```

[House Report 111-561]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

111th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     111-561

======================================================================

 
 TO PROVIDE FOR THE FURNISHING OF STATUES BY THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 
       FOR DISPLAY IN STATUARY HALL IN THE UNITED STATES CAPITOL

                                _______
                                

   July 22, 2010.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

                                _______
                                

Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania, from the Committee on House Administration, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                             MINORITY VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 5493]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

  The Committee on House Administration, to whom was referred 
the bill (H.R. 5493) to provide for the furnishing of statues 
by the District of Columbia for display in Statuary Hall in the 
United States Capitol, having considered the same, report 
favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill 
do pass.

                       PURPOSE OF THE LEGISLATION

    H.R. 5493 is a bill to enhance the artistic display of 
sculpture in the United States Capitol by providing the 
District of Columbia with the right to request that no more 
than two statues of prominent, deceased persons associated with 
that jurisdiction be displayed in the National Statuary Hall 
Collection. The Collection was created by statute in 1864 (2 
U.S.C. 2081) to honor distinguished persons chosen by the 
states, for display in what is now called Statuary Hall; in 
later years the statues were also displayed outside the 
overcrowded Hall, and, more recently, in the Capitol Visitors 
Center. In 2005, New Mexico submitted the 100th statue to 
complete the Collection, with two from each state.
    Choices of potential historical personages to receive the 
honor would be made by the District of Columbia government and 
presented to the Joint Committee of Congress on the Library. 
The District would bear the costs of making the statues and 
transporting them into the Capitol for display. H.R. 5493 would 
also provide to the District the ability to replace its 
statues, at a future time, as currently permitted by Federal 
law for existing statues in the Collection.

                   BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR H.R. 5493

    Upon completion of the new House wing of the Capitol in 
1857, the House of Representatives looked for a use for its old 
chamber, located between the Rotunda and the House wing. The 
idea for a statuary hall was proposed in April of 1864, during 
President Lincoln's administration, and National Statuary Hall 
was created by law on July 2, 1864. Each state was invited to 
send two statues of worthy citizens of their choosing to the 
newly created National Statuary Hall.
    By 1933, National Statuary Hall contained 65 statues and 
began to suffer from overcrowding and safety issues involving 
excess weight, so Congress passed House Concurrent Resolution 
47, to allow for the relocation of statues within the Capitol 
by the Joint Committee on the Library. In the 106th Congress, 
the efficacy of a House-numbered concurrent resolution beyond 
the Congress in which it had originated was discussed. As a 
result, the JCL's authority was codified in legislation in 2000 
(Public Law 106-554 [40 U.S.C. 187a]), the Consolidated 
Appropriations Act of 2001, which also gave the states the 
ability to replace their previous selections.
    The District of Columbia, by virtue of not being a state, 
was not included in the original 1864 statute. The Committee 
agrees with proponents of H.R. 5493 that the time has come for 
the contributions of residents of the District to be recognized 
in the same manner as those of the states.
    The need for a federal capitol that is not within a state 
was documented in Federalist No. 43 of The Federalist Papers 
and was codified in Article 1 Section 8 of the U.S. 
Constitution. James Madison, writing in Federalist No. 43, 
believed the Federal government, and not a state, should 
exercise total control over the new federal capitol, which led 
to the District of Columbia's unique designation.
    The area which currently comprises the District, 
irrespective of its changing governmental structure over time, 
has been part of the American republic since the formation of 
the United States. While not a state, the District of Columbia 
shares more in common with states than it does with American 
territories, which were acquired at various times through 
agreements or conquest. District of Columbia residents are 
granted the same rights and responsibilities as citizens of the 
50 states under the Constitution, except the ability to have 
voting representatives in the Congress; are treated the same 
for tax purposes; and vote, pursuant to the 23rd Amendment to 
the Constitution, for three electors to cast votes for 
president and vice president.
    This legislation is about art, not politics. It has nothing 
to do with the issue of D.C. voting representation in Congress 
and its enactment would not bolster any claims the District 
might have for the enactment of legislation on that subject, 
which is not within the jurisdiction of the Committee on House 
Administration. The land now comprising the District has had a 
history as long as the United States has existed, originally as 
part of the state of Maryland, and has had many famous 
residents of national and international renown.
    The District has indicated that, if the bill is enacted, 
that it would expect to propose the names of Pierre L'Enfant 
and Frederick Douglass for inclusion in the Collection, and has 
already commissioned statues which are currently on display in 
a local government office building. The Committee takes no 
position on the identity of the persons who might be chosen by 
the District.
