Eleanor Norton

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Yet, Mr. Chairman, I have sought a compromise that should be acceptable to Republicans, as it is to President Obama. We support, and I repeat, we support allowing our current D.C. voucher students to remain in the program until graduation. That ensures D.C. would have voucher students for many years to come. That is the kind of sensible compromise that Congress must get back to or be content with the label ``least productive Congress,'' as it has come to be known each year under this majority. This bill goes beyond the compromise, we have offered, by seeking to admit new students as well. We are here so that Speaker John Boehner has a capstone to his own political career. The D.C. voucher program is his pet project, not D.C.'s. The Speaker has introduced only two bills this Congress: a bill on the Iran nuclear agreement and this bill. Even if Members do not respect D.C.'s right to self-government, they should at least care whether the program improves achievement, which was the stated reason for vouchers in the first place. Far from helping students, however, the program has demonstrably failed. According to the congressionally mandated evaluation of the program's effectiveness, this program, these vouchers, have failed to improve academic achievement, as measured by objective math and reading testing scores. Most importantly, the program has not had significant impacts--that is also from the congressionally mandated evaluation--has not had ``significant impacts'' on the achievement of students whom the program was designed to most benefit: those who previously attended low- performing public schools. The majority cites improved high school graduation rates. However, the evaluation did not examine dropout rates or the rigor of the schools' curriculum or graduation requirements. The majority also cites high college attendance rates. However, the evaluation did not measure college attendance rates. Even if the program were successful, Mr. Chairman, it would still not be needed, at least in the District of Columbia, which has perhaps the most robust public school choice program in the country. Almost 50 percent of our public school students attend charter schools, which the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools ranked as the strongest in the Nation. In addition, 75 percent of public school students in the District attend out-of-boundary schools. What D.C. has developed amounts to a model choice education program. Moreover, the D.C. public schools have made some of the most impressive improvements in the country, by any measure, spurred by competition from the rapidly growing D.C. charter schools, not from the small number of voucher schools. In fact, a 2013 assessment of D.C. public schools indicated that the District had made the greatest improvement of any urban school district in the Nation. D.C. charter schools have even higher educational achievement and attainment than D.C. public schools. D.C. charter schools outperform D.C. public schools across traditionally disadvantaged groups, including African Americans and low-income students, and have a higher percentage of such students, precisely the students the voucher program was ostensibly designed to serve. Greater confidence in D.C.'s public schools is also clear. D.C. public school enrollment has increased for 7 consecutive years, right alongside the very large number of charter schools. If Congress wants to support D.C. students, we ask that you support our home rule public choice, not impose yours. Any new funding for education in the District should reinforce the hard work of our city, our parents, and our residents, who have shown the Nation how to build a fully accountable public school choice program. D.C. residents, not unaccountable Members of Congress, know best what our children need and how to govern our own affairs. During this debate, Mr. Chairman, we will consider an amendment I have offered to restore the scientific integrity of the program's evaluation, one like the evaluation Congress has always mandated, and another to crack down on so-called voucher mills. Given that the Speaker's bill will surely pass, I want to work with Members who support vouchers to ensure that our voucher students attend high-quality schools, like our accredited Catholic and other parochial schools, not fly-by-night, often storefront schools in low-income neighborhoods that were opened only after the voucher program was created to get access to unrestricted Federal funds. I appreciate that the majority indicated in committee and on the floor that they also want to prevent voucher mills. I look forward to continuing to work with them as this bill moves forward to protect our families from voucher mills. Under the Home Rule Act of 1973, Congress gave the District authority to establish its own education system; and unlike some other local jurisdictions, D.C. has never created a voucher program. Instead, like many D.C. bills in Congress, this bill seeks to impose a program on the District that does not have national support. Just think of it. Only 3 months ago, both the House and Senate defeated Republican national private voucher amendments on the floor. Members reject private school vouchers for their own constituents but want to impose them on mine. No wonder. Since 1970, every single referendum to establish State-funded vouchers or tuition tax credits has failed, and by large margins. Now the majority wants to do to the District what it would not dare do at home. The recent vote to deny voucher funding on a national level shows where Republicans really stand. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I simply want to say, once again, that no child currently enrolled in the program under the compromise that I have offered would be stricken from the program and all current voucher students could stay until graduation. It is new students that we object to, given the evaluation that shows that the program had not met its goal, which was to improve reading and math scores. By contrast, we have had improvement in reading and math scores both in the D.C. public schools and the D.C. charter schools. Also, Mr. Chairman, there is no waiting list for vouchers in the District of Columbia. However, there are long waiting lists for our charter schools, and now, even for some public schools. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Jersey (Mrs. Watson Coleman).

