[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 143 (Friday, September 23, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5924-S5929]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
AMERICAN JOBS
Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I want to speak for a few moments about
what has been happening all week here in the Senate and in the House of
Representatives.
First of all, this year we have seen a terrible string of natural
disasters that have shut down businesses and left families homeless
across America. As chair of the Agriculture Committee, I am certainly
very concerned about the flooding along the Mississippi and Missouri
Rivers, and the record droughts that have devastated the livelihoods of
men and women who grow our food across America.
In response to that, the Senate, on a strong bipartisan basis,
responded to provide the funding for FEMA to help with communities
across America, 48 States, to be able to respond and be able to do what
we always do as Americans--to be able to step forward and work together
and meet these kinds of natural disasters and the help that is needed.
We sent that to the House. The House decided, on the other hand, that
they not only would lower the funding amount, even though we know that
means multiple times now having to keep churning to work something out,
but they have cut the amount. Then they added to it an effort to cut in
half a public-private sector effort that is creating jobs.
I know people in Michigan and people across the country would be
scratching their heads, saying, Wait a minute. Did I hear this right?
We are stepping forward to help families who had their house wiped out
or their business wiped out or their farm wiped out or some other
horrendous challenge because of natural disasters. In order to help
them, the House Republicans are saying we have to cut jobs. That makes
absolutely no sense.
I would say that while Michigan was very fortunate that we were not
one of the 48 States that has lost, because of weather disasters, homes
or businesses or jobs or families, we have had a different kind of
disaster that has been going on. It is an economic disaster, it is a
jobs disaster.
I find it appalling that, on the one hand, we see strong support on
the other side of the aisle to rebuild homes and businesses and roads
and schools in Iraq and Afghanistan. We are not saying there, well,
gosh, we need to take away an effort to fund jobs or education here at
home to be able to fund what we are doing in Iraq and Afghanistan. But
when it comes to helping people in America, somehow we can't work
together and get that done without having to pit one State which has a
jobs crisis against another State which has a flood or a hurricane or a
drought. I don't find that to be very American.
I think it is time to stop playing politics. When hundreds of
thousands of families and businesses have been devastated by
unprecedented strings of floods, tornadoes, hurricanes, wildfires, and
other natural disasters, we ought to be stepping up, doing what we did
in the Senate and passing a bipartisan bill to help those families,
those businesses, those farms, without playing
[[Page S5925]]
politics and trying to hurt other States that have been hit by other
kinds of economic disasters.
We have 14 million people out of work in this country, and that
doesn't count people working part time two jobs, three jobs, or trying
to piece it all together in some way. We know it is much higher than
that when you count those individuals and families. For each and every
one of them, their job search is an emergency. It is an emergency every
time they think about how to put food on the table for their family. It
is an emergency every month when they have to scrape together the money
they need for rent or to pay the mortgage. It is an emergency every
time these men and women are filling out applications, every day going
to job fairs, going on the Internet, trying to fill out forms, getting
in lines, to find the best way to be able to get back to work. It is an
emergency.
So, to me, it is outrageous that the House of Representatives--the
Republicans in the House--has included a job-killing offset to what is
an important disaster assistance bill, to pull the rug out from
businesses across the country and put up to 50,000 American jobs at
risk.
Let me tell you about what this particular program is. I am proud to
have championed this and initiated it in the Energy bill back in 2007,
a bipartisan bill signed by President Bush. It was slow to get going
initially to get the funding. I am proud that President Obama embraced
it and moved forward to be able to put in place an alternative vehicle
manufacturing loan program to help retool plants in America so we
wouldn't be losing the production of new, small plug-in electric
vehicles and other new technology vehicles to other countries. It is a
loan program to retool plants in America, and it is working.
In Michigan, these retooling loans made it possible for Ford Motor
Company to save 1,900 jobs at their Michigan assembly plant in Wayne,
MI, so they could build the all-new Ford Focus electric and the
battery-electric Focus in America. In the process of that, between the
retooling loans and our partnership with industry to invest in advanced
battery technology, we are now bringing jobs back from Mexico.
How many times have I heard colleagues on the floor talking about how
we want to make sure we are exporting products, not jobs, and that we
want to bring jobs back? What the House Republicans have done is to cut
in half an initiative with the private sector that is actually bringing
jobs back from other countries. So far, 41,000 jobs have been saved or
created through this effort around the country. Obviously, I care
deeply about Michigan and have fought for this, but we are talking
about Indiana, Illinois; we are talking about Florida and Louisiana and
California, and all across our country where we are seeing communities
have the opportunity to retool plants that would be idle, empty, an
eyesore, and be able to bring those back with new technologies that are
going to get us off of foreign oil and are creating jobs--41,000 jobs
so far.
