[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 77 (Wednesday, May 21, 2014)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3239-S3241]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mrs. MURRAY:
  S. 2366. A bill to amend the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch 
Act to establish a permanent, nationwide summer electronic benefits 
transfer for children program; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I know that many students across the 
country are waiting on the edge of their seats and looking forward to 
school letting out shortly for their summer break. But for many of 
those kids who participate in school meal programs, the summer can be a 
pretty uncertain time--not knowing when or where they are going to get 
their next meal. It can be a stressful time for those kids' parents as 
well, who have to stretch every dollar they have to feed their family 
today.
  That is a struggle Nicole, a single mom from my home State of 
Washington, knows all too well. She has been unemployed now for about a 
year. She has two kids. She has a daughter who is finishing 
kindergarten and a son who is just finishing fifth grade. They have 
relied on SNAP benefits to help pay for their groceries and school 
meals to get help during the school year. But Nicole says that last 
summer, without school-provided meals, it was particularly difficult to 
put enough food on the table to feed her kids.
  Today I am here introducing a bill that will help families like 
Nicole's and many across the country. It is a bill to make sure more 
children can get the nutrition they need during the summer break. When 
school is in session, millions of kids from low-income families can get 
free or reduced-price meals through our National School Lunch Program. 
But during the summer, hunger goes up in this country about 34 percent 
for families with school-aged kids, according to a study.
  Right now we do have a Federal congregate summer meals program, of 
which I have long been supportive. It is called the Summer Food Service 
Program. It is very successful in some areas of our country. I always 
look forward to working with my colleagues to strengthen and expand 
that program to make sure it is reaching as many children as possible.
  But in a study from 2012, summer congregate meals programs only 
reached about 14 percent of the students who qualified for free or 
reduced-priced meals during the school year. That adds up to tens of 
millions of kids across our country who do not have access to meal 
programs in the summer.
  In my home State of Washington, just 9.8 percent of those kids 
participated in 2012. That means those kids are more likely to deal 
with hunger or food insecurity. That is unacceptable to me. When it 
comes to ensuring that our kids grow up with the nutrition they need to 
learn and to thrive, there are no excuses.
  We have to do more to fight summer hunger. That is why I am here 
today introducing legislation called the Stop Child Summer Hunger Act. 
The bill is pretty simple. It provides families with an EBT card that 
will help them afford groceries during the summer months to replace the 
meals those kids would otherwise have gotten at school. It is based on 
a very successful pilot program that has proven now to decrease hunger 
by 33 percent. Some of the demonstration projects had participation 
rates as high as 90 percent. Scaling up that program with the Stop 
Child Summer Hunger Act will help more children get the nutrition they 
need in the summer months.
  The bill is fully paid for. We do that by closing a tax loophole that 
actually encourages U.S. companies to shift our jobs and profits 
offshore. From my perspective, that is a pretty fair trade. It will 
encourage companies to keep jobs and profits here in America. At the 
same time, it will help kids get the nutrition they need during the 
summer.
  Fighting hunger, especially among kids, is an issue that is extremely 
important to me. I have told this body before that when I was just a 
teenager--15 years old--my dad, who fought in World War II, was 
diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. Within a few years he could not work 
any longer. My mom had to go to work and find a job. It did not pay 
anywhere near enough to support seven kids and a husband who had a 
growing stack of medical bills. So for several months when I was young, 
we had to rely on food stamps. It was not much, but I remember it 
helping to get my family by during a very tough time. So I know how 
hard it is for families who are struggling to put food on the table.
  As adults, I believe it is our moral responsibility to take care of 
our children, to make sure they can grow up healthy and to make sure 
they have every opportunity to thrive and learn. I hope we can live up 
to this responsibility by tackling this problem and helping more kids 
get the nutrition they need to live healthy lives. I hope this body can 
work with me to make sure that kids who are now looking forward to 
their summer break can enjoy it free from hunger.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. WYDEN (for himself, Mr. Merkley, Mrs. Feinstein, and Mrs. 
