[House Hearing, 110 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
THE SOUTHEAST CRESCENT AUTHORITY, THE NORTHERN BORDER ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION, AND SOUTHWEST REGIONAL BORDER AUTHORITY
=======================================================================
(110-36)
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON
TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MAY 3, 2007
__________
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
35-918 PDF WASHINGTON DC: 2007
---------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866)512-1800
DC area (202)512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail Stop SSOP,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
JAMES L. OBERSTAR, Minnesota, Chairman
NICK J. RAHALL, II, West Virginia JOHN L. MICA, Florida
PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon DON YOUNG, Alaska
JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois THOMAS E. PETRI, Wisconsin
ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina
Columbia JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee
JERROLD NADLER, New York WAYNE T. GILCHREST, Maryland
CORRINE BROWN, Florida VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan
BOB FILNER, California STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio
EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas RICHARD H. BAKER, Louisiana
GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi FRANK A. LoBIONDO, New Jersey
ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland JERRY MORAN, Kansas
ELLEN O. TAUSCHER, California GARY G. MILLER, California
LEONARD L. BOSWELL, Iowa ROBIN HAYES, North Carolina
TIM HOLDEN, Pennsylvania HENRY E. BROWN, Jr., South
BRIAN BAIRD, Washington Carolina
RICK LARSEN, Washington TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois
MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania
JULIA CARSON, Indiana SAM GRAVES, Missouri
TIMOTHY H. BISHOP, New York BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania
MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
BRIAN HIGGINS, New York SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West
RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri Virginia
JOHN T. SALAZAR, Colorado JIM GERLACH, Pennsylvania
GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida
DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois CHARLES W. DENT, Pennsylvania
DORIS O. MATSUI, California TED POE, Texas
NICK LAMPSON, Texas DAVID G. REICHERT, Washington
ZACHARY T. SPACE, Ohio CONNIE MACK, Florida
MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii JOHN R. `RANDY' KUHL, Jr., New
BRUCE L. BRALEY, Iowa York
JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania LYNN A WESTMORELAND, Georgia
TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota CHARLES W. BOUSTANY, Jr.,
HEATH SHULER, North Carolina Louisiana
MICHAEL A. ACURI, New York JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio
HARRY E. MITCHELL, Arizona CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan
CHRISTOPHER P. CARNEY, Pennsylvania THELMA D. DRAKE, Virginia
JOHN J. HALL, New York MARY FALLIN, Oklahoma
STEVE KAGEN, Wisconsin VERN BUCHANAN, Florida
STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
JERRY McNERNEY, California
VACANCY
(ii)
Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency
Management
ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of Columbia, Chairwoman
MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine SAM GRAVES, Missouri
JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania
MICHAEL A. ARCURI, New York SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West
CHRISTOPHER P. CARNEY, Pennsylvania Virginia
TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota CHARLES W. DENT, Pennsylvania
STEVE COHEN, Tennessee JOHN R. `RANDY' KUHL, Jr., New
JAMES L. OBERSTAR, Minnesota York
(Ex Officio) JOHN L. MICA, Florida
(Ex Officio)
(iii)
CONTENTS
Page
Summary of Subject Matter........................................ vi
TESTIMONY
Butterfield, Hon. G.K., a Representative in Congress from the
State of North Carolina........................................ 12
Cuellar, Hon. Henry, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Texas....................................................... 21
Dole, Hon. Elizabeth, Senator from the State of North Carolina in
the United States Senate....................................... 12
Filner, Hon. Bob, a Representative in Congress from the State of
California..................................................... 21
Hayes, Hon. Robin, a Representative in Congress from the State of
North Carolina................................................. 12
Hinojosa, Hon. Ruben, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Texas....................................................... 21
Hodes, Hon. Paul W., a Representative in Congress from the State
of New Hampshire............................................... 5
McIntyre, Hon. Mike, a Representative in Congress from the State
of North Carolina.............................................. 12
Reyes, Hon. Silvestre, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Texas................................................. 21
Rodriguez, Hon. Ciro D., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Texas................................................. 21
Welch, Hon. Peter, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Vermont........................................................ 5
PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
Altmire, Hon. Jason, of Pennsylvania............................. 30
Arcuri, Hon. Michael A., of New York............................. 31
Butterfield, Hon. G.K., of North Carolina........................ 37
Cohen, Hon. Steve, of Tennessee.................................. 33
Cuellar, Hon. Henry, of Texas.................................... 39
Dole, Senator Elizabeth, of North Carolina....................... 40
Hayes, Hon. Robin, of North Carolina............................. 43
Hinojosa, Hon. Ruben, of Texas................................... 44
Hodes, Hon. Paul, of New Hampshire............................... 46
McHugh, Hon. John M., of New York................................ 60
McIntyre, Hon. Mike, of North Carolina........................... 63
Michaud, Hon. Michael H., of Maine............................... 34
Reyes, Hon. Silvestre, of Texas.................................. 66
Rodriguez, Hon. Ciro D., of Texas................................ 68
Welch, Hon. Peter, of Vermont.................................... 70
SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD
Hodes, Hon. Paul W., a Representative in Congress from the State
of New Hampshire, letter from the Northern Forest Center....... 51
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
HEARING ON THE SOUTHEAST CRESCENT AUTHORITY, THE NORTHERN BORDER
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION, AND THE SOUTHWEST REGIONAL BORDER
AUTHORITY
----------
Thursday, May 3, 2007
House of Representatives,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and
Emergency Management,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:13 a.m., in
Room 2167, Rayburn House Office Building, the Honorable Eleanor
Holmes Norton [chairwoman of the subcommittee] presiding.
Ms. Norton. I want to welcome today's witnesses and say
good morning to all of you. It is my privilege to welcome
Members of Congress to testify before the Subcommittee this
morning on economic development and the elimination of poverty.
I have only brief opening remarks because the Subcommittee
appreciates and values the additional information and the very
valuable time of the Members who will provide testimony
following our own hearing on this very issue in July, 2006,
concerning regional economic development initiatives.
I especially want to acknowledge the efforts of Mr.
Michaud, Mr. Hodes, and Mr. McIntyre and to commend you for
your perseverance and dedication to pursue legislation you
believe is vital and necessary for your region. We appreciate
the time and energy you have invested in efforts to address
poverty in your regions. For the Members new to the effort, we
welcome your participation and will draw on your insights to
help move these initiatives forward.
In these times of severe budget constraints, we are mindful
of the need to avoid redundancy and duplication in programs,
and of the importance of targeting scarce resources in areas
that will bring the highest investment return. We are very
interested in hearing from Members about how your initiative
fits into these concerns as well.
We thank each of you for coming this morning, and we offer
a special welcome to Senator Elizabeth Dole, who we believe
will join us later. We look forward to hearing testimony from
all of today's witnesses. I am pleased to say to the Ranking
Member, everybody take note, the Ranking Member has been
totally feminized here, we appreciate that Mrs. Capito has come
in for Mr. Graves, whose grandmother died. I know he would have
wanted to be here to hear the Members. We very much appreciate
her coming in his stead.
Mrs. Capito.
Mrs. Capito. Thank you, Madam Chair. I wish to extend my
condolences to Mr. Graves on the death of his grandmother. I
know that he wishes he could be here today to hear the
testimony.
I just briefly want to thank you for holding the hearing.
And I also want to thank the distinguished panels of witnesses
for taking the time out of their very busy schedules today. You
will be providing testimony on the proposed regional economic
development initiatives for the southeast, southwest, and
northern border. Areas in these regions have high unemployment,
low per capita income, and lack necessary infrastructure.
Over the past couple of years, there has been increasing
interest in creating regional economic development authorities
to spur economic development in these areas. As a Member of
Congress from West Virginia, I have great experience with one
such commission, that being the Appalachian Regional
Commission, which covers all 55 counties of my State of West
Virginia. Interestingly enough, during the past five years,
three counties of my 18 counties have been removed from the
ARC's list of economically distressed counties, and one has
jumped to the competitive category.
I have seen first-hand what the ARC has done in my
district, what it has done for the region, and it has had a
long-standing history of success and great help for local
economic development authorities. So I am very familiar with
that.
I look forward to everybody's testimony. I thank the
gentlemen for coming today. Thank you.
Ms. Norton. Other members who have statements to make? Mr.
Michaud.
Mr. Michaud. Thank you very much, Madam Chairwoman. I want
to thank both you and the Ranking Member for holding this
hearing. Chairwoman Norton, you have been an incredible
advocate for economic development and for helping regions that
are struggling, and on behalf of one such region, I want to
thank you very much.
I also want to recognize our colleagues here today. Mr.
Hodes, Mr. Welch, and Mr. McHugh, who will not be able to make
it today but I would ask, Madam Chair, that we ask unanimous
consent that Mr. McHugh's testimony be inserted in the record.
Ms. Norton. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. Michaud. The work of these colleagues and the work of
their staffs has been invaluable in developing this
legislation. They are truly dedicated to helping improve the
economy in our region.
I first lead a group of bipartisan cosponsors three years
ago in developing this bill, and I especially want to commend
Mr. Hodes, who has shown extraordinary leadership in heading up
our group on this legislation in this Congress, as well as Mr.
Welch.
Madam Chairwoman, for 40 years the ARC has shown us an
effective way to address regional economic distress. A small
Federal investment in that region is going a long way towards
creating jobs, infrastructure, business opportunities, and hope
for the future.
