INTRODUCING LEGISLATION REQUIRING THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE TO REVIEW AND UPDATE FORMS CONTAINING RACIALLY OR ETHNICALLY INSENSITIVE TERMINOLOGY; Congressional Record Vol. 165, No. 96
(Extensions of Remarks - June 10, 2019)
Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E729]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
INTRODUCING LEGISLATION REQUIRING THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE TO REVIEW
AND UPDATE FORMS CONTAINING RACIALLY OR ETHNICALLY INSENSITIVE
TERMINOLOGY
______
HON. ALCEE L. HASTINGS
of florida
in the house of representatives
Monday, June 10, 2019
Mr. HASTINGS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce legislation
requiring the Department of Defense (DOD) to review and modernize any
of its in use forms utilizing outdated and racially insensitive
terminology. Today, Senator Tammy Duckworth will introduce the same
legislation in the U.S. Senate. I thank her for joining me in this
effort, and express my gratitude for the 42 members of the House of
Representatives and the four Senators who have joined us in introducing
this legislation.
It was recently brought to my attention that the Defense Department's
DD-2064 Form, which is issued when a service member loses his or her
life while deployed overseas, utilized the term ``Negroid'' as one of
the means for denoting race. Quite frankly, I was shocked to see this
term listed on documentation sent to the family of one of my
constituents just a few months ago, after their son lost his life in
service to our country.
Imagine for a moment what this must feel like. In the midst of the
pain and crisis of losing a son, a daughter, a husband, or a wife, to
receive a form from the Federal government identifying that loved one
with outdated, offensive, pseudoscientific terminology once used to
justify racism and concepts like racial inferiority or racial
superiority. No family should ever have to cope with such added injury
when mourning a family member in a time of crisis.
This terminology is not compliant with requirements from DOD and the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). In 1997, OMB set guidance for
federal data on race and ethnicity, and in the years that followed, DOD
released several issuances guiding the implementation of OMB's
direction.
I also want to acknowledge--and I want to be very clear--that the
Department of Defense acted expeditiously to rectify this oversight
once my office brought it to their attention. While I commend them for
addressing this issue with the seriousness it requires, the fact that
this document retained outdated terminology for more than two decades
calls into question the status of other forms in use by the Department.
It is my understanding that the Department has begun a process of
reviewing hundreds of other forms to ensure that no others are out of
compliance. However, this review is just a small fraction of the forms
and surveys utilized by the Department, individual service components,
and military installations world-wide.
That is why this legislation is a necessary step that is in the best
interest of our service members and our country.
This is a short, straightforward bill. It requires the DOD to review
each of its forms and surveys currently in use to determine if any
others contain terms or classifications that may be considered racially
or ethnically insensitive. If they find any, they must take the
appropriate steps to modernize them.
I would again like to thank my colleagues who have supported this
measure, and ask that we move expeditiously to bring it to the floor
for a vote.
____________________