        Boxer):
  S. 2379. A bill to approve and implement the Klamath Basin 
agreements, to improve natural resource management, support economic 
development, and sustain agricultural production in the Klamath River 
Basin in the public interest and the interest of the United States, and 
for other purposes; to the

[[Page S3240]]

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, today I rise to introduce a bill that would 
authorize the implementation of the landmark agreements that settle 
some of our country's most complex and contentious water allocation and 
species preservation issues. Water management crises this century have 
made the Klamath Basin nationally known, with all interests having 
experienced devastating water years. Overcoming that adversity, the 
parties in the basin have spent years coming together to hammer out 
solutions--essentially giving up their right to obstruct in the name of 
the greater good. With this bill the basin should now be known for the 
dedicated and enduring collaborative efforts that have honed in on a 
sustainable and more economically certain future for the basin--an 
example that other regions can emulate for their watershed challenges. 
It is time for Congress to place its seal of approval and set about 
implementing these agreements to restore the basin by passing the 
Klamath Water Recovery and Economic Restoration Act of 2014.
  I am pleased to be joined by three colleagues on this bill. Senator 
Merkley has tirelessly worked to support the collaborative approach 
undertaken by two states, four Tribes, multiple Federal agencies, and 
countless stakeholders. Senators Feinstein and Boxer have answered the 
call for communities reeling from unprecedented drought, and the 
Klamath Basin--spanning Oregon and California--is yet another 
illustration of their efforts to assist communities in need while 
supporting fish and wildlife. Together, we are committed to working 
with our colleagues in the Senate and House to advance this bill and 
get it signed by the President.
  The story of the Klamath Basin revolves around water. Congress 
authorized a federal irrigation project for the basin in 1905. Now the 
Klamath Project provides water service to roughly 210,000 acres of 
productive farmland--producing such crops as potatoes, cereal grains, 
sugar beets, alfalfa and other hay, and irrigated pastures for beef 
cattle. The Klamath Hydroelectric Project supports power needs in the 
basin with seven dams, the last of which was built more than 50 years 
ago. Water needs for irrigation have increasingly come into conflict 
with the needs of fish and wildlife. In 1908, President Teddy Roosevelt 
established the nation's first waterfowl refuge, Lower Klamath National 
Wildlife Refuge. The importance of the basin for migratory birds along 
the Pacific Flyway saw the later creation of the Clear Lake, Tule Lake, 
Upper Klamath, Bear Valley, and Klamath Marsh National Wildlife 
Refuges. The basin is also home to 13 species of anadromous fish. Three 
of these species are listed under the Endangered Species Act, including 
the endangered listing of the Lost River and shortnose suckers in 1988, 
the threatened listing of coho salmon in 1997, and the threatened 
listing of bull trout in 1999. These fisheries--particularly salmon and 
suckers--are important to the six federally recognized tribes in the 
basin. Water demand often far exceeds the amount of water in a given 
year, setting up a situation ripe for conflict.
  That conflict grew to a head in the early 2000s. In 2001, biological 
opinions about the water necessary for endangered fish resulted in the 
Bureau of Reclamation of the Department of the Interior withholding 
much of the water that would have normally gone to Klamath Project 
irrigators. Researchers for Oregon State estimated that the water 
curtailment would have, in the absence of public and private emergency 
mitigation efforts, reduced agricultural output in the Upper Basin by 
$82 million, about 20 percent, and regional employment by almost 2,000 
jobs. Then in 2002, low water flows and poor water health caused the 
death of as many as 70,000 fall chinook before they could navigate up 
the Klamath and spawn, in an event known as the ``2002 fish kill.'' The 
rancor and legal conflicts only intensified with these events, creating 
uncertainty in the basin that has impeded overall growth and 
prosperity.
