[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 150 (Thursday, October 4, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H11259-H11261]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 3246, REGIONAL ECONOMIC AND
INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2007
Mr. ARCURI. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 704 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 704
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it
shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R.
3246) to amend title 40, United States Code, to provide a
comprehensive regional approach to economic and
infrastructure development in the most severely economically
distressed regions in the Nation. All points of order against
consideration of the bill are waived except those arising
under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. The amendment in the nature
of a substitute recommended by the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure now printed in the bill,
modified by the amendment printed in the report of the
Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, shall be
considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be
considered as read. All points of order against provisions of
the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall
be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, to final
passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of
debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and
ranking minority member of the Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure; and (2) one motion to recommit with or
without instructions.
Sec. 2. During consideration of H.R. 3246 pursuant to this
resolution, notwithstanding the operation of the previous
question, the Chair may postpone further consideration of the
bill to such time as may be designated by the Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York is recognized
for 1 hour.
Mr. ARCURI. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings).
All time yielded during consideration of this rule is for debate only.
General Leave
Mr. ARCURI. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks
and insert extraneous materials into the Record.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New York?
There was no objection.
Mr. ARCURI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 704 provides for consideration of H.R.
3246, the Regional Economic and Infrastructure Development Act of 2007.
The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by
the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure.
I rise today in strong support of this rule and H.R. 3246. I want to
thank the distinguished chairwoman of the Economic Development, Public
Buildings and Emergency Management Subcommittee, Ms. Norton, Chairman
Oberstar, and the ranking members, for drafting this legislation to
authorize three new economic development commissions.
H.R. 3246 establishes the Northern Border, Southeast Crescent and
Southwest Border Regional Commissions and reauthorizes the successful
Delta and Northern Great Plains Regional Commissions. These five
commissions will
[[Page H11260]]
help bring economic development to regions of our country that
desperately need it.
Mr. Speaker, this bipartisan legislation creates a Northern Border
Regional Commission that will bring much-needed job creation and
economic development resources to the Northeast region. Maine, New
Hampshire, Vermont and upstate New York will all benefit tremendously
from the establishment of this commission because it will assess and
address the very specific needs, assets and challenges of this region.
Over the last several decades, upstate New York, including my
congressional district, has experienced a consistent pattern of
economic distress resulting from substantial loss in the manufacturing
sector, coupled with an 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 from 2000 to 2005. This has been
devastating to our local communities; however, this loss isn't an
anomaly. It is extremely characteristic of several States in the
Northeast. A targeted regional approach like this one created by this
bill can help bring economic vitality to this region.
The three new commissions are modeled after the highly successful
Appalachian Regional Commission, ARC. The commission similar to the ARC
will create Federal-State partnerships where local development
districts and other nonprofits bring project ideas and priorities from
the local level to the commissions to promote economic development.
Specifically, the Northern Border Regional Commission will be charged
with investing $40 million per year, rising to $60 million per year by
2012, in Federal grants focused on local transportation and
infrastructure projects, broadband development, alternative energy
projects, agricultural development, and health care facilities. With
regional planning, technical assistance, and funding of projects aimed
at encouraging economic prosperity, this Commission will help local
communities work together to support common developmental goals.
Simply put, the numbers speak for themselves. Since its creation, the
ARC has reduced the number of distressed counties in its region from
219 to 100, cut the poverty rate from 31 percent to 15 percent, and has
helped 1,400 businesses create 26,000 new jobs. In fiscal year 2005,
each dollar of the ARC funding leveraged $2.57 in other public funding
and $8.46 in private funding.
Speaking from personal experience, six counties in my upstate New
York district have experienced similar success being a part of the ARC.
The Village of Sherburne in Chenango County is a great example of how
small ARC grants are extremely helpful in leveraging funds from State,
local and private sources for economic development initiatives that
create jobs. A $200,000 ARC grant to improve aging water infrastructure
in Sherburne, New York, a problem that is plaguing many States in the
Northeast, was able to leverage close to $4 million in State and local
community investment.
Mr. Speaker, the Northern Border Regional Commission will not only
extend benefits to economically distressed counties in Maine, New
Hampshire and Vermont; it will give upstate New York counties like
Oneida, Herkimer, Cayuga and Seneca the opportunity to enjoy the same
benefits their neighboring counties in the southern tier enjoy under
the ARC.
We need to ensure that every American has access to job training,
employment-related education and high-tech infrastructure so that we
can retain and grow our global competitive edge. I am confident that
the Regional Economic and Infrastructure Development Act will help us
achieve that end.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Washington is recognized
for 30 minutes.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Arcuri) for yielding me the customary 30
minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. HASTINGS of Washington asked and was given permission to revise
and extend his remarks.)
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, this rule provides for
consideration of the Regional Economic and Infrastructure Development
Act, which would authorize $1.25 billion to create three new regional
commissions and replace two other regional commissions. These five
regional commissions would be Federal-State partnerships that would
provide grants to State and local governments to promote infrastructure
and economic development.
While I believe that comprehensive, regional approaches to addressing
infrastructure and economic development needs often can be beneficial,
I am not convinced that creating five commissions and the layers of
bureaucracy associated with them is necessary to provide grants to
communities most in need.
The Regional Economic and Infrastructure Development Act was
originally considered by the House on September 17 under suspension of
the rules, which limits debate, bars amendments and requires a two-
thirds vote for passage. Bills typically considered under suspension of
the rules are bills and resolutions to name post offices and Federal
buildings, congratulate sports teams and to raise general awareness of
other issues.
Generally, bills authorizing $1 billion in government expansion are
not considered under a process with limited time for debate and no
opportunity for amendment, but that is what the Democrat majority chose
to do with the Regional Economic and Infrastructure Development Act
last month.