In the northern border region, we have seen a clear,
persistent pattern of economic distress, with a lost of natural
resource-based industries, the loss of jobs, and aging and
crumbling infrastructure. If you look at the 28 counties in
this bill that lie on the border or right next to the border
between Maine and New York, you will find poverty above the
national average, median household income that is $7500 below
the national average, persistent unemployment that is
consistently higher than the rest of the country, and most
striking of all, a loss of almost 1 percent of the population
between 1990 and 2000, compared to 13 percent growth nationally
over the same period.
Clearly, this region has a compelling need for new
investment.
As we have heard in testimony before in this Subcommittee,
most recently on January 23rd of this year, the regional
commissions are an extremely valuable tool for promoting
economic development. They can help us address the unique
challenges of different regions without duplicating other
Federal programs. I think the testimony we will hear today, and
that we did hear on July 10th of last year, will show that the
northern border region has a real need and that a regional
commission can help us tremendously. A regional commission can
help us invest in transportation, health care, agriculture,
broadband, and alternative energy. It can help us create jobs
for the long term.
Our region has all of the ingredients we need to face our
challenges head-on and make ourselves an economic engine. A
regional commission would bring us the resources and leadership
we need to make a fundamental change in our future.
In closing, Madame Chairwoman, I can say from personal
experience that this commission is sorely needed. Like my
father and my grandfather before me, I worked at Great Northern
Paper Company in East Millinocket. Two days after I was elected
and sworn in to Congress, the mill filed bankruptcy and closed
its doors. It devastated the community. The story that I tell
is not unfamiliar to other areas in the State of Maine that
have had this happen to them as well. That is why this bill has
the strong bipartisan support of our group of cosponsors. It
also has the united support of economic development district
directors, local NGOs, and major conservation groups.
We need the kind of leadership and investment that a
regional commission can bring, to make sure that instead of
more mills closing, we can get onto a path of new jobs, new
industry, where young people can stay, build, and live in the
region where they were born.
I look forward to hearing the testimony of the witnesses
and to moving forward with this legislation to improve the
lives of the people who live in the northern border region.
With that, I yield back, Madam Chairwoman.
Ms. Norton. Thank you, Mr. Michaud.
Are there any other opening statements? Mr. Arcuri.
Mr. Arcuri. Thank you, Madam Chair. I would like to thank
the Chairwoman and the Ranking Member for holding this hearing.
Also, Mr. Hodes, Mr. Welch, thank you very much for your
leadership, and Mr. Michaud, thank you very much for your
leadership on this bill as well. It is a very important piece
of legislation that I think will greatly benefit the region.
I am proud to join the chorus of supporters here today as
an original cosponsor of H.R. 1548, the Northern Border
Economic Development Commission Act of 2007. This bipartisan
legislation would be incredibly beneficial to the region by
assessing and addressing the very specific needs, assets, and
challenges of the region as a whole. The commission would
create a Federal-State partnership where local development
districts and other non-profits bring projects, ideas, and
priorities to the commission from the local level to promote
economic development through the planning, technical
assistance, and funding of projects aimed at encouraging
economic prosperity, specifically by providing grants for local
transportation, infrastructure projects, broadband development,
alternative energy projects, agricultural development, and
health care facilities.
Most importantly, this legislation is modeled after the
very successful Appalachian Regional Commission approach, an
idea conceived by the distinguished full Committee Chair, Mr.
Oberstar, when he was a staffer on this very Committee over 40
years ago. Simply put, the numbers speak for themselves. Since
its creation, the ARC has reduced the number of distressed
counties in its region from 210 to 100, cut the poverty rate
from 31 percent to 15 percent, and helped 1,400 businesses
create 2,600 new jobs.
Speaking from personal experience, six counties in my
upstate New York district have experienced similar success. The
Village of Sherburne, New York, in Chenango County is a great
example of how a small ARC award granted to them was extremely
helpful in leveraging additional funds from State, local, and
private sources for economic development initiatives that
create jobs. A $200,000 grant from ARC for the enhancement of
aging water infrastructure in Sherburne, a problem that is
plaguing many of the States in the northeast, was able to
leverage close to $4 million dollars in State, local, community
investment. By providing enhanced infrastructure capabilities,
Sherburne, New York, has become a home for a number of new
businesses in the area and continues to attract new investment.
The Northern Border Economic Development Commission not
only will extend similar benefits to economically distressed
counties in Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont, but will also
allow upstate New York counties like Oneida, Herkimer, Cayuga,
and Seneca to enjoy the same benefits their neighboring
counties in the southern tier of New York enjoy under the
Appalachian Regional Commission.
Over the last several decades, upstate New York has had a
consistent pattern of economic distress as a result of
substantial losses in the manufacturing sector coupled with the
aging infrastructure and lack of opportunities for a skilled
workforce. My district alone has seen a staggering loss of more
than 14,000 manufacturing jobs between 2000 and 2005. This has
been devastating to our local communities. However, this is not
an anomaly, it is extremely characteristic of several States in
the northeast. A targeted regional approach like the one
created by this bill can help bring economic vitality to a
region in dire need.
Madam Chair, I look forward to working together with my
colleagues on both sides of the aisle to expedite the
consideration of this bill before the Subcommittee and the full
Committee. I thank you, and I yield back the balance of my
time.
Ms. Norton. I want to thank both of these members. Your
remarks I think have been tantamount to testimony that helps
the Committee to understand why this bill and these regions are
so important because of the kind of approach we have taken
through this effort. We are fortunate to have with us the
architect of all of this. I am very pleased that the Chairman
of the Committee has joined us and would ask him if he would
say a few words of opening remarks at this time.
Mr. Oberstar. Madam Chair, your opening statement is right
on target. You have framed the issue. We need to proceed with
this hearing. We need to proceed with this legislation. It has
broad bipartisan support. This is legislation that is in the
best tradition of what we do on this Committee, and that is
provide jobs, growth, mobility, economic development.
But as we enter this hearing and move toward reporting this
legislation from Committee in the near future, I am reminded of
the report of the Chair and Co-Chair of the Appalachian
Regional Commission about 20 years ago. It said, ``Halfway home
and a long way to go.'' You cannot overturn 100 years of
decline in 5, 10, 15, or 20 years. It takes long-term
investment and partnerships, and that is what this legislation
creates the opportunity to do, as we have done with the
Appalachian Regional Commission, to deal with the
underpinnings--the need for infrastructure investment, the
backbone road system, water and sewer and sewage treatment
facilities, and then move to the vocational education centers,
and then to the health clinics, and then to the industrial
parks, and then the airports, the rail sidings. All that are
needed to create the underpinnings for growth. ``If the public
sector does its part,'' as Adam Smith said 200 years ago,
``then the private sector can do its part.'' Thank you.
Ms. Norton. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I am very pleased to welcome the first two Members who will
testify. Representative Paul Hodes of New Hampshire's District
2, and Representative Peter Welch, a Vermont Member at Large.
Which of you would like to proceed first?
Mr. Hodes. I am happy to begin, Madam Chair.
Ms. Norton. Are you both new Members of Congress?
Mr. Hodes. We are both.
Ms. Norton. See, I will not even ask you about seniority.
No, I knew you were both new. Please go ahead, Mr. Hodes.
TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE PAUL W. HODES, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE; THE HONORABLE PETER
WELCH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF VERMONT
Mr. Hodes. Madam Chairwoman and Ranking Member Capito, I
want to thank you for giving my colleague Peter Welch and me
the opportunity to present testimony before the Transportation
and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public
Buildings, and Emergency Management today. I also thank the
distinguished panel for attending. And I join with you in
expressing condolences to the Ranking Member, Mr. Graves.
As you know, I am Paul Hodes. I represent New Hampshire's
2nd congressional district. I come before you today to offer my
strong support for H.R. 1548, the Northern Border Economic
Development Commission Act of 2007.
My home State of New Hampshire is a unique State, blessed
with incredible beauty, an abundance of natural resources, and
a citizenry that values hard work, community, and fiscal
restraint. But we are also facing our share of significant
challenges. Parts of our State, specifically the northern
region, have taken an economic beating are struggling to
recover. A staggering number of jobs, and especially
manufacturing jobs, have been lost. New Hampshire, and
especially northern New Hampshire, has seen plants close and
young people disappear to places that offer more opportunity.
Parts of New Hampshire are economically stricken and for the
people there it is getting harder and harder to get by.
While running for office, I spent a lot of time in the
North country and I spoke with countless people who had great
pride of place, pride in their community, they had the drive to
work hard and to improve their neighborhoods, but they felt
their communities had been ignored for years, and especially by
the Federal Government. Despite this neglect, there is a
compelling case for coordinated Federal investment in northern
New Hampshire. In fact, for the entire northern border region,
which you can see here on the chart we have brought, which
includes the northernmost counties of Maine, New Hampshire,
Vermont, and New York, that region has higher unemployment, a
higher percentage of people living in poverty, and lower
household income than the rest of the Nation.k
In northern New Hampshire, as I was campaigning, I will
just point out one example that comes to mind, campaigning in
the city of Berlin, the largest metropolitan area, if you will
call it that, in my State north of Franconia Notch, is a city
that was built on paper. Generations of people worked in the
paper mills--fathers, sons, members of families. And entire
culture was built on paper. As I campaigned this past summer in
Berlin, while the paper mill had been bought and there were
jobs there, the pulp mill had been closed down--300 jobs lost,
moved out of the county. People were walking the streets at the
annual summer festival for the first time in their lives
without jobs, without prospects, ready to work but without the
infrastructure and the help to do it.
