Bobby Rush

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank both of my colleagues for allowing me to come before this body to speak on behalf of the people of the city of Chicago, the people of the First Congressional District. Mr. Speaker, I must say that although Muhammad Ali was and is a native of Louisville--that is his birthplace--I must also claim that Chicago is his adoptive city. He spent many, many years in Chicago. He bought a home on South Kenwood Avenue in my district. Mr. Speaker, as a young man, a young civil rights activist myself, I can't even express the pride that I had when I would travel down the street and point out to my young sons and anybody else who was with me that that is where Muhammad Ali lives. He was a man of the neighborhoods in Chicago. He touched many people--young people, old people, and people who didn't necessarily share his same political or religious ideas, but he touched them anyhow. Mr. Speaker, Muhammad Ali was a man for all seasons. Yes, he achieved prominence in the boxing arena, in the sweet science of boxing, but he achieved greatness because of the life that he led both inside of boxing and outside of boxing. Mr. Speaker, on Saturday afternoons, many of us who had few heroes would gather around television sets and watch Muhammad Ali fight in the heavyweight division against other fighters and other boxers. One of his predictions came true when he defeated and knocked out his opposition in the time that he said he would, and there was a collective cheer that you could hear throughout the neighborhoods of Chicago. He meant something to me. He meant something to others. Muhammad Ali not only achieved, worked hard, and sacrificed for excellence, but he also inspired excellence in others. Muhammad Ali would walk down some of the main thoroughfares in Chicago: 47th Street, 79th Street, and Madison Avenue. He would walk down those streets, and the crowds would just gather around him and follow him. His beam in his eyes, the halo and the charisma that he had just made for an exciting time, a grand time for all of us. Mr. Speaker, Muhammad Ali not only was a great boxer, but he was indeed a man for all times. Look at his following not just in Louisville, not just on the south and west sides of Chicago, but all across the Nation, all across the world, foreign countries, African countries specifically. The same kind of enthusiasm that he inspired, the same kind of reverence that he inspired to the young men and young women in Chicago, you could see the same kind of inspiration ran up in the Congo, in Nigeria, in Zaire, and in other places all across the world. Mr. Speaker, when he retired, I remember as a freshman here in Congress when we had a session and we honored the 50 greatest athletes of the century. Here were some great athletes, but the one who I wanted to be with, the one who I was most excited about, the one who I wanted to be photographed with was only Muhammad Ali. Bart Starr, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, and many, many others were here; but Muhammad Ali was here, and he kind of sucked the air out of the room. Later, Mr. Speaker, when I chaired the Annual Legislative Conference, for the dinner, the gala--I chaired the gala--I was so honored that he came to me to accept an award from the Congressional Black Caucus with his lovely wife, Lonnie; another great time, another great memory. But, Mr. Speaker, the greatest honor, the greatest moment of inspiration, my most profound memory of Muhammad Ali was when he refused to go to fight in the Vietnam war. I think, in my humble opinion, had he just been a great champion--we have had other great champions who are African American: Jack Johnson, Sugar Ray Robinson, and many others, many, many others who are great champions. But Muhammad Ali wasn't just a boxer. He didn't just inspire others to take up boxing. I was a political activist in the sixties, and Muhammad Ali spoke to the quintessential aspect of all my activism when he said: Hell no, I won't go. Hell no, I won't go. No Vietnamese have ever called me the N word. And he said it. I don't want to say it on the floor, but he said it. Mr. Speaker, from that moment on, he solidified his appeal, his essence, his relationships; he solidified himself with all of the struggling people of the Nation, of the world. Let me just say this: I thought about Muhammad Ali when I heard of his death, and I thought of trying to recapture some of my memories of him--how he walked, his gait, how he talked. I remember his size. I remember the face that was also a beautiful face. He was proud of how he looked. But, Mr. Speaker, I guess what inspired me most about Muhammad Ali was how he did not surrender his faith, surrender his belief, surrender his core values to the U.S. Selective Service which drafted him. Mr. Speaker, I don't remember the names of the men who were on that Selective Service committee. I don't remember anything about them. They thought that they were destroying The People's Champion, but they could not destroy The People's Champion. He rose even above all of those people who were officially appointed to bring him down. Nobody could knock out Muhammad Ali, in a real sense.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), the outstanding ranking member of the full committee.

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor), an outstanding and hardworking member of the Energy and Power Subcommittee and the Energy and Commerce full committee.

