Eleanor Norton

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in support of S. 1393, the Jobs for Our Heroes Act. This bill is a step in the right direction to help the Nation tackle the longstanding commercial driver's shortage--a shortage that I must say I have been working on ever since I have been on this committee and especially since becoming ranking member of the subcommittee--and, of course, at the same time, to support veterans in a successful transition from military to civilian life. S. 1393 ensures that all qualified medical professionals employed by the Department of Veterans Affairs can perform commercial driver physical examinations for their veteran patients. The medical professionals that this bill addresses are already eligible to become certified medical examiners. This bill simply allows these individuals to utilize an alternative certification process that is currently being finalized by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. The most recently available data shows that, of the 54,000 medical professionals listed in FMCSA's National Registry of Certified Medical Examiners, only 25 medical professionals are employed by the VA. The online training and testing system being developed by FMCSA and the VA should help remedy this situation. These two agencies have done a good job creating an alternative process that will eventually allow more VA doctors to become certified medical examiners, while maintaining the safety and integrity of the certification system. Although the FAST Act provision authorizing this process referred to physicians, FMCSA should allow VA-employed nurse practitioners, chiropractors, physician assistants, and other qualified medical professionals to participate. This bill ensures that these medical professionals are eligible to use this process. The bill also ensures that current servicemembers who have military experience operating commercial motor vehicles will be able to more easily obtain a commercial driver's license. Congress included a provision in the FAST Act to allow States to waive the written CDL knowledge test for drivers with military commercial motor vehicle driving experience, but it restricts this waiver to ``former members'' of the military. There are a significant number of current reservists and members of the National Guard with military commercial motor vehicle experience who could benefit from the waiver. These servicemen and -women receive what the FMCSA describes as ``thorough and comprehensive training,'' including many hours of behind-the-wheel training, something that I have long sought and advocated for as a requirement for civilian drivers. These military drivers already have it. FMCSA has already taken action to make current servicemembers eligible for the knowledge test waiver on a temporary basis. Last year, FMCSA issued an exemption that allows States to waive the CDL knowledge test for trained military truck drivers, whether they are current members of the military or our veterans; however, FMCSA's temporary exemption expires October 2018. This bill makes permanent the ability of current members of the military to utilize the FAST Act waiver. S. 1393 is nearly identical to two bills the House previously passed earlier this year, H.R. 2547 and H.R. 2258, both of which passed by votes of 409-0, or unanimously. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Aguilar).

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, this bill marries two priorities: jobs for our veterans. So many come back, and they have had training, yet we are finding that we can't always find jobs for them. Here are jobs where there is a chronic problem, tough jobs, jobs which require people to be away from home, often for long hours, jobs that do not pay as well as some other jobs. So there has been a chronic shortage. This bill serves both purposes, and it serves our Nation very well. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in support of S. 1532. This legislation institutes a lifetime ban from operating a commercial motor vehicle for any individual who has used such a vehicle to commit human trafficking. In the summer of 2017, 10 people died in San Antonio, Texas, in the process of being illegally trafficked in a truck at Walmart. That horrendous incident served as a stark reminder that the transportation sector can be exploited for heinous acts. Since 2007, the National Human Trafficking Hotline has received reports of more than 22,000 sex trafficking cases inside our country. In addition, it has received over 5,000 reports of individuals who have been coerced into forced labor or indentured servitude. The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children estimates that one of every six runaway children who was reported to them last year had become victims of sex trafficking. The FMCSA currently prohibits any individual from operating a CMV for life if he or she is convicted of committing specific crimes, including negligent manslaughter and drug trafficking. This bill ensures that the FMCSA also takes action against perpetrators who use their CMV to commit ``severe''--and that is the operative word--forms of sex trafficking, as defined by the Trafficking Victims Protection Act. The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure reported an identical bill, H.R. 3814, to the House by a voice vote in November. This legislation takes important steps to reduce human trafficking in the transportation sector. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, this is another example of what bipartisanship can achieve in the House of Representatives, unlike, sadly, the tax bill that was just passed just before us in the House of Representatives here this afternoon. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this bill as well. S. 1536 will help ensure that the U.S. Department of Transportation has the necessary tools to reduce the prevalence of human trafficking in commercial vehicles. In 2016, more than 7,000 cases of human trafficking were reported to the National Human Trafficking Hotline. With this legislation, Congress is stepping in to ensure DOT has additional authority and resources to combat this egregious crime. This bill provides the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, FMCSA, more flexibility to combat human trafficking by authorizing funding from two existing grant programs to be used to support the reporting and the prevention of human trafficking. The bill will also help DOT coordinate efforts to fight human trafficking with other Federal agencies, and it establishes an advisory committee on human trafficking. The advisory committee will convene experts from law enforcement, victim advocacy organizations, and the transportation industry to advise DOT of concrete steps it can take to improve the recognition and the prevention of trafficking. The advisory committee will also develop and share best practices with State and local stakeholders so that they are better equipped to combat the trafficking in their own communities. The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure reported an identical bill, H.R. 3813, authored by the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. Esty), to the House in November. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. Esty), the author of the bill.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce the District of Columbia Civil Enforcement Equality Act. This bill is necessary to allow the District to enter into contracts with private attorneys to sue on the District's behalf for violations of D.C. law that may otherwise go unpunished due to a lack of resources. This bill would give D.C. the same authority enjoyed by states, other local governments and most federal agencies. The federal Anti-Deficiency Act, which applies to both the federal and District governments, prohibits contracting in advance of appropriations, such as contingency fee contracts. However, Congress has provided the authority for most federal agencies to enter into such contracts, notwithstanding the Anti-Deficiency Act, but has not done so for the District. This precludes the District from entering into contracts with attorneys on a contingency fee basis. In a contingency fee contract, lawyers pay for the initial costs of the litigation, and then the lawyers are reimbursed only for out-of-pocket expenses and receive a percentage of any amount awarded to the plaintiff. There is no federal law that precludes states and other local governments from entering into such contracts. At least 36 states, both red and blue states, have already used contingency fee contracts to enforce state laws, in addition to numerous city and county governments across the country. Contingency fee contracts are especially useful in cases with a large, costly discovery component. Examples of cases that are commonly tried on a contingency fee basis by state and local governments include nuisance, deceptive lending, securities fraud and debt and tax collection. This is an important step to increase D.C. home rule and generate revenue for the District, and I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing Joseph Tran-Malan for his participation in the Congressional App Challenge (CAC). The CAC began in 2013, and has since grown to include nearly 4,000 students across 33 states and territories. Specifically, the CAC encourages students to learn how to code through an annual district- wide competition. For his CAC submission, Joseph chose the video game Overwatch. In particular, he created a video that described why he chose Overwatch, and what he would do to make the video game better as part of his app. Currently, Joseph is in the third grade and attends Harmony DC Public Charter School, which has a Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) program. In addition, the school organizes two major STEM events every year: the Harmony Science and Engineering Fair, which serves as a way for students to learn more about the scientific process; and the Stem Festival, where students participate in various STEM demonstrations and explain the science behind them. Joseph is a proud big brother and the son of Mr. and Mrs. Jose and Kim Tran-Malan. In his free time, Joseph likes to travel and see new things, but is content with spending quality time at home with his family. He also loves to dance and use his imagination by building with LEGOs or by creating new worlds in the video game Minecraft. I am very proud of Joseph. Therefore, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in honoring achievement at a very young age by recognizing Joseph Tran-Malan for his participation in the Congressional App Challenge.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing Christopher Gresham for his participation in the Mandela Washington Fellowship Reciprocal Exchange. The Mandela Washington Fellowship, the flagship program of the U.S. government's Young African Leadership Initiative, helps to develop the next generation of African leaders across government, business and civil society. The fellows build strategic partnerships and lasting connections through training and networking opportunities at leading institutions of higher education. The Reciprocal Exchange Component, for which Christopher has been competitively selected, provides U.S. experts and leaders a chance to expand their work in partnership with Mandela Washington Fellowship alumni in Africa. Past participants have included a wide range of experts, from entrepreneurs to disability rights advocates, who have contributed meaningfully to efforts such as promoting peace, stability and economic prosperity in the region. The program provides important contributions to U.S. diplomacy efforts. A native Washingtonian, Christopher has dedicated his career to breaking down barriers and promoting diversity in entrepreneurship. He