When I was first elected to serve in Congress this past
November, I was very proud to work closely with other Members
of Congress, along with my staff, and especially Mr. Michaud,
from the border region to put together a plan to bring much
needed economic development to the area. The Northern Border
Economic Development Commission Act will help create jobs and
kick-start local economies in northern New Hampshire and in the
entire northern border region.
The commission enforces the notion that if you are willing
to work hard and play by the rules, we are here to help you get
ahead. The people in the area this bill targets deserve a
Government that works for them and with them. The Northern
Border Economic Development Commission is an important step
towards providing good paying jobs and economic opportunity in
an area that needs and deserves it.
The commission this bill would create would be charged with
investing Federal resources for economic development and job
creation in the most distressed counties of the northern border
region. I am proud to say that a number of Representatives from
both sides of the aisle have signed on as cosponsors to show
their support. Among them is my colleague from New Hampshire,
Carol Shay Porter, Maine Representatives Michael Michaud, who
is with the panel today, and Tom Allen; New York
Representatives John McHugh and Michael Arcuri, who is on this
panel today; and my colleague, At Large Representative Peter
Welch of Vermont, who you will hear from.
By design and purpose, this bill follows the innovative
Appalachian Regional Commission model drafted by Chairman
Oberstar, who is also with us today, and I thank him for his
extraordinary leadership in fashioning the notion and
implementing commissions that show the great results that can
be achieved. Based on this model, the commission we propose
today would create a unique Federal-State partnership charged
with promoting developing through regional planning, technical
assistance, and funding of projects aimed at encouraging
economic prosperity. Community development groups and other
non-profits are encouraged to bring project ideas and
priorities to the commission from the local level. This is very
important in New Hampshire because we value public-private
partnerships and grassroots initiatives. In fact, I am already
working with local groups to prioritize funding needs.
This bottom-up approach ensures that actions reflect both
local needs and regional economic development goals. It also
ensures that States have a deciding voice in what investment is
made within their borders.
I would like to bring to the Committee's attention the
Northern Forest Center, which has submitted a letter of support
which, with the Chair's permission, I would submit for the
record.
Ms. Norton. So ordered.
Mr. Hodes. Thank you very much. This letter you will see
points to a 2006 sustainable economic initiative in the
northern border region which will work in close harmony I think
with the commission we create.
With its proposed budget of $40 million per year, the
Northern Border Economic Development Commission can help meet a
range of local needs. Whether the need is agricultural
development, land and forestry conservation to maintain
productive traditional uses, investment in transportation
infrastructure, cyber infrastructure, alternative and renewable
energy, or health care, this commission will play a key role in
investing in the Nation's economy.
If this bill is passed, it will provide a much-needed boost
for our northern communities. The people who live in this
region that might be called the ``ice belt'' are hard-working,
taxpaying, caring citizens. Their plight deserves our
consideration. Working together, we can improve life in these
distressed communities and build a better future not only for
the region but for our entire country.
I thank you for your time. Thank you for allowing me to
testify before this distinguished Subcommittee. I look forward
to working with you as we move ahead. Thank you very much.
Ms. Norton. Thank you very much, Mr. Hodes.
Mr. Welch.
Mr. Welch. Thank you very much. I have a certain amount of
modesty appearing before this Committee because the Members who
have already given opening statements and have long experience
have forgotten more about this than I will ever know. But I
want to say, Mr. Michaud, you have laid out what is the
challenge for these economically depressed areas, and that is
what this is all about.
Across the northern tier in New York, Vermont, New
Hampshire, and Maine, we have those challenges. The idea here,
Mrs. Capito, you have described exactly what the model is. I
gather it is not a bad idea to do again, follow a model that
has worked successfully in one place and transport it to
another. That is essentially what it is that we are doing. I
think Mr. Arcuri, Mr. Hodes, and I are very grateful that there
is this model that has been successful, and we are grateful to
you, Mr. Michaud, that you have encouraged us to come forward
and try to provide this in a cooperative way to the northern
tier.
Vermont, in Franklin County, Orleans County, and Essex
County, are all on the northern tier and have many of the
problems that my colleague Mr. Hodes described and you did as
well. This would have a very significant impact on that region
of Vermont. These counties share similar struggles--
infrastructure, high unemployment, youth who are leaving for
better opportunities elsewhere. The northern border regions of
Vermont, New York, and New Hampshire share those similar
challenges. And what I think is great about this commission is
it allows us as a region to work together and to try to
leverage our assets into opportunity across that entire tier.
Many community and economic development organizations work
in this region in Vermont to promote higher quality of life and
good paying jobs, I was very alarmed when I learned that there
is no single economic development entity that is focused on the
overall needs of the northeast border region as a whole. We do
believe that we have to partner with our fellow States in order
to best provide for the future opportunities for our citizens.
I invite any of you here to come up sometime to Franklin
County or the northeast kingdom. It is great biking, Mr.
Chairman, some hills, if you can handle that. But if you did
come, you would find some wonderful people--entrepreneurial,
hard-working, and incredible natural resources, wonderful
towns, but high unemployment, low wages, $10,000 below the
national median. People are struggling and doing their best to
get from here to there and pay their bills. They would like to
be able to do what all of us would like to be able to do, and
that is live in the communities we grew up in.
The creation of this commission is going to give us a
chance to face and tackle the challenges of rural economic
development together. I thank this Committee for inviting us,
and for your work and for your commitment to helping all of us
across this country. Thank you.
Ms. Norton. I thank you both for your insights and this
testimony. Let me just ask a couple of questions.
We had a hearing on economic development and the Economic
Development Act and the important advances that have been made
in other regions, leveraging a very small amount of funds,
drawing in industry in quite extraordinary ways, many times
Federal investment. We began with areas where poverty had been
endemic despite the industrial revolution, despite all that has
happened to make this country an economic powerhouse. Now we
are to the point where we better watch out about stereotyping
where such needs are because the global economy has shuffled
the deck. You, of course, come from New England and this was
the strong manufacturing sector. People are moving from New
England in part because it is cold and in part because of the
loss of that manufacturing job base.
In the testimony that we had before us previously, people
have often focused on the difference between the investments
made in the early years of the Act in traditional public works
and toward new investments in technology, the information
highway, if you will, instead of the concrete highway. I do not
know that this is the only wave of the future, but any insights
you could give us on whether or not that or other entirely new
kinds of activities--you mentioned some of them--would take
easily in the New England area where this has now become an
endemic problem?
Mr. Hodes. Sure. Let us focus for a moment on the existing
natural resources. In the norther border region there is an
abundance of wood. This country faces a crisis in our energy
policy, for example. The possibility of a new vision for the
northern border region where the natural resources are used as
biomass alternative fuels to create new industries, new jobs
out of existing facilities and using the workforce in place is
a great opportunity. For instance, there is a possibility, I
talked about the pulp mill in Berlin that is now closed, there
is a great opportunity to transform that potentially into an
alternative fuel electricity-generating facility. We then would
have the need for infrastructure in terms of moving that
alternative energy out of the region into the grid. So that
involves the basic infrastructure of electric transmission
lines and other transportation facilities.
So along with other initiatives, there is the possibility I
think of a transformation and a new vision for the northern
border region which this commission can play a key part in
helping to create, first, with the appropriate studies, then
with the appropriate investments that I think would transform
the region. I see the possibility, being parochial for a
moment, that New England and the northern border region can
lead this Nation towards a new 21st century energy policy that
will not only transform the lives of the people here, but
throughout the country, and then we can lead the world in
alternative energy. That is just one example of the way this
commission could work to create a new kind of infrastructure
than that which traditionally was focused on with other
commissions.
Ms. Norton. Mr. Welch?
Mr. Welch. Madam Chair, it is a great question, but in
Vermont we are creating jobs mainly from small companies.
Oftentimes it is folks who live in urban areas, have an idea,
and they prefer the lifestyle, and some of you from urban areas
may not believe this, but there are actually folks who like
living in the country and they want to come up and live there,
they think it is a great place to raise their kids. They need
infrastructure and they need a trained workforce.
We are creating jobs in some of these northern areas but
they are literally because somebody has an idea, they have a
company, but they need an infrastructure and they need a
workforce. Broadband is a big deal. We do not have it
everywhere in Vermont. What has happened where there have been
successful partnerships is we have had these development
agencies that want to get to yes, what are the practical
problems that a new business faces in order to get started.
There is a location that these entrepreneurs can go to and get
practical answers to there questions of people who want to help
them succeed. We have got to have jobs, we know that, but we
really need them in these poorer, lower income areas of
Vermont.
Ms. Norton. I would like to ask the Ranking Member, Mrs.
Capito, if she has any questions for these witnesses.
Mrs. Capito. I do not really have a question. I would like
to make a comment just as a person who lives in the ARC and has
enjoyed the benefits I spoke about earlier. And thank you to
Chairman Oberstar for his leadership those many years ago. We
still have a lot of work to do and we are going to continue to
do that, and he knows that.
My comment is really centered on resources. The ARC, every
year we fight to get the funding into the budget to be able to
keep viable projects within the ARC. Certainly, as you create
new regional commissions, it becomes again a question of
resources. So I would hope if this is the direction that we go
that we would all join together and make sure that to provide
resources for a commission such as this and maintain our ARC
resources it is not divide by half, it is multiply by two. With
that, I yield back my time.
Ms. Norton. I would like to ask the Chairman if he has any
questions to these witnesses?
Mr. Oberstar. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I thank Mrs.
Capito. I have been in West Virginia on numerous occasions,
going back to the very origins of the ARC.