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, when members of the Committee on Energy and Commerce first began to address a comprehensive bipartisan energy bill in the beginning of 2015, there was a sense of hopefulness, a sense of optimism that the committee would once again set the standard for working together to get things done on behalf of the American people in a spirit of bipartisan cooperation. At that time, Mr. Speaker, many of us on the minority side had enormous expectations that we would draft a bill that would move our energy policy forward in a manner befitting the challenges facing our Nation in this, the 21st century. Specifically, Mr. Speaker, from my perspective, a comprehensive energy bill would need to modernize the Nation's aging energy infrastructure, train a 21st century workforce, and address the critically important issue of manmade climate change. Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, none of these issues are addressed in the bill that we are voting on here today. This 800-page hodgepodge of Republican and corporate priorities is nothing more than a majority wish list of strictly ideological bills, many of which the minority party opposes and the Obama administration and the American people do not support. Outside of just a few minor crumbs thrown in to represent the priorities of the minority party, including my workforce development legislation, the bill almost contains nothing that the American people could support or rally behind. Specifically, Mr. Speaker, the underlying bill, H.R. 8, does little more than take us backwards in terms of energy policy, while also providing loopholes to help industry avoid accountability and to avoid further regulation. H.R. 8 contains efficiency provisions that will actually increase energy use and energy costs to consumers, putting industry interests above the public interest. The bill's hydropower title weakens longstanding environmental review procedures and curtails State, local, and tribal authority over projects in their respective lands. Mr. Speaker, the bill flagrantly binds the U.S. to an outdated dependency on fossil fuels while failing to offer any constructive, forward-looking policies to incentivize the development and the deployment of clean energy. As you know, Mr. Speaker, many of the bills contained in the House amendment include controversial provisions that the minority party has repeatedly opposed at both the committee level as well as here on the House floor. Additionally, Mr. Speaker, many of these same poison pill amendments in the bill have already received veto threats from the Obama administration. So, Mr. Speaker, with a bill that fails to modernize our energy infrastructure, that fails to invest in job-creating clean energy technologies, and that fails to cut carbon pollution, it is safe, Mr. Speaker, to proclaim to this body that we still have a long, hard, and cumbersome road ahead if we are ever to reach a point of finding consensus, bipartisan consensus. Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, I cannot support this bill before us. I urge my colleagues to oppose it as well. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. McNerney).

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi).

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time I have remaining?

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I just want to reemphasize that, for the minority side to support this bill and its going forward, there must be provisions included in the bill that will address the deeply felt concern that our Members have continually expressed. Specifically, Mr. Speaker, our Members would like to see funding to modernize the Nation's energy infrastructure. Our Members want to see investment in clean energy technology. Our Members want to see resources to train a 21st century workforce. Our Members want to see policies to transition our economy away from the energy sources of the past and towards the sustainable energy sources of the future. Mr. Speaker, without these provisions, this bill won't go very far. Mr. Speaker, I encourage all Members of this House to vote ``no'' on this so-called energy bill. It is a relic. It is backwards-looking. It puts the Nation on a reverse course. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall Vote No. 250 on S. 2012, I mistakenly recorded my vote as ``yea'' when I should have voted ``nay.''