graduated from The George Washington University and went on to obtain a Master's from Thunderbird School for Global Management. He then became the Vice President of Communities at SEED SPOT, where he works to increase startup activity and economic growth with a focus on entrepreneurs developing sustainable solutions to address some of the world's most pressing problems. In addition, Christopher founded Swillings Coffee, an impact-driven venture that works directly with small family-owned farms in rural Colombia to apply sustainable growing techniques and employ women in the local community. As part of the Mandela Washington Fellowship Reciprocal Exchange, Christopher empowered hundreds of Beninese entrepreneurs with entrepreneurship training, educated its largest university on sustainable economic development programs and promoted cooperative trade with the U.S. and multiple institutional stakeholders. Therefore, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing Christopher Gresham for his accomplishments and for his participation in the Mandela Washington Fellowship Reciprocal Exchange.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, in light of recent train derailments across the country and ongoing transportation security threats, I rise to introduce the Save Our Community from Risky Trains Act, which directs the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) to find ways to the greatest extent possible to reroute trains that are carrying certain hazardous materials from selected high-threat urban areas, including the District of Columbia. This legislation is needed now more than ever, especially given DOT's recent announcement that it will rescind a requirement that rail tank cars carrying crude oil be outfitted with an advanced braking system designed to prevent derailments. Derailments of rail cars carrying hazardous materials are a serious concern and should be a priority of Congress. In 2016, 16 cars of a CSX freight train derailed in a dense residential neighborhood of the nation's capital, disrupting Metrorail, passenger rail, and freight rail service and putting families at risk. Among the derailed freight train cars, cars carrying sodium hydroxide, calcium chloride and ethanol--which is flammable and led to a Metrorail shutdown--spilled. The neighborhood was lucky that there were no injuries, but the continuing threat to the safety and security of urban communities is clear. In 2007, the House passed the Rail and Public Transportation Security Act of 2007, which included my amendment to protect the District and similar communities nationwide from dangerous hazardous material shipments by mandating that federal regulations and penalties be developed to increase security and safety for the shipment of these materials through high-threat urban areas. My amendment was not included in the final bill signed into law. While freight companies have begun working with DOT to voluntarily reroute the shipment of certain materials that are toxic or poisonous by inhalation, or explosive from these communities, there is no federal law requiring them to reroute the materials. This bill would require the Secretary of Transportation to issue regulations to require enhanced security measures for shipments of security-sensitive materials. The bill also requires railroad carriers to use the most secure route and storage pattern to avoid moving certain hazardous materials by rail through selected high-threat urban areas. These security sensitive materials include a highway route- controlled quantity of a Class 7 (radioactive) material; more than 25 kilograms of a division 1.1, 1.2, or 1.3 explosive; more than one liter per package of a material poisonous by inhalation; shipment in other than a bulk packaging of 2,268 kilograms gross weight or more of one class of hazardous materials for which placarding of a vehicle, rail car or freight container is required; and select agents or toxins regulated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. High-profile derailments in North Dakota, Virginia, West Virginia, and Canada demonstrate the need for this legislation. Ethanol, which is flammable, still travels through big cities, and even within a few blocks of the U.S. Capitol. This bill will protect our communities from the risk created by trains carrying hazardous materials. I urge support for this bill.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, 44 years ago this month, Congress passed the District of Columbia Home Rule Act. A Republican President signed it. A Democratic Congress, together with the Republican President, freed the Nation's Capital from government by three unelected commissioners. The irony is that the self-government the District of Columbia enjoys today is a virtual replica of what a Republican Congress and a Republican President granted to the District of Columbia right after the Civil War. It granted the Home Rule Act and, of course, a Delegate to Congress. But, with Reconstruction and Democratic control, Democrats took back what Republicans had granted and, once again, Democrats denied the District of Columbia self-government. Then, 44 years ago, with bipartisan support, after 100 years of struggle, the District of Columbia finally won what we call home rule. My colleagues should respect their own history. It was Richard Nixon who signed the Home Rule Act, acting on the most revered, as far as we are told, Republican principles of local control, that local residents should always have a democratically elected local government controlled entirely by their government. The District has become one of the most successful jurisdictions in the United States since home rule, with a $14 billion budget. Before and after home rule however, District of Columbia residents have always paid Federal income taxes. Today, D.C. residents rank number one--that is first--per capita in taxes paid to support the government of the United States. In