    The Committee intends that the Joint Committee on the 
Library, pursuant to its statutory authority, would determine 
appropriate locations within the Capitol complex for display of 
statues presented by the District of Columbia for inclusion in 
the National Statuary Hall Collection.

                        COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

    H.R. 5493 was introduced by Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton 
of the District of Columbia on June 9, 2010. The Committee on 
House Administration conducted a markup of H.R. 5493 on July 
14th, 2010. The Committee considered and rejected, by voice 
vote, an amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by 
Rep. Lungren of California which would have limited the 
District to a single statue in the Collection, and added to the 
Collection a single statue each from the following territories 
of the United States: American Samoa, Guam, the Northern 
Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
    The Committee then ordered the bill reported favorably, by 
voice vote, without amendment, with a quorum being present.

                   ANALYSIS OF THE BILL (AS REPORTED)

    Section 1. Section 1 authorizes the President to invite the 
District of Columbia to provide and furnish no more than two 
statues celebrating the achievements of deceased citizens that 
the District of Columbia deems worthy of the honor. The 
subjects of the statues must be deceased for no fewer than 10 
years.
    Section 2. The District of Columbia may request the Joint 
on the Library to approve the replacement of a statue that was 
furnished pursuant to Section 1. This request will be 
considered by the Joint Committee on the Library if the request 
has been approved by the Council and Mayor of the District of 
Columbia. This request cannot be made until the statue that is 
to be replaced has been displayed for at least 10 years or 
unless the Joint Committee on the Library waives this 
requirement for cause. If the request is approved by the Joint 
Committee on the Library, the Architect of the Capitol will 
enter into an agreement with the District of Columbia to carry 
out the replacement procedure pursuant to any conditions the 
Joint Committee may require. The new statue is subject to the 
same conditions set forth in Section 1 and the District of 
Columbia shall bear the entire cost of the replacement process. 
Upon replacement and subject to the approval of the Joint 
Committee on the Library, ownership of the statue being 
replaced will be transferred to the District of Columbia. The 
replaced statue is prohibited from being displayed again in the 
U.S. Capitol unless specifically authorized by Federal law. The 
Architect of the Capitol, upon JCL approval, is authorized to 
direct and provide for the location and relocation of any 
statues.

             MATTERS REQUIRED UNDER THE RULES OF THE HOUSE

Constitutional authority

    Clause 3(d)(1) of House Rule XIII requires each committee 
report on a public bill or joint resolution to include a 
statement citing the specific constitutional power(s) granted 
to the Congress on which the Committee relies for enactment of 
the measure under consideration.
    The Committee cites the legislative power broadly granted 
to Congress under Article I. Pursuant to House Rule X, clause 
1(j)(4), the jurisdiction of the Committee on House 
Administration includes statuary and pictures, and acceptance 
or purchase of works of art for the U.S. Capitol.

Committee votes

    Clause 3(b) of House Rule XIII requires the results of each 
recorded vote on an amendment or motion to report, together 
with the names of those voting for and against, to be printed 
in the committee report. No recorded votes were taken during 
the Committee's consideration of H.R. 5493.

Congressional Budget Office estimate

    Clause 3(c)(3) of House Rule XIII requires the report of a 
committee on a measure which has been approved by the committee 
to include a cost estimate prepared by the Director of the 
Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 403 of the CBA, 
if timely submitted. The Director submitted the following 
estimate:

                                                     July 20, 2010.
Hon. Robert A. Brady,
Chairman, Committee on House Administration,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 5493, a bill to 
provide for the furnishing of statues by the District of 
Columbia for display in Statuary Hall in the United States 
Capitol.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Alan Eder 
and Matthew Pickford.
            Sincerely,
                                              Douglas W. Elmendorf.
    Enclosure.

H.R. 5493--A bill to provide for the furnishing of statues by the 
        District of Columbia for display in Statuary Hall in the United 
        States Capitol

    H.R. 5493 would authorize the President to invite the 
District of Columbia to place up to two statues of deceased 
citizens known for distinguished civic or military service in 
Statuary Hall in the United States Capitol. The bill also would 
require the District of Columbia to cover the costs of 
providing new statues. CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 
5493 would have no significant impact on the federal budget. 
Enacting the bill would not affect direct spending or revenues; 
therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures would not apply.