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today because, despite our best efforts, racial redlining is still alive and well today. I come to this Chamber because racial redlining has once again reared its ugly, evil head across our Nation. Mr. Speaker, on April 21, Bloomberg published an analysis entitled ``Amazon Doesn't Consider the Race of Its Customers. Should It?'' Bloomberg explains how amazon.com discriminates against mostly African American communities nationwide by shutting them out, shutting them off from receiving its Prime free same-day delivery service. Mr. Speaker, it must be understood that mostly predominantly African American ZIP Codes in this Nation have been excluded from receiving Amazon's Prime free same-day delivery service. It must be understood, Mr. Speaker, that this is absolutely unacceptable. Amazon's vice president for global communications, Mr. Craig Berman, feebly attempted to justify this by saying that ``demographics play no role'' in the determination by which neighborhoods have access to Prime free same-day service. He goes on to state that distance matters and that in terms of determining factors, close proximity to a warehouse is certainly one of the factors that they consider. Well, Mr. Speaker, on the face of it, that seemingly appears to be both logical and understandable. However, when viewed through a sharper lens, there are some glaring, flagrant inconsistencies. In my hometown of Chicago, Illinois, just for example, same-day service is available to a majority of the city and its surrounding suburbs. This free, same-day delivery service is not available to my constituents in predominantly African American ZIP Codes. Mr. Berman, the article explains, again, feebly blames this on the distance of these ZIP Codes from a distribution center that is located in Kenosha, Wisconsin. That would be understandable if not for the fact that this free, same-day Amazon delivery service is available to residents in Oak Lawn, Illinois, which is a community that is also in the district that I represent, but Oak Lawn is even farther south, farther away from Kenosha, Wisconsin, a greater distance from the distribution center in Kenosha, Wisconsin, than all these African American-predominant ZIP Codes. Mr. Speaker, because I live in a predominantly African American ZIP Code, I cannot be served by the Amazon Prime free, same-day delivery service, but my White constituents can be served by Amazon with their Prime free, same-day delivery service. Simply put, Mr. Speaker, despite amazon.com's assertions of impartiality and a strictly numbers-based approach to the availability of this Prime free, same-day delivery services, Amazon's implementation of this service has been disparate, disappointing, disgusting, and apparently discriminatory. Mr. Speaker, not only does this occur in the city of Chicago, but also Bloomberg found similar situations existing in five other cities. Not just Chicago, but Atlanta, Boston, Dallas, New York City, and Washington, D.C., all across our great Nation. Mr. Speaker, historically and unfortunately, the situation with amazon.com is not a unique experience for people of color. Today, in the year 2016, too many Americans still are denied services and access to goods based off the color of their skin and where they reside or the location of their ZIP Code. This is redlining. This practice is known as redlining. This redlining has been a major, significant obstacle to communities of color to gain access to the fullness of their American Dream, to the fullness of their American ideal. For decades now, despite efforts during the civil rights era of our Nation, during similar efforts, not only before, but even after the civil rights era of our Nation, despite many multiple legislative attempts to stamp redlining out, this very injustice continues to spread, even among some of my corporate citizens who, on the face of it, would never accept the fact that they engage in discriminatory business practices. But when you look at it from my perspective, look at it from my vantage point, look at it from the experience of my constituents who are African American, Amazon fails to meet the acid test. Its Prime same-day delivery service is far less than prime for too many of my constituents and too many American citizens. Mr. Speaker, Members of this body of the U.S. House of Representatives, we cannot allow businesses in this country to discriminate against any particular group of Americans. We cannot allow businesses in this country to discriminate against neighborhoods, against communities based on their business's race-based perceptions. Mr. Speaker, this body, this U.S. House of Representatives cannot allow the Amazons of the world, amazon.com to violate laws of our Nation, laws like the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Amazon cannot violate the laws of our Nation with impunity and without accountability. Mr. Speaker, I must call upon amazon.com and its CEO, Jeff Bezos, to come and do what is right, to come and right this wrong. Make Amazon's Prime same-day delivery service a prime service that is available to all the citizens of this Nation and not just to the White citizens of this Nation. People all across this Nation like amazon.com. I am a customer of amazon.com, and amazon.com benefits from Black Americans' dollars because Black Americans' dollars are just as green as any other Americans' dollars. White Americans' dollars are not more powerful, aren't colder or hotter. These are Americans' dollars, greenbacks, and Amazon must respect the buying power, the consumer right of African American consumers just as it does all other American consumers. Mr. Bezos, again, I appeal to you, do what is right and right this wrong. Mr. Speaker, I must call upon our colleagues in the executive branch to ensure that the laws of our Nation passed by this U.S. Congress are faithfully and equally executed so that communities of color get equal and fair treatment by its corporate citizens all across this country. Redlining is an evil that has ripped apart the dreams and the aspirations of African American citizens and other minorities. It is high time now. The hour has passed. It is time now to put redlining and all the vestiges of it aside, buried deep. Take it out of the consciousness of the corporate decisionmakers in this Nation. Mr. Speaker, our economy is a service economy. Our economics are based on service. Our social contract means that all Americans should have access and a level playing field when it comes to getting service and being serviced in this service economy. Now, amazon.com's Prime same-day delivery service stands as a stark example of how much still needs to be changed in our society. No matter how much things change, so much remains the same. Let us rise up to the call. Amazon, do what is right, and right this wrong. Mr. Speaker, we can do no less than our best for all American citizens. This is an extraordinary violation of not only the civil rights laws of our Nation, but it stands as a significant barrier to greater economic opportunities, to a greater sense of being treated equally and fairly. There is something called justice in our society, and any injustice must be courageously confronted. Any injustice. Amazon.com, your Prime same-day delivery service is not so prime until all your customers are treated fairly and equitably in your business model. No excuses. This is shameful. It must be corrected. Make the Amazon Prime same- day delivery service available for all Americans because we live in a society where being prime really should mean something--this America that we live in. Mr. Speaker, again, I call upon Mr. Jeff Bezos, Amazon's CEO, to do what is right and right this less than prime wrong. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the article: ``Amazon Doesn't Consider the Race of Its Customers. Should It?'' [From www.bloomberg.com, Apr. 21, 2016] Amazon Doesn't Consider the Race of Its Customers. Should It? (By David Ingold and Spencer Soper) For residents of minority urban neighborhoods, access to Amazon.com's vast array of products--from Dawn dish soap and Huggies diapers to Samsung flatscreen TVs--can be a godsend. Unlike whiter ZIP codes, these parts of town often lack well- stocked stores and quality supermarkets. White areas get organic grocers and designer boutiques. Black ones get minimarts and dollar stores. People in neighborhoods that retailers avoid must travel farther and sometimes pay more to obtain household necessities. ``I don't have a car, so I love to have stuff delivered,'' says Tamara Rasberry, a human resources professional in Washington, D.C., who spends about $2,000 a year on Amazon Prime, the online retailer's premium service that guarantees two-day delivery of tens of millions of items (along with digital music, e-books, streaming movies, and TV shows) for a yearly $99 membership fee. Rasberry, whose neighborhood of Congress Heights is more than 90 percent black, says shopping on Amazon lets her bypass the poor selection and high prices of nearby shops. As Amazon has expanded rapidly to become ``the everything store,'' it's offered the promise of an egalitarian shopping experience. On Amazon and other online retailers, a black customer isn't viewed with suspicion, much less followed around by store security. Most of Amazon's services are available to almost every address in the U.S. ``We don't know what you look like when you come into our store, which is vastly different than physical retail,'' says Craig Berman, Amazon's vice president for global communications. ``We are ridiculously prideful about that. We offer every customer the same price. It doesn't matter where you live.'' Yet as Amazon rolls out its upgrade to the Prime service, Prime Free Same-Day Delivery, that promise is proving harder to deliver on. The ambitious goal of Prime Free Same-Day is to eliminate one of the last advantages local retailers have over the e-commerce giant: instant gratification. In cities where the service is available, Amazon offers Prime members same-day delivery of more than a million products for no extra fee on orders over $35. Eleven months after it started, the service includes 27 metropolitan areas. In most of them, it provides broad coverage within the city limits. Take Amazon's home town of Seattle, where every ZIP code within the city limits is eligible for same-day delivery and coverage extends well into the surrounding suburbs. In six major same-day delivery cities, however, the service area excludes predominantly black ZIP codes to varying degrees, according to a Bloomberg analysis that compared Amazon same-day delivery areas with U.S. Census Bureau data. In Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, and Washington, cities still struggling to overcome generations of racial segregation and economic inequality, black citizens are about half as likely to live in neighborhoods with access to Amazon same-day delivery as white residents. The disparity in two other big cities is significant, too. In New York City, same-day delivery is available throughout Manhattan, Staten Island, and Brooklyn, but not in the Bronx and some majority-black neighborhoods in Queens. In some cities, Amazon same-day delivery extends many miles into the surrounding suburbs but isn't available in some ZIP codes within the city limits. The most striking gap in Amazon's same-day service is in Boston, where three ZIP codes encompassing the primarily black neighborhood of Roxbury are excluded from same-day service, while the neighborhoods that surround it on all sides are eligible. ``Being singled out like that and not getting those same services as they do in a 15-minute walk from here is very frustrating,'' says Roxbury resident JD Nelson, who's been an Amazon Prime member for three years. ``It's not a good thing, and it definitely doesn't make me happy.'' Rasberry was excited when Amazon announced Prime Free Same-Day was coming to Washington. But when she entered her ZIP code on the retailer's website, she was disappointed to find her neighborhood was left out. ``I still get two-day shipping, but none of the superfast, convenient delivery services come here,'' she says. Rasberry pays the same $99 Prime membership fee as people who live in the city's majority-white neighborhoods, but she doesn't get the same benefits. ``If you bring that service to the city,'' she says, ``you should offer it to the whole city.'' There's no evidence that Amazon makes decisions on where to deliver based on race. Berman says the ethnic composition of neighborhoods isn't part of the data Amazon examines when drawing up its maps. ``When it comes to same-day delivery, our goal is to serve as many people as we can, which we've proven in places like Los Angeles, Seattle, San Francisco, and Philadelphia.'' Amazon, he says, has a ``radical sensitivity'' to any suggestion that neighborhoods are being singled out by race. ``Demographics play no role in it. Zero.'' Amazon says its plan is to focus its same-day service on ZIP codes where there's a high concentration of Prime members, and then expand the offering to fill in the gaps over time. ``If you ever look at a map of service for Amazon, it will start out small and end up getting big,'' he says. This is a logical approach from a cost and efficiency perspective: Give areas with the most existing paying members priority access to a new product. Yet in cities where most of those paying members are concentrated in predominantly white parts of town, a solely data-driven calculation that looks at numbers instead of people can reinforce long-entrenched inequality in access to retail services. For people who live in black neighborhoods not served by Amazon, the fact that it's not deliberate doesn't make much practical difference. ``They are offering different services to other people who don't look like you but live in the same city,'' says Rasberry. Amazon cites several reasons a ZIP code within a city may be excluded: too few Prime members to justify the expense of sending out trucks and drivers, or the area is too far from the closest Amazon warehouse. ``Distance matters,'' Berman says. ``At some point, with the math involved, we can't make it work--in time or in cost for the carrier. There is a diminishing return on orders.'' In some cases, Amazon says, it's difficult to find delivery partners willing to serve the area. ``We deliver same day up till 9 p.m.'' says Amazon spokesman Scott Stanzel. ``There are a lot of carrier partners. A lot of variables.'' Amazon won't reveal specifics about how it decides its same-day delivery areas--the competition would kill for that info, says Berman. Broadly speaking, it comes down to cost. Same-day delivery is expensive to provide, in part because Amazon can't rely on the built-in infrastructure and low negotiated rates of United Parcel Service and the U.S. Postal Service, which shoulder the retailer's standard and two-day Prime deliveries. To get packages out within hours, Amazon uses a mix of its own drivers, local couriers, and independent contractors making deliveries in their own vehicles through an Uberlike service called Amazon Flex. Cities where Amazon offers broad one-day coverage appear to have something in common: close proximity to product warehouses, making it less expensive to reach all areas. ``It's not the only variable. It's certainly one of them,'' says Berman. ``It definitely has an impact if we have a fulfillment center that's outside a city, or we have a fulfillment center that happens to be on one side of it'' Amazon declined to reveal the locations of its same-day hubs, so it's difficult to tell how that works. In same-day cities Amazon hasn't yet surrounded with warehouses, the company must decide which neighborhoods are worth the cost of service and which aren't. That's where things get complicated. atlanta Amazon's Prime Free Same-Day Delivery closely mirrors the city's historical racial divide. The largely white