  Instead of accepting a future determined by acrimonious and costly 
legal battles over the water, stakeholders in the basin came together 
to chart a different path. They recognized that their respective 
interests could be better met through cooperative efforts designed to 
enhance species recovery, the certainty of agricultural operations, and 
stability in the basin for economic growth and civic relations. Years 
of complex and challenging work culminated in two historic agreements 
in 2010--the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement, KBRA, and the Klamath 
Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement, KHSA. The KBRA settles water 
disputes in exchange for greater water certainty for farmers and 
ranchers, water for fish and wildlife needs, reduced power costs for 
irrigators, and restoration efforts for fisheries. The KHSA sets out a 
process whereby four hydroelectric dams may be removed, at no federal 
cost, should removal be in interest of fish restoration and the public 
interest considering local community impacts. Together these 
cooperative efforts can achieve more for the basin than asserting 
individual interests could. The collective efforts will promote 
economic stability and growth, while ensure a full suite of restoration 
efforts are in place for the recovery of listed fish species.
  The latest agreement in the basin became final just this year, the 
Upper Basin Comprehensive Agreement, UBA. I am especially proud of the 
work that produced the UBA, having helped convene the special task 
force that worked mightily to find agreement on the key remaining 
issues in the basin. The task force came about after a June 2013 Senate 
Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing on water issues in the 
basin that I chaired. The Committee heard from 17 diverse witnesses and 
received roughly 4,000 comments via email prior to the hearing. Most 
acknowledged the clear impetus for a comprehensive solution given that 
the Oregon Water Resources Department found in March 2013 that the 
Klamath Tribes held a time immemorial water right, making them the most 
senior water right holder in the basin. And after months of arduous 
work on the task force, members including irrigators, 
environmentalists, and tribes found common ground on habitat protection 
and restoration and swallowed hard to reduce the federal expenditures 
needed as I had called for in the Senate. The UBA lays out specific 
water management and restoration measures for the Upper Basin, 
including 30,000 acre feet of increased stream flows into Upper Klamath 
Lake. The agreement provides crucial economic certainty to small 
business in the basin who sell equipment to farmers growing the crops, 
certainty for the cattle ranchers who manage their herds, certainty for 
the tribes who want to pursue promising opportunities in forestry, like 
biomass and other economic development.
  The Klamath Basin Water Recovery and Economic Restoration Act of 2014 
authorizes these historic agreements and paves the way for the 
restoration work needed to achieve their goals. In so doing, it sets 
out a new cooperative management plan that the Bureau of Reclamation 
will administer. For the first time, the Klamath Reclamation Project 
will include fish, wildlife, and National Wildlife Refuges as 
authorized purposes for the project. This will allow water managers to 
increase in-stream flows and lake levels. Private landowners and others 
will undertake permanent protections for riparian areas and other 
enhancements that will help restore hundreds of miles of fish habitat. 
Fish biologists estimate that these efforts will boost annual 
production of adult Chinook salmon by 80 percent. Additional water and 
flexible releases for the National Wildlife refuges means greater 
numbers of migratory waterfowl, non-game water birds, wintering bald 
eagles, and other sensitive species.
  Achieving these benefits for fish and wildlife correspond to economic 
benefits to the basin. The restoration efforts will also produce jobs. 
The Department of the Interior calculates that more than 4,000 farming, 
ranching, commercial and recreational fishing, construction, and other 
jobs will be created or preserved. The water management plan provides 
for more predictable water for farmers and ranchers to ensure irrigated 
agriculture continues in the basin. A drought management plan assists 
in navigating the challenges created by drought and climate change in 
the basin. To deal with the escalating electric costs faced by 
irrigators, the bill lays out a path to

[[Page S3241]]

affordable power including renewable energy development. There are also 
economic benefits to tribes, beyond what a water right alone can 
achieve. The legislation sets up an economic development fund for the 
Klamath Tribes so they can create tribal jobs while sustainably 
managing their natural resources. By modifying some parties' interests 
for the greater good, the basin can move beyond years of polarizing 
debate and create a stable future from which to plan and prosper.
