[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 89 (Thursday, May 25, 2023)]
[House]
[Pages H2626-H2628]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




              RENAMING THE RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 9, 2023, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green) is recognized for 
60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
  Mr. GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, and still I rise. And still I rise 
a proud descendant of the enslaved people who are the foundational 
mothers and fathers of the United States of America.
  They are the foundational mothers and fathers because many of them 
had their entire lives sacrificed so that the country can have the 
economic foundation that it had in the early stages of its existence.
  These foundational mothers and fathers are the persons who were 
kidnapped, brought to this country, placed into slavery, forced into 
labor, centuries of labor, not compensated, no remuneration. I am a 
proud descendant, and I am a proud descendant because they ought to be 
respected.
  It is time to respect the foundational mothers and fathers who laid 
the economic foundation upon which this Nation stands today.
  I am also proud to be here today to speak about the conscience 
agenda.
  We want to make sure that we have a slavery remembrance day, August 
20. On August 20, 1619, the White Lion docked in Point Comfort, 
Virginia, near what we now call Norfolk, Virginia. On this White Lion 
were persons who were placed into slavery in this country.
  August 20, 1619, a moment in time that will impact the rest of time, 
we will never be able to escape the fact that it happened. It was a 
seminal moment in time. August 20 ought to be slavery remembrance day.
  We ought to also do something to acknowledge those persons whom I 
call the foundational mothers and fathers. I am a proud descendant of 
them.
  In 1956, we accorded a Congressional Gold Medal to Confederate 
soldiers, to those persons who would enslave persons or maintain 
slavery. This Congress did it, a Congressional Gold Medal.
  Well, why not have a Congressional Gold Medal for the enslaved, the 
foundational mothers and fathers?
  This is part of the conscience agenda, a Congressional Gold Medal for 
the enslaved.
  In this country that I love, I salute the flag; I say the Pledge of 
Allegiance; and I stand for the national anthem. It means something to 
me to be an American.

  By the way, the greatness of the country won't be measured by whether 
I do these things. The greatness of the country will be measured by 
whether I would defend those who choose not to salute the flag, who 
choose not to say the Pledge of Allegiance. The greatness of America is 
in how we tolerate persons who have opinions that are not popular.
  That is the greatness of America, in part. There are many other 
aspects of it.
  The truth is, in this country that I am proud to be a part of, proud 
to say I am an American--the United States is my home; the origin of my 
descendants was far away--we revere the enslavers and revile the 
enslaved.
  How can we possibly allow this to continue? These were human beings. 
They merit a Congressional Gold Medal.
  If we can give a Congressional Gold Medal to the enslavers, the 
Confederate soldiers, then we can accord one to the enslaved people who 
were the foundational mothers and fathers who worked for hundreds of 
years to make this country the great Nation that it is.
  That is all a part of the conscience agenda. Today, however, having 
spoken of these things briefly, I am going to focus on the third item 
on the conscience agenda.
  The third item on the conscience agenda is removing the name of 
Richard Russell from the Russell Senate Office Building.
  To properly address this, I have to lay a predicate. We have to talk 
first about beneficial bigotry.

                              {time}  1330

  And to properly explain beneficial bigotry, we have to address a 
concept. It is this notion that those who tolerate bigotry perpetuate 
bigotry. Those who tolerate bigotry, because of that toleration of 
bigotry, you are perpetuating it because you're not doing what you can 
to stop it.
  We ought not tolerate bigotry. The Russell Senate Office Building is 
named after Richard Russell, a self-proclaimed white supremacist. That 
is what he called himself. He was a person who fought antilynching 
legislation. That means he did not want us to pass antilynching 
legislation.
  He was a person who fought integration. If he had his way, there is a 
good likelihood I would not be standing here today. He was the person 
who coauthored the Southern Manifesto. Richard Russell, his name is on 
the Russell

[[Page H2627]]