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chair, I want to remind the gentleman that the $100 million doesn't come out of the air, that this majority is cutting $2 billion from K-12. Most of our children are K-12. That money has to come from somewhere. We know it comes from education funds. I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Takano).

Ms. NORTON. I am pleased to yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chair, I just want to tell the gentleman that the so- called immigrants that he speaks to who send their children to schools in Maryland and Virginia live in Maryland and Virginia. Eighty percent of the jobs in the District of Columbia go to people who live in the suburbs. As to the schools in the District of Columbia, as I have indicated, there are waiting lines to get into almost all the charter schools, and the D.C. public schools have improved so much that some of them also have waiting lines. I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings), our very distinguished ranking member.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, this morning, a Member said that a letter had come from a member of the city council, Anita Bonds, asking that her name be removed from the letter sent by the council, the majority of the council, saying that they opposed reauthorization of this bill. That member has since called me. She writes: ``Dear Member of Congress, ``Due to some confusion about my position on the District of Columbia voucher bill (H.R. 10), I want to make my position clear. I oppose this bill, and I intend to remain a signatory of the letter previously acknowledged that seven of my colleagues on the D.C. Council and I sent to Chairman Jason Chaffetz dated October 8, 2015, in oppostion to the bill.'' Signed, Councilmember At-large, Anita Bonds. Mr. Chairman, I submit her letter for the Record. Council of the District of Columbia, Washington, DC, October 21, 2015. Dear Member of Congress, Due to some confusion about my position on the District of Columbia school voucher bill (H.R. 10), I want to make my position clear. I oppose this bill, and I intend to remain a signatory of the letter previously acknowledged that seven of my colleagues on the D.C. Council and I sent to Chairman Jason Chaffetz dated October 8, 2015, in opposition to the bill. Sincerely, Anita Bonds.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, once again, let's get this straight. The control study did not evaluate college attendance. It was not a part of the study. Now, it did evaluate graduation rates. Mr. Chairman, what it did not evaluate was dropout rates. Private schools are notorious for sending back to the District of Columbia children who they think are not doing well or they are not acting as they think they should act. Unless we had those figures, we would have no idea what the graduation rates were, because the graduation rates are those who were left in the school and did not get sent back. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, Members can keep repeating all they want to figures that have come from the air. The only thing evaluated by the congressionally mandated evaluation was the test scores. Our public school students and our charter school students have to take these tests. These children took these tests. Our public school students are doing better--not nearly as good as they should--and so are our charter schools. In fact, our charter schools are doing even better than our public school students, and these students didn't move at all. That is what the congressionally mandated study showed. As to civil rights, these schools are exempted from many of the civil rights laws, and for that reason, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, the NAACP, and a number of organizations wrote opposing reauthorization of this bill. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I don't know about other Members' districts, but I challenge Members to meet what the District of Columbia has done to keep students from being trapped in bad schools. In your districts, can 75 percent of the children choose to go to a better performing district? They can in mine. In your district, are there 110 publicly accountable charter schools as an alternative to your own traditional public schools? There are in mine. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. The Speaker has said that, without this program, these children would have been in bad neighborhood schools. Well, I think it must be noted that the District of Columbia has done more to make sure that those children are not trapped in such schools than any district I have yet read about or heard of. I have noted that 75 percent--that means the overwhelming number--of children stuck in neighborhood schools that they believe are not good schools go to the other side of town, if necessary, to a better school. Far from being trapped, they are encouraged to choose a better school. And I have also cited the 110 charter schools that increase their choices. And, Mr. Chairman, I want you to know that many of the voucher parents whom I have met with--after all, they are my constituents--have said to me that they tried to get into one of our charter schools, but the waiting lists were too long, which is why they went to the voucher schools. Now, isn't it interesting that the voucher schools have no waiting list, but the D.C. charter schools and many of our public schools have waiting lists, so much so that D.C. has had to combine the public schools and the charter schools on one list in a lottery so that families can choose which school to go to. How many Members on that side of the aisle have a lottery that lets the children, the parents, choose the best school for them to go to? Do not dare tell me that the District of Columbia leaves children trapped in failing schools. It has gone out of its way to do just the opposite. And what does it get for it? The imposition by this body of yet another alternative. It is true that, a former mayor, who himself went to Catholic schools, said he was for vouchers. Well, Mr. Chairman, I ask you, then, since the District of Columbia has control of its own education apparatus, why hasn't the District of Columbia set up its own voucher schools? Some other districts have done that. Because the majority, they don't prefer vouchers, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire how much time I have remaining?