  These historic agreements didn't happen by osmosis. They represent 
years of hard work among parties who have stood up to incredible 
pressures and made very real sacrifices to better their communities and 
the associations they represent. I have thanked many parties for their 
dedication over the course of these agreements and want to again 
express my deepest thanks to the members of the task force and those 
who went before them to tee up the work for Congress. With this bill, 
it is now time for Congress to step up and deliver on this package of 
agreements. The spirit of compromise on these thorny water issues has a 
message for not just Congress, but provides an example of how other 
vexing water situations across the Nation can sit down to work out 
their differences.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BOOKER:
  S. 2380. A bill to amend title 49, United States Code, to improve the 
national freight policy of the United States, and for other purposes; 
to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Freight 
Priorities Act, which takes an all-of-the-above approach to addressing 
our 
Nation's freight needs. We must improve the movement of freight and 
strengthen our economic competitiveness by examining a comprehensive, 
multimodal, national network that includes not just our major highways, 
but our rail, seaports, local roads and intermodal facilities. This 
bill would authorize the Department of Transportation to broaden our 
approach to freight policy, set goals for reducing air pollution, and 
creates a pilot program to study the disproportionate impacts on urban 
communities that can be caused by the movement of freight.
  In 2011, 17.6 billion tons of goods were transported throughout the 
United States, valued at more than $16.8 trillion. The Federal Highway 
Administration estimates there will be a 60 percent increase of freight 
being moved over the next 30 years.
  In New Jersey, hundreds of millions of tons of freight are annually 
shipped through our ports, by rail, and highways. The port of New York 
and New Jersey, as of 2012, supported over 296,000 jobs and 28.9 
billion in business income. This major economic engine drives New 
Jersey's economy and boosts U.S. economic competitiveness. 1However, 
too often, our lack of investment and our limited focus on the highway 
network causes our freight to get stuck in congested, heavily 
trafficked urban areas. Extended truck, rail and ship idling negatively 
impacts the health and air quality of local urban communities. With a 
slight adjustment of our priorities and a strong national commitment to 
investing in our infrastructure, we can dramatically reduce congestion, 
improve the health of American communities, make sure goods get where 
they need to go faster and cheaper, strengthen our economy and create 
jobs.
  The Freight Priorities Act sets goals for increasing efficiencies. It 
outlines goals to reduce air pollution and congestion, and requires the 
inclusion of port authorities in freight infrastructure investment 
decisions. The bill requires DOT to meet performance measures for all 
modes of freight movement, and establishes a pilot program that will 
help find ways to reduce the impact on local communities and help 
create access to jobs at ports and other multimodal facilities.
  By refocusing our priorities, we will ensure that the smartest, most-
cost effective projects secure funding. In New Jersey this could mean 
investing in the Raritan intermodal hub project in Essex, Union and 
Middlesex counties, which would create a direct connection for freight 
cars to access the port of New York and New Jersey. The project would 
relieve congestion on the roads and shift freight off of Amtrak's 
passenger lines. This bill would also prioritize investments that 
reduce air pollution, such as shore power technology at the port of 
Newark, which would help reduce emissions by allowing major cargo 
vessels to plug into the electric grid while at port.
  Rather than finding ways to merely skate by on the limited 
infrastructure funds we have each year, the conversation we should be 
having in Congress is how we can dramatically increase investments in 
our infrastructure and improve the safety and functionality of our 
entire network that transports both people and goods. This bill is a 
strong step in that direction. I urge my colleagues to join me in 
supporting this important piece of legislation, and look forward to 
working with my colleagues on the Senate Commerce Committee to carry 
these priorities as we draft our portion of the Surface Transportation 
Reauthorization bill.

                          ____________________