Mr. Hodes, your predecessor some years removed, a member of
this Committee, Congressman Jim Cleveland did not vote for much
in the way of social programs funded by the Federal Government.
The things he did support, the Federal Aid Highway Program, the
Appalachian Regional Commission, and the Federal Economic
Development Administration programs. He was a strong,
articulate, and persistent advocate. And because he had such
staunch views on other issues, when he spoke favorably on EDA
and ARC people on his side of the aisle listened. We had a
great partnership. He served with my predecessor and then I
served with him.
Creating this kind of regional economic development crosses
over; it is not Democratic or Republican, it is people, it is
needs. And we see this all throughout the country where
resource-dependent areas have been depleted. The need to create
new economic opportunities that are not natural resource-based
is a huge, steep challenge.
New England was the birthplace of industrial revolution in
America. But it was also the first to be hurt by long-term
economic decline. First, the leather goods industry moved out,
and then the needle trades moved out, and then wood fiber moved
out as the lowly southern yellow pine was perfected for
scientists to find a way to take the resin out and cure it to
create straight two-by-fours instead of curvy ones and use that
wood chip in pulp production, as I am sure Mr. Michaud very
painfully knows. This is competition within the United States,
however.
So, creating an entity for economic development, but
regional economic development. We know that problems do not
start or stop at political boundaries, they cross over.
I want to see more of an emphasis on regional initiatives
in the legislation. As I have read through this, I think there
are some refinements that I would suggest to my colleagues on
shaping this and the other commissions to prioritize projects
that truly are regional. I had an experience with the Upper
Great Lakes Regional Commission in my district where all too
often projects masqueraded under the name of regional but they
were intensely local. You have to build coalitions across
borders.
I would suggest one of the priorities to be development of
a natural resource research center. We established such an
entity in Duluth for northern Minnesota, northern Wisconsin, it
benefits the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. We do not have a
regional commission any longer, it was dissolved many years
ago, and I also want to take the lessons of failure of that
commission to benefit the new commissions that we are creating
here. But the establishment of a natural resource research
institute that does some of the basic research on new product
development. For example, they initiated hybrid poplar that
grows to an eight inch, ten inch round wood in eight years.
They harvest it just like any other crop on a farm. It can grow
on those lands that we have taken out of production of corn or
wheat or other grains, and you do not need the fertilizer or
the limestone or the other to mend the soil. Those are the
kinds of initiatives that really cross over boundaries, cross
jurisdictions, and come back to the resource base of the area
to benefit and create new job opportunities.
So I encourage you to stimulate the regionality of your
approach. And there are many others, we need not go into all of
the parameters. But for that, and the southeast, and the other
commissions that are created, those are the kinds of
initiatives I think create justification for regional
commission development, including backbone highway development
where we can accelerate the movement of goods as well as
people, both for travel and tourism and for goods movement.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I thank our colleagues for their
comments.
Mr. Hodes. Madam Chair, may I just briefly respond?
Ms. Norton. By all means, Mr. Hodes.
Mr. Hodes. Thank you, Mr. Oberstar, for those insightful
comments. It is very helpful for you to focus the work of this
commission regionally. I hesitate of course to speak for Mr.
Cleveland, but I recognize his good work in this area and it is
because he recognized the I think genius in these commissions
of the bottom-up grassroots approach and the public-private
partnership.
I would commend to you, Mr. Oberstar, the letter from the
Northern Forest Center which I think addresses your thoughts
very directly, because it talks about the cooperation here
between New Hampshire, Vermont, Maine, New York, and the
governors of those States. This letter has appended to it a
list of all the members of the Sustainable Economic Initiative.
I think you will see that this work that has begun lays the
kind of foundation you suggest is important and that this
commission would then be instrumental in working with this
initiative that has begun to focus regionally in exactly the
way you suggest. I have submitted this for the record, as the
Chairwoman has allowed me to do, but I commend it to your
attention. Thank you very much.
Ms. Norton. I am going to move on because we have Senator
Dole here and we have promised her that we would take her right
away because she has such a narrow window. So we are finished
with this panel. We very much appreciate their testimony, very
appropriate testimony to open this hearing.
Ms. Norton. We appreciate that Senator Dole has walked all
the way across from the other side to be with us. I am told
that our Members from North Carolina will appear on the same
panel with Senator Dole. Therefore, I am pleased to welcome
Representative Mike McIntyre, Representative Robin Hayes, and
Representative G.K. Butterfield as well to this panel. Thank
you very much.
Senator Dole, you may proceed.
TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE ELIZABETH DOLE, SENATOR FROM THE
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE; THE
HONORABLE MIKE MCINTYRE, MEMBER OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA; THE HONORABLE
ROBIN HAYES, MEMBER OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA; THE HONORABLE
G.K. BUTTERFIELD, A MEMBER OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Senator Dole. Thank you very much, Chairwoman Norton,
Congresswoman Capito, members. I thank you very much for
holding this hearing today and I welcome the opportunity to
address the SouthEast Crescent Authority Act, SECA.
This important legislation, which is identical to a
companion bill I introduced in the Senate, would improve the
lives of people in economically distressed communities across
the southeastern United States. I sincerely appreciate the hard
work of my friend Congressman Mike McIntyre on this issue, and
I am grateful for the work that Congressmen Hayes and
Butterfield are doing to help get this legislation passed by
the House of Representatives.
Broadly speaking, economically distressed hardly seems to
describe my home State of North Carolina. Our statewide
unemployment rate is a low 4.5 percent. Our economy is growing
and adding new jobs. In fact, it was reported last month that
7,600 new tech jobs have been filled in just one year. North
Carolina is home to 25 of the Fortune 500 companies, many of
which are in Charlotte, the second largest financial center in
the United States.
But if you travel beyond the glittering skyline of the
queen city, the thriving research and university campuses of
the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill triangle, the bustling main
streets and commerce centers of the Piedmont triad and our
other cities, and the picturesque storefronts of our small
towns, or if you just head down the road from the sprawling
ocean front and mountainside vacation homes, you find a vastly
different North Carolina. It is largely rural and it is
significantly poorer.
It is in these parts of North Carolina where educational
attainment tends to be lower, unemployment rates tend to be
higher. The challenges of globalization have landed smack on
the shoulders of the region's textile mill towns, tobacco
producing areas, and furniture manufacturing communities. It is
also in these parts of North Carolina where the rates of health
problems such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and obesity
are well above average. Just consider this. If the region east
of Interstate 95 in North Carolina were its own State, it would
rank fiftieth in terms of premature mortality.
Madam Chairwoman, my aim is certainly not to paint a
depressing picture of rural North Carolina. Rather, I describe
this all too often overlooked part of my State so that this
Subcommittee understands the tremendous opportunity that SECA
holds for certain areas in North Carolina and across the
southeast, areas that while distressed still hold great
promise.
SECA would provide the assistance to enable communities to
leverage existing resources, update infrastructure, improve
educational opportunities, and attract economic development.
Proof positive is what the Appalachian Regional Commission, on
which SECA is modelled, has done for parts of western North
Carolina. According to the ARC, the percentage of Appalachian
adults with a high school education has doubled over the past
30 years--doubled. Many residents now have access to adequate
health care for the first time. And more than 840,000
Appalachian adults now have clean water and sanitation
facilities.
While 29 of our counties in western North Carolina have
benefitted from the Appalachian Regional Commission, there is
no Federal partnership to help our 71 counties to the east,
counties that could desperately use a helping hand. For
example, one community that would greatly benefit from SECA is
located in rural Washington County. Approximately 30 families
there live in serious poverty, 8 miles away from the closest
public sewer system.
Because these families do not have indoor plumbing, they
are forced to rely on wellwater and outhouses. This is totally
unacceptable in this day and age. Washington County has a
modest operating budget of only $13 million per year, and
three-quarters of these funds are allocated to State and
federally-mandated programs such as health care, social
services, and public safety. The county is financially unable
to provide public sewer service to these families due to the
lack of available programs at the State and Federal levels.
This is just one example of where SECA could be a tremendous
help.
Another place that would benefit from SECA is the town of
Ahoskie, a small community of approximately 4,500 residents in
rural Hertford County. Hertford County is classified as Tier I;
meaning, it is among North Carolina's most economically
deprived communities. According to the National Association of
Development Organizations, Ahoskie's wastewater treatment plant
has reached full capacity, placing a tremendous burden on the
town's ability to grow and prosper. Under current estimates,
the Town of Ahoskie must finance a $15.9 million project to
expand the treatment plant. But it has only been able to secure
$6.5 million in grant funding. In order to make up the over $9
million difference, the town will have to raise average sewer
rates from $19 to $58 per household. This more than 200 percent
rate increase will result in Ahoskie, one of the most
economically depressed towns in the State, having the highest
sewer fees in North Carolina.
Last year my friend Al Delia, the former director of
Federal Relations at East Carolina University, testified before
this Subcommittee about SECA. In his testimony, Al mentioned a
conversation he had with former Appalachian Regional Commission
national chair, who said, and I will quote Al: ``ARC rarely
puts in the most money to a project, but it often puts the
first or the last money into a project. In effect, the ARC
money is the glue that holds projects together.''
Let me underscore, communities across North Carolina and
throughout the southeast need this glue. These areas are
hurting. And we have seen with ARC and similar development
commissions that SECA would make that positive difference. I am
proud to support this legislation because SECA is not just
about trying to provide opportunity, SECA is about not missing
out on the tremendous opportunity that is just within the
region's grasp. Thank you very much for this opportunity to
share my views this morning.