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, there are many reasons why I oppose this bill. First, it has failed the goal that the Congress gave it. Bring these children's test scores up. The public schools have brought their test scores up. The public charter schools have done even better in bringing their test scores up. These children's test scores have not risen. Moreover, I can't fail to note how recently the majority has cut K-12 by $2 billion while taking $100 million out of, obviously, education funds to fund a private school voucher bill. Mr. Chairman, not everybody on my side of the aisle is for public charter schools, but I have supported public charter schools because my own constituents wanted and needed a way out of neighborhood schools very often. Yet, even though I come to this floor with home rule choices, this body is insisting on its choices, knowing full well that nobody in the District of Columbia can vote against their choices. And it says to the District of Columbia residents: No matter what you do, people, no matter how good your choices are, no matter how much you meet the standards we often talk about when it comes to choice, you, who have no vote on this floor, who will not vote on this bill when the bell rings in a few minutes, must do what we say. That, my good friends, is not a chapter in democracy. It shows once again that Republican do whatever they care to do to the District of Columbia, even when they reject the same choice for their own constituents, and vote down for their constituents what they now impose on mine. Just a few months ago, the House and Senate voted down vouchers, but today--today--they will vote to impose these same vouchers on the District of Columbia. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I actually agree with the chairman, and the chairman has consulted with us on these changes, which are technical in nature. I do not oppose this amendment. Indeed, I want to thank our chairman for working with us before this committee markup on this bill on some additional technical changes. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment, although I am not opposed to it.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. The Speaker's voucher bill is sure to pass, and I am sure it is offered with the best of intentions. Therefore, I want to work with him and with Members and with those in the Senate who support vouchers to provide much-needed oversight for the millions in Federal dollars in this bill. It is in that spirit that I offer a two- part amendment, and both parts are entirely consistent with the underlying bill. The Government Accountability Office, the GAO, said in 2007 and again in 2013 that the voucher program lacks quality control, transparency, and information. In response, the first part of my amendment restores the scientific integrity of the program's evaluation, copied from prior authorizations of this bill, and the second prohibits voucher mills, not our accredited Catholic schools, which are attended by most of our children, but their competition for vouchers--a small, but significant, number of private schools that would not exist but for this Federal funding. First, my amendment restores the evaluation of the program's effectiveness that Congress has required since the program was created in 2004--and I am quoting from Congress--``to be conducted using the strongest possible research design.'' In contrast, this bill requires the evaluation to be conducted using ``an acceptable quasi-experimental research design that actually prohibits the more scientific randomized controlled trial Congress mandated in prior authorizations.'' Yet the congressionally mandated evaluation said that randomized controlled trials ``are especially important in the context of School Choice because families wanting to apply for a Choice program may have educational goals and aspirations that differ from the average family's.'' I appreciate that this bill requires for the first time that schools be accredited, but it gives unaccredited schools 5 years, along with the grace period of a year, to become accredited. This time frame is so long that it would allow existing and new unaccredited schools to accept voucher students well into the decade. The 50 percent cap that my amendment proposes at least would ensure that voucher schools would ultimately be eliminated. For example, the GAO found that six participating voucher schools had more than 80 percent of their enrollment from voucher students. A Washington Post investigation found one school where voucher students comprised 93 percent of the total. The majority concedes that there is a need for the ongoing evaluation of