northern half is covered, while the largely black southern half isn't. The company extends the service 35 miles north of downtown but excludes Norcross, a less distant eastern suburb where blacks and Hispanics outnumber whites, and Redan, with a black population of 94 percent. boston Although Amazon's same-day service is available to most addresses in Boston and reaches almost to New Hampshire, the centrally located neighborhood of Roxbury, with a population that's about 59 percent black and 15 percent white, is excluded. The residents of the ZIP codes that border Roxbury on all sides are eligible for the service. Amazon's Berman calls Roxbury ``an anomaly.'' chicago Amazon's same-day service area includes about 2.2 million people in the city but excludes about 472,000 people in Chicago's predominantly black South Side. Berman says the South Side ZIP codes are beyond the reach of the company's distribution center in Kenosha, Wisconsin, about two hours north of the city. Yet same-day service is available to Prime members in Oak Lawn, which is eight miles farther south than the excluded portions of Chicago and has a white population of about 85 percent. The company does offer the service in largely black neighborhoods in the city's center, including Austin. dallas Amazon's same-day service area includes suburbs between Dallas and Fort Worth, but about 590,000 residents of eastern and southern Dallas, where a majority are black or Hispanic-- such as Oak Cliff--are just outside the delivery area. Amazon cited distance from the company's warehouses and a low concentration of Prime members as reasons those areas were left out. new york city Amazon's same-day coverage area extends, unbroken, from New York City all the way south to Philadelphia, with one notable exception: The largely black and Hispanic borough of the Bronx, which is excluded from the service. The Bronx has the lowest percentage of white residents of the five boroughs at about 33 percent. Berman says the Bronx is difficult to reach because the warehouses that serve the area are in New Jersey. washington, d.c. One of Amazon's largest same-day service coverage areas extends from Washington, D.C., north to Baltimore and encompasses much of the Maryland and Virginia suburbs. Yet all neighborhoods in the capital's predominantly black southeast quadrant are excluded, along with several largely black Maryland suburbs to the southeast--notably Suitland and Silver Hill, which have average income levels comparable to those in some ZIP codes between Washington and Baltimore that do have same-day coverage. Some excluded ZIP codes correspond with higher crime rates. Amazon won't say whether concerns about stolen packages or the safety of drivers figure into its decisions about where to deliver, saying only ``the safety of our employees is a top priority.'' Income inequality may also play a part. Many excluded areas have average household incomes below the national average. And households with Prime memberships skew wealthier--not surprising given the $99 membership fee. An April study of families with teenagers by investment bank Piper Jaffray estimates 70 percent of such U.S. households with incomes of $112,000 per year or more now have a Prime membership, compared with 43 percent for households with incomes of $21,000 to $41,000. Income differences alone don't explain the gaps in service, however. In Chicago, New York, Boston, Atlanta, and other cities, some areas that are excluded have household incomes as high or higher than ZIP codes Amazon does cover. Berman points to cities where some black ZIP codes get same-day service and some white ones don't. In Los Angeles, black and Hispanic communities south of downtown have same- day service, but mostly white Malibu, on the far side of the traffic-clogged Route 27 and Pacific Coast Highway, doesn't. In several cities where the same-day service area encompasses the vast majority of all residents, including Los Angeles, San Jose, and Tampa, a higher percentage of blacks live in ZIP codes eligible for same-day delivery than whites. Overall, though, in cities where same-day service doesn't extend to most residents, those left out are disproportionately black. (In the six cities with disparities, Asians, on average, are as likely as whites to live in an area with coverage; Hispanics are less likely than whites to live in same-day ZIP codes, but more likely than blacks.) ``As soon as you try to represent something as complex as a neighborhood with a spreadsheet based on a few variables, you've made some generalizations and assumptions that may not be true, and they may not affect all people equally,'' says Sorelle Friedler, a computer science professor at Haverford College who studies data bias. ``There is so much systemic bias with respect to race. If you aren't purposefully trying to identify it and correct it, this bias is likely to creep into your outcomes.'' Amazon says it's misleading to scrutinize its current delivery areas so closely, because the service is new and evolving. Eventually, coverage will extend to every ZIP code in same-day cities, says Berman. The service is indeed expanding. Since Bloomberg first contacted Amazon for this article in February, the company announced 12 new same-day cities. As it adds locations, however, Amazon has yet to extend coverage to excluded majority-black ZIP codes in the existing cities with gaps in service. How long will those customers have to wait to get the full benefits of their Prime membership? Berman says there's no set timetable: ``We'll get there.'' Juan Gilbert, chair of the University of Florida's department of computer and information science & engineering, says Amazon has an opportunity to use its data resources to correct its oversight and avert falling into the retail patterns of the past. ``I think it was a mistake, and it never crossed their mind,'' he says. ``This is a perfect example of how Amazon had a blind spot.'' Update, April 21: Corrects the number of New York City residents who live in ZIP codes eligible for Amazon same-day delivery; updates the article and final chart to indicate cities where black residents are more likely than whites to live in zip codes eligible for same day service. methodology Amazon's website allows users to type in ZIP codes to see where Prime Free Same-Day Delivery is available. Bloomberg entered every U.S. ZIP code into the tool, and mapped the results on top of a complete U.S. ZIP code shape file, provided by ESRI, to produce a coverage map of Amazon's Prime same-day delivery areas. Coverage maps show Amazon data as of April 8, 2016. Population data were compiled using block group figures from the 2014 American Community Survey 5-Year estimates tables. Table B03002--Hispanic or Latino Origin by Race-- provides population figures by racial category, including the following subsets: white alone, black or African-American alone, Hispanic or Latino, Asian alone, and other races. The data were released on Dec. 3, 2015 and are the most recent local population data available from the ACS. All ACS figures are estimates with a 90% confidence interval and are subject to a margin of error. City-level figures presented in the graphics and charts are compilations of individual block group estimates, and share the same 90% confidence level. Each population dot represent 100 residents, and are evenly distributed across each block group. They do not represent exact addresses, and populations below a 100-person threshold within an individual block group are not shown. In some cases, individual block groups straddle multiple ZIP codes or intersect a city boundary. Often these block groups feature clear divisions between residential areas, and nonresidential areas made up of parks, lakes, or empty land. In these cases, a block group was included in the ZIP code that included the residential area. When a block group was not clearly separated in this manner, the population was proportionally distributed based on the area of overlap.

