years, Ms. Bogen has been a champion for the senior citizens of Texas in her role as the Director of Operations for Senior Source. The Dallas-based entity has worked tirelessly to meet nearly every need of our elderly population, a feat that would not have been possible without Ms. Bogen's resourcefulness, devotion, and endless compassion. Ms. Bogen has dedicated her entire life to dutifully serving her community. She first received her undergraduate degree from Southern Methodist University, before moving to United of Texas at Arlington to pursue her Master's of Science in Social Work. This would allow her to become officially licensed by the Texas State Board to practice social work, and begin her exemplary career. Her work with the elderly is now legendary, and she has since come to be recognized as a Distinguished Alumni by both of her alma maters. Through her work with Senior Source, Ms. Bogen has cemented a legacy that is rooted in the immense imprint she has left on the senior community of Texas and the nation at large. Her appointment as the President and CEO of the organization in 1976 brought about expansion and growth. Recognizing a gap in the community, Ms. Bogen introduced a series of programs devoted to supporting senior citizens with employment, financial management, advocacy and companionship. As such, the organization has now become one of the country's most renowned senior-service providers, and this was in no small part due to the immense love, respect and kindness that Ms. Bogen imparted into her daily work. Her selfless passion will no doubt continue to inspire her dedicated fifty-six-member staff, as they continue to perform and cultivate Ms. Bogen's incredible work. Mr. Speaker, the extraordinary compassion shown by Ms. Bogen over the course of her four-decade career is a testament to her magnificent character and commitment to her community. The people of North Texas owe her a tremendous debt of gratitude and wish her all of the best in her retirement. It is hard earned, and may it be one of contentment and joy.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning with a sense of grief to acknowledge the passing of one of the most gracious and giving citizens to have ever lived in North Texas. Edward ``Rusty'' Washington Rose III, a philanthropist, a brilliant financial genius, a conservationist and former owner of the Texas Rangers Baseball team has taken his leave. He was 74 years old. A graduate of the Harvard Business School, Mr. Rose donated millions of dollars to worthy causes. While giving with an abundant heart, he preferred to stay out of the limelight. For him, it was enough to know that he had helped someone or that his giving had enriched the city of Dallas, culturally, socially and economically. Ten years ago. Mr. Rose, his wife. Deedie, and two other Dallas couples donated portions of their personal art collections to the Dallas Museum of Art. The bequest was valued at $25 million. The couples agreed that at their deaths, their extensively valuable art collections would be given to the museum. Among his personal donations was a $10 million gift to assist in building the AT&T Performing Arts Center in Dallas which has become the anchor of cultural activity in North Texas. In many respects Mr. Rose was a simple man. His major passion was bird watching, an activity he began as a young boy. On his ranch he created a bird sanctuary and wetlands. Often, he invited friends and colleagues to join him as the birds he had cared for soared skyward and migrated to the North. Mr. Speaker, like the birds he nurtured, Mr. Rose possessed a mind, a character and a spirit that took flight and soared beyond the sky. My condolences go out to his wife, children and grandchild. The people of North Texas were blessed that he chose to walk and work amongst us.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, when President Barack Obama delivered his final State of the Union address last month, he highlighted the resilience and determination of the American people. The President touted notable achievements in scientific advancement, greater transparency throughout our political system, and a stronger and more equitable economy as evidence pointing to the strength of our Nation. For context, in the final month of President George W. Bush's presidency, the economy was in free fall. The private sector lost nearly 820,000 jobs in the final month of President Bush's presidency alone and unemployment peaked at around 10 percent in the midst of the Great Recession. Today, the economy has added 14.1 million jobs over 70 consecutive months of private-sector job growth, household wealth has increased by more than $30 trillion, and average home prices have recovered to pre-recession levels under President Obama's Administration. However, economic indicators are not the only method for determining the true state of our union. As we celebrate Black History Month in February, it is timely to consider how other great leaders from our past would perceive the state of our union today. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. is one such leader who envisioned a greater future for our Nation in the face of unspeakable discrimination and intolerance. In his famous ``I Have a Dream'' speech delivered at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C., Dr. King laid out his vision of our country where all men are created equal and where freedom must ring if America is to be a great nation. Today, those principles ring true. We have made great progress as a nation to move away from the darkest moments of our past. Yet, there is still much work to be done. We have witnessed continued efforts to disenfranchise select groups of voters by gutting the Voting Rights Act and persistent racial tension between law enforcement and the communities they are sworn to protect. It is a constant struggle that afflicts communities all across the United States and suggests that more work needs to be done if we are to achieve Dr. King's dream. Mr. Speaker, the freedoms we enjoy in the United States are not absolute. The principles and values that define our Nation are constantly challenged and ever-evolving. Dr. King had a distinct vision for the future of our Nation and his legacy can help guide our decisions moving into the future so that we can avoid making the same mistakes of our past.