The real insult to me, as I look at what is happening to people in my
State and across the country, is that they are poised to be giving out
up to 11 additional loans to partner with business in the next couple
of months that will create somewhere between 40,000 and 50,000 new
jobs, saving or creating new jobs in the next few weeks. And right when
this is about to happen, the House Republicans are saying: Oh, no, in
order to help the folks in Joplin, MO, who are wiped out as a
community, we want to make sure we are not creating jobs in Michigan;
that we are not creating jobs in Indiana, Ohio, Illinois, Florida,
Louisiana, California, Minnesota, wherever it is; that somehow we have
to pit Americans against each other. That is not the America I know and
love.
In Michigan we don't have a weather emergency. But we stand with
every single State on this floor, every single Member who has had one.
We stand as Americans together to support people across this country.
But we say, Stop, when that means that somehow an effort to make things
in America, manufacturing, the backbone of our economy, is somehow
attacked one more time and partnerships taken away in order to make
that happen.
It makes absolutely no sense. That is what this debate is about. I
wish to share some comments because we received a lot of support. I
wish to share a couple comments, if I might, on the floor.
The National Association of Manufacturers has sent a letter opposing
the defunding of this particular partnership and they say: ``Defunding
the Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing Loan Program will hurt
manufacturers and their employees.''
Everybody is spending a whole lot of time talking about jobs around
here. Unbelievably, we are talking about defunding this program in the
middle of talking about jobs, how we need to create jobs, how we need
to support employers, and how we can compete internationally with
countries such as China that say: Come on over. We will build the plant
for you. Forget a loan you are going to pay back with interest; we will
just build it for you. Come on over, and, by the way, we will steal
your patents and manipulate our currency and make sure you get the
toughest deal possible to compete with us. But that is what they do.
So we put together something to say we are going to partner with the
private sector to be able to keep the jobs in America and it is
actually working. Jobs are coming back. We are rebuilding communities.
We are rebuilding plants. We are helping to get off foreign oil because
we are focused on new electric vehicles and an advanced battery
technology industry where, because of our efforts, from producing 2
percent of the world's batteries, we are on our way to producing 40
percent, having the capacity to manufacture and create 40 percent of
the world's batteries within the next 3 years. Why? Because we have
been working together in partnerships with industry, which is what our
industry is competing against around the world.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce said: ``The ATVM loan program . . .
promotes manufacturing in the U.S. and is an important component of
America's energy security.''
We all want to get off foreign oil. We do not want to be buying oil
from folks we do not like and they don't like us and we can't trust
them. We have an opportunity, through the efforts we are focused on
around alternative vehicles and battery initiatives, to get off foreign
oil.
This makes absolutely no sense to me. We have multiple other
letters--the Alliance for Automobile Manufacturers, the Blue/Green
Alliance--we have others who have come back and shared that as well.
We are at a moment when we know we need to pass a continuing
resolution on the regular budget. We have a new process for a
supercommittee to look at how we take on and tackle the issues around
our national debt and economic growth. During the process that set that
up, there was an agreement on the budget numbers. We have the ability
to pass that now. We have passed a bill to help our citizens across the
country who have had weather disasters, natural disasters. We came
together in the Senate to do that. The House has that.
There is one thing standing in the way: whether at this time we are
going to say to people in Michigan and in other States where the
economic disaster has been overwhelming that we are going to pit their
need for jobs against somebody else's need to have their home or their
street or their school rebuilt.
That is not who we are in America. I do not believe Americans support
that strategy. I think it is outrageous that there is a proposal that
passed. I thank my House Democratic colleagues and my House colleagues
in Michigan and the Democratic leadership in the House for waging a
fierce battle to protect those jobs.
This is about making products in America. It is about rejuvenating an
advanced manufacturing sector that is critical. We are not going to
have a middle class if we do not make products in America. We are not
going to have a middle class. This particular partnership, which is
nothing more than a loan, repaid with interest, but it is support for
our communities to rebuild--rebuild not in Afghanistan, not in Iraq but
in America; rebuild communities and create jobs. It is working. It is
beginning to bring jobs back. It is outrageous that they have decided
to take half the funding for this partnership away.
[[Page S5926]]
I wish to support our effort to send over the continuing resolution
on the budget we need. I thank my caucus and our leadership for
standing firm and standing up for American jobs. That is what we care
about. That is what we have been fighting for. Along the way, we are
going to make sure we are doing everything we can to help citizens who
have been so devastated by the natural disasters across the country.