Ms. Norton. Thank you, Senator Dole.
The way I am going to proceed is I am going to ask one
question of Senator, and I am going to ask the three Members to
go vote and then come back. Before I ask Senator Dole a
question, I am going to ask any of those Members who are
privileged to vote on the House floor whether they have a
question first for the Senator because you now have a vote.
Mr. Oberstar?
Mr. Oberstar. Madam Chair, may I join you in welcoming
Senator Dole.
Senator Dole. Thank you very much.
Mr. Oberstar. It is wonderful to have our colleagues from
the other body make the long journey.
[Laughter.]
Senator Dole. Thank you. I appreciate that.
Mr. Oberstar. When Members from this side try to make the
journey to the other side, there are more whitened bones along
the 200 meters than along the old Chisholm Trail. But when they
come from the other side over here, it is wonderful.
We have a partnership and we intend to work together, and
we have a great delegation in your State with strong advocates
on both sides of the aisle. And I said earlier, I am a strong
advocate of regional economic development initiatives and
probably have one of the pens that Lyndon Johnson used to sign
into law the Economic Development Act of 1965 and the
Appalachian Regional Commission Act. I was on the staff with my
predecessor over there in the corner, John Blotnik, when that
legislation was created and drafted much of the language and
the Committee Report on the bill. So all those years I have
followed ARC and supported other regional economic development
initiatives.
But I will say to this panel as I said to the previous one,
in looking in over the draft and the proposed bill, I want to
see more emphasis on regionality of projects. I also seek to
develop kind of an umbrella entity for the regional commissions
so that regionality really means something.
We had some very unfortunate experiences in the Upper Great
Lakes Regional Commission of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan
that caused its collapse and I want to avoid such failures for
other commissions going forward. I think an important way to do
that is to ensure that in the mix you have projects that are
truly regional in nature, that cross over boundaries, because
geography determines your economics, not the political
boundaries. And whether it is development of roadways, regional
rail systems, or emphasis on wood fiber resource development,
and I need not go any further than that, we should stimulate
and provide incentives for and increased grant support for
projects that truly are regional in nature.
Senator Dole. Thank you very much. I appreciate those
comments. And as we move forward together, we will certainly be
looking at all aspects of this and understand exactly the
message that you are conveying. Thank you very much.
Mr. Oberstar. Thank you, Senator.
Ms. Norton. Before I ask my question, let me ask again if
any member has a question? Mr. Coble, we are pleased to have
you. I ask unanimous consent that Mr. Coble be welcomed to sit
on the panel. He is not a member of the Subcommittee. Hearing
no objection, Mr. Coble, you may speak.
Mr. Coble. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted to welcome
my friends, particularly Senator Dole, to this side of the
Hill. I may have to stay on the floor, Madam Chairman, and may
not get to come back. But I am fully supportive. My six
counties probably will not directly benefit but certainly will
indirectly benefit, as will the entire State. Thank you, Madam
Chairman.
Ms. Norton. Yes, indeed. The members should go to vote.
I just have one question for the Senator--the bell does not
toll for her, at least over here--and that is, I think people
might be surprised to hear you talk about wellwater and
outhouses in a part of North Carolina which we now associate
with the New South and all that sort of thing and the Research
Triangle. Again, the Chairman talked about how geography
determines this. One side of the State is ``in the Appalachian
Region'' because of where the Appalachian Mountains flow, and
the other side equally poor and does not have the same benefit.
Do you think that the focus should be first on clean water and
sewer treatment with some Federal money leveraging state money
to make the area seem like an area where businesses of various
kinds would want to locate?
Senator Dole. Certainly, that is a very important aspect.
But I think there are many issues--education, economic
opportunity, health care access, infrastructure. All of these
are aspects where grants would be provided. So many parts of
the rural south just fall below the national average with
regard to these areas. And I think that, you know, as I have
said, east of I-95, yes, it is almost like two different States
in terms of these areas that are economically depressed that
really have no economic base off which they can build. So we
have got to provide the basics, and certainly infrastructure is
very important. The Town of Ahoskie cannot grow, it cannot
prosper when the treatment plant is at full capacity. And to
think that a town, one of the most depressed economically,
people suffering in Ahoskie from this situation, that their
water rates would go from $19 to $58 and they would be paying
the highest sewer rates of any town in North Carolina, and yet
they are one of the most economically depressed.
So I think we are on target to try to make the difference,
to work this through carefully. I look forward to working with
my colleagues to get this done in this session of Congress
because it will make a tremendous difference to these areas of
North Carolina and other parts of the southeast.
Ms. Norton. I very much appreciate your coming, Senator
Dole. And I want to say, one of the first things we say is if
we did anything will the Senate reciprocate. So I am very
pleased to have you here and to note your interest.
I am now going to call a recess until----
Mr. Butterfield. Madam Chairman.
Ms. Norton. Yes, sir?
Mr. Butterfield. May I ask unanimous consent to enter my
strong statement of support into the record in case I cannot
get back?
Ms. Norton. Indeed, sir.
Sorry for this bell, but I know I have held you already.
Senator Dole. Thank you again for the opportunity to work
together to get this done. Thank you.
Ms. Norton. Thank you, Senator.
We will resume in about 20 minutes.
[Recess.]
Ms. Norton. Mr. McIntyre, rather than hold you, and I am
not sure if the other members are coming back, I understand Mr.
Hayes has indicated that he wanted his remarks in the record, I
would be happy to receive your testimony at this time.
Mr. McIntyre. Thank you so much, Madam Chairman. And you
are correct, Representative Hayes told me he was doubtful he
would be able to make it back. So I am happy to proceed. Thank
you for your kindness.
Madam Chairwoman, many thanks to you for agreeing to hold
this important hearing on legislation that I have introduced,
H.R. 66, a bill to create the SouthEast Crescent Authority. And
thanks also to Chairman Oberstar, who I know was here earlier,
and to all the Subcommittee members.
This is a measure that I have introduced, as you may
recall, every Congress since the 107th Congress. It has
continued to receive bipartisan support and cosponsorship from
Members from States throughout the Union, including several
southern States. I want to also thank Senator Dole and my
colleagues Representatives Hayes and Butterfield, who are
appearing on this panel as well today and for their presence
earlier this morning.
In fact, the first time this bill was introduced, the first
time, back in the 107th Congress, and subsequently, we have not
only been warmly received, but the first time it received
unanimous bipartisan support. My hope is that this Subcommittee
will once again endorse this bill and perhaps this legislative
session we can move it to full Committee and hopefully
ultimately to the floor.
A Chapel Hill, North Carolina think tank that has studied
changes in the south for almost 40 years, including in its
State of the South Report for the year 2007, had information
and statistics that examine the job and population growth,
education systems, racial gaps, and economy of all the southern
States. This report states: ``As a result of the national
economic slowdown of the early part of this decade, job growth
stagnated in much of the south between the years 2000 and
2004.'' The report continues to state: ``The slowdown
illuminated the restructuring of the south's economy.''
I can tell you well, as many of my friends in my
neighborhood, my church, friends I grew up with in school,
friends of our family, jobs in the textiles in our area and in
furniture-making factories in other areas of North Carolina,
those jobs are gone, they have fled, while jobs in services,
retail, and the professions have come in. And as a Member that
represents a district from one of these southern States, the
7th District of North Carolina, as discussed in this 2007
report, I understand the conventional wisdom that low-wage
manufacturing jobs are being exchanged for even lower-wage
service and retail jobs. However, this conventional wisdom only
goes so far. And it is apparent that, as the 2007 report
states, ``A more high-tech, globally competitive economy has
introduced new employment opportunities for southerners but,''
it says, ``it has also destroyed jobs held by mature adults who
have had prospects, very few, for shifting into jobs with
comparable pay.''
I know factories in my own hometown of Lumberton and in
Robeson County and in adjoining counties particularly in
southeast North Carolina where folks who had worked at factory
jobs for the last 25 to 35 years, went straight out of high
school, they got off the tobacco farms, were told that your
future will not be in the tobacco farms, it will be in the
factories, go work in the factories, then those children grew
up, many of whom are my age now, and have been working in those
factories literally for the last 25 to 35 years and now find
themselves without a job and having to go back for worker
retraining or trying to find the kind of opportunity at
community colleges and other places so that they can find other
jobs that may have somewhere that they hope they can get
comparable pay.
Madam Chairman, the time is now in this situation and this
atmosphere to work to change this pattern and ensure those
individuals, whether they worked in textiles, tobacco, or
manufacturing, and those communities that have been affected
are not left behind. I am confident that the SouthEast Crescent
Authority will do just that. The southeastern portion of our
country, encompassing the States of Virginia, North Carolina,
South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Florida, is
an area that has seen poverty rates well above the national
average, unfortunately coupled with record unemployment. In
fact, the Census Bureau found that in the calculation of
poverty rates for 2003 to 2005 ten southern States exceeded the
national average poverty rate of 12.6. And unfortunately, the
educational gaps contribute to the economic gap, causing
southerners to have even a harder time finding work that pays
an above average wage that does not require education beyond
high school.
The seven States in the SouthEastern Crescent Region also
experience natural disasters at a rate two to three times
greater than any other region of the U.S. I can tell you during
my first four years in office we had six hurricanes alone
strike North Carolina in our district. We know of the other
tragedies and unfortunate situations with storms, floods, the
effect of nor'easters and hurricanes, as mentioned, tornadoes,
that the south is affected at a rate two to three times greater
than other regions and this vulnerability to natural disasters
only further exacerbates the ability to recover from economic
distress.