the program's effectiveness by requiring a study of this bill, but after the mandated study showed that vouchers did not improve student achievement, the majority took care of that by watering down the mandated evaluation. The second part of my amendment prohibits fly-by-night, often storefront school voucher bills by eliminating the percentage of voucher students in the school to 50 percent of the school's total enrollment. No current voucher student or sibling would be affected by the cap. My amendment would disqualify so-called voucher mills, a small, but significant, number of schools that cannot survive without government funding, most of which sprang up in low-income neighborhoods after the program was created to get unrestricted Federal funds. Why should the major recipients of voucher funds--our fully accredited Catholic schools or other parochial and private schools-- have to share the available funding with voucher mills of low quality? The way to eliminate these unaccredited schools, which are unworthy of our students, is to require that their enrollment not consist primarily of voucher students. Mr. Chairman, I ask that the Post's investigation, entitled, ``Quality controls lacking for D.C. schools accepting Federal vouchers,'' be included in the Record. [From the Washington Post, Nov. 17, 2012] Quality Controls Lacking for D.C. Schools Accepting Federal Vouchers (By Lyndsey Layton and Emma Brown) Congress created the nation's only federally funded school voucher program in the District to give the city's poorest children a chance at a better education than their neighborhood schools offer. But a Washington Post review found that hundreds of students use their voucher dollars to attend schools that are unaccredited or are in unconventional settings, such as a family-run K-12 school operating out of a storefront, a Nation of Islam school based in a converted Deanwood residence, and a school built around the philosophy of a Bulgarian psychotherapist. At a time when public schools face increasing demands for accountability and transparency, the 52 D.C. private schools that receive millions of federal voucher dollars are subject to few quality controls and offer widely disparate experiences, the Post found. Some of these schools are heavily dependent on tax dollars, with more than 90 percent of their students paying with federal vouchers. Yet the government has no say over curriculum, quality or management. And parents trying to select a school have little independent information, relying mostly on marketing from the schools. The director of the nonprofit organization that manages the D.C. vouchers on behalf of the federal government calls quality control ``a blind spot.'' ``We've raised the question of quality oversight of the program as sort of a dead zone, a blind spot,'' said Ed Davies, interim executive director of the D.C. Children and Youth Investment Trust Corp. ``Currently, we don't have that authority. It doesn't exist.'' Republicans in Congress established the D.C. voucher program eight years ago to demonstrate the school-choice concepts that the party has been espousing since the 1950s. Vouchers were once thought to be moribund, but came roaring to life in 2010 in states where Republicans took control. Fourteen states have created voucher programs or expanded existing ones in recent years. Some states, such as Wisconsin, now include middle-class families in their voucher programs. Other states, including Virginia, have begun indirectly steering public dollars to private schools by offering tax credits to those who donate to scholarship funds. In some cases, the public has pushed back against the idea of routing state dollars from public to private schools. Legal challenges are pending in Colorado and Indiana. In the November elections, Florida voters rejected a ballot amendment that would have permitted tax dollars to flow to religious institutions, including parochial schools. That would have enabled the state to revive a voucher program that had been declared unconstitutional in 2006 by its highest court. Yet Florida continues to offer vouchers for disabled students who want to attend private schools and awards tax credits to corporations that donate to private-school scholarship programs. In the District, it's clear that vouchers have provided many children with an education at well-established private schools that otherwise would have been out of reach, and their parents rave about the opportunity. Of the 1,584 District students now receiving vouchers, more than half attend Catholic schools and a handful are enrolled at prestigious independent schools such as Sidwell Friends, where President Obama sends his