Because of concerns either with the underlying bill or with the way
in which this bill was originally considered, it failed to garner a
two-thirds vote and did not pass under suspension of the rules. This
closed rule does provide for more time to debate the merits of the
underlying bill, but, unfortunately, it also shuts Members out from
offering amendments to make this perhaps a better bill.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ARCURI. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I ask my friend from New
York if he has any other speakers, and if not, I am prepared to yield
back if he is.
Mr. ARCURI. We have no additional speakers.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance
of the time.
Mr. Speaker, House Republicans believe that every earmark should be
debatable on the House floor. Republican Leader Boehner has introduced
a proposal to improve the House rules and allow the House to debate
openly and honestly the validity and accuracy of earmarks contained in
all bills.
To date, 196 Republicans have signed a discharge position to bring
this measure to the House floor for a vote. Unfortunately, we are still
22 Members shy of what is needed. Therefore, I not only would encourage
all Members of the House to sign the discharge position, but I will
also be asking my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question so
that I can amend the rule to the House to allow the House to
immediately consider House Resolution 479 introduced by Republican
Leader Boehner.
It is vital that the House of Representatives act today and pass
House Resolution 479 so that we can show American taxpayers we are
serious when it comes to earmark transparency.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have the text of the
amendment inserted into the Record prior to the vote on the previous
question.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Washington?
There was no objection.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I urge my colleagues to oppose the
previous question, Mr. Speaker, and I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. ARCURI. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend and colleague from the
Rules Committee, Mr. Hastings. But I must say that I am a bit confused
as to what earmarks and what the statements that he just made have to
do with this rule.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. ARCURI. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I will be more than happy to tell you. We
[[Page H11261]]
think that the intent on both sides of the aisle was to have all
earmarks have a transparency to them so we know where those earmarks
come from. Under this rule, we are self-executing an amendment, and
that amendment is not covered, is not covered under the transparency.
Now, I don't know if there is something within that bill that has
earmarks that aren't being reported, but Leader Boehner's resolution
simply would make this subject to transparency. That is all we are
saying. That is all that we are saying.
I thank the gentleman for yielding on this point.
{time} 1100
Mr. ARCURI. I thank the gentleman. With all due respect, I couldn't
disagree more. While some of my colleagues on the other side continue
to criticize our new earmark rule, the fact of the matter is that the
House Democratic majority has implemented the most honest and open
earmark rule in the history of the United States House of
Representatives. But don't take my word for it. In this week's CQ
Weekly, Ryan Alexander, president of Taxpayers for Common Sense is
quoted as saying: ``The House has given us more information than we
have ever had before on earmarks, and they deserve credit for that.''
Mr. Speaker, the other side continues to talk about their plan to
modify the earmark rule, but what they don't tell you is that their
earmark rule would not cover any measure not already covered by the
earmark rule presently in effect. It is important to remember which
side actually abused the earmark process, and who actually stepped up
to the plate to reform the system and provide transparency. We didn't
wait until 2 months before the election; we responded to the people's
call for more openness on the first day of this Congress.
It seems quite clear to me that the minority is more concerned with
obstructionism, while we are focused on actually meeting the needs of
our constituents. That is exactly what this bill does and what the
underlying rule does.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. ARCURI. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I appreciate the gentleman yielding, and
I appreciate that he has a little bit different view than I have. I
would ask the gentleman, what bills are covered by the earmark rule,
transparency rule, that you are talking about today? What bills?
Mr. ARCURI. This bill today.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. The rules only cover appropriation bills.
Mr. ARCURI. If I may reclaim my time, the bill today is covered by
it. As I say, this bill is about helping Americans. This is about
putting Americans back to work and about putting money back into the
development of infrastructure, into financing hospitals, and doing the
kind of things that I was sent to Congress to do today.
Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, passage of this bipartisan
legislation, which this rule provides consideration of, is a critical
step toward helping some of our neediest communities achieve economic
parity with the rest of the country. The Regional Economic and
Infrastructure Development Act authorizes the creation of five regional
economic development commissions under a common framework of
administration and management. These commissions are designed to
address problems of systematic underdevelopment in their respective
regions.
In general, the five commissions authorized in this bill will utilize
the successful Appalachian Regional Commission model, which facilitates
a bottom-up approach. Local development districts, nonprofit
organizations, and others bring projects and ideas to the commission
from the local level, ensuring that the actions of the commission
reflect local and regional economic development needs and goals.
Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned a short while ago, the Northern Border
Regional Commission created by this legislation builds on the success
of the ARC. It would be charged with investing $40 million each year in
Federal resources for economic development and job creation in the most
economically distressed border areas of Maine, New York, New Hampshire,
and Vermont. This commission will help fund projects that both
strengthen traditional sectors in the region's economy and help to
diversify it. The Northern Border Regional Commission is focused on
helping areas in the Northeast that have higher levels of unemployment,
a significant loss of population, and significantly low household
incomes.
This legislation is yet another example of true bipartisan
cooperation often seen on the Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote
``yes'' on the previous question and the rule.
The material referred to previously by Mr. Hastings of Washington is
as follows:
Amendment to H. Res. 704 Offered by Mr. Hastings of Washington
At the end of the resolution, add the following:
Sec. 3. That immediately upon the adoption of this
resolution the House shall, without intervention of any point
of order, consider the resolution (H. Res. 479) to amend the
Rules of the House of Representatives to provide for
enforcement of clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House
of Representatives. The resolution shall be considered as
read. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on
the resolution to final adoption without intervening motion
or demand for division of the question except: (1) one hour
of debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and
ranking minority member of the Committee on Rules; and (2)
one motion to recommit.
Mr. ARCURI. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I
move the previous question on the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous
question.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas
and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this question will be postponed.
____________________