I suggest the absence of quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I come to the floor and will spend the
next 15 minutes or so, maybe even longer, to support the arguments made
just recently, and I might say eloquently and passionately, by the
Senator from Michigan, who was one of the key architects of this very
successful job creation program that the Republican House leadership is
trying to kill. That is, in large measure, what this debate this
weekend and through next week is about. That is why almost unanimously
Democrats in the Senate are supporting our Democratic caucus in the
House as we try to bring this debate forward so the American people can
understand at this time and hopefully give their voice of support for
what we are trying to do--keep government operating and keep jobs being
created in this country.
It is a struggle. We know we are not creating as many as we would
like. But one of the programs that is creating thousands of jobs and
has broad support in America--and I am going to read the groups
supporting it in just a minute. For some reason, the Republican leader
in the House, Eric Cantor, decided last week--even as the winds were
affecting his district and Hurricane Irene was challenging the east
coast, a portion of the country he represents--he decided we needed to
find an offset so we could send money to his district and to other
districts across the country and picked this program.
They couldn't have picked a worse one because this program is
actually working. It has already demonstrated it has revitalized
communities.
In addition, it is a program that created jobs, so several dozen
Republican House Members have sent private letters to the Secretary of
Energy asking for the money to go back to their districts, but publicly
they want to gut the program. Democrats have decided to bring this to
the attention of the American public. I have those letters, and I am
going to submit them for the Record.
How is it that dozens of Republican leaders wrote private letters--
which are a public record--but they do not issue them to the press.
They sent them to the Secretary. Anyone can get copies of them. I did
this morning and I have them. They are private letters to the
Secretary, asking for this program to loan money to a public-private
partnership to create jobs in their district. Then they go home and
they talk about their efforts to create jobs and they come back to
Washington and try to gut the program under the guise that they need
the money to help disaster victims. That is what this debate is about.
That is why the Democrats are not--at least at this point, and I hope
over the weekend and through next week--going to give in to that
nonsense and hypocrisy.
I hope the President and the White House will fight hard, along with
the Democrats. I hope some of the Republicans who have signed these
letters will think twice when this vote comes up again. I hope the
press is reading these letters and asking these Republicans, whose
signatures are on these letters, one question: How is it possible that
they sent a letter to the Secretary asking for a loan to support job
creation in their district and then, at the same time, stand on the
Senate floor and vote to gut the same program and then go back home and
claim they are helping to create jobs in America?
I am going to start with the first letter, which is the most
interesting to me. It is from Dr. Darrell Issa. He is a Member of
Congress. He actually chairs an oversight committee. I think his
district is in California. He is a Republican from California. He is a
very powerful Member of the House. I am going to read his whole letter.
I write to express my support for Aptera Motors'
application for a loan under the Department of Energy's 136
Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Incentive Program.
Otherwise known as the ATVMIP.
The program he voted last night to eliminate. The same one.
Funding will allow Aptera to establish U.S. manufacturing
facilities for the commercial production of its plug-in and
hybrid electric cars. Aptera Motors plans to purchase and
equip manufacturing facilities to begin commercial-scale
production of its energy electric vehicles. Awarding this
opportunity to Aptera Motors will greatly assist a leading
developer of electric vehicles in my district.
Electric vehicle initiatives, like Aptera's, will aid U.S.
long-term energy goals by shifting away from fossil fuels and
using viable renewable energy sources like plug-in electric
energy. Additionally, Aptera's vehicles will reduce
dependence on foreign oil and enhance energy security.
Aptera's project will also promote domestic job creation
through California as well as in other States.
Unlike many other electric vehicles, Aptera's energy
efficient electric vehicles have a range of over 100 miles
per charge and the possibility to become one of the most
energy efficient vehicles in the world. A loan to Aptera will
help accelerate the move from gasoline-powered vehicles to
cleaner electric vehicles.
I urge you to give Aptera's Advanced Technology Vehicles
Manufacturing Incentive Program funding application full
consideration.
If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate
to contact me--
or amazingly--
my press assistant.
Normally, when I write these letters, I say if I can be of further
assistance, please contact me and my energy assistant. The energy leg
person usually handles this. But in this case he said we should call
his press secretary. I guess the press secretary could go back to his
district and claim he is doing a great job creating programs in
California.
Maybe the press actually writes that Darryl Issa, Republican leader,
is promoting manufacturing in California. This is what he says in his
district, and this is the letter he sends to the Secretary. However,
when he was on the floor of the House last night, he voted to gut this
program. That is what this debate is about. I am looking forward to
having it.