daughters. But the most comprehensive study of the D.C. program found ``no conclusive evidence'' that the vouchers improved math and reading test scores for those students who left their public schools. The study, released by the U.S. Department of Education in 2010, found that voucher students were more likely to graduate than peers without vouchers, based on data collected from families. And parents reported that their children were safer attending the private schools, though the students themselves perceived no difference. Congress set aside $20 million for the D.C. voucher program this year. Since 2004, the federal government has appropriated $133 million for the program. Private schools that participate in the D.C. program don't have to disclose the number of voucher students they enroll or how much public money they receive, and many declined to release such information to The Post. While public schools must report test scores and take action when they don't meet goals, private schools participating in the D.C. voucher program are insulated from such interference. The schools must administer a single standardized test, but can choose the type. Those scores are not made public, and schools can stay in the voucher program no matter how their students fare. Schools that accept vouchers are required to hold a certificate of occupancy and employ teachers who are college graduates, but they do not have to be accredited. The Post found that at least eight of the 52 schools are not accredited. Parents, not the government, should determine a school's quality, according to Kevin Smith, a spokesman for House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio), a proud product of Catholic schools who designed the voucher program. ``Our belief is that parents--when provided appropriate information--will select the best learning environment for their children,'' he wrote in an e-mail. At Archbishop Carroll High School, where 40 percent of students receive vouchers, principal Mary Elizabeth Blaufuss agrees. ``The question is, to what extent do we trust parents to make educational decisions for their kids?'' she said. Santa Carballo knew little about the Academia de la Recta Porta before enrolling her daughter, Emma, through the voucher program. She chose it because it was across the street from the Catholic school for boys that her son attends, also with a voucher, and it seemed better than a neighborhood public school that has failed for years to meet achievement targets. ``This is private, it's good,'' said Carballo, an immigrant from El Salvador who works as a waitress and struggles with English. ``It's more intelligent. And it's religious, it's good. I'm so happy.'' A nondenominational Christian school, the Academia charges $7,100 a year and occupies a soot-stained storefront between a halal meat shop and an evening wear boutique on a busy stretch of Georgia Avenue NW near the Maryland line. The K-12 school consists of two classrooms. A drum set and keyboard are stowed in a corner for music class; for gym, students travel nearly two miles down Georgia Avenue to the city's Emery Recreation Center. Annette and Reginald Miles founded the unaccredited school 13 years ago. He is the pastor of the associated church, she is the school director, their daughter is a teacher and their grandson is a student. Annette Miles declined to say how many of her 70 students receive vouchers. If the program were to end, the Academia would ``have to stretch with fundraising'' to continue operating, she said. To be eligible for a voucher, families must qualify for food stamps or meet other income requirements. Through the D.C. program, the federal government pays about $8,000 a year for each elementary school student and $12,000 for high schoolers. That's less than the $18,000 a year it costs to educate one child in the D.C. Public Schools. Many of the participating private schools do not offer costly services for children with disabilities, who make up about 18 percent of the DCPS school population. The voucher payments are enough to cover tuition at most Catholic schools, which enroll about 52 percent of D.C. voucher students. But they pay only a fraction of costs at elite institutions such as the Sheridan School in Northwest D.C., where charges can reach about $30,000 a year. Tiblez Berhane has a daughter in eighth grade who is attending Sheridan with a voucher and financial aid from the school. ``It's wonderful,'' said Berhane, an immigrant from Eritrea who works in a day-care center. ``We could never afford this.'' While Sheridan, Sidwell Friends and the Washington International School each have one voucher student, the Academy for Ideal Education depends almost