This legislation is modeled primarily after the successful
Appalachian Regional Commission, to which Mr. Oberstar referred
earlier when Ms. Dole was testifying. It puts together a local-
Federal-State partnership to lift our citizens out of poverty
and to create jobs. Unfortunately, we have been hit by the
double whammy with the high record levels of unemployment and
poverty, the highest in the Nation over several of these years.
We want to help. And that is what SECA would do, with
infrastructure, education and job training, an emphasis on
health care, entrepreneurship, small business development, and
leadership development. The communities with the greatest need
would be targeted and grants would be made according to the
degree of distress.
Madam Chairwoman, the southeastern United States is one of
the last vast areas of our country not to have a Federal focus
on dealing with economic development and ending poverty and
strengthening these communities. We know that the other various
economic commissions all serve great areas, but the south has
had no such entity. We have many projects, as I am sure we
could discuss for a long time, where Federal funding like SECA
could help make those projects a reality and help leverage the
Federal funds into much greater return. This is just the final
component that is missing to help the south truly have a chance
to move ahead.
Madam Chairwoman, thank you for this opportunity to
testify. SECA will be a valuable tool to assist local and
county officials to work with regional officials. I know the
Chairman, Mr. Oberstar, raised that issue with Ms. Dole
earlier. We are focusing on working with councils of
governments, which by definition serve regions that have a
multi-county area, that can focus on those pockets of economic
distress and that could leverage additional funds to allow our
citizens to reach their economic potential. I am pleased we
will have the opportunity to continue to hear from others from
the affected region. We all share the same excitement to help
this area of our country that, unfortunately, has been too
often overlooked. This will be that opportunity to bring those
new resources. This will be that final chance we have to access
Federal monies to help clean up the distress left in the wake
of unemployment, poverty, drop-outs, and poor health care
delivery.
Thank you so much for your willingness to hold this
hearing. I look forward to working with you, Madam Chairwoman,
the members of the Subcommittee, and, Lord willing, the full
Committee so that we can move this to the floor. It is the
least we can do to act now and to help the least of these who
have suffered enough to help bolster economic progress and help
them, indeed, fulfill their opportunity for the American dream.
Thank you so much, and may God bless you as you consider this
and deliberate upon it.
Ms. Norton. Thank you very much, Mr. McIntyre. This is very
interesting testimony. You indicated that the region, the
SouthEast Crescent Region, those three, four, five States----
Mr. McIntyre. Seven States.
Ms. Norton. Seven States.
Mr. McIntyre. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Norton. That region has had flat or only a slight
increase in job creation. You know, what happened to the New
South? What is the biggest impediment? Why has job growth,
which in past decades spurted in this area, are slowed?
Mr. McIntyre. Thank you for asking that. That is why I
would be happy to provide to the Committee in much more detail
that State of the South Report, to which I referred, that has
all the demographics and statistics. But let me say in more
general terms, yes, there have been great opportunities, as
Mrs. Dole indicated in her testimony. We know that banking and
commerce are tremendous particularly in the Charlotte area,
that runs right up to the South Carolina line from North
Carolina. We know that the Research Triangle Park has been the
cutting edge in terms of high-tech opportunity in the Raleigh-
Durham-Chapel Hill-Cary area. We know Atlanta has taken off.
And there are other certain areas that we can point to as
beacons of progress, thankfully. But move beyond those areas
and we are in great distress.
Madam Chairwoman, I can tell you as the Chairman of the
Subcommittee on Rural Development over on the Agriculture
Committee, we just had testimony two days ago on rural
broadband access and the great distress that is suffered now
because a lot of these areas do not even have broadband access
to telemedicine, health care delivery, business opportunity,
educational opportunity. In the Subcommittee that I Chair on
Rural Development, this was a very vicious problem in terms of
allowing any economic progress. For instance, in North Carolina
85 our 100 counties, which makes the math easy, therefore 85
percent of our counties in North Carolina are considered by
definition rural. So, yes, we have 15 counties we are very
proud of and that you regularly hear about as part of the New
South, the other 85, including nearly all the ones except for
one that I represent, are all involved in a dire situation with
regard to poverty, with regard to high school drop-outs, with
regard to worker retraining.
Let me say also another reason is, I mentioned earlier I
grew up and I live on tobacco road, we all know the changes
that have occurred with regard to tobacco production. It was
the last, and a lot of people still do not realize this, when
we did the tobacco buy-out, that I helped co-author a couple of
sessions ago, that was the last Federal farm program in America
from the Depression Era that the farmers were still living
under in eastern North Carolina and South Carolina and
Virginia, down into Georgia and northern Florida. They are just
coming out of that, just from the last two to three years, of
living under a Depression Era federally-mandated farm program.
And as they make the transition out of the tobacco economy,
then we are hit with the whammy of the textile mills closing,
which was to support farm families. Those are gone now with
some the trade agreements that have occurred, that are a matter
of record, and that has affected textiles and furniture,
particularly in North Carolina.
I remember when President Clinton used to talk about how
the trade agreements would positively affect America. We have
had some positive benefits, as we know, but he also would say
there would be pockets of distress. And yes, that is what this
is targeted at is those pockets of distress, to use President
Clinton's phrase, the economically distressed counties that are
still way far behind the curve and that are still suffering
from high unemployment levels because of the economic downturn
they have suffered.
Ms. Norton. Mr. Capito, do you have any questions for Mr.
McIntyre?
Mrs. Capito. I want to thank the gentleman for his
testimony. I appreciate the analysis that you made.
Mr. McIntyre. Thank you.
Mrs. Capito. I just have one quick question. Senator Dole
in her comments mentioned that parts of North Carolina are part
of the Appalachian Regional Commission.
Mr. McIntyre. Right.
Mrs. Capito. And I guess parts of the SouthEast Crescent
Authority are also part of the Delta Regional Commission. Is
that correct?
Mr. McIntyre. Not exactly. What we have tried to do, and
Dr. Al Delia, who was with East Carolina University, and we
have a representative from ECU today that is here on their
behalf, did was to make sure there is no overlap. This covers
counties that have not been helped. For instance, in North
Carolina, yes, we have some counties way up in the western part
of the State in the mountains that are part of the, thankfully,
very successful Appalachian Regional Commission. I live five
hours from the mountains because I am down from I-95, which I
am sure you all are familiar with, and East to the coast. And
it is that eastern part of I-95, as Senator Dole mentioned,
that is the most severely affected by poverty and drop-outs and
economic downturn.
We live on Tobacco Road, as I referred to earlier, and
where the textile mills have closed. This is where we have some
of the most impoverished counties actually in America, and
these counties are not covered now at all in our State because
we are so far East away from the mountains. This legislation
covers eastern and central Virginia, the Carolinas, down to
Georgia, northern Florida and over. This does not touch
anywhere near the mountain areas, barely runs into the piedmont
areas, which are the rolling hills between the mountains and
the coastal plain.
Mrs. Capito. I thank you. I was just wondering about any
kind of duplication. I know a lot of the coordination has to go
through the governors' offices. They are on the commissions and
they do a lot of the detail work and the research work. I am
sure it could be worked out. Anyway, thank you very much.
Mr. McIntyre. Thank you. In fact, if anything, the
governor's office, for instance, could use ARC in the western
part of our State, they would not have to reinvent the wheel,
they could use it as an example for the counties down East, as
we say, who are literally five hours away, 250 miles East of
the mountains, that are still in this unfortunate poverty cycle
that we are in.
Mrs. Capito. Thank you. I yield back.
Ms. Norton. Thank you very much, Mrs. Capito. And I very
much thank you, Mr. McIntyre, for coming and offering us this
very helpful testimony.
Mr. McIntyre. Thank you, Ms. Norton. I appreciate your
consideration. God bless you all in your work.
Ms. Norton. I would like to ask what looks like a Texas
delegation to come forward now. Mr. Cuellar, Mr. Reyes, Mr.
Filner from California, Mr. Hinojosa, and Mr. Rodriguez, from
Texas as well.
Mr. Cuellar, we will have begin. You said you had to be out
of here by a time certain.
TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE HENRY CUELLAR, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS; THE HONORABLE SILVESTRE
REYES, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS;
THE HONORABLE BOB FILNER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA; THE HONORABLE RUBEN HINOJOSA, A
REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS; THE
HONORABLE CIRO D. RODRIGUEZ, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM
THE STATE OF TEXAS
Mr. Cuellar. Thank you, Madam Chair. [Remarks made off
mic.] First of all I want to thank Chairman Reyes. The Chairman
is the elite sponsor and I want to thank Chairman Reyes for the
leadership that he has taken.
I am honored to join Congressman Reyes as one of the
cosponsors of H.R. 2068, the Southwest Regional Border
Authority Act. This legislation strives to reverse the economic
hardship facing our communities along the border. What I want
to focus on, Madam Chair and members of the Committee, is the
hundreds of thousands of citizens that live in the unique
communities called colonias. I think Congressman Filner and
Congressman Rodriguez know about the colonias. These are
unincorporated communities that are composed of families with
very low income and usually lack the basic services. They do
not have water, they do not have sewage, they do not have sewer
systems, they do not have the basic utilities that we take for
granted.