The next letter I am going to read--and I am going to do this all
week, so I hope the press gets ready to ask these Republican leaders
how they could possibly have the gall to hold press opportunities in
their districts promising people they are helping them create jobs and
then come back to Washington and cut the rug out from underneath their
feet with the bogus excuse that they have to come up with $1 billion,
when the real need is only $175 million. I checked with Craig Fugate, a
very good friend of mine. I am the chair of his committee. I talk to
him all the time. When the real need for FEMA in 2011 is $175 million,
but under the guise of having to provide $1 billion, they want to gut
this program that is creating jobs, and they themselves have asked for
these loans to be made in their district.
This is the next letter signed by several Members, and I am going to
submit their names for the Record. There are several Republicans. I am
sorry, but from this letter I am not able to determine which ones are
Republicans and which ones are Democrats.
I ask unanimous consent that theses letters be printed in the Record
at the conclusion of my remarks.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(See exhibit 1)
Ms. LANDRIEU. Thank you. This is to Secretary Chu.
The State of California has traditionally assumed a leading
role in fighting global warming and working to eliminate our
dependence on foreign sources of oil. We want to commend you
for also taking effective steps towards achieving these
goals. As part of this effort, the Department of Energy's
Electric Drive and Vehicle Battery and Component
Manufacturing Initiative is currently reviewing submissions
for the construction of new lithium ion battery facilities in
the United States. This initiative is a huge step forward in
our efforts to improve our environment, eliminate our
dependence on foreign sources of oil, and create a modern
green-collar workforce here in the United States.
Quallion, an innovative American company located in
California, can be a valuable partner in your efforts because
it is ready today to directly support President Obama's
[[Page S5927]]
goal to have one million plug-in hybrid cars on the road by
2015. Quallion is a world leader in the development of
customized lithium ion batteries for medical, military,
aerospace and vehicle applications. If Quallion is successful
in its bid for grants through the Department of Energy's
Electric Drive and Vehicle Battery Component Manufacturing
Initiative, it is set to immediately execute the construction
of state-of-the-art manufacturing facilities to produce--
Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
Quallion projects that with this grant funding the proposed
facility could be fully operational by 2011, and could
produce more that 20,000 lithium ion batteries each year.
This is the killer.
In addition, Quallion projects this funding will create
more than 2,300 new and long-term jobs nationwide.
This is the program that Representative Cantor decided to use as an
offset so he could fool the American people into believing we need to
find an offset to offset $1 billion of expenses, when we only have $175
million in expenses.
So they write the letters privately to the Secretary asking for
funding to go with their districts to create jobs and then they come to
Washington and they gut the program for no reason.
This is another letter, and it is a little close to home. This is a
letter I wrote. I was joined by my colleague Senator Vitter, Republican
from Louisiana, and my Republican counterpart Rodney Alexander, who
represents the district in my State. We sent this letter on December
21.
We are writing to reiterate our strong support for Next
Autoworks Company's loan application under the Department of
Energy's Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing Program
and inquire about the status of the application.
Next Autoworks resubmitted a revised application in May
2010 that was almost immediately declared substantially
complete and expeditiously reviewed for technical and
financial merit. We appreciate the Department's work to move
the application through several critical stage-gates over the
past several months.
Next Autoworks has the ability to transform communities in
Louisiana by bringing critical economic growth in jobs to our
state and region. As you know, the company plans to re-equip
a former Guide Corp Plant in Monroe, LA, that was shuttered
in 2006 and establish a production facility that would bring
approximately 1,400 direct jobs and an additional 1,800
indirect jobs to Northeast Louisiana. In addition, the
project will create thousands of jobs at supply facilities
across the U.S. The State of Louisiana and local communities
have already demonstrated their commitment by offering this
company $82 million in grants, $128 million in employee
training services, and an estimated $33.8 million in tax
abatements to support the project.
This is how strongly our Republican Governor and Republican
legislature in Louisiana feel about this project, that we have put up
State and local money to see if we could attract this loan from the
Federal Government to get this going.
It is signed by my colleague Senator Vitter and signed by my friend
and colleague Representative Alexander, who represents this district.
This is one of our No. 1 economic development projects in the State of
Louisiana, and what did the Representative do last night? He voted to
gut the program.
I have dozens of other letters, but I am going to pause because I
think I have made my point. I am going to read every one of these
letters that I have between now and when this debate ends. I just pray
the press will do their job and ask the Members who voted and sent
these letters why did they send a letter to the Secretary asking for
the program and then turn around and gut the program when they came to
Washington.
