Eleanor Norton

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, I want to join the chairwoman, Ms. Corrine Brown, not only in asking the House to pass this bill, but to commend her. The chairwoman discovered this issue and acted on it. She discovered it in Florida, when there were refugees, as it were, from Katrina. She was moved by it. She decided to do, in fact, work on the ground in Florida for these children and others who were caught in Katrina, and she followed up with legislation, and never let up until this very day. And I know she won't let up until the other body sees fit also to pass the bill. So I want to commend her for her discovery of a vital issue that my own committee, which has jurisdiction over FEMA, had not noted with nearly as much attention as the gentlelady from Florida. I want also to note the work of Mark Schreiber, whose work on the commission went far beyond his chairmanship. He took this cause unto his own, pressed it with all that he had, and deserves great credit for making sure that we got to the day when we would pass the bill.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, for the first time in history, the other body has to wait for a new Member to be sworn in today to take up unemployment insurance and break a filibuster. Even in the mildest of turndowns, there has always been bipartisan support for unemployment benefits. Ask the average American: Give us your definition of emergency spending: unemployment benefits paid for in part from employee paychecks or more tax cuts for the wealthy? The question answers itself, for all except my Republican friends in this House. They've gone further and insulted the unemployed by offering as an excuse that benefits keep people from looking for and taking jobs. The Bush recession left one job for every five job- seekers. It's cruel to blame the unemployed for not finding work in the midst of the great recession. It is worst to deny them food to put on the table.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. I'd like to thank Chairwoman Waters for not only today's bill but for her comprehensive bill, the first since 1994; also Chairman Frank for his work, making sure we got to the floor today as well. I chair the subcommittee with primary jurisdiction over FEMA and understand how important the chairwoman's comprehensive bill is. I understand also that Katrina was a wake-up call. As controversial as these maps are, and they have been controversial in my district, the most important thing we do in this bill is the 5-year grace period and appeal period delay. It's the least we can do instead of facing property owners with a new and expensive mandate in the middle of an economic crisis that began in a mortgage crisis with hundreds of people waiting to close on homes, others newly in a flood map zone. This is needed relief and the least we can do before we go home. We've had our separate fights. Let's get this temporary bill done and then get on to comprehensive reform.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce the District of Columbia National Disaster Insurance Protection Act. This bill amends federal law to exempt from federal income taxation catastrophic insurance reserves and the investment income derived from such reserves if held by insurance companies in the District of Columbia. Under current federal law, these funds are subject to federal income taxation, which has led property and casualty insurers to hold billions of dollars in reserves, either directly or indirectly through reinsurance, in foreign jurisdictions, such as the Cayman Islands and Bermuda, where they are not subject to U.S. income taxation. This bill serves important national purposes. This bill will help protect individuals and businesses with property and casualty insurance across the country, as well as U.S. taxpayers. Today, if a catastrophe occurred in the U.S. but foreign insurance companies did not pay the claims, U.S. taxpayers likely would be on the hook for the claims. In fact, after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, the U.S. Government had to establish a federal backstop for losses related to terrorist attacks, the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act, which is still in place today. As the recent financial crisis showed, the U.S. Government has a strong interest in preventing systemic financial risks. Transparency, for example, is a major feature of the pending Wall Street reform bill, but there is little transparency in the catastrophic insurance market, posing a risk to the U.S. economy and taxpayers. Instead, individuals and businesses must rely on small foreign jurisdictions to preserve and protect catastrophic insurance reserves. I chair the subcommittee that has primary jurisdiction over disasters. Since 9/11, we have plugged all of the most obvious holes in U.S. security. There is no reason to leave the funds necessary to recover from disasters offshore. By locating these funds in the nation's capital, the most protected and secure city in the U.S., Congress would be shoring up an existing but overlooked security vulnerability.