signing the bill for the Home Rule Act, President Nixon wrote: ``One of the major goals of this administration is to place responsibility for local functions under local control and to provide local governments with the authority and resources they need to serve their communities effectively.'' Since Congress granted the Home Rule Act, it has shown no interest in governing the District of Columbia, but it requires the D.C. budget to actually be passed again here, by Congress, for the sole purpose of seeking to overturn local laws that Members of Congress don't support. The basis for our federation of States is that each has its own laws and they must be respected, yet there are eight different laws pending here to be overturned by the Congress of the United States. I believe I will be able to retain most of these laws for the District of Columbia, but why should I have to spend any of my time protecting local laws passed by my local jurisdiction? They range from trying to get rid of all the District's gun laws; making the District pay for private schools out of local funds; the medical aid in dying law, which six States already have and DC would not be allowed to have, although two Republican leaders have such bills in their States; no budget autonomy law; repeal of the nondiscrimination law that the District has based on reproductive choices of family members; no local funds for marijuana commercialization, though that is now done by eight States; and the prohibition on spending for abortions for low-income women. That is done by 17 States. This is a sampling of what is pending, Mr. Speaker. Congress allows these same laws to exist in their own local jurisdictions. The way to commemorate self-government for the District of Columbia granted by Congress 44 years ago is for Congress itself to respect the Home Rule Act it passed in 1973.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce a bill to redesignate the National Park Service-owned Rock Creek Park, in the District of Columbia, as ``Rock Creek National Park.'' Renaming this park will highlight its significance to the nation, including visitors to the nation's capital, and will help get much-needed funding for the park's inviting trails, waterways and other unique features. Rock Creek Park is already a national park, established by Congress in 1890 ``for the benefit and enjoyment of the people of the United States,'' and is the oldest urban park and the third federal park ever created, after Yellowstone and Sequoia. Rock Creek Park was designed to preserve animals, timber, forestry and other interests in the park, and to ensure that its natural state is maintained as much as possible, for all American people, not just for D.C. residents. Over time, several structures have been established or donated to further preserve Rock Creek Park. In 1892, for example, the federal government acquired Peirce Mill in Rock Creek Park, one of the mills used by local farmers during the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries. In 1950, the Old Stone House, located at 3051 M Street NW., with its great pre-Revolutionary War architectural merit, was acquired by the park. The building was restored, and programs explain the house's rich history from the colonial period to the present day. The Fort Circle Parks were also acquired to interpret and preserve the Civil War Defenses of Washington, which created a ring of protection for the nation's capital during the Civil War. Today, Rock Creek Park offers residents of the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Northern Virginia, as well as thousands of visitors, an escape from our increasingly urban environment. Residents and tourists alike also enjoy many activities in the park's 2,000 acres, including hiking and bike riding on the historical trails, horseback riding, picnicking, tennis and other recreational activities in some of the open fields. Our residents have expressed their appreciation by volunteering to clean up and maintain the trails and waterways. Redesignating Rock Creek Park as Rock Creek National Park will help recognize the national status of the park and protect and revitalize this remarkable resource in our nation's capital. I strongly urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I thank my good friend from Virginia. He is doing a public service with his response to the bill that is coming forward today. Mr. Chairman, you can call this bill whatever you want, but it is not a reform bill. It creates a problem in order to get rid of it. Mr. Chairman, 0.18 percent is all of the employees who get dismissed. The sponsor must want more. Instead of taking that as an indication of the competency and of the excellence of Federal employees--under 1 percent, only 0.18--there must be more to be fired than that. The data shows the opposite. The Federal workforce has consistently been understood to be the best qualified public employees in the country however you look at them, particularly with their education and with their efforts. The first reason the sponsor gives for this bill is that managers ``simply lose track of time and are unaware of the 1-year deadline approaching.'' Whose competency should we be checking? Not the employees, surely. Management should be doing its job. They are paid big Federal bucks precisely for that. But they are paid to do something else. They are paid to observe. They are not observing if they are not even looking for the 1-year deadline wherein they could fire an employee. They are supposed to assist employees during that first year. They are supposed to help correct employees during that first year. What are they doing during that first year losing track of it? Who bears the burden is the employee who may be perfectly competent but wasn't receiving the assistance or the oversight to which she was entitled. We are moving without information that would help us understand if there is a problem. What is the reason for not calling witnesses to find out if there is a problem? Because if there is, then we ought to do something about it. We do know this: 36 percent of all the employees dismissed are dismissed in that first year. That would seem to indicate that maybe management is doing its job. Today's young workforce is always looking for better opportunities. Pass this bill, and you chase away the best and the brightest from even applying to work for the American people.