Eleanor Norton

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing Thelma Fagin Hyman, who devoted her professional life to teaching in the segregated school system of the District of Columbia and who continued teaching for years after the historic U.S. Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education ended segregation in the District and elsewhere. The Dunbar Senior High School class of 1955, which celebrates its 60th anniversary this year, particularly thanks Ms. Hyman for her dedication as a teacher and recognizes her as a mentor of the class of 1955. Thelma Fagin Hyman was born January 29, 1917, at Freeman's Hospital (now Howard University Hospital) and educated in District of Columbia public schools. She received her Bachelor of Science from Howard University and her Master of Arts from Columbia University. Before returning to Dunbar High School in 1946, Ms. Hyman taught physical education at Cardozo High School and Turner Jr. High School in D.C. She remained at Dunbar until she retired in 1964. She was married to Vincent Fagin for 38 years until his death. Later, she married Harold Hyman. Ms. Hyman taught physical education to many students in the Dunbar class of 1955. She personified the excellence and dedication Dunbar teachers brought to their work. The class of 1955 believes it most appropriate to recognize one of its outstanding teachers as the class celebrates its 60th anniversary. At 98, Thelma Fagin Hyman is as lively today as she was as a teacher at Dunbar. Along with the class of 1955, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in commending Thelma Fagin Hyman for her dedication as a teacher in the District of Columbia public schools, particularly at Dunbar High School, and as a mentor of the Dunbar class of 1955.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in celebrating the class of 1955 of Paul Laurence Dunbar Senior High School in the District of Columbia as it celebrates its 60-year class reunion Saturday, October 3, 2015, its reunion committee and particularly Donald R. Wines for his phenomenal leadership with the Dunbar Alumni Federation, and Dunbar High School itself in history and today. I am fortunate to be an alumna of Dunbar High School and a member of this distinguished class. Dunbar High School, which started in a church basement, was the first public high school for African Americans in the United States and remained segregated until 1954, when the District of Columbia was one of the six Brown v. Board of Education jurisdictions that successfully challenged segregated schools in the United States. Dunbar was instrumental in making the District of Columbia a bulwark of education for almost a century, attracting students from across the District, who were drawn by the school's excellent reputation. That same reputation was reinforced by Dunbar's remarkable record of graduating more distinguished African Americans than any high school in the country. Among them were Edward Brooke, the first Black popularly elected United States Senator; Robert C. Weaver, the first Black Cabinet member; Benjamin O. Davis Sr., the first Black general in the U.S. Army; Wesley Brown, the first Black graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy; Charles R. Drew, the discoverer of blood plasma; and Mary Jane Patterson, the first African American to achieve a college degree. Dunbar also drew teachers with advanced degrees who would have been college professors but for segregation in higher education that persisted at the time. The 60-year Dunbar High School class reunion is another occasion for pride in Dunbar High School today and in the class of 1955. Dunbar has been recently rebuilt into a state-of-the-art facility and became a neighborhood school following the Brown decision. Its storied history continues to inspire generations of students. The class of 1955 graduated the year following the historic Brown decision and has come together at important intervals to celebrate its class, the education received at Dunbar, and the school today. Keeping the class together did not take place spontaneously. This work has been a commendable team effort, but that team recognizes that the leadership of Donald R. Wines has been indispensable to its success. Donald has discouraged all acknowledgment of his extraordinary leadership on behalf of Dunbar and the class of 1955. However, the House of Representatives is free to commend and thank Donald for focusing his many talents, his organizational expertise, and the skills he honed as a Dunbar student to the class of 1955 Dunbar High School and the historic Dunbar tradition. Mr. Speaker, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in celebrating the 60-year class reunion of the 1955 class of Paul Laurence Dunbar High School and the Dunbar High School Reunion Committee and Dunbar High School itself. I ask the House to particularly commend the leadership of Donald R. Wines, whose indefatigable energy and wise guidance have been the essential ingredients to the consistency of efforts that have enabled the Dunbar class of 1955 to celebrate 60 years of continuing friendship.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. I thank my good friend for her incredibly excellent work on this bill. A threat to shut down the government over funding Planned Parenthood's contraceptive and preventative care measures looms again in 3 months, although 73 percent of the public is against forcing a shutdown over Planned Parenthood. I am grateful for the high-quality coverage Planned Parenthood gives women's health across the board, including abortion services, not funded by the Federal Government. The District of Columbia is the only jurisdiction Congress denies the full reach of Roe v. Wade to low- income women, by denying the local government the right to spend its own local funds on abortion services for poor women. For the Nation, to cut government funds for Medicaid, family planning, and preventative care would cut off our collective noses to spite our faces. Every public dollar spent on family planning services alone saves $7 in undesired births and other preventative care. For all the heat generated by Republicans, Planned Parenthood is regarded more favorably now than it was before the current fight began. The reason is, for nearly a century, Planned Parenthood's incredibly effective work for women's health has won it a strong following across our country from both parties.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, although it appears the federal government will narrowly avert a shutdown on October 1, the second shutdown since 2013, I rise today to offer the District of Columbia Government Shutdown Avoidance Act of 2015 to permanently authorize the District to spend its local funds during a federal shutdown and therefore to remain open during a shutdown. Congress has recently exempted D.C. from shutdowns on an annual basis, and this bill simply makes those exemptions permanent. The District has an $8 billion local budget, which is comprised entirely of local revenue sources, such as taxes and fees. The District should be free, as every state and city is, to spend its own local funds during a federal shutdown. The shutdowns involve congressional disputes about federal funding, but the federal government does not provide a dollar of D.C.'s local budget. The D.C. government should never have to wonder whether it will be part of a federal shutdown, have to prepare in case of a shutdown, or even have to ask Congress to be exempted annually. No Member of the House or Senate has spoken up in favor of shutting down the D.C. government, and I do not believe any Member wants to shut down the D.C. government and bring a large, complicated city to its knees over purely federal matters in which the city is not involved. There is unprecedented bipartisan and bicameral support, as well as support from the Obama administration, for preventing D.C. shutdowns. In fiscal years 2014 and 2015, for the first time ever, Congress exempted D.C. from shutdowns for an entire fiscal year (fiscal years 2015 and 2016, respectively). The pending House and Senate fiscal year 2016 D.C. Appropriations bills each exempt D.C. from shutdowns for fiscal year 2017. Among the most important reasons for a permanent shutdown exemption would be the significant financial and operational benefits for the District. If the District shuts down, it could default under certain financing agreements and leases. The financial importance of eliminating shutdown threats to the District were definitively shown recently. The three leading bond rating agencies have cited the annual shutdown exemption as a positive credit factor in upgrading or maintaining their ratings on the District's bonds. The city's partners, Wall Street and vendors alike can charge a risk premium for the uncertainty created by shutdown threats. A permanent shutdown exemption would undoubtedly improve D.C.'s creditworthiness even more. The 650,000 D.C. residents do not suffer alone when vital city services cease during a shutdown. Federal officials, federal buildings, foreign embassies and dignitaries, businesses and tourists rely daily on the city's services as well. Successive continuing resolutions (CRs) do not help much. Not only do successive CRs make it difficult for the city to plan its activities for the year, they increase the city's costs of doing business. Shutdown threats force the District to invest time and money preparing contingency shutdown plans. Although federal shutdowns have shut down the District in the past, the District did not shut down during the 2013 federal shutdown, only because D.C. was able to use previously appropriated contingency funds to remain open. However, the District had to severely ration its payments, risking its credit standing, and if the federal shutdown had continued for much longer, the District would have exhausted those funds and shut down, too. It is clear that Congress does not intend such risks and consequences to the District. Congress loses nothing by allowing the District, which submits a balanced budget, almost always with surpluses, each year, to remain open. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. I thank my good friend, Representative Sheila Jackson Lee, first, for her kind and generous words, but especially today for her leadership of this Special Order, which is characteristic of her leadership in this Congress. I am so pleased that our chair Rep. G.K. Butterfield has been here and spoken and that we have heard from several other Members. I just want to say a few words about this troika of African Americans who have written their signatures across our time. You have heard their biographies. I don't want to recount their extraordinary bios, because that is not the only reason we are honoring them with this Special Order. I just want to say something about what they meant to me. Two of them I knew personally: Representative Louis Stokes, whose many years in the Congress happened to overlap with my first years here; and, of course, Julian Bond, whom I knew best. I was not fortunate to know Amelia Boynton. She may have been the most courageous woman in the movement of the 1960s, who insisted upon facing death, if necessary, in that march from Selma to Montgomery, and nearly lost her life. I was privileged to be in her presence, as so many Members of Congress were, when we went to Selma this past summer. That was a privilege in and of itself. I was fortunate to know Congressman Louis Stokes, who was a founder of the Congressional Black Caucus long before I served. This was a man of great accomplishment. Yes, he can speak about his firsts, and much more. He is the first African American to serve in Congress from his hometown of Cleveland, as one of the two famous Stokes brothers--his brother, Carl, the first African American mayor. There is something about the way those men were raised and showed themselves in public life. But it is Rep. Stokes' career in Congress that stands out for me. I am not certain there has ever been a more distinguished Member of this body. It looks as if when they were trying to ask somebody to do something hard, they looked to Louis Stokes. He was the first African American to serve on the Appropriations Committee. My heavens. And then look at the committees he has chaired-- hard ones--the Ethics Committee, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. Then they needed someone to do something else that was difficult, and that was to serve on the Iran Contra Committee, and House Select Committee on Assassinations, nothing was more difficult than that. If you were looking for a Member whom the public would trust and who this body would trust, who do you go to? They went to Louis Stokes. So if you are trying to find out how to serve, recall the life of Representative Louis Stokes. In the District, we recall his life and his work. Much of his work was done in the field of health. The Howard University Louis Stokes Health Science Library is named for him here in the District of Columbia at Howard University. So we will never forget him. Of the three, the one I knew best, of course, was my colleague and friend in the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, later a client of sorts, and then finally--for 25 years, a constituent. I met Julian several years after he founded, along with a handful of other students, the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee. You have got to understand that that group was as different from any student group since. They were not an offshoot of the civil rights movement. They were a group that stood on its own. I would go down in the summers. I was in law school. SNCC was the equivalent of major civil rights organizations, every single one, right alongside them. That is why John Lewis got to speak on the March on Washington. The reason that SNCC stood out is the quality of its leadership in those early years. Julian became the spokesman. The reason he was the spokesman was his way with words. He was a poet and a writer, and he could explain what we were doing. He served a most valuable role in these early years. So no one should be surprised that he went after the zenith of the civil rights movement to serve in the Georgia House of Representatives. What you may be surprised to learn is that when he moved on to the senate, the Georgia Senate, they refused to seat him because he had endorsed a SNCC statement opposing the Vietnam war. Imagine denying a seat to a member duly elected because of a statement he had made on an issue of great moment. This case was taken all the way to the Supreme Court. At that point, I was a constitutional lawyer working for the American Civil Liberties Union in New York. I got to write the amicus brief. We took very few amicus briefs to the Supreme Court, but this one seemed to have the makings of a landmark case. Indeed, it did become a landmark case. You do not see anybody denying anyone else the right to sit in his seat--or her seat, today--because of that person's views. The Julian Bond case settled the matter. What was Julian Bond to do with the rest of his life? First of all, SNCC broke a fair number of people. And though they gave much to the movement, you may not have heard about many of them since. What Julian did was to give the rest of his life to the movement. For every single day of his life as a man, after he left public service in the Georgia Legislature, he was devoted to the civil rights movement he had entered as a very young man. He moved to the District of Columbia with his wife, taught at American University and the University of Virginia, and became--and this is a matter that makes me chuckle--became the chairman of the NAACP. At SNCC we thought the NAACP was way too conservative for us, the young and foolish. It tells you how Julian grew. He grew to be the long-time and devoted chairman of the NAACP. He carried out his devotion to civil rights magnificently. Throughout his entire life, he remained a major spokesman for the civil rights movement and for progressive causes, his entire life speaking all around the country, carrying the message. When he moved here, I had a Black Caucus event with Julian and with John Lewis simply discussing their lives as young men in the civil rights movement. That was to be one of the most memorable moments since I have been in Congress. Just last February, during Black History Month, I asked Julian to come to Howard University, where he and I engaged in an intergenerational conversation with Howard students about the police shootings in Ferguson, Missouri, and New York City and what they meant to this generation and how this generation had to have its own issues and move in its own direction. One of the things we indicated was that for all of the work of the youth of the civil rights movement of our day, we never touched racial profiling. It remained alive and kicking for a new generation, which has taken it on. I am, finally, particularly grateful that when Julian moved to the District of Columbia, he really became a part of this city, lending his civil rights celebrity to the great cause of this city for full citizenship, for D.C. voting rights, yes, and for statehood for the District of Columbia. If you came into the District by taxis a few years ago, there was an advertisement. Julian was speaking in a cab, informing you that you were coming to the District of Columbia, where the residents were trying to get their full citizenship. Wherever he was, he had a way of touching upon the issue of freedom of the day and of the people around him. I will always miss him. This country will always miss him. We are grateful for the life he led. We are grateful, especially, for this Congressional Black Caucus evening devoted to his life and to the lives of two others, very divergent lives but, in other ways, very similar. I thank my good friend, Representative Jackson Lee, again, for her leadership here.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, September 27, 2015 marks the 125th anniversary of Rock Creek Park, and to celebrate, 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 encourage more daily use and involvement with the park's beautiful trails, waterways and features by residents of the District of Columbia. Rock Creek Park is a historically rich 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. 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. 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 District of Columbia, Maryland, and Northern Virginia residents an escape from urban living. 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. Moreover, residents are involved in the cleanup and maintenance of the trails and waterways. The Rock Creek Conservancy works directly with the National Park Service and is dedicated to protecting and promoting the entirety of the Rock Creek watershed through conservation, recreation, and education programs. Redesignating Rock Creek Park as Rock Creek National Park will help the National Park Service, the Rock Creek Conservancy, area residents, and visitors to recognize the national status of the park and protect and revitalize this remarkable resource in our nation's capital. It is fitting that we recognize the historical significance of Rock Creek Park on its 125th birthday by using the occasion to rename it Rock Creek National Park. I strongly 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 PYXERA Global, headquartered in Washington, D.C., on its 25th anniversary, and for its work to improve lives and build capacity of individuals and institutions around the world. On January 1, 1990, President George H.W. Bush announced the formation of the Citizens Democracy Corps (CDC), created by executive order after the fall of the Berlin Wall. A New Vision for Global Engagement was launched. Americans wanted to help in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union to strengthen the foundations of free society. CDC sent American business professionals who volunteered their expertise to support the transition to a market economy and promote international