I would like to ask for 5 minutes more.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Ms. LANDRIEU. The other point is this: This is not just an issue for
one State or two States. That is why Democrats believe strongly about
this because this is about the whole country. The President has
declared disasters this year in 48 of the 50 States. Maybe if we just
had had disasters in one or two places and they were not that terrible,
we would figure out some way. The problem is we have disasters in all
States, and I am going to show what these pictures portray because they
are heartwrenching.
This is New Jersey. This is someone's household belongings. This is a
home that is completely uninhabitable. I am not sure how high the water
is, but this is what a home looks like after a flood. I can visualize
what it looked like after Katrina and smell, even more than the vision.
This is what New Jersey looked like a couple weeks ago. This water
has gone down, but this is Bound Brook, NJ. We do not know much about
this town. We hear about Trenton. We hear about New York. I have never
been to Bound Brook, NJ, but I am sure it is a lovely place and it
needs our help.
So what does Representative Cantor do? He comes to Washington, he
looks at places such as this, and he decides out of the blue sky that
he is now going to assert his power by demanding an offset for disaster
funding when it is not necessary. The offset is way more than what is
required. Again, it is an offset that is creating jobs in America.
I wish to say something else about the danger of requiring offsets
and respond directly to what minority leader Mitch McConnell said
earlier today. I think he said something akin to the reason we want to
require offsets is because we have to stop doing things the same way
around here, and just because we have never required them in the past,
that is no reason to not require them now. I understand that. I am kind
of a person who likes to do things differently. I like to change
things.
I wish to remind the leader that not one Republican, to my mind,
either in the Senate or the House, ever asked for 5 minutes to debate
$1 to offset war or rebuilding in Iraq and Afghanistan. I wish to put
up this chart.
This is from 2001, so this is a chart that shows--let's say the last
year. I think it is important for the public to understand not just
today but 10 years.
If we were to chart, which we have done here, a lot of this
supplemental spending, emergency spending and disaster spending--these
are not for just natural disasters, these are for emergencies. For
example, when we went to war in Iraq, it was an emergency. When we went
to war in Afghanistan, it was an emergency. When we had the avian flu,
that was an emergency, not a disaster. So this is disasters and
emergencies.
Let's take this red bar here. It says Iraq and Afghanistan, $79
billion. Do my colleagues see this zero here? That is zero offset. So
$79 billion and no offset. This one is war money.
This is tsunami money that we actually sent to--remember we had the
tsunami in Indonesia, and we sent some money over there. Did Eric
Cantor come to the floor and say we need to offset the money? No. So we
sent that money, and less than 2 percent of it was offset.
Here is Iraq and Afghanistan, and none of it was offset--$87.6
billion.
So I think disaster victims in his own district and around the
country are saying: So why are we now in this debate trying to find an
offset we really don't need for a program that really works? That is a
good question. If we want to find an offset, we should find another
program. The only offset required is $175 million, but that makes too
much sense.
So I want the Republican leadership to know they are risking a very
important debate. I don't believe we should even talk about shutting
the government down. People are tired of that. We just went through a
challenge to the whole economy with the debt ceiling limit. Enough is
enough. Democrats should not, in my view, cave on this point. We should
fight and get them to compromise which is reasonable.
In addition to these arguments, I will put up a chart that is hard to
look at, but I think for the gulf coast Republicans and Republican
Senators, it is a very important chart.
One of the dangers of requiring an offset is, No. 1, like right now,
it is virtually impossible to get 535 Members to all agree on an
offset. So what happens is, if we demand to have one, we keep the
victims waiting while we debate. It also doesn't help to choose an
offset that is very popular on one side. There might be a program that
we could over the next couple of months decide is unnecessary, but we
can't do that within a few days of the disaster. It takes time. They
should know that.
Let me explain what this is for the gulf coast Senators. I had this
done after Katrina just to show the vulnerability of the gulf coast.
All of these red lines that look like spaghetti and then these bigger
lines--the blue and the yellow and the orange--these are all
[[Page S5928]]
hurricanes that have actually hit the United States between 1851 and
2008. It is a very frightening chart.
One of the reasons I think Senator Rubio from Florida is voting with
us is because he has seen a picture of this chart. That is how many
hurricanes have hit Florida since 1851. He is most certainly aware from
his State that if he takes the position that we have to require an
offset to fund disasters, his job as a Senator will be very, very
difficult, even more challenging than it is today, because the next
time a hurricane hits Florida, he is going to have to go sit down with
the budget folks and find out--before he can offer his people the
$2,000 in emergency aid, the $30,000 that helps them, the loans through
the Small Business Committee, the loans to get their businesses back--
he is going to have to come up here and negotiate to find an offset.