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts for yielding, but I particularly thank him for his leadership on many issues in our subcommittee, not the least of which is this issue which he has shepherded to the floor so rapidly. And I certainly want to thank Mr. Sarbanes, add my kudos to those he's already heard from the leadership, what he has shown when he was a member of our subcommittee. Mr. Speaker, this bill does nothing more than give us a presumption in favor of teleworking, and I believe that's the most important thing the bill does. You have heard we have been doing something called teleworking for decades, but that was whatever agency chose to move forward, whatever employees chose to participate. I can't imagine what the ranking member is talking about when he says millions of dollars this is going to cost the Federal Government. Mr. Wolf, from his side, essentially rebutted that by getting up and talking about how much money it saved and citing examples. Let me cite an example of something that is almost intuitive. I had occasion to speak to a practitioner, small practitioner, and he was glowing about how his practice has, in fact, developed and expanded. He didn't have to have an office anymore. He has a tiny hole on Tenth Street, and he's got about 15 lawyers working out of their homes. In a real sense, the Federal Government is behind. There is no case to be made that when you allow people to work at home, you somehow are costing the government more money. Perhaps it costs a few dollars in administrative costs, transaction costs to set up the system, but anybody from the private sector hearing a Federal official get up and say, ``Oh, we're going to teleworking and boy is that going to cost us an arm and a leg'' will scratch his head and say, ``What is he talking about? Don't they know this is one of the first and most important things the private sector has done, invested money in doing, precisely to save money?'' They look at the bottom line. That's the conclusion they reached long before today. When I speak of the presumption in favor of telework, notice that an agency has a 20 percent goal every 2 weeks of doing telework. We wouldn't have set that goal if they were already doing it. And the fact that you have to do it gives us a some uniformity across the government, and with the appropriate exceptions allows many, many workers, many, many employees to buy into what has now become essentially a workforce practice everywhere with a workforce as large as ours. The bill, it's very careful. Managers are going to have to be trained. Many are old-school managers. They do not know perhaps as well do I feel instinctively as at home with employees under their supervision who telework. They're going to have to learn how it's done. And importantly, teleworking, as opposed to coming in, does not affect your job performance evaluation. So people are not going to have to think, if I'm in the boss's face for 8 or 9 hours a day, I've got to do better than this mother who is at home and producing as much work as I do. Continuitive operations has been talked about here. Post 9/11, the closest thing we have even had to continuity of operations is the kind of teleworking that goes on anyway in the Federal Government. Everybody in the Federal Government at certain levels does teleworking. They take their work home. Employees have been voting with their feet. Managers have been allowing them to vote with their feet and take the work home. The flexibility, we cannot say enough about the flexibility. We're in an era where fathers and mothers feel responsibility for their children and where, because they are adept at technology, they are able to get as much done and more done. They're doing it at home rather than spending what in this region could easily be an hour or so back and forth each way. Everybody teleworked in the snowstorm. There weren't a lot of people just sitting at home. We are doing it anyway. We are just not doing it systematically. We are doing it episodically. Doing it that way, we are, in fact, wasting money. Let's, in fact, save money by making sure that as many as are capable are doing what they can given the new technology.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker. I rise today to introduce a bill to clarify that the federal government, like private citizens and corporations, must take responsibility for the pollution it produces. This bill will clarify that the federal government has a responsibility to pay fees assessed by local governments for managing polluted stormwater runoff from federal properties. Recently, the Government Accountability Office issued letters to federal agencies in the District of Columbia that instructed them not to pay the District of Columbia's Water and Sewer Authority's, D.C. Water's, Impervious Area Charge. D.C. Water calculates the charges based on the amount of impervious land occupied by the landowner. Impervious surfaces, such as roofs, parking lots, sidewalks and other hardened surfaces are the major contributors to stormwater runoff entering the sewer system and local rivers, lakes and streams, which causes significant amounts of pollutants to enter these waters. D.C. Water's Impervious Area Charge simply is to defray the cost of reducing water pollution caused by stormwater runoff. In fact, D.C. Water's fees are the result of a federal mandate to reduce sewer overflows from excess stormwater and to improve water quality in local waters, such as the Anacostia and Potomac Rivers and the Chesapeake Bay. It is, therefore, unfair, at best, for the federal government to turn around and refuse to pay these fees. Moreover, it is contrary to President Obama's commitment to preserve the Chesapeake Bay and the Anacostia River, as outlined in Executive Order 13508, which I have applauded many times. When I looked into this issue further, I found that at least nine states faced the same issue of federal agencies refusing to pay the local fees associated with controlling the stormwater pollution originating from their properties. Surely, the federal government understands that these local governments still must cover the cost of managing the pollution from federal properties. So, in effect, what the federal government is doing is passing on that cost to already financially burdened citizens. In a city such as the District of Columbia, where nearly a quarter of the land is owned by the federal government and still more is leased by the federal