    H.R. 5493 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and 
would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments.
    The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Alan Eder and 
Matthew Pickford. The estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, 
Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

Federal mandates

    Section 423 of the CBA requires a committee report on any 
public bill or joint resolution that includes a federal mandate 
to include specific information about such mandates. The 
Committee states that H.R. 5493 includes no federal mandates.

Preemption clarification

    Section 423 of the CBA requires a committee report on any 
public bill or joint resolution to include a committee 
statement on the extent to which the measure is intended to 
preempt state or local law. The Committee states that H.R. 5493 
is not intended to preempt any state or local law.

Oversight findings

    Clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII requires each committee report 
to contain oversight findings and recommendations required 
pursuant to clause 2(b)(1) of House Rule X. Membership of the 
Joint Committee on the Library, which has jurisdiction over the 
placement of statues in the Collection, consists predominantly 
of members of the Committee on House Administration. The 
Committee has oversight responsibility under clause 4(d)(1)(B) 
of rule X for the management of services provided to the House 
by the Architect of the Capitol, except those that lie within 
jurisdiction of the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure. The AoC would supervise physical placement, and 
replacement, of statues in the National Statuary Hall 
Collection. The Committee finds that the Architect and the JCL 
can find appropriate locations within the U.S. Capitol for 
inclusion of additional statues in the National Statuary Hall 
Collection.

Statement of general performance goals and objectives

    Clause 3(c)(4) of House Rule XIII requires committee 
reports to include a statement of general performance goals and 
objectives. The Committee finds that the addition of two 
statues from the District of Columbia to the Collection would 
add to its artistic merit and increase its historical interest 
to the American people.

Congressional ``earmarks''

    Clause 9 of House Rule XXI requires committee reports on 
public bills and resolutions to contain an identification of 
congressional ``earmarks,'' limited tax benefits, limited 
tariff benefits, and the names of requesting Members. The bill 
as reported contains no such items.

Congressional Accountability Act applicability

    Section 102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act 
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-1) (CAA) requires each report on a public 
bill or joint resolution relating to terms and conditions of 
employment or access to public services or accommodations to 
describe the manner in which the legislation applies to the 
Legislative Branch. The bill as reported contains no such 
items.

Changes in existing law made by the bill, as reported

    H.R. 5493 would not make any changes in existing law.

                             MINORITY VIEWS

    The statues displayed throughout the Capitol complex add 
both history and beauty to the experience of visiting the 
United States Capitol. We do not object to giving the District 
of Columbia and the territories the opportunity to add to that 
experience by displaying a statue of a person of historical 
significance. However, there are unfortunately those who will 
distort the meaning of any legislation affecting only the 
District of Columbia to manufacture an argument that it shows 
support for giving the District of Columbia rights and status 
that are specifically not provided to it by the Constitution. 
We fear that the way the committee has treated this issue today 
will further lend support to those erroneous arguments.
    The legislation considered today authorized the District of 
Columbia to place two statues for display in Statuary Hall. 
This is the same number of statues that each state is allotted 
under the current rules. Additionally, this committee also 
passed legislation that gave the territories the right to 
display statues, yet each territory was only given 
authorization for one statue. H.R. 5493 seeks to give the 
District of Columbia the imprimatur of statehood by giving it 
two statues, and in the next breath, H.R. 5711 further 
distinguished the District of Columbia by only giving the 
territories one statue instead of two. While we do not wish to 
reargue other issues relating to the District of Columbia in 
this context, clearly the District of Columbia is not a state 
under the plain reading of the United States Constitution and 
it should not be treated as such.
    Ranking Member Lungren offered an amendment to make clear 
that this bill was designed to include the District of Columbia 
and the territories in the Capitol's statuary collection rather 
than as an exercise in political gamesmanship to advance an 
unrelated agenda relating to the District of Columbia. The 
amendment provided for both the territories and the District of 
Columbia to display one statue each. This change would have 
allowed members to support this bill without fear that their 
vote would be used to advance another agenda. However this 
amendment was defeated in committee.
    While we do not object to--and in fact support--the 
District of Columbia and the territories having the opportunity 
to display a statue, we do object to using this process as a 
political pawn in the game to grant the District of Columbia de 
facto statehood without going through the proper and necessary 
process of amending the Constitution.

                                   Daniel E. Lungren.
                                   Kevin McCarthy.
                                   Gregg Harper.

                                  

```