Senate Office Building. He identified himself as a white supremacist.
  Well, dear friends, his name ought not be there. We ought not 
tolerate his name being there. To tolerate his name there is to 
perpetuate the bigotry associated with his many exploits.
  Richard Russell's name should be removed from the Russell Senate 
Office Building, and it should be replaced with the name that it had 
before it became the Russell Senate Office Building. I don't have a 
person's name that I would call to the attention of the Congress, I 
don't. There will be some debate about that.
  I do believe we can let it revert to the name that it had prior to 
becoming the Russell Senate Office Building, and that was the Old 
Senate Office Building. I think it should be called the Old Senate 
Office Building. Let it revert back to this, then take as much time as 
you need to acquire an honorable name to go on the building.
  The Russell Senate Office Building is currently a symbol of national 
shame. It is. The Senators ought to be ashamed because they have the 
power to remove this name from the building. They have the power to do 
it, the Senate. The same Senate that voted on removing names from 
military bases can remove this name from the Russell Senate Office 
Building.
  The toleration of bigotry is the perpetuation of it. Allowing this 
name to stay there is the toleration of bigotry, especially when you 
have the power to remove it. We ought to use that awesome power that 
the Senate has to do not the right thing but the righteous things. It 
would be a righteous thing to remove this name from the building.
  Mr. Speaker, I am going to talk about beneficial bigotry, this is a 
part of my predicate. When you benefit from bigotry, if you believe it 
benefits you in some way, you tolerate it.
  I, by the way, have not been afforded that luxury. If I say something 
that is bigoted or if I am near bigotry, I have to apologize. I have 
apologized, by the way, for things that I found to be unacceptable. I 
have. I have to. I am not allowed the luxury of having the benefits 
that beneficial bigotry can afford people.
  There are many who fight bigotry until it benefits them. They don't 
have to apologize. They can let a building be called the Russell Senate 
Office Building, fight bigotry everywhere but in the building wherein 
they happen to have offices. They fight it everywhere but here, the 
Russell Senate Office Building, with this name.
  Let me give you some examples of what beneficial bigotry allows. 
Beneficial bigotry will allow a country to name a town after a bigot. 
Beneficial bigotry. Beneficial bigotry allows some people the luxury of 
associating with bigots and justifying it. That is what beneficial 
bigotry accords some people.
  We ought not allow the benefits of bigotry to allow us to tolerate 
bigotry, such that we perpetuate bigotry. That is what is happening 
with the Russell Senate Office Building.
  My friends, I live today to live to see the day that this name will 
come off of this building. I don't know when it will happen--it will. 
But I do know how the system works, and it is beneficial to know how it 
works.
  The system functions such that when some people demand things of 
others who have the power to make the change, they will not make that 
change because of the simple fact that the demand was made, and they 
don't want it to appear as though they had to succumb to the demand 
that was made. I am demanding. I am demanding. I am not begging. I am, 
in a sense, pleading. I am demanding that the name come off.
  You see, when you do this and when you are bold enough and you have 
the courage enough to demand that the righteous thing be done, there 
are some people who are not going to do the righteous thing simply 
because they can't let it be said that they have caved in, as it were--
to borrow the parlance of many persons--that they caved in to a demand 
to do the righteous thing. They can't accept that.
  What they will do is they will try to find a way to do this, to 
remove the name, and proclaim victory because it was done for some 
other reason, not because of the demand, but for some other reason. I 
am okay with that. Just remove the name. Find a clever way to do it.