entirely on the federal program. Founder Paulette Jones-Imaan created the school more than two decades ago, aiming to provide a nurturing environment with small classes and a learning model known as ``Suggestopedia,'' a philosophy of learning developed by Bulgarian psychotherapist Georgi Lozanov that stresses learning through music, stretching and meditation. Jones- Imaan melds that philosophy with an African-flavored approach that includes students addressing teachers as ``Mama'' and ``Baba,'' honorifics meaning mother and father. Jones-Imaan also founded a K-12 public charter school, Ideal Academy, based on the same educational philosophy, in 1999. She served on the board for more than a decade. But the charter school ran into trouble. Last year, the D.C. Public Charter School Board threatened to close it because of chronic poor performance. Ideal Academy agreed to shutter its high school, which had a particularly poor record, in order to keep its lower grades open. The preschool-8th grade Ideal Academy was classified as ``inadequate'' this year by the city's charter officials, which means it could be closed if it doesn't improve. Meanwhile, the private Academy for Ideal Education continues on. More than 90 percent of its approximately 60 students are paying the $11,400 tuition with vouchers, Jones- Imaan said. ``If this program were to end, this school would end,'' she said. While some schools have libraries, art studios and athletic fields, the Muhammad University of Islam occupies the second floor of a former residence east of the Anacostia River. The unaccredited K-8 school is supported by the Nation of Islam, according to director Stephanie Muhammad. Parents choose the school because of its small classes, safety and strict discipline, she said. About one-third of the 55 students hold vouchers. Few of the others can afford the $5,335 annual tuition, Muhammad said. They are asked to help defray tuition by raising funds. Last month, they sold pizzas. This month, it's coffee and tea. The classrooms are small, located in what were perhaps once bedrooms. On the walls are posters of Louis Farrakhan, the controversial leader of the Nation of Islam. On a recent visit, the only bathroom in the school had a floor blackened with dirt and a sink coated in grime. The bathtub was filled with paint cans and cleaning supplies concealed by a curtain. Muhammad said in a subsequent interview that the bathroom is used only in emergencies, and students typically use a restroom on the floor below in a day-care center that she had previously described as unrelated to the school. Kevin P. Chavous, a former D.C. Council member and now a senior adviser to American Federation for Children, which lobbies for voucher programs nationwide, said schools receiving public funds should meet quality standards. But supporters of the D.C. program have been focused on overcoming political challenges, he said. ``There should be some accountability measures in all these programs,'' Chavous said. ``Our biggest challenge has been the constant threats to shut this down before we can even measure the schools.'' Since Congress created the voucher program in 2004, Boehner and Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) have regularly wrestled with Democrats over its fate. Republicans and Lieberman want to expand the program; Democrats want to phase it out. ``Our goal is to provide a quality education to all children--not just a few--which is why the Obama administration does not believe vouchers are the answer to America's educational challenges,'' said Justin Hamilton, a spokesman for Education Secretary Arne Duncan. Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D) and D.C. Mayor Vincent C. Gray (D) also are opposed to the voucher program, saying public dollars should go toward improving public schools where they can help the most students. Still, the program has offered some children a crucial path out of troubled city schools. Ophelia Johnson and her daughters were homeless when she learned about the voucher program. She obtained vouchers for both her daughters and enrolled them at the Calvary Christian Academy, which she credits with providing her children a secure, caring and consistent environment as she pulled her life together. ``It's wonderful,'' Johnson said about the voucher program that allowed her daughters to attend the academy. ``The atmosphere, the education, and it's also a Christian school. They taught my girls.'' Now, Johnson is employed, newly remarried and living with her daughters in a condominium on Capitol Hill. Her older daughter, Tabitha, is applying to colleges. ``She'll be the first to go in the family,'' Johnson said, pride in her voice.