government, the refusal by the federal government to pay these fees will impose substantial and burdensome costs on individual citizens. It is important that we continue to work to improve the quality of our waters. Reducing pollution and improving water quality in the District has been a priority for me. My bill to secure funding for the Anacostia River cleanup plan became law in 2007 and the plan was released by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in April. Additionally, my bill to amend the National Children's Island Act of 1995 to make Kingman and Heritage Islands a center for environmental education recreation and restoration of the Anacostia River ecosystem passed in the House last year and I am working hard to get it through the Senate this year. This bill simply requires the federal government to continue its recent commitment to protecting and cleaning our waters, as well as to be a good neighbor here in the District and throughout the country. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Ms. NORTON

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

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I can only say that the gentleman from Florida learned all too well the lessons of persistence from Senator Paula Hawkins. And may I say, as well, whenever the gentleman from Florida is right in his persistence, he will find the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia right there beside him and in his corner. Mr. Speaker, I again urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this measure. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. I thank the gentleman from Florida for his kind and generous comparison of my service with that of Paula Hawkins. She was much admired for the breakthroughs that her service represented. I have no further requests for time, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. On behalf of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, I am pleased to present H.R. 5395 for consideration. This measure designates the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 151 North Maitland Avenue in Maitland, Florida, as the Paula Hawkins Post Office Building. H.R. 5395 was introduced by our colleague, the gentleman from Florida, Representative John Mica, on May 25, 2010. It was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform which waived consideration of the measure to expedite its consideration on the floor today. It enjoys the support of the entire Florida delegation. Paula Hawkins was a Republican Member of Congress who served a single term as a Senator from Florida, fighting to protect children and blazing a trail for women. Paula Hawkins was born on January 24, 1927, in Salt Lake City and passed away on December 3, 2009, at the age of 82. Paula Hawkins was the eldest of three children born to Paul, a naval chief warrant officer, and Leone Fickes. In 1934, the family moved to Atlanta, where her father taught at Georgia Tech. Her parents split when Paula was in high school, and Leone and the children returned to Utah. She finished high school at Richmond, Utah, in 1944, then enrolled at Utah State University. On September 5, 1947, Paula Fickes and Walter Eugene Hawkins were married and moved to Atlanta. The couple had three children before moving to Winter Park, Florida, in 1955, where Paula Hawkins became a community activist and Republican volunteer. Ms. Hawkins was the first woman elected to a full Senate term without being preceded in politics by a husband or father. She was also the first woman to be a Senator from Florida. While in the Senate, she was the leading sponsor of the Missing Children's Act of 1982, which requires the Federal Bureau of Investigation to enter descriptive information on missing children into a national computer database that can be used by law enforcement agencies across the country. With incredible courage, she shocked her colleagues by disclosing in a congressional hearing that she had been molested as a child by a neighbor. Besides her daughter Genean and her husband, both of Winter Park, her survivors include another daughter, Kelly McCoy, also of Winter Park; a son, Kevin, of Denver; a sister, Carole Fickes of Sacramento; 11 grandchildren; and 10 great grandchildren. Paula Hawkins was truly an inspiration to Members of Congress and to women everywhere. I therefore urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this measure. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5395) to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 151 North Maitland Avenue in Maitland, Florida, as the ``Paula Hawkins Post Office Building''.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would like to reiterate my strong support for S. 1510, as amended. The bill is PAYGO-neutral. It makes important improvements that will strengthen the Secret Service. It improves government efficiency and helps a handful of DOD civilian employees who have been wronged. I encourage all Members to support this bill. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis).