As a former Texas Secretary of State, I can tell you that
there are about 400,000 people living in more than 2,000
colonias in Texas alone. When you look, for example, at my
congressional district, the average household income is about
$28,866, which is about 31.3 percent below the national
average. When you look at the people who live in the colonias,
their average income is usually around $10,800 a year. So you
are talking about people who have incomes of $10,800 a year,
you are talking about people who do not have water and sewers,
you are talking about people that do not have the roads, and it
affects them in so many ways. It is not only the physical
infrastructure that is not available for them, but it is also
what I call the social infrastructure, because they do not have
access to health care and the other things that we take for
granted.
I am in support of this legislation because it is one way
that the Federal Government can join the States along the
southwest border. I know in the State of Texas as a former
legislator, and I believe I passed probably the landmark
legislation that we had in Texas at the State level dealing
with colonias, but also as a former Secretary of State, I can
tell you that when you talk about 400,000 people that live in
the colonias just in Texas, and Mr. Filner can talk about
California also, you are talking about 2,000 colonias that are
basically ``people that live in Third World conditions.'' I
certainly would invite you all to come in. I think once you
walk out of one of the colonias you will see that we are not
exaggerating. We are talking about people that really are
living in very difficult areas.
I will close at this time, Madam Chair. I want to thank
you. I have to go introduce the Tejano, I think means Texan, of
the Year for the Speaker; I think the Members are going to join
me. But I want to thank you, and I certainly want to thank
Chairman Reyes, Mr. Filner, and Mr. Rodriguez, but especially
Mr. Reyes for taking the lead on this. Thank you.
Ms. Norton. Thank you. Obviously, the notion of such
primitive conditions should make us understand there is a lot
of work to be done on this issue. We appreciate your testimony.
Thank you very much for coming.
Mr. Reyes.
Mr. Reyes. Good morning, Madam Chair and Ranking Member
Capito. Thank you very much for holding this hearing and for
allowing me to testify on H.R. 2068, the Southwest Regional
Border Authority Act. I would also like to thank Chairman
Oberstar for his vision in helping me with this issue, and also
to thank all my colleagues here from the U.S.-Mexico border
region for their support in creation of this very important
piece of legislation.
Members of the Subcommittee, I am here today to talk about
the conditions that exist in many places along the border and
to give you I think a better understanding of the great need
for the creation of a regional economic development authority
for the southwest border region of the United States. It was
because of this need in places like my congressional district
of El Paso, Texas, that I introduced H.R. 2068. I just want the
members to understand that I have introduced this particular
legislation for the past three congresses. I would greatly
appreciate your support to move this legislation very important
to our border region in this the 110th Congress.
The southwest border region, as defined in H.R. 2068,
includes all counties within 150 miles of the U.S.-Mexico
border. This region contains 11 counties in New Mexico, 65
counties in Texas, 10 counties in Arizona, and 7 counties in
California, for a combined population of approximately 29
million people. According to research compiled by the
Interagency Task Force on Economic Development of the Southwest
Border, 20 percent of the residents in this region of the
Nation live below the poverty level. Unemployment rates often
reach as high as five times the national unemployment rate. And
a lack of adequate access to capital has created economic
disparities and has made it very difficulty for businesses to
start up and to remain in business in this border region.
Border communities have long endured a depressed economy and
very low paying jobs.
Our economic challenges partly stem from our position as a
border community. Economic development in border communities is
difficult to stimulate without assistance from the Government,
private sector, and community non-profits. H.R. 2068 would help
foster planning to encourage infrastructure development,
technology development, and deployment of that technology,
education and workforce development, and community development
through entrepreneurship.
Modeled in part after the Appalachian Regional Commission,
the Southwest Border Region Authority would be successful
because of four guiding principles:
First, the Authority would fund proposals designed at the
local level, followed by approval at the State level, in order
to meet regional economic development goals.
Second, these projects would lead to the creation of a
diversified regional economy to be prioritized. Currently,
States and counties often are forced to compete against each
other for the very limited funding that is available.
Third, the Authority would be an independent agency. Having
the Authority set up in this manner would keep it from having
to attempt to satisfy another Federal agency's mission
requirements when determining which projects are to be funded.
And finally, the Authority would be comprised of one Senate
confirmed Federal representative and the governors of the
States of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California. The
proposed structure would allow equal representation by each
State and a liaison back to the Federal agencies.
For too long, Madam Chair, the needs of the southwest
border region have been either ignored or overlooked and
certainly underfunded. We need to recognize all of the
challenges facing this potentially vibrant border and to help
the region make the most of its many, many assets. One
important part of that effort would be to establish a new
economic development opportunity in the southwest through an
authority created by H.R. 2068, the Southwest Border Regional
Authority Act.
Madam Chair, I want to thank you and Ranking Member for
allowing me to speak on behalf of this very important
legislation. I would be glad to answer any questions you might
have. Thank you very much.
Ms. Norton. Thank you very much, Representative Reyes, for
this testimony on this terrible poverty in the southwest
region. Again, that is not what people think of when they think
of Texas. And so you have brought to light an important problem
somehow or the other we are going to have to deal with.
Mr. Filner.
Mr. Filner. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for holding
this hearing. We thank Mr. Reyes for the legislation. And I
accept your apology for lumping me in with the Texans.
[Laughter.]
Ms. Norton. Well, I do not know what rich California is
doing here in the first place.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Filner. Well let me tell you. I represent the entire
Mexico-California border. The issue I think for us is that
because of the border, which impacts every aspect of life in
our community, what happens there is a result of national
policy and yet the local communities are expected to bear the
brunt of that. And I just want to give you a few examples.
Interestingly enough, Madam Chair, 300,000 people per day
go back and forth across the border in my district, legally,
300,000 a day. That is an incredible movement. That is a major
city going back and forth. When we built the border crossings
which handle this incredible volume of traffic, the local
infrastructure was not considered. When NAFTA, for example,
lead to an increase of trucks from, say, 1500 to 3000 a day,
there was no road envisioned, planned, or built to take that
traffic to the Interstate Highway System. Local roads had to
handle it. Those roads are now the most dangerous roads in
America because of this heavy international truck traffic. Yet
the Federal Government, whose policy resulted in the traffic,
did nothing to help ameliorate it.
I am probably the only Congressman in America who can say
that 50 million gallons of raw sewage flows daily through my
district. That is because the rivers that come from south of
the border in Tijuana and other parts of Baja flow north, the
Tijuana River in one part of my district, the New River and
Alamo River in another part, flow through my district, one of
them into the Pacific Ocean. Because Tijuana has no sewage
facilities for more than half of its population of two or three
million, that raw sewage, which gets dumped in back gullies and
flows into a river, comes through my district. It is an
international problem.
The local community cannot afford to build a waste
treatment plant to cover that. It took us two decades to
finally get one built at the border and it was obsolete the day
it opened. That took two decades to get Federal funding for
that infrastructure. And everybody in America is entitled to
waste treatment, and yet we at the border did not have that.
Mexico could not handle it. We had to do it to protect the
health of our own citizens, and yet the local community has to
bear the brunt.
One of my counties at the border is a nonattainment area
for a particulate matter. The Mexican city of Mexicali in fact
produces much of the pollution that U.S. citizens have to deal
with. And yet we are required under the law to mitigate that
pollution. It is not pollution coming from our Nation, and so
how can our communities be burdened with the expense of that.
We can go on and on. Local hospitals have closed in my area
because of the impact of having to provide medical care for
poor and also undocumented workers. In every aspect, whether
you talk about health, transportation, environmental
protection, highways, other means of infrastructure, the border
impacts the local communities. The mechanism that Mr. Reyes
envisions in this bill will help us get support for doing the
work that has to be done just for the quality of life that
everybody else in America enjoys but because of the border
pressures we cannot afford.
So we are looking forward to the passage of this bill and
to these mechanisms to help us deal with these very crucial
problems. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Norton. Thank you very much, Mr. Filner.
Mr. Rodriguez.
Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you very much
for allowing us this opportunity to present to you some of our
concerns and ask for your support on this important
legislation. Let me also take this opportunity to thank
Congressman Silvestre Reyes for introducing this legislation
that is drastically needed. Let me also indicate to you that
there is a real serious situation on the border and the
Southwest Regional Border Authority Act provides the
opportunity for many communities along the border to receive
the assistance and resources they have long needed in order for
them to develop their infrastructure and economic prosperity.
Madam Chair, I represent an extensive district that spans
from El Paso County, far West Texas, to Dimmit County, close to
700 miles along the Mexican border, and also up 150 miles to
San Antonio. This district encompasses one of the largest
stretches of border of any other that is contiguous in the
United States. I have represented this district for the last
five months. But as I have travelled through the 20 counties
which I represent in the 23rd Congressional District, I have
seen some of the poorest counties in the entire country. The
Southwest Regional Border Authority Act brings the Federal
Government to the border and this particular legislation can
help enhance that community.
I would like to share with the Committee a situation in a
community in my district that we are facing. They are a small
rural community that was in great need of a wastewater
treatment plant, and I have several that fit this description.
The current wastewater plant was built years ago on a flood
plain, and with the annual rains came the overflow of waste.
The State environmental agency had threatened to fine this
particular community. The community applied and received
approval from the USDA Rural Development Loan Grant Program.
They were approved and the award was granted, an 80 percent
loan, 20 percent grant. This posed a significant problem for
this particular community. They have very little resources and
could not afford the payment on the loan to be able to make
that happen. These rural communities have a very small tax base
and most of the individuals go at this time of year to the
north to work in the fields, then come back to the community.
These are communities that as they go they build their own
homes, without any insurance, and have very little resources.