understanding. The Corporate Assistance Program established an innovative approach wherein United States corporations provided free technical and business assistance to enterprises and institutions. These programs had a lasting and positive impact in Eastern Europe and the countries of the former Soviet Union. In 1991, the Citizens Volunteer Program was launched. This program sent advisors to work with local municipal governments, nonprofits, and institutions of higher education. In 1995, CDC launched its first Local Content Development program in Russia, in which small and medium enterprises gained the capabilities to supply the rapidly expanding oil and gas industry, creating new jobs and mutually profitable, sustainable enterprises. The Enterprise and Economic Development Program was created, operating out of key cities to support local business development. In 2000, the MBA Enterprise Corps joined the organization, and in 2002 the name changed to Citizens Development Corps, and later, CDC Development Solutions (CDS) with the inclusion of MBAs Without Borders. A landmark pro bono program for corporate employees was pioneered by IBM with CDS in 2008 with teams in Romania, Ghana, and Tanzania. The IBM Corporate Service Corps became a new model of global leadership development and corporate social responsibility. Following the publication of the Harvard Case Study, IBM: The Corporate Service Corps, CDS hosted the First International Corporate Volunteerism Conference, and IBM, USAID, and CDC Development Solutions formed the Center for Excellence in International Corporate Volunteerism. Today, more than 30 major companies send employees into underserved communities to build capability and capacity through skills-based volunteerism. In 2012, the U.S. Center for Citizen Diplomacy (USCCD) became part of CDS, and with their expanded mission, the organization adopted a new name in 2013, PYXERA Global. Today, PYXERA Global takes pride in the solutions that have inspired, enriched, and endured for a quarter century in more than 90 countries. They continue to facilitate groundbreaking partnerships between the public, private, and social sectors in dozens of countries, reinventing international development through purposeful global engagement to address the world's most pressing challenges. Mr. Speaker, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in celebrating the 25th anniversary of PYXERA Global and its work enriching lives and livelihoods inclusively and sustainably.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to salute the long and distinguished career of Marjorie Ann Browne, a native Washingtonian and servant of Congress in the area of foreign affairs. On October 10, 2015, Ms. Browne will retire after a remarkable 55 years of faithful service to the legislative branch as an international relations specialist in the Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division of the Congressional Research Service (CRS). Marjorie Browne graduated from the University of Rochester in 1960 with a B.A. in history. After working for a few summers as a typist at the State Department, Marjorie joined the Library of Congress on October 10, 1960, in the office of the deputy director of the Legislative Reference Service (LRS), as CRS was known prior to 1970. In 1962, she was promoted to a reference assistant and moved to the Foreign Affairs Division of LRS. After working closely with analysts who specialized in international organizations and international law, Marjorie was converted to an analyst in 1971. She became increasingly involved in multiple issues related to the United Nations. Ms. Browne has served as a specialist on the United Nations and international organizations for Congress, producing numerous reports, committee prints, and individualized responses to congressional inquiries for several decades. Over the years, she has mentored scores of colleagues and has always sought to assist others in their work. Highlights of Marjorie Browne's long career include her attendance intermittently from 1973 to 1982 at meetings of the U.N. Conference on the Law of the Sea in New York and her attendance in the 1980s at the National War College in Ft. McNair, D.C. More recently, during a congressional visit to the United Nations, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon recognized her service during his remarks to the visiting delegation. For a long stretch of her career at CRS, Ms. Browne worked actively in the Congressional Research Employees Association (CREA), including during the time period when CRS staff moved from the Jefferson Building to the then-new Madison Building in 1980, and on CREA's health and safety committee. In 2010, the Library of Congress honored Marjorie for 50 years of service. Marjorie Browne leaves behind multiple legacies: distinguished public service over half a century, an indefatigable commitment to fulfilling the mission of CRS and the work of Congress, and an extraordinary career that has served as a role model for many. Mr. Speaker, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in expressing our deepest gratitude and appreciation to Marjorie Ann Browne on the occasion of her retirement for 55 years of service to Congress and our nation.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce a bill similar to a bill I have introduced in four previous Congresses, the Universal Prekindergarten and Early Childhood Education Act of 2015 (Universal Pre-K), to begin the process of providing universal prekindergarten education in public and public charter schools in states that have or plan to phase in or are phasing in prekindergarten education for three- and four-year-old children. The Obama administration and the District of Columbia have made considerable strides since I first introduced this bill, but today's bill is still needed to fill a hole in the ``No Child Left Behind Act,'' which addresses elementary and secondary education but ignores the prekindergarten years, the most critical years for children's brain development. My bill also seeks a breakthrough in public education by providing the initial funding for states to encourage local school districts to add prekindergarten for children at three or four years of age, as kindergarten programs were for five-year-olds, which are now routinely available in public schools. The bill would eliminate some of the major shortcomings of unevenly available ``day care'' and, importantly, would take advantage of the safe facilities required in public schools. Unless early education becomes a necessary part of a child's education, it almost surely will continue to be unavailable to the majority of families with children. My bill provides federal funds to states, which must be matched by at least 20 percent of state funds, to establish or expand universal, voluntary prekindergarten in public and public charter schools for three- and four-year-olds, regardless of income. The classes, which would be full-day and run throughout the entire school year, must be taught by teachers who possess equivalent or similar qualifications to those in other grades in the school. The funds would supplement, not supplant, other federal funds for early childhood education. The unique money-saving aspect of my bill is that it uses the existing public school infrastructure and trained teachers to make early childhood education available to all, and save billions of dollars in its implementation. The success of Head Start and other prekindergarten programs, combined with new scientific evidence concerning the importance of brain development in early childhood, virtually mandate the expansion of early childhood education to all children today. However, early learning programs have been available only to the affluent, who can afford them, and to low-income families in programs such as Head Start, which would be unaffected by my bill. My bill provides a practical way to gradually move to universal, public preschool education for the majority of families The goal of the bill is to afford the benefits of early childhood education to the great majority of the American working poor, lower-middle-class and middle-class families, most of whom have been left out of this essential education for their children. We cannot afford to continue to allow the most fertile years for childhood development to pass, only to later wonder why Johnny can't read. The bill responds both to the great needs of parents who seek early childhood education, as well as to today's brain science, which shows that a child's brain development begins much earlier than had been previously understood. Considering the staggering cost of day care, the inaccessibility of early childhood education, and the opportunity that early education offers to improve a child's chances of success, schooling for three- and four-year-olds is overdue. The absence of viable options for working families demands our immediate attention. My bill reflects what jurisdictions throughout the nation increasingly are trying to accomplish. The District of Columbia, for example, has achieved an extensive integration of early childhood education as part of a larger effort to improve the D.C. public schools. A recent report highlighted the economic benefits of early childhood education, emphasizing its role in expanding job opportunities and in decreasing the amount of money spent on programs to address teen pregnancy, crime, and the like. I strongly urge my colleagues to support the legislation.