  Usually they will find some person that they find favor with to 
become the person that actually caused it to happen. History is replete 
with examples of where persons of African ancestry have not been 
properly credited for what they have done in history. I can think of 
some examples that are in my book that I will share with you at a later 
time.
  The point is this: We cannot allow persons to simply decide that 
because they have the power, and they get to set the agenda that they 
won't do it. There is nothing preventing the Senate from changing this 
name, removing it, saving will. Just the will. Remove the name of the 
bigot from the building. There is nothing preventing it except for 
will.
  My prayer to the Senate is that the Senate would do the righteous 
thing. Don't tolerate bigotry. You don't have to. Your offices are in 
the building. Your offices are in the building, in the Russell Senate 
Office Building, a symbol of national shame. You ought to be ashamed 
that it is there--your office.
  What is wrong with us?
  I know how the system works. I am a part of it, I ought to. There is 
some positive news related to Richard Russell, and the positive news is 
that one of my colleagues of whom I am proud to associate with, as it 
relates to this, the Honorable Bonnie Watson Coleman is proposing 
legislation that would take Richard Russell's name off of a bill--off 
of legislation. I came to this floor some time ago, and I brought up 
the fact that his name is on more than a building, his name is on 
legislation. There is a lunch program that his name is on.
  Mrs. Watson Coleman has legislation that would rename the National 
School Lunch Program Act. It is going to remove his name and substitute 
it with another name. I compliment you, my dear friend, Mrs. Watson 
Coleman. I compliment you for doing this.
  This is the honorable thing to do. I appreciate it. I am going to 
appreciate it. I am going to, if allowed, be her co-lead on this 
legislation.
  I made a commitment, and I want the world to know that I try my best 
to honor my commitments. I made a commitment, and the Record of the 
Congress will reflect that on April 28, 2023, Volume 169, Number 72 of 
the Daily Edition, there is a topic styled ``The Conscious Agenda.'' It 
is part of the Congressional Record.
  I stood right here in this very spot, and I made a commitment. About 
halfway through my message, you will find the commitment where I am 
speaking of legislation that bears the name of Richard Russell--the 
same person whose name is on the building.
  I said: ``It is the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch 
Program.'' That is what I am talking about. I indicate that this 
legislation bears his name. Here are my exact words: ``His name 
shouldn't be on a school lunch program.'' I go on to say: ``I am filing 
legislation''--and I said--``this is the update''--because the last 
time when I spoke on this topic it was an update--I say, ``this is the 
update.''
  ``I am filing legislation--this is the update--to have Richard 
Russell's name removed from all legislation that happens to bear it 
currently--all legislation--and to never have his name listed again.'' 
And I go on to say: ``He is a symbol of national shame. His name should 
be removed.''
  I still stand by that. So while I am going to support and co-lead and 
am proud to know that Mrs. Watson Coleman is filing her legislation, I 
will file my legislation to keep my commitment that I have made to 
people who chronicle the things that I do. I want them to know that I 
am following through. I will be filing my legislation, notwithstanding 
the fact that I will support, proudly, Mrs. Watson Coleman's 
legislation.
  Friends, we live in a country that accords us free speech. This is a 
priceless possession to have, free speech. There are so many places in 
the world where one cannot stand as I am standing today before the 
world, literally, and say the things that I have said. This is one of 
the reasons why I love my country because of the free speech.
  Here is a question that we have to ask ourselves: If we have free 
speech and free speech can be the methodology by which we can bring 
about change, and if we are tolerant of bigotry, is that free speech 
really being used to