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing the contributions of Nancy M. Ware, who served as the Director of the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency for the District of Columbia (CSOSA) for the past six years. A native Washingtonian, Director Ware has been tireless in her fight to improve public safety and the quality of life in neighborhoods throughout the District. She began her educational pursuits in District of Columbia public schools, ultimately graduating from Coolidge High School and then going on to earn her Bachelor's and Master's degrees from Howard University. Early in her career, Director Ware served in various leadership positions for a number of organizations and government agencies, including the Rainbow Coalition, the Citizen Education Fund, the District of Columbia's Mayor's Youth Initiative Office and the Department of Justice's Weed and Seed Program as well as its Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs. Of Director Ware's many accomplishments, her work as the first Executive Director of the District of Columbia Criminal Justice Coordinating Council (CJCC) stands out. The District's criminal justice system is a complex web of federal and local jurisdictional authorities. Director Ware led the development of the infrastructure to promote collaboration between the District and federal governments on critical public safety issues. As director of the CJCC, Director Ware was instrumental in advancing the city's technical capability and capacity to support criminal justice information sharing among CJCC member agencies. On December 1, 2011, she was sworn in as Director of CSOSA, an independent federal executive branch agency that is tasked with enhancing public safety, preventing crime and reducing recidivism among those supervised. As the head of CSOSA, Director Ware was responsible for leading over 800 federal employees in providing community supervision for as many as 15,000 adults on probation, parole or supervised release in the District. During her tenure at CSOSA, Director Ware's accomplishments are numerous, ranging from establishing a young adult initiative that focuses on supervisees 25 years old and younger to enhancing the agency's internal and external communications and program integration. Therefore, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing Director Nancy M. Ware for her dedication to public service and for her continued commitment to ensure that the nation's capital remains safe for residents, workers and visitors, and that juveniles and adults who have become involved in the criminal justice system are provided opportunities to contribute and thrive in their community.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the chair and ranking member of the committee for bringing this bill forward at a time of national crisis in the workplace on sexual harassment. When I chaired the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which was 15 years after the statute had been passed, sexual harassment had not even been defined as a form of workplace discrimination. We held hearings and so defined it, and the Supreme Court thereafter affirmed the EEOC guidelines. Congress, nevertheless, exempted itself until 30 years later when in 1995--prompted by a controversy involving Members of the Congress-- brought Congress under 13 major civil rights and labor laws. But mysteriously--and I still can't understand why--Congress exempted itself from the easiest provision, the provision we bring forward today for posting and training. I will never understand that failure, but we are trying to move forward today. There are other needed provisions, and I have introduced a bill to bring the comprehensive provisions that we now require of the legislative branch or the private sector forward, and I thank the Committee on House Administration for continuing to work on these issues, too. Congress failed in 1964. Congress failed again in 1995. Now, in 2017, it is impossible to justify exempting congressional offices and Members of Congress from the comprehensive provisions Congress now requires of private employers and Federal agencies. We will never be respected until we are brought under the same laws as everybody else. Congressional staff deserve the same civil and antidiscrimination protections afforded to other Federal employees. It is important that powerful figures who play an outsized role here in Congress be brought to the same level as other employers.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce a bill to permit commercial filming and photography on the grounds of the U.S. Capitol, east of Union Square, the only area where such filming is currently authorized. This bill would permit commercial filming and photography outside of the Capitol and congressional office buildings by permit, so long as both the House and Senate are not in session. In today' s world, where many societies are facing upheavals, our country should be the first to encourage commercial filming and photography of the Capitol, which symbolizes U.S. democracy at work. Hollywood and other commercial filmmakers should not have to go to other or fake capitol buildings for movies and films about the U.S. Capitol. The current policy permitting filming near the United States Botanic Garden shows that the Capitol police can handle filmmaking on Capitol grounds, especially when Congress is not in session. However, filming from that vantage point