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, today, I come to the House floor to stand up for women's health. Republicans are using a heavily edited, agenda-driven series of videos that falsely portray Planned Parenthood's participation in tissue donation programs that support lifesaving scientific research. These outrageous and false claims about Planned Parenthood have been discredited. Edited and distorted video should not undermine the incredible work that Planned Parenthood does across this country in providing critical health care to millions of women. This bill to defund Planned Parenthood would not defund abortion. Only three percent of all health services provided by Planned Parenthood are abortion services, and these services already cannot be paid for with federal funding. What this bill would defund is basic health services for millions of women. Planned Parenthood provides family planning counseling and contraception to 2.1 million patients, 400,000 lifesaving screenings for cervical cancer, nearly 500,000 breast exams, and nearly 4.5 million tests and treatments for sexually transmitted infections, including HIV. Despite news this week that the number of uninsured Americans decreased by 8.8 million last year thanks to the Affordable Care Act, 33 million Americans still have no health insurance. Perhaps hardest hit by this defunding effort will be the women who live in one of the 20 states that have declined the Medicaid expansion provided by the Affordable Care Act and who rely on Planned Parenthood for lifesaving health care. Defunding Planned Parenthood would also be devastating for low-income communities, women of color, and young people. It would unravel our nation's reproductive health safety net. Planned Parenthood health centers comprise 10% of all publicly funded family planning centers, and serve 36% of all clients who obtain care from the nation's network of family planning providers. The view of some Republicans that federal funding could simply be redistributed to other health care centers and providers ignores where Planned Parenthood health centers are located. They are not typically on Main Street, but rather in areas and neighborhoods where they are most needed. For example, a new Planned Parenthood center currently under construction here in D.C. is located in a underserved area in Ward 5 whose population greatly needs access to the health services that Planned Parenthood provides. Unfortunately, we in the District of Columbia know all too well this type of assault on women's reproductive health and Planned Parenthood. Whenever Republicans have controlled the House, they have imposed a devastating rider on the District that prevents us from spending our locally raised taxes on abortion services for low-income women, singling us out as the only jurisdiction in the country that cannot spend its local tax dollars for such purposes. We were successful in getting that rider removed from the Senate's fiscal year 2016 D.C. Appropriations bill, and we will continue to fight to have the rider removed from any final spending bill. I urge my colleagues to vote no on this hyper-partisan bill, which would devastate women's access to health services, most drastically in low-income and minority communities.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce the Congress Leads by Example Act of 2015, to subject Congress and the rest of the legislative branch to the federal whistleblower and antidiscrimination laws that now protect employees in the private sector and the executive branch. Congress should abide by the laws it imposes on the American people, American businesses, and others. Congress made that promise when it passed the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (CAA). The CAA was an important first step in making the legislative branch accountable for its employment practices, but it did not finish the job. The CAA did bring the legislative branch under 13 major civil rights, labor and workplace safety and health laws, but it exempted the legislative branch from important notice and training provisions, and altogether omitted important substantive and administrative protections. The Congress Leads by Example Act of 2015 is a necessary follow-up bill to our 2010 investigation concerning staff complaints of conditions at the Capitol Visitor Center (CVC) and to the ongoing recommendations from the Office of Compliance (OOC), which found a gap in OOC's authority to enforce the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSHA) provisions against the legislative branch. In the 111th Congress, as chair of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management, I held a hearing examining claims by OOC, which was created by the CAA, of an estimated 6,300 safety hazards in the U.S. Capitol complex, as well as complaints by CVC tour guides that they were compelled to work in uniforms that were inappropriate for outdoor work in the summer and winter, and that there were limits placed on their water consumption. Our hearing demonstrated that many of the serious safety hazards in the Capitol complex had been resolved, and the Architect of the Capitol testified and offered evidence that it was continuing to correct the outstanding hazards with due speed. Eventually, the formation of a union with AFSCME Local 658 by CVC tour guides, aided by our hearings, helped speed up specific improvements in uniform and water consumption practices and policies. However, in its annual report for fiscal year 2014, OOC identified additional provisions of federal workplace laws and standards that should be applicable to the legislative branch. OOC's recommendations include laws that grant the OOC General Counsel subpoena power, provide whistleblowers with protection from retaliation, and require the maintenance of employment records. The OOC report presents the successes and shortcomings of the CAA by tracking the trends in legislative branch employee complaints and workplace safety hazards in fiscal year 2014. This bill takes into account the OOC report, and seeks to both apply the standard of fairness to employees in the legislative branch that Congress requires for other employees and to provide a safer work environment for Congress, Capitol Hill employees, and visitors by bringing the legislative branch in line with the legal requirements of private sector employers and the executive branch. Legislative branch employees have no way to report misuse of federal funds and other violations without fear of retaliation. This bill provides general whistleblower protections, and makes applicable additional OSHA provisions to the legislative branch, including providing subpoena authority to OOC to conduct inspections and investigations into OSHA violations, and requiring the posting of notices in workplaces detailing employee rights to a safe workplace under OSHA. This bill also furthers the CAA's mission to prevent discrimination in legislative branch offices by prohibiting the legislative branch from making adverse employment decisions on the basis of an employee's wage garnishment or involvement in bankruptcy proceedings pursuant to the Consumer Credit Protection Act (CCPA) and Chapter 11 of the bankruptcy code. This bill requires legislative branch employers to provide their employees with notice of their rights and remedies under the CAA anti-discrimination provisions through the placement of signage in offices highlighting relevant anti-discrimination laws, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. This bill also requires legislative branch offices to provide training to employees about their CAA rights and remedies. Adding the CCPA and bankruptcy provisions will deter economic discrimination, while the notice and training provisions will empower legislative branch employees with full knowledge of their rights. Finally, this bill bolsters the CAA's recordkeeping requirements. It extends to the legislative branch the obligation to maintain accurate records of safety information and employee injuries, as otherwise required by OSHA, as well as employee records necessary to administer anti-discrimination laws. The enhanced recordkeeping requirements will facilitate better enforcement of laws. By passing this bill, Congress will help restore the trust of the public in this institution by redoubling our efforts to exercise leadership by example. I urge bipartisan support for this important measure.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce the Respect for Native Americans in Professional Sports Act of 2015, a bill that would prohibit professional sports leagues that promote or allow a member club or franchise connected with that league to promote the use of the term ``Redskins'' from receiving an exemption from federal antitrust laws. The name has already been found to be disparaging by the United States Patent and Trademark Office in connection with its use by the National Football League's (NFL) Washington football team. On June 18, 2014, the United States Patent and Trademark Office, in a landmark decision (Blackhorse v. Pro Football, Inc.), found the name used by the Washington football team to be disparaging to Native Americans and not deserving of trademark protection, and canceled federal trademark protection for the ``Redskins'' name. This decision was most recently affirmed by a federal district court in July 2015. The NFL is the nation's largest sports league, generating almost $10 billion annually. Under current federal law, the NFL is able to negotiate broadcast rights for the entire league instead of separately for each individual team without running afoul of federal antitrust laws. This exemption is a great benefit for smaller market teams, which would otherwise be unable to convince major networks to pay for or broadcast those games nationally and would significantly reduce revenue for these teams. My bill would deny this benefit to the NFL, and any professional sports league that uses the slur ``redskins'' as a team name or a promotional tool. Federal antitrust laws should no longer offer substantial benefits to multibillion dollar leagues that profit from a name that has been officially found to be a racial slur, and is degrading to many Americans. This bill would revoke all federal antitrust exemptions for professional sports leagues that choose to continue to use the offensive and derogatory term ``Redskins.'' Over 300 tribes and two million Native Americans, as well as religious and human rights organizations, have called on NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and Daniel Snyder, the Washington football team owner, to change the team's name because it is an insult to indigenous people. In addition, several media outlets around the country no longer print or use the term ``Redskins'' when referring to the Washington football team because the term is offensive. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. I thank my good friend for yielding to me on this important subject for our country today and in the foreseeable future. Mr. Speaker, while many Republicans have been trying to find a way, just this very day, not to have a vote on the Iran agreement, I have been searching for a way to represent my 650,000 constituents by voting on any version offered. Five nations, whose systems differ from one another in every conceivable way, and the United Nations have approved this deal, but the Republicans are torn on whether to even vote on the deal at all. No wonder. Left with no credible argument against the deal, itself, Republicans have changed the subject, even knowing that Iran is close to getting the bomb as I speak and risking the loss of U.S. international credibility. Instead, Republicans cite side agreements. However, they have all of the information available to any nation on all nuclear agreements, or they cite issues not under negotiation at all, like Iran's role in the Middle East. Here is what my constituents cite, Mr. Speaker: $12,000 in Federal taxes per resident--the most per capita in the United States--but no vote on the Iran deal or on anything else on this House floor. With statehood, D.C. would vote ``yes'' and be counted just as Uncle Sam counts our taxes every single year.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise to ask the House of Representatives to join me in honoring Alfred W. Blumrosen, Thomas A. Cowan Professor of Law Emeritus, Rutgers School of Law Law School, who died this month, for his pioneering work in the development of the nation's equal opportunity laws and for his frontier role in the shaping of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which celebrated its 50th year of operation on July 2, 2015. The nation is fortunate that Professor Blumrosen's dedication to equal rights led him to choose a brand new field of law, equal employment law, to which to devote his brilliant mind. When Professor Blumrosen was born, in 1928, there were no laws requiring equal treatment in the United States. His legacy is work that was instrumental in laying the groundwork for modern anti-discrimination law. Professor Blumrosen inspired generations of law students at Rutgers School of Law for almost 50 years. As a public intellectual, his steady stream of publications in discrimination and labor law, were matched by his work on the ground helping to put new anti-discrimination laws in action. Blumrosen's work in both these worlds was cited just last month in a dissent in a housing discrimination case, Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project, by Justice Clarence Thomas, who gave Professor Blumrosen credit for the development of disparate-impact theory, the most powerful tool used in equal opportunity legal work. ``Alfred Blumrosen, one of the principal creators of disparate-impact liability at EEOC, rejected what he described as a ``defeatist view of Title VII'' that saw the statute as a ``compromise'' with a limited scope. A. Blumrosen, Black Employment and the Law 57-58 (1971). Blumrosen ``felt that most of the problems confronting the EEOC could be solved by creative interpretation of Title VII which would be upheld by the courts, partly out of deference to the administrators. . . . EEOC's guidelines from those years are a case study in Blumrosen's `creative interpretation.' Although EEOC lacked substantive rulemaking authority it repeatedly issued guidelines on the subject of disparate impact.'' . . . EEOC's strategy paid off. The Court embraced EEOC's theory of disparate impact, concluding that the agency's position was ``entitled to great deference.'' See Griggs 401 U.S., at 433-434. Professor Blumrosen began his leadership in developing anti- discrimination law and the EEOC itself as soon as Title VII, the employment equal rights section of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, was enacted. He was the EEOC's first chief of conciliations, where early Title VII law was often made by securing negotiated agreements with employers. He was director of federal-state relations, guiding state and local anti-discrimination agencies in applying this burgeoning new area of law. Although Blumrosen's work in anti-discrimination law was particularly prominent at the EEOC, his work with other agencies was also important, particularly with the Office of Federal Contract Compliance, including his research with that agency to show that so- called reverse discrimination was uncommon in affirmative action cases. He served as special attorney in the Civil Rights Division of U.S. Department of Justice. Blumrosen was always generous in lending his brilliant mind to develop equal employment law--as counsel to Kaye, Scholer, Fierman, Hays and Handler, a New York law firm, and as counsel to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, among others. Mr. Speaker, when I chaired the EEOC, Professor Blumrosen was a principal advisor on much of my most important work. He was particularly instrumental in helping us develop our guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures as well as our affirmative action guidelines to motivate employers to correct discriminatory patterns before they led to liability. Al was on the front lines with me in the total reorganization of EEOC operations nationwide to eliminate its huge backlog while significantly increasing remedies for complainants using negotiated agreements. Notwithstanding his groundbreaking law development work in the public sector, Professor Blumrosen remained a prolific scholar, whose efforts in the field often informed his scholarship. For his essay ``Six Conditions for Meaningful Self-Regulation'', he received the Ross Prize from the American Bar Association. I was fortunate to write the introduction to one of his books, coauthored by his late wife, the late Ruth Gerber Blumrosen, Slave Nation: How Slavery United the Colonies and Sparked the American Revolution. Ruth Blumrosen, a professor of business and an adjunct professor of law at Rutgers, often collaborated with her husband. Together, they were a formidable team of scholars. Not surprisingly, their work in the law also infected their two sons, Steven and Alexander, who are both attorneys and legal scholars. Mr. Speaker, Alfred Blumrosen spent his professional life as a leader on the development of equal opportunity law and in bringing equality to the workplace. It is rare that a lawyer or a professor has been able to be so influential simultaneously in law development and in implementation of one of the nation's most important laws. Alfred Blumrosen was fortunate to live to see the 50th anniversary of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 50th anniversary of the opening of the EEOC itself just this past July 2. A fair share of both of these commemorations belongs to Professor Blumrosen. Mr. Speaker, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in honoring Alfred K. Blumrosen for a lifetime of productive trailblazing work that was instrumental in the creation of equal opportunity law, in the invention of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and in sparking scholarship in a new field of American law.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce the Open and Transparent Smithsonian Act of 2015 to further ensure that the Smithsonian Institution is accountable to the public for the taxpayer funds it receives. The bill provides that, for the purposes of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and the Privacy Act, the Smithsonian should be considered a federal agency. This bill is necessary because there is no reason why the Smithsonian should not be accountable to the public for the annual federal appropriations it receives, which account for 70 percent of its budget. Although the Smithsonian was created by Congress as a federal trust, it receives the great majority of its funding from the federal government, much like federal agencies, and has always been treated as a federal agency except for FOIA and other open government laws. In the 1990s, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit found under the current act that the Smithsonian is not a federal agency for purposes of FOIA and the Privacy Act. The Smithsonian's website states that it is ``not an Executive Branch agency, and FOIA does not apply to the Smithsonian.'' This bill would amend FOIA and the Privacy Act to apply to the Smithsonian, which would require the institution to make administrative staff manuals, interpretations of law or regulations, final opinions, policies, and other records available to the public. The bill would also require the Smithsonian's Board of Regents and other boards to hold meetings to the public. The current absence of transparency at the Smithsonian should be of concern, particularly in light of its recent history of secrecy and corruption. In 2007, an independent review found that the Smithsonian Board of Regents had violated many principles of good management Regents during the tenure of Lawrence Small as Secretary of the Smithsonian. The report indicated that the Board had failed to provide the needed oversight, had over-compensated the Secretary, and had allowed the creation of an ``insular culture.'' The report further found that the Smithsonian's deputy secretary and chief operating officer, Sheila Burke, was frequently absent from her duties because of outside activities, including service on corporate boards, for which she earned more than $1.2 million over six years. Importantly, the report indicated that Smithsonian leaders took great measures to keep secret these missteps and mismanagement. While the Smithsonian has since had new leaders, who are moving away from the mistakes of the past, Congress has not ensured that the Smithsonian is a transparent entity, which should not depend on who is in charge. An entity supported primarily by federal funds must be accountable to the American people. I urge my colleagues to support this measure.