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 1510, the United States Secret Service Uniformed Division Modernization Act of 2010. The bill was introduced by Senator Joseph Lieberman. It passed the Senate by unanimous consent on October 13, 2009. S. 1510 makes a long overdue change by transferring the personnel and pay authorities for the Secret Service's Uniformed Division from the District of Columbia Code to the United States Code. The bill creates a new salary table for the Uniformed Division and also provides the Secret Service with enhanced hiring flexibilities. S. 1510 deals specifically with the Secret Service's Uniformed Division. There are approximately 1,300 Uniformed Division law enforcement officers who help protect the President, the White House, foreign dignitaries, and mission offices. The Uniformed Division helps provide protective arrangements for the President and other foreign dignitaries at venues around the world. The measure in S. 1510 was endorsed by the Bush and Obama administrations to respond to ongoing concerns about recruitment and retention within the UD. According to the Secret Service, the Uniformed Division is currently operating under a salary schedule that is out of parity with other Federal police forces. It performs similar protective tasks as Federal police forces but has the additional duties and responsibility of frequent travel in support of the Service's protective mission. In addition, the Uniformed Division has stricter suitability requirements. Every officer must hold a top secret clearance and undergo a polygraph exam. The Secret Service tells us that staffing shortfalls have continued to increase, despite new recruitment initiatives, and these shortfalls result in the Division incurring overtime costs that would not be required if it were at full staffing. This is an important bill that ultimately will build a better, more effective Uniformed Division. However, there are costs associated with these improvements. CBO estimates that this legislation would increase direct spending by $14 million over 10 years. Under House and statutory PAYGO rules, this direct spending must be offset--and this bill is offset. The Oversight Committee has identified an appropriate set of costs associated with the Secret Service bill. The bill we are considering today will actually result in a small amount of net savings for the government. The savings are captured in title II of the suspension amendment, which would add the text of H.R. 2495 to the Secret Service legislation. H.R. 2495, or the Federal Real Property Disposal Enhancement Act, which is now title II of S. 1510, will make it easier for Federal agencies to sell property that they no longer need. This addresses a longstanding concern of the Government Accountability Office, the Oversight Committee, as well as both the Bush and Obama administrations. H.R. 2495 was introduced by Representative Dennis Moore of Kansas on May 19, 2009. It enjoys bipartisan support, as similar legislation did in the last Congress. The Oversight Committee approved a similar bill in the 110th Congress, and it also passed by voice vote when it reached the House floor. Lastly, in addition to strengthening the Secret Service and enhancing government efficiency, this legislation would correct an injustice for approximately 40 individuals who returned to government service after September 11. The provisions in title III authorize the Secretary of Defense to retroactively waive repayment of voluntary separation pay for certain individuals who were reemployed in temporary positions by DOD to help respond to terrorist attacks. Before accepting reemployment, these individuals were assured in writing that they would not be required to repay their separation pay. In making these assurances, the DOD components were apparently following guidance from the Office of Personnel Management on filling emergency positions. Unfortunately, this guidance was not applicable to DOD at that time, and DOD lawyers have determined they do not currently have the authority to retroactively waive the repayment requirement. As a result, even though these individuals received written assurances that they would not be required to repay, the Department has since taken steps to collect the payments for these individuals. This is an injustice created by bureaucratic error and needs to be corrected. This bill provides the Secretary of Defense with the discretionary authority he needs to waive the repayment requirement for these individuals. I want to thank Representative Hank Johnson and the Armed Services Committee for their work and support on title III of this legislation. I encourage all Members to support the good government efforts in this legislation. These efforts will strengthen the Secret Service, enhance government efficiency, and correct an injustice for civilian DOD employees. House of Representatives, House Committee on Armed Services, Washington, DC, June 28, 2010. Hon. Edolphus Towns, Chairman, Committee on Oversight and Government, House of Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Towns: I am writing to you concerning S. 1510, the United States Secret Service Uniformed Division Modernization Act. There are certain provisions in the legislation which fall within the Rule X jurisdiction of the Committee on Armed Services. In the interest of permitting your committee to proceed expeditiously to floor consideration of this important resolution, I am willing to waive this committee's right to jurisdiction. I do so with the understanding that by waiving consideration of the resolution, the Committee on Armed Services does not waive any future jurisdictional claim over the subject matters contained in the bill which fall within its Rule X jurisdiction. Please place this letter into the committee report on S. 1510 and into the Congressional Record during consideration of the measure on the House floor. Thank you for the cooperative spirit in which you have worked regarding this matter and others between our respective committees. Very truly yours, Ike Skelton, Chairman.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 1510) to transfer statutory entitlements to pay and hours of work authorized by the District of Columbia Code for current members of the United States Secret Service Uniformed Division from the District of Columbia Code to the United States Code, as amended.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 1439) congratulating the Chicago Blackhawks on winning the 2010 Stanley Cup Championship.