[[Page H2628]]

the benefit of the people who actually accorded us or afforded us the 
free speech, the people who are the Framers of the Constitution?
  I have great respect for them. The Framers who thought this thing was 
so important that they put it in the Constitution.
  I am standing here to take advantage of and use that free speech. 
That free speech allows me to stand here and tell you that beneficial 
bigotry is going to become the shame of many persons in this country.
  I have here invitations. These are all invitations. I won't turn them 
toward the camera because I really don't want to today expose the names 
of the persons who sent me these invitations.
  Here is one that is for a luncheon that took place in the month of 
May. I won't give the date because I am not interested in identifying 
the organization. They are inviting me to an event taking place in the 
Russell Senate Office Building.

                              {time}  1345

  Obviously, if you know me, you know that I didn't go.
  I am a one-person protest. I refuse to go into the Russell Senate 
Office Building except to protest. I am not going into that building 
unless I am to protest, and I will go in for that purpose.
  However, my friends, whose names I shall not reveal, sent me this 
request and I wrote them a letter in response. I will come back to the 
letter in just a moment.
  I have other friends having an event in the month of May at the 
Russell Senate Office Building. I didn't attend. I sent them a letter. 
I will come back to the letter in just a moment.
  I received another offer to attend the Russell Senate Office Building 
and be a part of an event. I did not attend. I sent them a letter.
  Now, all of these are just for the month of May, and while not 
calling names, some of the people who sent me these invitations are 
people who fight bigotry vehemently, who stand against bigotry in all 
its forms. They do, but they have events in the Russell Senate Office 
Building.
  How can you have events in the Russell Senate Office Building and say 
that you are antithetical to bigotry, that you are going to fight 
bigotry?
  There are some places that if I went into, I would have to apologize 
because those places are associated with bigotry, but not my friends 
over in the Senate, in and out on a daily basis. I have friends 
inviting me to come to events there, be a part of programs. The Russell 
Senate Office Building is a benefit to them. You cannot allow 
beneficial bigotry, my friends, to cause you to tolerate bigotry.
  When you do this, you perpetuate bigotry. I told you I sent a letter 
to my friends explaining my position. I am just going to read some 
excerpts from the letter, and the reference is, invitation to luncheon, 
leaving out the rest of it, and it is in the Russell Senate Office 
Building.
  I am going to say ``friend'' so as not to identify the persons, Dear 
friend: ``Thank you for your invitation to the luncheon,'' without 
getting into the details. ``I am compelled to decline your invitation 
as I am boycotting the Russell Senate Office Building wherein the 
luncheon will take place.''
  Yes. The ``yes'' is not here. That is just a part of me expressing 
myself because I feel good about what I did. Yes.
  I write: ``Richard Russell was an unapologetic bigot and a white 
supremacist who claimed that America was `a White man's country.' '' 
Check the records if you don't believe me. It is all there. We are 
talking about the same Richard Russell that the building is named 
after, ``a White man's country.''
  He goes on to say: `` `We are going to keep it that way.' '' It is `` 
`a White man's country . . . and we are going to keep it that way,' '' 
meaning, we are going to keep it a White man's country.
  I know this is uncomfortable for many people to hear. We would rather 
have Al Green simply tolerate bigotry and perpetuate bigotry. That is 
what we would like to do when it is beneficial bigotry and it benefits 
other folk.
  Let me go on, if I may. ``He not only successfully filibustered 
antilynching bills, but also voted against the 1964 Civil Rights 
Act''--Richard Russell--that is my commentary--``calling it''--these 
are his words--`` `shortsighted and disastrous.' ''
  The man whose name is on a building paid for by taxpayer dollars, 
many of whom are people of color, indicated that the 1964 Civil Rights 
Act was ``shortsighted and disastrous.''
  Richard Russell, a beneficial bigot, whose name is on the Russell 
Senate Office Building.
  Permit me to read on. These are my words: ``Furthermore, he 
coauthored the `Southern Manifesto' in opposition to racial 
integration.''
  I won't read it in its entirety. I am going to go to the next to the 
last line in the letter.
  I indicate: ``For these and other compelling reasons, I will not 
enter the Russell Senate Office Building (except to protest) until the 
name of the bigot is removed from the building.''
  I know there are people who are saying, Who let him say that? How 
could you let Al Green come to the floor of the House of 
Representatives and say these things? Here is how: Free speech. Here is 
how: Speaking truth.
  This is how it happens. I am here to do what we say we will do but 
many times do not. I am here to speak truth to power.
  Yes, there are consequences, but at some point in life you ought to 
decide that you are not going to tolerate beneficial bigotry, 
especially when you are not allowed to tolerate it and to see others 
tolerate it while demanding that you not tolerate it, that is also 
hypocritical, I indicate, until his name is removed from the building, 
upon which I still stand.
  Now, I would go on record saying this, just as I went on record 
saying that I would file the bill to remove his name from legislation, 
and I will. I have my bill prepared, and I am going to sign on to 
Congresswoman Watson Coleman's bill, but now my commitment is this: I 
am going to send a letter now to all of my friends in the human rights/
civil rights movement, because many of the folk who wrote me these 
letters that I have, many of these people are in the human rights/civil 
rights movement.
  I am going to send them all a letter, do not invite me to attend 
meetings in the Russell Senate Office Building. Be so kind as to not 
insult me. I am not a perfect victim. I am not the victim who is going 
to tolerate the bigotry and witness your toleration of it because it is 
beneficial, so don't send me a letter, don't invite me. I am not 
coming.
  They can continue to tolerate the beneficial bigotry that they enjoy 
by being in the Russell Senate Office Building, but know this: There 
will come a time when this name will be removed. There will. It will 
come down. The universe is constructed, such as Dr. King put it, the 
arc, ``the moral arc is long, but it bends toward justice.''

  This will be the just thing to do, to remove Richard Russell from the 
Senate Office Building.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________