Mr. RUSH. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I come here to the House floor today to express my deep concern and disappointment regarding the grave financial challenges facing the Chicago State University, which is located in my district on the south side of Chicago. Mr. Speaker, due to the enormous budget crisis currently taking place in my home State of Illinois, the university has not received the State funding that is essential to maintaining its multifaceted operations. Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, after 7 months of utilizing its financial reserves, Chicago State University is now in a dire position. Chicago State University must confront the real possibility of closing its doors in the immediate future. Mr. Speaker, the impact of this pending reality is far reaching in its scope, and it would adversely affect thousands of students and hundreds of faculty and staff, many of whom reside in my district, the First District of Illinois. The entire Chicagoland region would be severely adversely affected by the closing of the Chicago State University. Mr. Speaker, my district is home to 4,300 students who are enrolled at Chicago State. Fifty-eight percent of these students are my constituents. The great need for this institution is demonstrated by the fact that almost 88 percent of enrolled students receive financial aid. Of those students on financial aid, 44 percent are first-generation college students, and 54 percent of these students are low-income individuals. In fact, Mr. Speaker, Chicago State University is renowned for recruiting and graduating nontraditional minority students who, due to a variety of reasons, have been denied many of the economic, social, and educational benefits enjoyed by the greater American society. As U.S. News and World Report notes, Chicago State University ranks first in Illinois in awarding bachelor's degrees to African Americans in the physical sciences, health professions, and other related sciences. Additionally, the school also ranks fourth in Illinois in awarding baccalaureate degrees to Latino students in the education sector. Mr. Speaker, closing Chicago State University, even on a temporary basis, would have a profound impact on the lives of all these students who have worked so hard to beat the odds and who desperately seek to provide a better life for themselves and for their families. Additionally, as one of my district's largest employers, if the university were to close, it would have a devastating rippling effect on the economics of Chicago's greater south side and also in the lives of the 850 faculty and staff who are employed by Chicago State University. Undoubtedly, the school's closing would also stifle any opportunity for economic recovery in communities on Chicago's south side and in the nearby suburban area of the city of Chicago. To help address this pending dire situation, in the coming days I will be introducing a bill in the House to provide Federal assistance to the university until this budget impasse in the State of Illinois can be resolved. Mr. Speaker, Chicago State University is far too important to the families, to the communities that I represent, to simply leave its fate to chance or to the political gamesmanship and indifference of its governmental leaders. Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner should not allow this historically crucial, minority-serving institution of higher education that so faithfully serves the needs of African Americans and Latino American students to shut down on his watch. Legislative leaders in the State of Illinois must not allow this legendary institution to close its doors on current and future generations of upward-bound students. Mr. Speaker, April 29 will be forever be known as the Day of Educational Infamy in my State of Illinois. It will be regarded as the day that Illinois lawmakers let the students of Chicago State University down. It will be regarded as the day that Illinois lawmakers let the citizens of the State of Illinois down. It will be regarded as the day that Illinois lawmakers stood in the schoolhouse door to deny access to the universally acknowledged benefits of higher education to predominantly minority students who study and matriculate at the Chicago State University. Mr. Speaker, we cannot afford to not afford to fund the Chicago State University. We must do everything in our power to address this ominous situation and provide help to this critical institution that has proven to be so vital to the needs of my constituents, to the needs of the citizens of the State of Illinois, and to our Nation as a whole. We must act, and we must act now. Save Chicago State. Save Chicago State. Save Chicago State University. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, it is with a heavy heart that I rise today to pay tribute to Mr. Bruce Teague Jr. (The Bossman), who was called to rest by his heavenly father on Thursday April 7, 2016. Bruce, Mr. Speaker, was born in Henry County, Tennessee on March 29, 1931. He was the seventh child out of eight born to Bruce and Essie (Boyd) Teague and he loved each of his siblings. Due to the limited opportunities available in Tennessee, Bruce decided to explore the bright lights, big city life in Chicago, Illinois. While residing with his big sister, Alice, Bruce began to work various jobs until he landed a career at the National Casting Company (NCC). Being a man of faith, he was led by God to pursue what became two of his own successful entrepreneurial endeavors in towing and in real estate investing. After 40 years of being a hardworking, dedicated, and exemplary employee, he retired from NCC in 1992. In 1958, he met Mary Helen Hargrove and they were married the following year on December 18, 1959. To this union six children were born: Regina, Donna, Tasha, Juan, Bruce, and James. There was nothing he enjoyed more than celebrating the accomplishments of his family and friends through weddings, anniversaries, graduations, baptisms, recitals, and many other special occasions. A major accomplishment of his own was celebrating 56 years of holy matrimony to his beloved ``May Helen''. Mr. Speaker, Bruce was a man of strong core values. His foundation and beliefs were deeply rooted in the Love of Family and Faith in God. Bruce believed in attending church faithfully no matter where he was. Whenever in Iowa City, he attended House of Praise Church under the leadership of Pastor Rick McCaslin. He poured his time, energy, and experience into the next generation of upcoming Deacons. Bruce implemented the ``Deacon Apprenticeship Program'' at House of Praise Church to train and develop young men how to carry out the duties of a deacon. Mr. Speaker, some of his greatest pastimes were having breakfast with his friends in Chicago and Iowa City, watching and attending baseball games while eating popcorn, gardening, and traveling with his family. ``Switchblade Bruce'', the ``Bossman'', shot straight from the hip. One could never mistake what he meant; he told you just what he felt. but Deacon Teague cried about everything. He even cried when he was forced by Mary Helen to discipline the children. He often reminded his children, ``If you do wrong, I will only come to get you from jail one time''. His legacy will live on through: his loving and devoted wife of 56 years Mary Helen; his children, Regina, Donna, Ricky, Tasha, Juan, Darron, Bruce, James, Jeremiah, Danielle and a host of family and friends. Mr. Speaker, those who truly knew Bruce Teague Jr. know he was not pompous or prideful, but proud of his life and all of those in it.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), the ranking member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time I have remaining?