Last night, I watched the debate on the House side. I thought our
Democratic colleagues did a beautiful job, and I wish to thank them for
the beautiful way they spoke. I didn't see one Republican come to the
floor. They had just one of their leaders talking last night when the
vote happened. Maybe they are a little embarrassed, and they should be
because I am going to read the letters they sent.
Also, the gulf coast Republicans I think really have to think about
this because these storms, as we can see--my State and the people I
represent are in Hurricane Alley. This is Hurricane Rita, the blue,
which is one of the most devastating storms. That is why it is a
thicker line. Hurricane Gustav is the orange, Hurricane Ike is the dark
pink, and Hurricane Katrina is the yellow. All of these storms hit us
and wrecked the gulf coast.
Let me say what happened after that. Haley Barbour, the Governor of
Mississippi, who is still the Governor of Mississippi, came up here
when George Bush was the President and got $4.6 billion without one
penny of offset, and he got that within 60 days of the storm. I am
going to repeat that. Governor Haley Barbour, who is still the Governor
of Mississippi, came to Washington, met with the President, and left
with $4.6 billion to rebuild Mississippi. The Congress gave Louisiana
$5.4 billion, for which I was very grateful. However, we had 70 percent
of the damage but only got 55 percent of the money, so we were
shortchanged. I had to work for years. I finally got that squared away.
But this is why gulf coast Republicans and Republican Senators from
the gulf coast should think not twice but three times before they vote
to require an offset.
I am just saying I am not going to forget this vote, because I chair
this committee, and if my colleagues vote to require an offset and
another storm hits their State, then the responsibility is on their
shoulders to tell their people: I am sorry, I can't help you until I go
to Washington and find an offset.
Maybe it will get so ridiculous--and I am going to call this the
Cantor doctrine--maybe it will get so ridiculous that Eric Cantor will
tell all the people in America--there was a cartoon in the newspapers
about this. I am having it blown up because it is really sad, but it is
actually funny. There is a woman sitting on top of her roof because her
house is completely flooded. She has a phone, and she calls FEMA and
FEMA says: We can't rescue you right now. We are looking for an offset.
So maybe the new Cantor Republican model of ``pick yourself up by
your bootstraps and swim away on your own'' will actually really be put
into practice because I think that is what they want because before
that woman can be rescued, before the debris can be removed, that woman
is going to have to sit down at the table with her husband and kids in
a broken-down house or trailer and suggest some offsets to send to
their Congressman before we can send them help. That is not right. That
is what this debate is about.
Now, do we eventually have to pay for these disasters? Absolutely.
The Wall Street Journal editorialized against me the other day, so
let me answer them. They said: There goes Senator Landrieu; she doesn't
think she has to pay for anything. That is not true. I believe right
now we are paying for the war in Iraq, and it is very tough to pay for
that. We are finding a way in the supercommittee. But we didn't have to
find an offset before we could let our troops march in. We didn't have
them standing on the border, saying: Stand right here. Hold your fire.
Eric Cantor is working on an offset for you. We sent the troops in, we
let the bombers go, and we will figure out how to pay for it later.
So I am telling the Republicans in the House that they better think
very carefully about this vote. Senator Reid has sent a very good
compromise. He said: We will give up our number, we will take your
number on FEMA, but we are not going to take this offset.
Now, I still think and I want to say for the record, as the chairman
of this committee, that 3.65 is not going to be enough to get us
through all of next year, but it will get us through the next couple of
weeks and months--not months, maybe weeks. The government won't shut
down, and FEMA will have money to operate, as the leader said. It is
not ideal. It is not what is in our bill, which is the best, which is a
$6.5 billion level, which is funding not just FEMA, but it will fund
the Corps of Engineers, community development, agriculture. What the
House is doing only funds FEMA. It doesn't give any money to the poor.
It doesn't give any money to community development. It doesn't give any
money to the farmers. So if you are sitting out there looking at your
farm with your crops ruined, please don't think the House of
Representatives is doing one thing to help you because they are not.
So I have given any number of reasons why this is an important debate
to have. There is no guarantee Democrats will win, but every now and
then it is a good thing to stand up for principle, and I believe this
is a principle worth standing up for and worth fighting for.
I hope the press does their job over the next several days and asks
these Republicans: How in the world can you send a private letter
asking for funding and then come back to Washington and gut the same
program? And if the press does their job and if the people in our
country will ask those same questions, maybe a few of these Republican
leaders will compromise the way they should. Either give up the offset
or come up with a different one. Come up with another one that is much
less harmful.
Let me end with this. We have three letters that I will submit for
the Record. If people can't take my word for any of this, they can
listen to the chamber of commerce. What did the chamber of commerce
say? I will submit their letter. This is the wrong thing to do, the
chamber says. Don't eliminate this program. It is creating jobs in
America. So the Republicans, I know, don't really like to listen to
what I say a lot, but they should listen to the chamber of commerce.