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, today I want to recognize the myriad accomplishments of a deeply curious and supremely impressive man--Kneeland Youngblood. Many people outside of the upper crust of Dallas' business community do not know the name Kneeland Youngblood, and until recently, he would have been satisfied with that fact. However, Youngblood recently decided to expose himself and his story to the greater Dallas community in order to inspire a new generation of leaders and entrepreneurs. Kneeland Youngblood has found his success in founding Pharos Capital Group LLC. However, his career and life took many steps and progressions before he settled on this career. Youngblood was born in the segregated neighborhood of Galena Park in Houston. His father and mother struggled to make ends meet supporting Youngblood and his six siblings. From these humble beginnings, Youngblood made his way to Princeton University, and then to UT-Southwestern Medical School. He began his career in Dallas in emergency medicine, and planned to climb his way up in the medical field, until his tastes changed. Youngblood was integral in organizing a diverse group of young professionals who were fundraising for Anne Richard's initial gubernatorial campaign. During this successful period, Youngblood was exposed to the business community in a way that wetted his appetite. In the impressive and forward way he now operates his business, he approached powerful people in the business community and asked them for help in a career transition. He was forty. Now, only twenty years later, he has founded Pharos Capital Group LLC, which operated a $525 million institutional fund in 2014. He serves on several local boards, and recently became the first black member of the Dallas Country Club, where his father waited tables decades ago. Mr. Speaker, more important to Youngblood than all of these successes, is the success of his family. He has six kids who between them went to Stanford, Harvard, Yale, or Princeton. Today, I want to honor the incredible path Kneeland Youngblood has travelled, and recognize him formally to allow him to serve as the example to young leaders and entrepreneurs he knows he is.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, let me thank my ranking member and the chair of the committee for their diligence in running this committee and overseeing some of the most important legislation for our Nation. The Clean Water Act is the key Federal law used to protect our Nation's waters and ensure that millions of Americans have access to clean water. The resolution of disapproval being considered today would block the implementation of important administrative reforms aimed at clarifying key components of this Clean Water Act. These reforms include considerations on how we define tributaries to traditionally navigable waters and sets out clear exclusions to the definition of waters of the United States, among other changes that will help streamline the regulatory process. Countless municipalities, businesses, and industry stakeholders have expressed concern around the confusing and outdated regulations established under the Bush administration. In fact, more than a million public comments submitted to EPA and the U.S. Corps of Engineers have contributed to the formulation of this final rule. The final rule would provide much-needed predictability and clarity for these groups, and that has got my attention. In my home State of Texas, 43 percent of the residents get their drinking water from sources that rely on small streams protected by the most recent Clean Water Act and rule. The rule also restores protections to more than 12,000 miles of streams that feed into Texas' drinking water sources. Further delaying the implementation of this rule will continue to have a dramatic impact on my State of Texas and other States around the country. I see a number of immediate problems with this resolution. For one, S.J. Res. 22 would block any future administration from ever clarifying the regulatory confusion related to the Clean Water Act unless Congress authorizes a new rule. In my opinion, that does not bode well for our ability to protect such an essential resource as clean water for Americans. Thankfully, President Obama has already expressed his intention to veto this resolution if it were to reach his desk. Based on a vote on this resolution in the Senate last year, Congress lacks the support to override a veto. This resolution is simply another attempt by this Congress to block this administration from carrying out its regulatory duties to protect Americans. I do not think that there is a single Member of this House who would disagree that access to clean water is absolutely essential for our well-being and health.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Here we are, dedicating even more time to consider legislation that would block our ability to protect important waterways and wetlands from pollution. Mr. Speaker, this resolution amounts to nothing more than a misguided direction. No one thinks that any American should be subjected to a questionable quality of water. For this reason, I would urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this resolution.