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4557 is an unnecessary bill that would set a terrible precedent. As the Statement of Administration Policy, which outlines the justification for President Obama's veto threat, states: ``H.R. 4557 would undermine the public health protections of the Clean Air Act by allowing further emissions of approximately 30 tons per month of toxic air pollution from brick and clay products production facilities. These toxic emissions include mercury, gases, and other hazardous metals which are associated with a variety of acute and chronic health effects, including cancers.'' Mr. Speaker, the statement from President Obama goes on to say: ``Because H.R. 4557 threatens the health of Americans by allowing more toxic air pollution, if the President were presented with H.R. 4557, his senior advisers would recommend that he veto the bill.'' Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4557 is the wrong remedy at the wrong time. Mr. Speaker, this bill is premature. While I understand that the industry feels that it has been penalized for complying with the 2003 rule, that is not sufficient reason in itself to set up a unique process that incentivizes all parties that object to this rule to file endless challenges to the rulemaking. The Brick and Clay Maximum Achievable Control Technology, or MACT, regulations that are the subject of this legislation are the subject of ongoing legal actions by industry and by public health communities across this Nation. The courts already have the ability to grant a stay on this rule, yet for some reason the industry has not yet made that request to the court. But there are a number of pending cases filed by the industry on this very rule. This week, Mr. Speaker, it was reported that the industry petitioned the court to put four suits on hold until the EPA decides whether to grant their requests to reconsider the regulations. The pending decision by the court and by the EPA indicate that there is no need for H.R. 4557, as there are ample remedies available under the Clean Air Act to address concerns about this rule. Additionally, Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4557 does not actually address the merits or the faults with the Brick and Clay MACT rules. Instead, what this bill does is takes these rules and this rulemaking outside of the process in the Clean Air Act that allows the EPA to issue final rules with deadlines for their implementation, without waiting for the conclusion of all the appeals and all the reviews. Mr. Speaker, this bill would also delay any subsequent rule issued that is similar in scope and similar in objective until any legal challenges to it were completed as well. In other words, Mr. Speaker, this bill allows an opportunity for endless lawsuits on this very issue. I fear, Mr. Speaker, that if H.R. 4557 were to become law, we would end up in a situation where we would never, ever control air polluting emissions from these facilities, no matter how cost-effective or how necessary that rule might be. Mr. Speaker, this is a policy that we must reject. As the Statement of Administration Policy also noted, if rules cannot go forward until all legal actions are complete, there is a strong incentive to use frivolous legal challenges to prevent any rules from being implemented. Under that scenario, we never would have achieved the improvements in air quality and in public health that have been accomplished under the Clean Air Act. We know, Mr. Speaker, that the Clean Air Act has delivered many cost-effective health benefits to the American people over the years. It has been demonstrated many times that we do not have to make a choice between healthy air and jobs in this Nation. We can have both. We cannot agree, Mr. Speaker, to setting this precedent and establishing a process that will delay important public health protections and encourage, at the same time, frivolous legal challenges to our clean air rules. The brick, clay, and tile industries would be better served by pursuing the options available to them right now under the Clean Air Act. For all of these reasons, Mr. Speaker, I must urge all of my colleagues to oppose this bill. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I have no additional speakers right now. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I don't know why we are even here debating this issue, which is an important issue, but not a prevailing issue. This is an issue that concerns one industry. It is a concern that is already under consideration by the courts and by the administration. In fact, Mr. Speaker, it is a problem that is more appropriately addressed by those branches of government than by this Congress. There are many other issues that this Congress has before it that it is our job to address. Yet, Mr. Speaker, we are not spending ample time on those things that are closely tied to the economic benefits and jobs for all Americans. Our water infrastructure, Mr. Speaker, is in dire need of repair and maintenance. We spend little to no time on our water infrastructure and the problems associated with it. We have Superfund sites and brownfield sites that need to be cleaned up and put to productive use. No time, no energy, no congressional resources are used to address these vital issues. Our States need support for modernizing and hardening the electricity grid. We are AWOL on these issues. And still, Mr. Speaker, many Americans are underemployed, unemployed, and underpaid for the work that they are doing. Where is the time allocation, the resource allocation? Where are our efforts on behalf of these people? All of these things, Mr. Speaker, particularly and especially the infrastructure issue, must be addressed by the Congress. There is no other place that can address these issues as appropriately, as effectively, as efficiently, except this Congress. And these issues, these infrastructure issues affect every industry, every State, every American in our Nation. So, Mr. Speaker, let us use this body's time and efforts on the critical issues that are of great importance to the American people. Mr. Speaker, our time could be better served if we would just address some of these prevailing issues of the day. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Morgan Park High School in Chicago, Illinois as it celebrates its 100th Anniversary. The centennial celebration is a highly anticipated milestone for most organizations. However, only a select group gets the honor of actually celebrating one hundred years of existence and Morgan Park High School is now among them. Since its inception in 1916 when it opened its doors to less than 300 students, Morgan Park has been a champion for educational exceptionalism. Morgan Park is set apart during this momentous occasion as a bearer of academic excellence, a laboratory for stellar educators, and the training ground for talented and intellectually-stimulated students. Mr. Speaker, the Mustang family is also a clan of notable alumni. Among them is physician, NASA Astronaut, and the first African-American woman in space Mae Jemison; Singer, songwriter, and record producer Jeremih; Actor Michael Colyar; Chicago Teachers Union and American Federation of Teachers leader Jacqueline B. Vaughn; Inventor James C. Bliss; and NFL Player Corbin Bryant--to name a few. Mr. Speaker, I would be remiss if, amongst this list of notable alumni, I did not mention my dedicated and diligent Chief of Staff, Reverend Stanley Watkins. The list of prestigious accomplishments that have emerged from the Mustang family is a testament of why Morgan Park High School is still standing 100 years strong. Mr. Speaker, 100 is a special number because it marks two significant transitions: the conclusion of one century and the beginning of a new one. While this is a time to celebrate the many victories and cherished moments of the passing century, it is also the moment in which we pause to reflect upon it critically to identify our shortcomings so that we can learn from them and better shape our future. So, Mr. Speaker, this year we celebrate both our beginning and our becoming. We celebrate the struggles of the past 100 years and we embrace the challenge of the next 100 years. We commend the triumphant strides of the many leaders that have been birthed from this rich Mustang blood. We unleash the unbridled Mustang spirit upon those who are being groomed now and those who are still to come. Mr. Speaker, therefore, we recognize this great achievement and commend Morgan Park High School for bestowing upon so many the opportunity of a lifetime; to pass through its halls, to sit in its classrooms, and to play on its courts. Go Mustangs and congratulations on reaching your centennial.