captures the least familiar view of the Capitol. At a time when the reputation of Congress is particularly low, filming of the Capitol, a building that represents American democracy, could bolster its image. Keeping filmmakers from standing in front of the Capitol is neither business-friendly nor true to the nation's democratic traditions. Encouraging commercial filming and photography at the Capitol would help spread the story of our national legislature around the world. The time is overdue to allow commercial filming and photography of the exterior of the historic 19th century Capitol building. There is no good reason why commercial filming and photography should be confined to Union Square. Specifically, my bill gives the Capitol Police the discretion, depending on the circumstances in and around the Capitol, to issue a permit authorizing commercial filming and photography under the same conditions as those in Union Square. Such areas might include, for example, Independence Avenue on the House side and Constitution Avenue on the Senate side. No policy or security reason exists to justify limiting commercial filming and photography of the Capitol complex to only one location, Union Square, particularly considering that permits are necessary. People are regularly seen on East Capitol Street (east of 2nd Street) taking pictures, where they get a full view of the Capitol building, demonstrating how arbitrary it is to limit commercial filming and photography to Union Square. Capitol Police would also have authority to charge a fee to cover any costs incurred by the Architect of the Capitol as a result of the issuance of the permit, to be deposited into the Capitol Trust Account. The Capitol Trust Account was established to accept proceeds from any fees collected for commercial filming and photography permits for Union Square. Amounts in the Capitol Trust Account would be available without fiscal year limitation for such maintenance, improvements, and projects with respect to the Capitol grounds as the Architect of the Capitol considers appropriate, subject to the approval of the Appropriations Committees of the House and Senate. Views of the U.S. Capitol are among America's most iconic. Limiting commercial filming and photography of the Capitol, an important vehicle for telling the nation's story, does not serve the American people. Indeed, most of the world knows our country and reveres our system of government largely through commercial films and photos of the Capitol, which symbolizes our democracy at work. Commercial films and photographs of the Capitol, the seat of our democracy, are perhaps the best modern vehicles for telling the nation's story and showcasing its democratic system of government. Republicans and Democrats alike revere the image as a symbol of patriotism. My bill would enable appropriate, permitted commercial filming and photography of the Capitol, and would create economic benefits for the nation, the city, and private business.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce the Reducing Long-Term Unemployment Act to address one of the lingering workforce tragedies in today's economy--our long-term unemployed--and to keep the economy growing. Although the overall unemployment rate has fallen to approximately four percent, Americans who have remained unemployed for longer than 27 weeks have not enjoyed a similar recovery. In October 2017, the number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more) was 1.6 million, which accounted for 24.8 percent of the total unemployed population. To make matters even worse, the long-term unemployed now face employment discrimination as employers show reluctance to hire these job-seekers because of the length of their unemployment. Therefore, my bill provides a necessary incentive to hire the long-term unemployed--a $5,000 tax credit for employers against their payroll tax liability for each (net) new long-term unemployed person they hire. This tax credit is large enough to give employers an incentive to increase the hiring and wages of those who have been unjustifiably left behind, while ensuring that the economy benefits from their participation. The credit would be available to the broadest base of employers because every employer, including nonprofits, pays payroll taxes, and employers could claim the credit on a quarterly, rather than annual, basis. According to the independent, non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, the proposal would ``increase both output and employment'' through four mechanisms: (1) with lower employment costs, employers would reduce the costs of their products and services, which, in turn, would first boost sales and then hiring and hours worked; (2) employers would pass on some of the tax savings to employees in the form of higher wages or other compensation, which, in turn, would increase employees' purchasing power; (3) higher profits would lead to higher stock prices for public companies, increasing shareholders' wealth and therefore their willingness to spend; and (4) with lower employment costs, employers would increase hiring. The bill has safeguards to prevent employers from gaming the system, including denying a credit to an employer that fires one employee and hires a replacement in order to take advantage of the incentive. For some time, it has been clear that targeted policies are necessary to address today's stubborn long-term unemployment rates. Without significant targeting, the long-term unemployed are in danger of becoming permanently unemployed. This group of competent and experienced Americans deserves better. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing the District of Columbia- based Washington Photo Safari, which has just hosted the 35,000th participant in its amateur photographers training program. Founded by professional architectural photographer E. David Luria, Washington Photo Safari was the first community-based field photography training program in the country. With 11 instructors, the program provides more than 40 photography skill sets in 140 different venues throughout the District. Most of Washington Photo Safari's participants come from the D.C.