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

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

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, I am pleased to present H. Res. 1439 for consideration. The bill congratulates the Chicago Blackhawks for their victory over the Philadelphia Flyers in the National Hockey League Stanley Cup Finals. H. Res. 1439 was introduced by our colleague, the gentleman from Illinois, Representative Mike Quigley, on May 25, 2010. It was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, which ordered it to be reported by unanimous consent on June 14, 2010. The measure has the support of over 50 Members of the House. Mr. Speaker, on June 9, 2010, the Chicago Blackhawks defeated the Philadelphia Flyers in Philadelphia to win the NHL's Stanley Cup Final hockey series. With that win, the Chicago Blackhawks ended 49 years of Stanley Cup frustration with a 4-3 overtime victory over the Philadelphia Flyers in a game that was numbered game six and clinched the National Hockey League's best-of-seven championship series. The Philadelphia Flyers were worthy opponents and should be congratulated for a hard-fought Stanley Cup series. Blackhawks captain Jonathan Toews, who scored seven goals in the playoffs and had 22 assists, including one on Chicago's first goal, was awarded the Conn Smythe Trophy for most valuable player for his team in the NHL playoffs. The Philadelphia Flyers fought hard, but they were no match for the hard-hitting, exciting brand of hockey of Blackhawks general manager Stan Bowman and head coach Joel Quenneville. Not since the days of Hall of Famers Bobby Hull, Stan Mikita and goalie Glenn Hall had the Blackhawks hoisted the cup, and Chicago unleashed nearly 50 years of frustration with a euphoric celebration on Philadelphia's home ice. I join my colleagues in congratulating the National Hockey League champions, the Chicago Blackhawks, on their victory in the 2010 Stanley Cup Finals. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members shall have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3913) to direct the Mayor of the District of Columbia to establish a District of Columbia National Guard Educational Assistance Program to encourage the enlistment and retention of persons in the District of Columbia National Guard by providing financial assistance to enable members of the National Guard of the District of Columbia to attend undergraduate, vocational, or technical courses, as amended.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, as amended, H.R. 3913 would require the Mayor of the District of Columbia to establish a program to provide financial assistance to members of the District of Columbia National Guard to assist in covering higher education expenses. The Mayor would establish this program in coordination with the commander of the District of Columbia National Guard. Assistance would be capped at $6,000 per year per National Guard member. H.R. 3913, as amended, authorizes appropriations to the District of Columbia for the assistance program. The bill would also authorize the transfer of funds from Federal agencies for providing assistance under the program. The initial authorization for the program is $370,000 in FY 2011. The bill would permit annual adjustments in succeeding years based on the tuition inflation index used by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs for educational benefits. As amended, H.R. 3913 complies with PAYGO requirements. Mr. Speaker, in addition, the bill seeks to name the bill after former General David Wherley of the District of Columbia National Guard. Mr. Speaker, I told the D.C. National Guard's 547th Transportation Company when they were deployed to Iraq about a year ago that I would introduce several D.C. National Guard bills concerning their service. Today, we consider the Major General David F. Wherley, Jr. District of Columbia National Guard Retention and College Access Act to permanently authorize funding for a program to provide grants for secondary education tuition to the members of the D.C. National Guard. The bill authorizes an education incentive program recommended by former Major General David Wherley and his successor, Major General Errol Schwartz, who suggested that education grants would be useful in stemming the troublesome loss of members of the D.C. Guard to units, in part, because surrounding States offer just such educational benefits. I am grateful that the Appropriations Committee has allotted funds in some years, with smaller contributions from the District, in the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations bill. A permanent authorization is necessary, however, to ensure that D.C. National Guard members receive equal treatment and benefits with other National Guard members on a regular basis, especially with surrounding States that do, in fact, have the higher education benefits we seek for the D.C. National Guard. The Guard for the Nation's Capital is competing for members from the pool of regional residents who find membership in Maryland and Virginia Guards more financially beneficial. Mr. Speaker, last week, on June 22, we marked the 1-year anniversary of the commemoration of the Metro collision here involving two Red Line trains that took the lives of nine area residents, seven from the District of Columbia, including a local hero, Major General David F. Wherley, Jr., and his wife Ann. This bill is named in honor of General Wherley, who not only served his country all his adult life and never forgot the men and women who served under him at home or at war, but also was particularly attentive to the residents of the District of Columbia, especially the city's most troubled youth. Thereafter, Congressman Jose Serrano, chair of the Committee on Appropriations Financial Services Subcommittee, was good enough to offer this renaming in his appropriations bill last year and to appropriate the funds without authorization this year or in prior years. Under General Wherley's command, the D.C. National Guard deployed several of its units to the global war on terrorism. General Wherley himself served courageously in both Iraq and Afghanistan, but at home he spent hours with me figuring out ways to get funds for programs for the District's children. We were successful, because he would show up, not only in my office, but wherever he was needed to get the funds to do the service for his men and for the children of this city. General Wherley was a full-service leader. He not only commanded the D.C. National Guard; he worked closely with me and with city officials on programs for our city and its disadvantaged youth and for keeping our Guard competitive as a premier force at home as well as abroad. The education incentives in this bill serve not only to encourage high-quality recruits, but, when appropriated, have had the important benefit of helping the D.C. National Guard to maintain the force necessary to protect the Federal presence, because this funding helps equalize an important benefit compared with what is offered by Guard units in surrounding jurisdictions which also are open to D.C. National Guard members. While the appropriators have been good enough to provide funding for the D.C. National Guard by considering it a programmatic request, it is imperative that this important educational initiative be authorized appropriately to ensure its permanent sustainability. I urge my colleagues to support the bill. I reserve the balance of my time.