Ms. NORTON. The Federal vouchers give these schools the Federal Government's seal of approval. Considering that the purpose of the voucher program is to improve student achievement, voucher bills are inconsistent with the congressional intent and should not be enabled with Federal funds or get the Federal imprimatur. I appreciate that the majority indicated in committee and also on this floor that they, too, oppose voucher mills and are willing to work with me on this issue. I hope to continue to work with the majority as the bill moves forward in order to eliminate voucher bills, which surely no Member supports. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Protect Riders of Metrorail Public Transportation Act of 2015 (PROMPT Act). I am joined by Ms. Edwards of Maryland and Mrs. Comstock of Virginia introducing this important piece of legislation that impacts our respective jurisdictions. The bill permits the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Secretary to administer State safety oversight activities for the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority until the District of Columbia, Virginia, and Maryland develop a State safety oversight program certified by the Secretary. The bill also permits the DOT Secretary to use the existing safety oversight formula funds set aside for the State Safety Oversight agency for transit safety oversight. Following the catastrophic 2009 WMATA Metrorail accident that killed nine residents of the region, Congress gave the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) safety oversight authority for transit rail systems as part of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21). MAP-21 directed FTA to create and implement a national public transportation safety plan, and gave FTA the authority to set and enforce minimum safety standards for transit rail systems. MAP-21 also gave FTA the authority to oversee state safety oversight programs for transit rail and provided $22 million annually nationwide for formula grants to eligible state safety oversight programs. On January 12, 2015, smoke filled a Metrorail train near the L'Enfant Plaza Metro Station in Washington, DC, killing one passenger and injuring at least 84 passengers. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) launched an investigation of the incident, examining the cause of the accident and expects to issue a final report early next year. NTSB is also investigating the Tri-State Oversight Committee (TOC), which was charged with supervising Metro's rail safety oversight program, and the FTA, which has not yet issued any safety regulations nor created a national public transportation safety plan. Earlier this year, the FTA conducted a safety management inspection of WMATA's rail and bus systems and audited the Tri-State Oversight Committee. FTA identified 78 corrective actions for Metrorail to address 44 safety findings and 13 corrective actions for Metrobus to address 10 safety findings. FTA's audit of the TOC found significant gaps in safety oversight, with the TOC lacking enforcement authority and failing to meet MAP-21 legal and financial requirements. Among the FTA's recommendations was that the jurisdictions transition the TOC into the Metro Safety Commission, which was authorized by the DOT Secretary in February 2014. Following an August 6, 2015, derailment of a Metrorail train outside of the Smithsonian Metro Station, the NTSB issued an urgent recommendation to the DOT Secretary that Congress amend 45 U.S.C. 1104(3) to list WMATA as a commuter authority, authorizing the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) to exercise regulatory oversight of WMATA Metrorail. On October 9, 2015, the DOT Secretary responded to the NTSB recommendation by directing the FTA itself to take over direct safety oversight from the TOC. DOT will have available resources from FTA and FRA to implement direct safety oversight, which will include direct enforcement and investigation by FTA of WMATA Metrorail, and FTA will perform unannounced facility inspections and issuances of directives to address any safety inefficiencies. This bill codifies the DOT response to the NTSB recommendation and makes the funding that would go to the TOC available to DOT and FTA to carry out direct safety oversight. I believe WMATA Metrorail riders will be relieved that the FTA will take direct oversight of Metrorail until the DOT Secretary certifies that a fully functioning Metro Safety Commission is up and running. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in congratulating Children's National Health System and its Division of Diagnostic Imaging and Radiology on the International Day of Radiology and on the tremendous impact that pediatric medical imaging and radiation has on children's health care in the District of Columbia. Children's National Health System and its Division of Diagnostic Imaging and Radiology offers District residents access to a specialized staff, full-time Child Life Specialists, state-of-the-art equipment and walk-in radiographs. When a procedure, such as an MRI, requires sedation, Children's National is the only hospital in the national capital region that guarantees a child's anesthesia is administered by a fellowship-trained pediatric anesthesiologist. Children's National has one of the few radiology programs in the United States with several physicists on staff. Children's physicists ensure patient safety through careful monitoring of all equipment. Their physicists supervise radiation safety throughout the hospital, can answer parents' questions about the radiation dose for an exam and ensure safe and effective application of Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Children's National performs approximately 130,000 diagnostic imaging studies each year. These studies play a critical role in the detection, diagnosis and management of a wide variety of diseases affecting children; and they are performed by specially trained physicians, technologists, sonographers, nurses and child life specialists who understand the unique