- area. The `participants' skill levels range from people who have just bought their first camera to seasoned professional photographers who value Mr. Luria's knowledge of when, where and how to capture the best images in the District. Averaging just six to seven participants per training session, the ``photo safaris'' take place at some of the District's most iconic landmarks, including the National Mall, Washington National Cathedral, Franciscan Monastery of the Holy Land in America, Tidal Basin, Capitol Hill, Cathedral of St. Matthew the Apostle, Smithsonian National Zoo, National Gallery of Art and National Museum of American History. The Washington Photo Safari has received Trip Advisor's Certificate of Excellence Award for the past five years due to dozens of five-star reviews from its customers, solidifying its place on Trip Advisor's list of top 10 outdoor activities in the District. In addition, with its success, similar programs have been implemented in 20 other U.S. cities with guidance provided by Washington Photo Safari. Therefore, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing Washington Photo Safari for its achievements and contributions to the District of Columbia tourism industry, as well as for serving as a member organization of Destination DC, Cultural Tourism of DC and the National Cherry Blossom Festival.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, a picture is worth a thousand words, so is a graph. Following the blue line, the tax scam works this way: For average taxpayers, the blue line--the blue line is for blue and red States--shows taxes for individual taxpayers go down for one full year. Then look what begins to happen at 2019. They begin to go up. By 2020, they continue. Follow the blue line for average taxpayers. Their taxes are continuing to go up, they reach a real high, and steeply go up for the entire 10-year period. For business tax credits, they go down, too. That means business taxes go down. And then they, too, go up. So the scam shows both look like they are doing the same thing, but 2024 is a dividing line. Then business income taxes plummet, but income taxes for average Americans go up. Who is paying for these business tax cuts? Individual taxpayers. Defeat this Republican tax scam.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, it usually takes time to uncover a tax scam, but this graph tells the whole story of the Republican tax bill in a glance. If the House bill passes, in 2018, taxes will probably go down, taxes for individuals; and that is the blue line. Income taxes will probably go down. So far so good. But follow the blue line for average U.S. taxpayers after 2019 and you will see income taxes from 2020 to 2027, the end of the time frame for this bill, go up. In fact, from 2019 to 2027, we see tax increases for average taxpayers. There is the blue line, and we see these increases take off steeply for average taxpayers. Now follow the red line for business income taxes. Business income taxes, like individual taxes, start off by going down, too. That means tax cuts. There they go. By 2020, business taxes, like individual income taxes, are still mostly level or going down. Then at 2020, business income taxes increase--the same with individual income taxes. Both go up. Then comes 2024. This is the divide line; the great divide between business income taxes and individual income taxes. Business income taxes turn abruptly down--there they go; there is the red line--while individual income taxes, just as abruptly, turn steeply up. There is the blue line. Individual tax increases. The graph showing individual income taxes going up is this blue line, but it represents what is happening in blue States and red States alike. The bottom line for individual taxpayers--less than half of taxpayers get anything approaching a permanent tax cut, and an additional one- third have their tax liability changed by $100 or less. That adds up for most Americans to tax increases. Business taxes go down. Here is the red line. Individual taxes, your taxes, you pay more, they go up, your taxes and mine. The Republican plan is a tax increase bill for average Americans. Defeat the Republican tax bill to keep taxes from going up for average Americans who pay taxes in our country today.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend from Illinois for yielding to me. I would also like to thank Representative Hice, our own Chairman Gowdy, and Ranking Member Cummings for including in this bill, like the similar bill from the last Congress, an update to the Former Presidents Act to reflect the positively changed status of the District of Columbia government since the enactment of the Former Presidents Act of 1958. As it affects the District of Columbia, this bill provides an update to indeed reflect the law regarding the District of Columbia as it is now as opposed to how it was at the time the Former Presidents Act was originally passed in 1958. In 1958, the District of Columbia had no elected local government. It didn't have any member of this body to draw this matter to the attention of the House. Instead, the D.C. government was run by three Presidentially appointed commissioners, and all locally raised D.C. funds were deposited in the U.S. Treasury--locally raised, but put right there in the Treasury--and the Federal Government paid the employer contribution of the pensions of D.C. government employees. You can see why D.C. thought of itself at that time as a colony of the United States of America. We have changed all that. Thanks to the Home Rule Act and the work of this Congress, this bill would treat employment of former Presidents and the widows of former Presidents in the