Mr. RUSH

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

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend my colleague from the great State of New York (Ms. Meng) for her work in bringing forth H.R. 4238, a bill to amend the Department of Energy Organization Act and the Local Public Works Capital Development and Investment Act of 1976 to modernize terms relating to minorities. Mr. Speaker, this commonsense bill received unanimous bipartisan support when it came before both the Energy and Power Subcommittee, on which I serve as the ranking member, and when it came before the full Energy and Commerce Committee. Mr. Speaker, words matter. This bill strikes outdated, offensive terms related to minorities out of the Federal statute that can be found in the Department of Energy Organization Act and the Local Public Works Capital Development and Investment Act of 1976. Mr. Speaker, this is a straightforward bill that helps bring these statutes up to modern times and into the 21st century, at least as far as getting rid of these offensive terms is concerned. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Meng).

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to and honor Chicago's Brainerd Senior Center, which celebrated its fifth Black History Month celebration on Friday. This year, the Center highlighted African American inventors and their inventions. This event, Mr. Speaker, helped educate many and remind others of the contributions of important people such as Madame C.J. Walker, Robert F. Flemming, Jr., and Sarah Boone. I applaud the Brainerd Center for keeping the legacies of these and other great Americans alive and ensuring that their contribution not only to our Nation, but the world, is not forgotten. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to pay tribute to the Brainerd Senior Center.

Mr. RUSH

Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend my colleagues on the Energy and Commerce Committee--Mrs. Ellmers and Ms. DeGette, in particular--as well as all of my other colleagues who worked on H.R. 4444, the EPS Improvement Act of 2016. This bipartisan piece of legislation would exclude the drivers that power light-emitting diodes, commonly known as LEDs, and direct-current ceiling fans from DOE's energy conservation standards for external power supplies. Mr. Speaker, in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, Congress directed DOE to establish conservation standards for external power supplies used to convert household electric current into DC current or lower voltage AC current. At the time, external power supplies were almost exclusively the kind of wall chargers used to power laptops, cell phones, and other similar consumer devices. Mr. Speaker, in 2005, LED lighting was in its infancy stages. LED lamps were not even on the market then, nor were they available in 2007, when Congress amended the definition of external power supply in the Energy Independence Act of 2007. However, in just over a decade, Mr. Speaker, LED and other high- efficiency, solid-state lighting products have become widely available. These lights provide significant energy-efficiency cost savings to consumers when compared with traditional light bulbs. LEDs get swept up in the energy conservation standards for external power supplies because they are powered by solid-state lighting drivers that bear superficial similarities to the kind of chargers that Congress directed DOE to set standards for. Now, Mr. Speaker, one might ask, if these LEDs are so efficient, how is it that their drivers cannot meet the energy conservation standards for external power supplies? Well, this is simply because in order to comply with the standards, an external power supply must be tested when it is disconnected from the object it is powering. For example, Mr. Speaker, a laptop power supply would have to be tested when it is disconnected from the laptop. LED drivers are not designed to operate when disconnected from LEDs, and so they cannot be tested in the same way as other external power supplies. This means that even though they are indeed very energy efficient, they cannot comply with the standards. The same is true of a new generation of energy-efficient ceiling fans. Mr. Speaker, to be sure, this legislation still holds these devices accountable to energy and conservation standards. H.R. 4444 makes DOE's authority to prescribe separate energy and conservation standards for LED drivers explicit. Ceiling fans with the direct current motors would still be required to meet DOE energy conservation standards for ceiling fans. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the bill before us. I ask unanimous consent to yield the balance of my time to the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette), and that she may control that time.