The community ended up accepting the award, but other
communities have not always been that fortunate. Now they find
themselves having to double and in some cases triple the amount
that they charge for water in order to pay for that loan. The
Southwest Regional Border Authority Act could help in future
situations such as this. It includes a section intended to
supplement Federal grant programs. Section 206 of this bill
provides opportunities for the communities who are unable to
take advantage of current Federal grant programs because they
do not have the required State or local match funds that are
needed in order for them to be able to access those loans.
Madam Chair, this is just one example of the situation that
we find ourselves in along the border. As I traveled through
all of the 20 of my counties, what I heard over and over again
was Congressman, please help us help ourselves. I believe this
bill does that.
Let me also share one thing that is seldom understood.
Every single community, and I will mention Eagle Pass, Texas,
that just got hit with a tornado, a very small community, about
34,000, 35,000, 7 people were killed, and finally after seven
days the Administration is there to help out--but the Mexican
border side has over 300,000 people. Each community, when you
look at El Paso, Juarez is approximately, what, over a million
people, 2 million people.
As Congressman Filner indicated, the communities on the
other side are usually ten times larger than our communities,
they continually come and use our infrastructure, they use our
access to health care, they use all of our facilities, and
those burdens usually have to be carried by the local
individuals there, such as law enforcement and other
facilities. That is one of the areas that is often overlooked
and not understood, that individuals come over and purchase on
our side and go back, but they use our infrastructure. So we
ask for your help and your assistance.
I will close by sharing with you. I have had this district
for just five months. I went to one of the communities when I
was campaigning and afterwards they asked me for an all-weather
road so the Border Patrol could go through there for checking.
And I felt like telling them, my God, you need an all-weather
road on all your existing roads. We have some communities that
are on the U.S. side and they almost look like, this sounds
very bad, but it looks like we are in a Third World country in
some of those communities, and I am talking about on the U.S.
side. So I would ask for your help and your assistance in this
area. It is an area that, as we look at trade with NAFTA, these
are the areas that need infrastructure in order to allow those
18-wheelers to go up north to Chicago through Eagle Pass, and
Del Rio, and some of my communities, Presidio. So I ask for
your help and your assistance in making this happen. Thank you
very much, Madam Chair.
Ms. Norton. I thank all three of you for your testimony. I
think most Americans have no idea about the grinding poverty
you are talking about. That is just not the image we have of
our country. And as to California and Texas, you appear to
share more than a border. And, yes, importantly, your Southwest
Border Regional Authority would cross State lines. These appear
to be all border towns. They are the first towns that would
receive immigration, legal and illegal. It is as if when
emigrants came in the 19th century, the very first place they
settled, they settled right in New York, New Jersey, in the
first places they hit. Of course, the difference was that they
came because there was an overwhelming need for work. So nobody
would have thought you needed some kind of economic
development. They needed jobs and that was the economic
development. The conditions were not the best, but then we
rectified that.
I would like to know, would your Southwest Border Authority
bill set up the first network for working together in these two
States on the impact of immigration from a poorer country to
our country? Is there any existing network, or would you in
effect be creating it?
Mr. Reyes. Our legislation, as I said, models the
legislation from Appalachia. What we are trying to do with this
legislation is provide an economic development engine for
border counties. We are not only America's first line of
defense, we are also America's best economic opportunity,
because trade and commerce, since the passage of the North
American Free Trade Agreement, comes through all of our
respective communities. There are four major trade routes
coming into the United States from Mexico, and by extension
from Latin America. They come through these four States.
So this is an opportunity to provide one authority that
would take into account all four States. It would be working
under a coordinated effort, also in conjunction with the State
governments, the governor would have an appointee on this
board. So we feel that it does three very important things:
first, it is a coordinated effort; secondly, it addresses the
biggest problem in terms of the economies of our border region,
and that is giving our communities an economic development
engine; and third, it also provides under this coordinated
effort an opportunity for States to work together. But more
than that, it provides a vehicle where we hope we can use it as
a springboard to bring Mexico into the equation. In other
words, everything on our border we feel strongly, I am not
speaking for the other Members, but having heard them speak
before, we all feel very strongly that Mexico needs to be
looked at as a partner. Whether it is dealing with issues in
border enforcement, economic opportunity, trade, commerce,
tourism, our communities are interlaced or interlocked. And
this authority would give us a great springboard for that.
Mr. Filner. Ms. Norton, if I may add.
Ms. Norton. Yes, Mr. Filner.
Mr. Filner. You hit upon a very good question. There is no
institutional mechanism that unites us. This would be the
first. We have informal alliances. We have a border caucus in
Congress; the governors have a border governors conference; and
the counties have a border counties caucus. So we have these
attempts to work together informally, but there is no
institutionalized mechanism and this would be a credible step
forward.
Ms. Norton. Yes, Mr. Rodriguez?
Mr. Rodriguez. Let me just reinforce the fact that this is
essential and critical. I have always said that this would be a
good way for us also to communicate with each other. I have
always felt real strongly that in order to protect our country,
we also need to be well aware in terms of what is happening in
Mexico and for us to have good relationships. And what better
way than to be working on projects together. I think this
legislation allows that to begin to occur. So I ask for your
serious consideration.
Ms. Norton. Well thank you very much. Formalizing this
border relationship across States will be very important. If
one State works by itself on reducing poverty and economic
development, you just simply end up exchanging poor people.
Well, poor people will go to where the economic development
appears and where there are jobs, and you do not get anywhere
that way. This is one value of being the United States; we can
work across borders.
I must say what is most intriguing to me about your
testimony is this opportunity for the several States to work
together now not only on border protection issues, which
obviously is already occurring, that is a Federal issue, but on
issues on which we are deeply implicated but issues of poverty
which come to you because of where you happen to be located.
I am going to ask the Ranking Member, Mrs. Capito, if she
has any questions for the panel.
Mrs. Capito. Thank you Madam Chair. I do not really have a
question. Well, I guess I do have a question. Since your region
is so vastly different than my region, which is a part of the
Appalachian Regional Commission, and I mentioned to the panel
before this that we are always struggling to fund the ARC and
have been for decades now to keep the funding source and stream
going. But in realizing that, the monies there are monies that
are supplemental to what you are already doing in Texas and in
California to help I am sure alleviate some of the problems
that you have described.
I am kind of curious to know how a commission created by
States would be able to interact with Mexico. I am sure that is
something that could be worked out and I am certain that it is
necessary as you move through the process. But I am just
interested to know, in each of your two States, what kind of
efforts the States are doing right now to try to alleviate
this. And how do you think a commission like this would come
in, as an overseer, or as a supplementer, or as a replacement?
Mr. Reyes. Thank you for that question. It is a great
question and gives us an opportunity to let the Committee know
that there are already organizations such as the Border Health
Commission that takes that into account. Because when we look
at the border region, as my colleague Mr. Filner mentioned,
there is no way to keep out pollution from Mexico, or vice
versa. Although the international boundary exists, it is an
imaginary line. So issues of pollution, contamination, as Mr.
Filner said, the problems that they have with sewer treatment,
affect both sides of the border.
We have the Border Health Commission, the Border Economic
Commission, and we have the Pan American Health Organization.
There are a number of organizations that have been in place
already that serve as models for what we think will spring from
this authority, and that is to help address the number one
issue of the border region in terms of poverty, unemployment
and even underemployment, because underemployment is a huge
issue along the border region. So we would be very happy to
provide you additional information because in this short period
of time it is impossible to really fully cover it but I think
it would be worthwhile for the Committee to consider.
Mr. Filner. Just briefly. You raise a really important
issue. Obviously, the Federal governments have the policy and
the authority at the border areas, and yet both Washington and
Mexico City do not really understand the border. The
relationships have been built around local relationships. I
mean, it is a truly binational community--families, jobs,
education, everybody going back and forth all the time.
Families have relationships, mayors have relationships, the
governors have tried in recent years, but the Federal
governments do not come as an integrative force from either
country. Obviously, the policies affect what is going on but
there is no attempt at the federal level to really integrate
with the things at that local level. So we need this kind of
organization, we need others. Right now we try to survive with
local relationships when it is the two Federal governments that
have the power and have not used that power to really aid our
border communities in a realistic way.
Mrs. Capito. Thank you. I yield back.
Mr. Rodriguez. I just want to add. Our problem right now,
and I would say especially with Mexico but also probably with
Canada, we need new institutions that allow us to begin to
dialogue together, and this allows that and it allows an
opportunity to create those new institutions. I am sure there
are others that are needed and that are lacking there. To give
an example, the tornado hit and I went and visited both Piedras
Negras and they got hit harder.
They are very different the way they operate. They cut to
the chase, they were out there cleaning up. After five days
they were offering help to us. I told the county judge there,
go in and take it, and so they came over and started helping
us. I went across and the reason I went across is because
during Katrina we had 20,000 people in San Antonio, the Mexican
army came into San Antonio and they just came in and set up and
they did not ask for anything, they just started to feed
people, and they fed people there for about 20 days or so. And
so I went over there to pay my respects and because they also
had lost three lives with the tornado, we lost seven.
And so I think this will allow us to begin to create those
institutions that might be needed. Maybe later on there might
be some changes that we might have to make. But I think this is
an essential institution that would help us dialogue together
and make some things happen that are positive for both side.
Ms. Norton. Again, I want to thank all three of you from
the now California/Texas delegation for coming to testify here.
It has been very, very informative and very helpful to us as we
try to see if we can find some way to be of assistance to you.
Again, thank you very much for your testimony this morning.
Mr. Reyes. Thank you, Madam Chair. We will provide that
additional information for the record.
Ms. Norton. Thank you very much.
The hearing is now adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:25 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]