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise to ask the House of Representatives to join me in remembering and honoring Warren K. Ashe, Ph.D., who passed away at the age of 85 this week after a lifetime of demonstrating what an African American can achieve, despite being denied the opportunities that were routinely available to other Americans. For purposes of disclosure, Dr. Ashe was my cousin and I am proud of the relationship. Although born in Halifax, North Carolina, Dr. Ashe was educated in the District of Columbia public schools, including the famed Dunbar High School, in those days of segregation, the college preparatory high school in the nation's capital for Black students. Dr. Ashe served in the U.S. Marine Corps during the Korean War and was honorably discharged as a sergeant. Dr. Ashe's achievements were outstanding by any measure. He received his Bachelor of Sciences degree, as well as his M.A. and Ph.D. in microbiology from Howard University, and his M.A. in Religious Studies. He rose from grade GS-1 medical biology technician at the National Institute of Health to become the first African American to be a senior research scientist at the National Institute for Dental Research, a research microbiologist in the Laboratory of Oral Microbiology, and a health scientist administrator in the Soft Tissue Stomatology Program. While at NIH, Dr. Ashe also served as equal opportunity officer. His selfless dedication to equality for others led him to take considerable risks to ensure that he did not become a token African American. As a result of Dr. Ashe's work in equal opportunity, the employment of Blacks at NIH and their promotion to scientific and administrative leadership increased significantly. In 1971, Dr. Ashe was appointed the first dean for research at Howard University. His accomplishments at Howard were remarkable: leadership in the establishment of the first clinical research center in the world with NIH funding at Howard University and establishment of the National Human Genome Center at Howard that helped in the sequencing of human genomes to tackle diseases that disproportionately affect the African diaspora. Dr. Ashe's professional accomplishments were matched by his dedication in preparing high school students for the health sciences, his activities as a member of the most distinguished professional organizations in his field, and his devotion, in particular, to his church, Turner Memorial AME, where he was a steward until his passing. Mr. Speaker, as an African American born in 1929, when segregation nationwide barred the doors to success, Dr. Ashe could hardly have dreamed of achieving these accomplishments. Dr. Ashe did more than dream--he worked until he moved 20th century discrimination out of his way. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues in the House of Representatives to join me in honoring the life and work of Warren K. Ashe, Ph.D. and in sending condolences to his wife, Grace and to Dr. Ashe's entire family.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, work on the Nation's bridges, highways, and transit has all but stopped because of 34 patch extensions that keep everything--except patchwork--on hold. Today, the House is rushing out of town early, leaving a new 3-month patch. This time, though, the Republican House is scrambling out of the Capitol, literally, to get away from the Republican Senate, which had been trying for a 6-year bill. The Republican House's ``my way or the highway'' was addressed to the Republican Senate, and the public be damned--and it worked. The Republican Senate has given up on the Nation's infrastructure, too. The Republican Senate announced this morning that it will accept the House's 3-month patch. Six months of control of the House and Senate by the Republicans has made Congress even more dysfunctional. The new House 3-month patch has nothing to do with roads and bridges. Who knows what will get done this time? House Republicans see political goals at the end of their 3-month road, when the must-pass highway bill could serve their purposes, such as the usual, if dangerous, dispute over an extension of the debt ceiling. Yet, Republican and Democratic States alike keep meeting their obligations under the State-Federal partnership. Eighteen States and the District of Columbia have raised their gas user fees, going as high as 10-cent increases in Iowa and in Wyoming; but the roads, bridges, and transit remain stalled because the Federal partner keeps dropping out. More than half of the funds for a nationwide system that connects our States with one another comes from the Federal trust fund. During the 34 patch delays, not a lick of work on a final bill has been done except the Senate's current try at a 6-year bill. There have been no serious talks here on alternatives to the gas user fee, although it long ago was swallowed by today's hard-won fuel efficiency that leaves the transit trust fund thirsty for a refill after a year and a half or so. Democrats, however, have offered four alternatives to the current user fee, which is the legacy of the Eisenhower years. House Republicans have offered none. Congress has refused to raise the Federal user fee since 1992, adding to the woes of the 1950's method we use to pay for our roads. The Republican House runs out of town today to hide from the Republican Senate. As they run home, I can only hope they run into the arms of their own angry constituents on their own rickety roads. House Republicans can run, but they can't hide from the broken down bridges, roads, and transit they will use back home.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, 2 weeks ago, 65 Republicans joined 54 Democrats in voting ``no'' on the extension of the highway bill to register their disgust with 33 extensions while the Republican Congress then did zero work on a long-term bill. There are now four long-term Democratic bills and one bipartisan bill. However, today's 34th patchwork extension cannot be applied to even start on the Nation's backlog without assurance of funds to complete construction. Yet House Republicans have now fled for an early vacation. Eighteen States and the District of Columbia have passed State user gas fee laws without retaliation by the voters, but the federal share is more than half of the funds needed just to get started. The only way to stop the self-inflicted deterioration of our once magnificent infrastructure is to man up and pass a long-term bill.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to honor the Citi Open Tennis Tournament, taking place August 1-9, 2015, in Rock Creek Park, and to recognize these dates as ``Tennis Week'' in the District of Columbia. All are invited to attend the 47th installment of this Washington tennis tradition, a cultural, economic, and community staple in the region. The Washington tennis tournament, now known as the Citi Open Tennis Tournament, was founded in 1969 by tennis legend and Hall of Famer Donald Dell, along with business partner John Harris, and with the support of Arthur Ashe. Ashe declared he would participate in the inaugural tournament under two conditions: the tournament would take place in a naturally integrated neighborhood, and it would be played on public land where all people could come together, enjoy the sport, and share the experience. Today, the tournament remains in its original location on 16th & Kennedy Streets NW, in Rock Creek Park. In 1972, Donald Dell gave the tournament charter to the Washington Tennis & Education Foundation (then called the Washington Area Tennis Patrons Foundation), a nonprofit organization supporting local education causes for children. The Citi Open Tennis Tournament draws the best players in the world, making D.C. a global tennis destination. The tournament is also seen on television in 182 countries. A 2014 economic impact study found that the estimated total gross impact of the Citi Open on the regional economy is more than $26 million. The tournament is the only Association of Tennis Professionals 500 level event in the United States, and it is one of only four professional tennis tournaments combining men's and women's events. Mr. Speaker, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in recognizing ``Tennis Week in the District of Columbia'' for the Citi Open Tennis Tournament, celebrated August 1-9, as well as the Washington Tennis & Education Foundation for their outstanding efforts to run a world-class sporting event and contributions to D.C. youth.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I certainly appreciate my good friend from Georgia for yielding to me to speak on this Secret Service reform bill and on the work of the chairman of the committee, Mr. Goodlatte from Virginia, on this bill. Our Oversight and Government Reform Committee held several hearings on Secret Service reform, and much of the content, I am pleased to say, is reflected in H.R. 1656. There, of course, have been an increasing number of fence jumpers in recent years, but it took a stunning penetration to the very interior of the White House by Omar Gonzalez last year to make it clear that the reform of the Secret Service was urgent. At hearings, we learned that there had never been--not once--a top- to-bottom review of the Secret Service in its more than 100 years of existence. This was, clearly, urgently needed; so Secretary Jeh Johnson appointed the first independent review panel. What it found was, across the board, weakness and flaws in the United States Secret Service. Although its mission has expanded greatly over the years, today, the Secret Service simply does not reflect the post-9/11 experience, much less that of today's ISIL and domestic terrorism. The fence jumpers had already shown that the Secret Service could not be expected to meet its zero failure mission. Today's bill shows that Congress takes the reform of the Secret Service very seriously. The funding, which is usually missing from such reform these days, is authorized, and the bill adopts much of the independent review's recommendations: Instead of blaming overworked uniformed Secret Service and agents who have been working 6 and 7 days a week for 12 hours a day because of no additional personnel, the bill authorizes the addition of 80 agents and 200 Uniformed Division personnel, which is virtually what the independent review panel recommended; The bill increases the number of hours of training to meet the Secret Service's expanded mission; It faces the need to make greater use of technology, and it even takes note of a post-fence jumper phenomenon, the unmanned drones that have become a new form of fence jumping.