needs of our youngest patients. Medical imaging reduces the number of invasive surgeries, unnecessary hospital admissions and lengths of hospital stays, and helps lower health care costs for Americans. On November 8, 2015, the International Day of Radiology, sponsored by the American College of Radiology, the European Society of Radiology and the Radiologic Society of North America, is celebrating the 120th anniversary of the discovery of the X-ray by Wilhelm Conrad Rontgen and the important role medical imaging and radiation oncology serve in health care. Children's National will designate Friday, November 6, 2015, to celebrate the International Day of Radiology, which this year is dedicated to pediatric imaging. Mr. Speaker, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in celebrating the 2015 International Day of Radiology and recognizing and honoring Children's National Health System and its Division of Diagnostic Imaging and Radiology for their invaluable contributions to improving pediatric radiology on behalf of the residents of the District of Columbia.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend for yielding. A sure sign that the Republican Planned Parenthood hearing failed is that they are now embracing their default, the much-discredited Benghazi Select Committee strategy. But, the Government Reform Planned Parenthood hearing left Planned Parenthood as strong as ever. The majority is trying to do to the Nation's women what they have done to D.C., now deprived of the right to spend even local funds on abortion. But no Federal funds go to abortion, so what is left? Women's health care. All that this witch-hunting select committee will do is highlight the new GOP war on women.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise to ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing Melanie L. Campbell, President and CEO of the National Coalition on Black Civic Participation (the National Coalition) for her exemplary leadership to expand and preserve civil, human and women's rights in the United States. This year marks the 20th year Ms. Campbell has led the National Coalition, which is composed of organizations that represent some 40 million people across our great nation. Campbell is well known for her unique ability to build powerful coalitions and networks that bring diverse people together for the common good. The National Coalition was founded nearly 40 years ago on May 5, 1976 in the District of Columbia by great heroes and sheroes of the Civil Rights Movement, including the late Dr. Dorothy Irene Height, Norman Hill, the late Maynard Jackson, Rev. Dr. Joseph E. Lowery, William ``Bill'' Lucy, Eddie Williams and many others--all of whom mentored Campbell to embrace servant leadership as a way of life in her journey in the fight for justice for all people. Melanie Campbell is a nationally recognized expert in civic engagement, voting rights, women's rights and youth empowerment, and has led many successful coalition-based campaigns that have empowered thousands of African Americans to have a voice in our representative democracy including: 1) the Unity Voter Empowerment Campaign helping increase Black voter participation to historic records over the past decade; 2) the Unity Diaspora Census Campaigns helping reduce the undercount of the Black population in 2000 and 2010; and 3) organizing the ReBuild Hope NOW Coalition in 2005 to assist survivors of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in rebuilding their lives in the Gulf Coast Region. Ms. Campbell acknowledges that one of her most rewarding accomplishments at the National Coalition has been creating an innovative, youth-led civic leadership development program, Black Youth Vote, which was launched April 4, 1996, under the banner, ``the ballot, not the bullet'' in commemoration of the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Campbell is a passionate advocate for women's rights and serves as convener of Black Women's Roundtable (BWR), an intergenerational public policy and organizing network of the National Coalition. Under her leadership, BMR empowers thousands of women and girls annually with tools and resources to live a higher quality of life. BWR is focused on fighting for income equality for women and a living wage job for all Americans. In 2014, Campbell led a Black Women's Roundtable delegation to challenge the NFL to address domestic violence and diversity in the league; and organized prayer vigils on Capitol Hill, with the National African American Clergy Network, to pray for Congress to confirm Loretta Lynch to become the first African American woman and second woman in history to serve as the U.S. Attorney General of the United States. Most recently, she established the Black Youth Vote/Gathering of Black Men & Boys Initiative which held a Capitol Hill day on April, 23, 2015, with over 200 young men and boys coming together to learn how the public policy process works and meeting their Congressional representatives from both parties to share their concerns that are impacting their lives. For her black male initiatives work, she was recently appointed to the My Brothers' Keeper Alliance Advisory Council supported by President Obama. Campbell is an active member of Delta Sigma Theta Sorority and several other prominent national organizations. She is a native of Mims, Florida and attributes her passion for civil rights and social justice to her parents, Mrs. Janet Campbell and the late Isaac Campbell, Sr., who instilled in her a strong faith in God and the understanding that ``helping others is the rent we pay for being born.'' Melanie L. Campbell has spent her entire professional life as a mentor and a role model for countless women and youth in the District of Columbia, the nation and the world. Mr. Speaker, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in saluting Melanie L. Campbell for her 20 years of service to our nation as a non-profit leader at the National Coalition, and for being a great humanitarian and outstanding citizen of the United States of America.