District government in the same manner as employment in other local and State governments. The Former Presidents Act was intended to prevent former Presidents and widows of former Presidents from double-dipping in the Treasury by collecting a Federal pension during any period they were employed by the Federal Government or the D.C. government, just in case that happened. However, the Former Presidents Act became outdated with respect to the D.C. government after Congress passed the Home Rule Act of 1973, and it needs to be updated. The Home Rule Act granted the District of Columbia a locally elected government. Under the Home Rule Act, D.C. local funds consisting of local taxes and fees are deposited in D.C. government accounts, not the U.S. Treasury. Also, because of the Home Rule Act, former Presidents and widows of former Presidents would not be double-dipping by collecting both a Federal pension and a salary from the D.C. government because they are funded by what is now different governments. I am very grateful that the House passed this bill last year. This is, of course, leftover business from more than 40 years ago.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend for yielding me another minute. While the District of Columbia struggles to become the 51st State, we certainly appreciate at least being recognized as an independent jurisdiction and no longer a ward of the Federal Government, as granted by the Home Rule Act of 1973. I particularly appreciate my friends from the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, on which I serve, seeing to it that this bill came to the floor, and Congressman Hice as well, and I appreciate the leadership for placing this bill on this calendar. Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge the adoption of this bill.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, Saturday is Veterans Day. That is the day we set aside to revere those who served in our Armed Forces, especially today, because all who serve are volunteers. Only one group of taxpaying volunteers who serve in our Armed Forces serve without a vote, and they are the veterans who reside in the Nation's Capital. They have no final vote on this House floor, though, of course, I vote in committee. They are not fully recognized as American citizens, although the District of Columbia is one of the oldest jurisdictions in the United States. D.C. veterans, therefore, are at the front of the line, demanding the vote in Congress and other rights granted only to residents of States. I thank the Members of this body who have cosponsored my bill to make the District of Columbia the 51st State. Each year we have beat last year's record in cosponsors. Today I have introduced a statehood resolution in tribute to the District of Columbia's 30,000 veterans as Veterans Day approaches on Saturday. The residents of your Capital City have never hesitated to serve or give up their lives in war for their country. They have died for their country without a vote in disproportionate numbers. World War I, more casualties than three States; World War II, more casualties than four States; Korean war, more casualties than eight States; the Vietnam war, more casualties than ten States of the Union. There have been three votes to go to war since I have been a Member of Congress: the Gulf war, the Iraq war, the Afghanistan war. I have gone to Arlington National Cemetery to comfort bereaved families from the District of Columbia who died in those wars. The tragedy of their sacrifice is deepened because these men died securing the vote for others in those nations, while they did not have the vote for themselves in their own nation. The only remedy to make our veterans whole is to give statehood to their city. The special urgency of our demand for statehood this Veterans Day is particularly pointed up by the fact that, for years now, District of Columbia residents have been number one, per capita, in taxes paid to support the Government of the United States. Understand that, number one above all the other States in taxes paid, all without a vote. That outsize contribution, yet no vote on this House floor, no Senators in the other body. That is not even a vote on D.C. matters. D.C. matters, some of them, have to come to this floor. The D.C. appropriation, even though D.C. residents raise more than $7 billion, not $1 of it is Federal money, yet the city's appropriation comes to this floor. D.C. laws, sometimes on abortion or guns, are rather controversial matters, but we don't bother the States when they do the same thing, and we certainly should have nothing to say when the residents of the District pass laws of their own. We almost got the vote on the House floor when we were paired with Utah, a Republican State. And the only reason we don't have that vote on the House floor now is that there was an attachment to the bill that tried to eliminate all the gun laws of the District of Columbia. Absurd. But we had to leave the bill on the table. The Founders faced a unique situation when they created the District of Columbia as their Capital, but they tried an 18th century remedy that the country has long outgrown. The Nation's Capital must not be under the thumb of the national government, with citizens left without their equal rights. We must erase the slander that the Framers of our country who went to war on the slogan of ``No Taxation Without Representation;'' that they would want to leave any Americans who paid taxes without equal representation in the United States, and especially on this floor and in the Senate. We will bring our statehood bill to the floor as soon as it is allowed. On this Veterans Day, I ask that we bring our D.C. statehood bill to the floor. Do it for District residents. But on this Veterans Day, I ask that you do it for the 30,000 veterans who have served you, who have served their country, and who deserve equal rights in each and every respect.