Ms. NORTON. I appreciate that. Mr. Speaker, the space in front of the White House is a First Amendment park. I was invited down to a commemoration by citizens, who come every Monday to urge the reform of our gun laws. To respond to fence jumping, some had talked of making it difficult for the public to come to that space in front of Pennsylvania Avenue. At hearings, I was assured that that was not necessary; and this bill backs that up. Spikes have been added for the fence jumpers, making it difficult to jump over, but Mr. Speaker, I was pleased to see today that the public continues to use Pennsylvania Avenue as the First Amendment space it has always been.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, today, as we approach July 25, and the 6th annual National Dance Day, I rise to reintroduce the Lifelong Improvements in Food and Exercise (LIFE) Act, authorizing a national initiative to attack a major health problem in the United States that cannot be remedied through the health care system alone. Increasing rates of overweight and obesity are now found in Americans of every age, race, and major demographic group, and threaten the health of Americans like no other single disease or condition. In fact, the key to eliminating many of the most serious health conditions is not only to reduce overweight and obesity but also to encourage exercise of all kinds. On National Dance Day across the nation, Americans will be dancing, one of the most enjoyable and popular forms of exercise. This bill would provide $25 million to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for a coordinated national effort to reverse increasingly sedentary lifestyles and diets that are high in fat and sugar. We see rising consciousness of the need to get moving, from the First Lady's ``Let's Move'' campaign for children and the television shows ``So You Think You Can Dance,'' ``The Biggest Loser,'' and ``Extreme Weight Loss''. Yet, the United States continues to have startling rates of obesity among adults and children. In 2010, estimates from the CDC National Center for Health Statistics showed that since 1980, the percentage of children who are overweight has more than doubled, and the percentage of adolescents who are overweight has tripled. Today, the 13 million overweight children have an 80 percent chance of being overweight adults, with the health conditions that follow, such as high blood pressure, heart disease, and cancer. The CDC reports that Type 2 diabetes, considered an adult disease, is now widespread in children. The rising cost of the health care system, including insurance premiums, reflects the epidemic. The consequences for kids will follow them throughout their lives if we do not act quickly and decisively. If we are serious about controlling health care costs, we must start where the most serious health conditions begin: overweight and obesity. This bill seeks to provide the first national strategy to combat the epidemic by directing the CDC to do three things: train health professionals to recognize the signs of obesity early and to educate people concerning healthy lifestyles, such as proper nutrition and regular exercise; conduct public education campaigns about how to recognize and address overweight and obesity; and develop intervention strategies to be used in everyday life, such as in the workplace and in community settings. This legislation is the minimum necessary to address our most important health crisis. Today, chronic diseases, many of which are caused or exacerbated by overweight and obesity, account for 70 percent of all deaths in the U.S., and 60 percent of U.S. medical care costs. According to the Surgeon General's Call to Action to Prevent and Decrease Overweight and Obesity, the cost of obesity in the U.S. was more than $117 billion in 2000. The CDC has highlighted a study that estimates the annual cost to be $147 billion. It is estimated that between 300,000 and 400,000 deaths per year are related to obesity. A focused national health initiative would provide guidance to the states to engage in similar programs, as mayors of some cities have done. National focus could lead to full participation in high school physical education classes, participation in which has dropped from 42 percent in 1991 to 33 percent in 2005. Changes in nutrition are equally critical because 60 percent of young people consume too much fat, a factor in the doubling of the percentage of overweight youth. Data show an increase in unhealthy eating habits for adults and no change in physical activity. According to a recent study conducted by the American College of Sports Medicine, the District of Columbia is the fittest city in the United States, and yet, obesity continues to be a severe problem even here. Most of the obesity epidemic is exercise-food-related. One-fifth of the District of Columbia is considered to be obese, and if the number is this high in the nation's capital, one shudders to think how high it is for other areas of the nation. We need to act now. I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this important legislation to mobilize the country now, before entirely preventable health conditions, which often begin in childhood, overwhelm the nation's health care system.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in honoring Maria Harrison, an outstanding public servant who retired after over 41 years of dedicated service to the federal government. On Monday, June 18, 1973, Maria Harrison began her career in government with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). She was one of many who benefited from Mayor Marion Barry's jobs program he so famously created. On January 3, 2015 Maria retired from the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) after 41 years and 6 months of service to our country as a federal employee. Except for 10 months at the Small Business Administration, her career was spent in the transportation field. Her exact sequence of service follows: Department of Transportation/FAA 06/18/1973-07/30/1977. Small Business Administration 07/31/1977-05/20/1978. Department of Transportation/Office of the Secretary (OST) 05/21/ 1978-04/03/1982. Department of Transportation/MARAD (Maritime) 04/04/1982-12/24/1983. Department of Transportation/FAA 12/25/1983-06/04/1988. Department of Transportation/Federal Railroad Administration 6/05/ 1988-11/03/2001. Department of Transportation/OST 11/04/2001-Present. Maria retired from the Office of Governmental Affairs at USDOT where she has been of assistance to my office and constituents numerous times. I can say with certainty that every office in the U.S. Senate and countless offices in the U.S. House of Representatives have benefited directly from her good work. As much as her colleagues at USDOT will miss her, she has earned the right to spend more time with her friends and family, especially her granddaughter whose pictures adorn the desk of her office. Maria has also earned the deepest gratitude from those of us in the U.S. Congress. Above all else she has earned the thanks of the country she has so unselfishly served for over 41 years. Thank you, Ms. Harrison. Mr. Speaker, I ask the House to join me in honoring Maria Harrison for her more than four decades of service to the federal government in the transportation field.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce a bill to modernize the Smithsonian Institution and to enhance its governance and fundraising capabilities, in keeping with the recommendations of a number of experts, including the Smithsonian Independent Review Committee, chaired by former U.S. Comptroller General Charles Bowsher. This bill, the Smithsonian Modernization Act of 2015, makes changes to the Smithsonian's governance structure by expanding and changing the current 17-member composition of its Board of Regents, which includes public officials--six Members of Congress, the Vice President of the United States, and the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court--to 21 members, comprised solely of private citizens. This change will strengthen both the Smithsonian's governance and fundraising capacity, and it would be the first significant change in this old and revered institution since it was established in 1846. This bill preserves and strengthens the traditional role of the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate in selecting Board members while eliminating the role of the Board in selecting private citizens for the Board. The Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate will each send 12 recommendations to the President of the United States, who will select the 21 members of the Board from these recommendations. The Smithsonian Institution is an irreplaceable cultural, scientific, historical, educational and artistic complex without any public or private counterpart in the world. Since its founding, the Smithsonian has developed an extraordinary array of world-class museums, galleries, educational showplaces and unique research centers, including 19 museums and galleries, nine research facilities, the National Zoo, and the forthcoming National Museum of African American History and Culture, which is now under construction. The Smithsonian has grown with