The National Manufacturing Association--a very conservative group--
sent the Republicans a letter saying: Bad deal. Don't do it. They did
it anyway.
I just got a letter from the U.S. Conference of Mayors. All of the
mayors in the country, Republicans and Democrats, sent a letter to the
House saying: Don't do this. And they did it anyway.
So the only people more powerful and the only group more powerful
than the chamber, than NAM, than the mayors, are the people themselves.
So I hope this weekend the people will say to their representatives:
Don't cut out a program that is creating jobs. Don't require disaster
victims to have an offset. Let's keep the government operating, and
let's find a way to pay for this over time together and get this
deficit under control.
I am willing to do that. As the chair of this committee, I promise
them we can do better budgeting in the future. Nobody did it really
great in the past. I am willing to do that. I am willing to work with
them in any way. But let's not go down this dangerous and inappropriate
road.
Exhibit 1
Congress of the United States,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC, January 14, 2009.
Hon. Steven Chu,
Secretary of Energy, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington,
DC.
Dear Mr. Secretary: I write to express my support of Aptera
Motors' application for a loan under the Department of
Energy's 136 Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing
Incentive Program (ATVMIP). Funding will allow Aptera to
establish U.S. manufacturing facilities for the commercial
production of its plug-in and hybrid electric cars. Aptera
Motors plans to purchase and
[[Page S5929]]
equip manufacturing facilities to begin commercial-scale
production of its energy efficient electric vehicles.
Awarding this opportunity to Aptera Motors will greatly
assist a leading developer of electric vehicles in my
district.
Electric vehicle initiatives like Aptera's will aid U.S.
long-term energy goals by shifting away from fossil fuels and
using viable renewable energy sources like plug-in electric
energy. Additionally, Aptera's vehicles will reduce
dependence on foreign oil and enhance energy security.
Aptera's project will also promote domestic job creation
throughout California as well as in other states.
Unlike many other electric vehicles, Aptera's energy
efficient vehicles have a range of over 100 miles per charge
and the possibility to become one of the most energy
efficient vehicles in the world. A loan to Aptera will help
accelerate the move from gasoline-powered vehicles to cleaner
electric vehicles.
I urge you to give Aptera Motors' Advanced Technology
Vehicles Manufacturing Incentive Program funding application
full consideration. If I can be of further assistance, please
do not hesitate to contact me or my Press Assistant, Justin
LoFranco at (202) 225-3906.
Respectfully,
Darrell Issa,
Member of Congress.
____
Congress of the United States,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Re Quallion application for Department of Energy's Electric
Drive and Vehicle Battery and Component Manufacturing
Initiative grant.
Secretary Steven Chu,
U.S. Department of Energy, Independence Ave., SW, Washington,
DC.
Dear Secretary Chu: The State of California has
traditionally assumed a leading role in fighting global
warming and working to eliminate our dependence on foreign
sources of oil. We want to commend you for also taking
effective steps towards achieving these goals. As part of
this effort, the Department of Energy's Electric Drive and
Vehicle Battery and Component Manufacturing Initiative is
currently reviewing submissions for the construction of new
lithium ion battery facilities in the United States. The
Initiative is a huge step forward in our efforts to improve
our environment, eliminate our dependence on foreign sources
of oil and create a modern ``green collar'' workforce here in
the United States.
Quallion, an innovative American company located in
California, can be a valuable partner in your efforts because
it is ready today to directly support President Obama's goal
to have one million plug-in hybrid cars on the road by 2015.
Quallion is a world leader in the development of customized
lithium ion batteries for medical, military, aerospace and
vehicle applications. If Quallion is successful in its bid
for grants through the Department of Energy's Electric Drive
and Vehicle Battery and Component Manufacturing Initiative,
it is set to immediately execute the construction of a state-
of-the-art manufacturing facility to produce advanced lithium
ion cells, modules and battery technology in volumes that
will meet America's current and future military and
commercial needs. Quallion projects that with this grant
funding the proposed facility could be fully operational by
2012, and could produce more than 20,000 lithium ion
batteries each year.
In addition, Quallion projects that this funding will
create more than 2,300 new and long-term jobs nationwide. It
will also signal America's seriousness to the world that we
are ready to compete in the manufacturing of green
technologies, in this case the lithium ion battery
manufacturing space.