private funding, donations from cultural foundations, and contemporary artists, but most of its funding continues to come from federal appropriations. Despite receiving 70 percent of its funding from the federal government, the Smithsonian has long had serious funding, infrastructure, and other needs. Today, the Smithsonian is embarking on a seven-year, $1.5 billion fundraising effort, but its current board members who hold public office are severely limited in participating, as is usually expected of board members. Under the Smithsonian's fundraising plan, the 19 museums and research institutions are working together as part of a unified campaign to raise the necessary funds. With this goal of $1.5 billion, it is more important now than ever that the Smithsonian's ability to raise money be modernized. Congress must help the Smithsonian strengthen its ability to build resources beyond what taxpayers are able to provide. The most important step Congress could take today is to rescue the Smithsonian from its 19th-century governance structure, which keeps it from accessing needed and available private resources and limits close and critical oversight. The Smithsonian Modernization Act provides a governance structure befitting the Smithsonian's unique complexity. The existing structure may have fit the Smithsonian over 170 years ago, but today the structure has proven to be a relic that does a disservice to the Smithsonian, the federal government, and the public. The present governance structure places immense responsibility to raise money on dedicated but overextended Members of the House and Senate, the Vice President of the United States and the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court. These federal officials comprise almost half of the Smithsonian Board of Regents, and must perform their fiduciary duties as board members while giving first priority to their sworn responsibilities as important federal officials. In 2007, an independent review committee found that the Board had violated principles of good management during the tenure of former Secretary of the Smithsonian Lawrence Small by allowing him to create an ``insular culture.'' The committee's report indicated that the Board had failed to provide the needed oversight and had overcompensated Mr. Small. The report also found that Sheila P. Burke, the Smithsonian's then-deputy secretary and chief operating officer, had frequent absences from her duties because of outside activities, including service on corporate boards, for which she personally earned more than $1.2 million over six years. Further, the Smithsonian's then-business ventures chief, Gary Beer, was dismissed for financial indiscretions. This crisis, caused by unprecedented controversies and irresponsible risks, put into sharp focus the need for new revenue streams and for a modern governance structure. The first full-blown scandal in the Smithsonian's history, replete with embarrassing media coverage, damaged its reputation and perhaps the confidence of potential contributors. The poor judgment and overreaching of Smithsonian personnel during that period demonstrate the need for new and concentrated oversight. The current Board, of course, has taken some important action on its own. After irregularities were uncovered by the media, the Board responded to the controversies by creating a governance committee, chaired by Patty Stonesifer, a Regent and former chief executive officer of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, with a mandate to comprehensively review the policies and practices of the Smithsonian and how the Board conducts its oversight of the institution. The Board also established an Independent Review Committee (IRC), chaired by former U.S. Comptroller General Charles A. Bowsher, to review the issues arising from an Inspector General's report, the Board's response, and related Smithsonian practices. The IRC was forthright in its investigation and recommendations. The IRC stated explicitly that the root cause of the problems at the Smithsonian was an antiquated governance structure, which led to failures in governance and management. According to the IRC, the Board must assume a fiduciary duty that carries a ``major commitment of time and effort, a reputational risk, and potentially, financial liability.'' The IRC further argued that the Smithsonian, with a budget of over $1 billion a year, must have Board members who ``act as true fiduciaries and who have both the time and the experience to assume the responsibilities of setting strategy and providing oversight.'' The IRC cited a lack of clarity in the roles of the Vice President of the United States and Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court on the Board in particular, and said that ``it is not feasible to expect the Chief Justice to devote the hours necessary to serve as a fiduciary agent.'' The same observation could be made of the Members of the House and Senate who serve on the Board. The IRC recommended that the Board increase the level of expertise and the number of members to ensure that the Board has sufficient time and attention to dedicate to the Smithsonian. My bill follows this guidance. The Smithsonian's own governance committee identified several Board weaknesses, concluding that the Board did not receive or demand the reports necessary for competent decision-making, that the staff whom the Board depended upon for oversight inquiries did not have direct access to information, and that the inability of staff to communicate red flags ``crippled'' internal compliance and oversight. Only Congress, with the concurrence of the president, can amend the Smithsonian Charter. The last change to the Board's structure occurred over 30 years ago, but it only increased the number of private citizens on the Board from six to nine. The Smithsonian Board is still a board dominated by highly placed public officials. The number of Regents, however, is not the root problem. My bill expands the Board from 17 to 21 members, but most importantly, it brings the Board into alignment with modern public and private boards by requiring all the Regents to be private citizens. The search for private funds by Smithsonian management was a major cause of the recent controversy. Faced with crippling budget problems, the Regents must be free to give new and unprecedented attention and energy to finding and helping to raise substantially more funds from private sources. The new structure envisioned by this bill will improve oversight and the capacity for fundraising from private sources. Unlike the eight federal officials on the current Board, the nine private citizens on the current Board are entirely free to assist in private fundraising. Most importantly, private citizens have sufficient expertise to serve on the Board, and are able to devote the personal time and attention necessary to fulfill the fiduciary responsibility that comes with serving such a venerable and complex institution. Considering the seriousness of the findings of the Board's own governance committee, as well as of the IRC, the changes prescribed by this bill are nothing short of mandatory. The reform of the fiduciary and governance issues that have brought public criticism to this iconic American institution must begin with the indispensable step of making the Smithsonian's governance consistent with that of similar institutions today. Only congressional attention can reassure the public that the controversies that recently besieged the Smithsonian will not recur. In the face of an unprecedented public controversy and a $1.5 billion fundraising goal, Congress would be remiss if it left the Smithsonian to its own oversight and devices alone. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend, the ranking member, for yielding. Mr. Speaker, the majority has turned virtually its only congressional policy, tax savings, on its head with useless short-term transportation bills and extensions. Their short-term policy on the Nation's highways, bridges, and transit has simply transferred the transportation tax burden to the State taxes of their constituents. Twenty-one States and the District of Columbia have raised their gas user fees--six since July 1--Iowa, Wyoming, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia, Vermont, District of Columbia, South Dakota, Idaho, Georgia, Nebraska, and Vermont. States going in that direction are Michigan, North Carolina, Utah, and Washington State. States also considering user fee increases are Kentucky, Missouri, New Jersey, and South Carolina. That makes almost half the States that Congress has driven to State taxpayers alone, States that have nothing in common except the desire to keep their transportation infrastructure, the key to a growth economy, from completely disintegrating. Meanwhile, the Representatives in Washington have continually failed to pay their part, on the average, about 50 percent of the costs of State infrastructure with Federal dollars, yet the Federal dollars are only a pass-through that goes right back to the States. For 22 years, we have allowed the Federal user fee to remain fixed at 1993 levels, although fuel efficiency long ago made that obsolete. Although American taxpayers have stepped up, they can't do their projects without a Federal long-term bill. In the Nation's capital, for example, the iconic Memorial Bridge, gateway to Arlington Cemetery in the south and, on the north, to the National Mall, is partially closed, leaving thousands of workers unable to take Metro buses to get to work. Even bridges like the H Street bridge here, which needs only repair, is standing in the way of billions of dollars of nontransportation development here and nationwide. So whatever the Congress does in the next authorization bill, two things must be done: We must put in pilots that instruct us, guide us, for a new way to fund transportation infrastructure in light of fuel efficiencies, such as cars like my hybrid Ford C-Max. And, most of all, to be useful at all, we must have a 6-year transportation bill.