The lithium ion batteries manufactured in Quallion's new
facility will have the potential to deliver real and
immediate environmental solutions, while also creating new
jobs at a time when Americans need them the most. The
Environmental Protection Agency estimates that truck idling
results in the emission of 11 million tons of CO2
and the consumption of 960 million gallons of diesel fuel
annually. Quallion's new facility will produce zero emission
advanced lithium ion batteries designed to replace engine
idling as a power source for stationary trucks. Quallion will
deliver an immediate clean energy solution that enables the 1
million heavy trucks on our roads to comply with the growing
number of anti-idling laws across the U.S., eliminate
unnecessary pollution, and significantly reduce America's
consumption of fossil fuels.
We believe that the Department of Energy's Electric Drive
and Vehicle Battery and Component Manufacturing Initiative
can and will play a large role in helping us achieve our
goals. We are also confident that Quallion is a perfect
partner in our objectives and will advance projects that are
vital to our energy policy and national security.
Thank you for the leadership you have provided the
Department and our country as we embark on an exciting era in
our nation's stewardship of the environment and as we move
towards our shared goal of energy independence.
Sincerely,
Brad Sherman, Dana Rohrabacher, Lynn C. Woolsey, Howard
L. Berman, Lois Capps, Brian P. Bilbray, Diane E.
Watson, Gary G. Miller, Jim Costa, Kevin McCarthy,
Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon, Ken Calvert, Duncan Hunter,
Darrell E. Issa, David Dreier, Jerry McNerney, Adam B.
Schiff.
____
Congress of the United States,
Washington, DC, December 21, 2010.
Hon. Steven Chu,
U.S. Department of Energy,
Washington, DC.
Dear Secretary Chu: We are writing to reiterate our strong
support for Next Autoworks Company's loan application under
the Department of Energy's Advanced Technology Vehicle
Manufacturing (ATVM) program and inquire about the status of
the application.
Next Autoworks resubmitted a revised ATVM application in
May 2010 that was almost immediately declared substantially
complete and expeditiously reviewed for technical and
financial merit. We appreciate the Department's work to move
the application through several critical stage-gates over the
past several months.
Next Autoworks has the ability to transform communities in
Louisiana by bringing critical economic growth and jobs to
our state and region. As you know, the company plans to re-
equip a former Guide Corp plant in Monroe, LA that was
shuttered in 2006 and establish a production facility that
would bring approximately 1,400 direct jobs and an additional
1,800 indirect jobs to Northeast Louisiana. In addition, the
project will create thousands of jobs at supplier facilities
across the U.S. The State of Louisiana and local communities
have already demonstrated their commitment to the project by
offering the company $82 million in grants, $12.8 in employee
training services, and an estimated $33.8 million in tax
abatements to support the project.
Every day that Next Autoworks' application is delayed is
another day that workers cannot be hired to begin work at the
Monroe site and help mitigate our state's continued high
unemployment rate. Moreover, continued delay in the financing
for the project will also negatively impact the vehicle's
launch timing and this Administration's goals for fuel
economy. DOE's own environmental assessment of this project,
issued in October 2010, states that Next Autoworks' vehicle
will have a significant positive impact on fleet fuel economy
and the environment by providing a high quality, affordable
``green'' car to the American market.
We strongly urge you to continue to expedite Next
Autoworks' application. We would request an update on the
status of the application and expected timeframe for moving
forward before the end of the year.
Sincerely,
Mary Landrieu,
U.S. Senator.
David Vitter,
U.S. Senator.
Rodney Alexander,
Member of Congress.
Ms. LANDRIEU. I yield the floor.
Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, first of all, I ask unanimous
consent that I be permitted to speak for no more than 5 minutes and
that the Senator from West Virginia follow my presentation.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, first of all, I want to thank
the Senator from Louisiana. I also want to point out, look at all those
red lines. Those are the paths of hurricanes. Where do you think most
of them were going between 1851 and 2008? And why are folks like us on
the gulf coast and the Atlantic coast so sensitive about disaster
money? It is because we have been hit over and over.
Our lands we call paradise. But they happen to be, as the Senator
from Louisiana said, in the middle of ``hurricane highway.'' It is a
part of our lifestyle. When I was a kid, it was an excuse to get out of
school. When I was a bachelor, it was an excuse to have a party. But
now that I have the privilege of representing one of those very large
gulf coast States and Atlantic coast States, it is absolute, utter
destruction.
When Hurricane Andrew hit Miami, had it turned one degree to the
north, and instead drawn a bead on the Dade-Broward line in north
Miami, it would have been a $50 billion insurance loss storm in 1992
dollars. That would have been upward of $80 billion today. It would
have taken down every insurance company that was doing business in the
path of that storm. This is the destructive power. Do our people need
help? Of course they need help.
____________________