[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 9]
[House]
[Pages 12150-12151]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                          CURSE OF THE CAN-DO

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Whitfield). Under the Speaker's 
announced policy of January 6, 1999, the gentleman from Massachusetts 
(Mr. Delahunt) is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the 
minority leader.
  Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Speaker, where I come from, in metropolitan Boston, 
generations of otherwise well-adjusted citizens have suffered from the 
ill effects of a well-known curse. It is referred to as the ``Curse of 
the Bambino.'' Since the Red Sox traded Babe Ruth, life has never been 
quite the same, although I am one of those with deep quiet faith that 
the curse of the Bambino officially expires as we enter into the new 
millennium.
  I would note, for my colleagues and friends, folks like Mr. Freedman, 
and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Fossella), and the gentleman from 
New York (Mr. Sweeney), that if they check today's American League 
standings, they would find that the Yankees are in second place and the 
Red Sox are in first.
  I rise today, however, Mr. Speaker, to discuss a different kind of 
curse. Call it the ``Curse of the Can-Do.'' The curse afflicts the 
United States Coast Guard in its long proud tradition of never turning 
down a call for help, of never shirking new responsibility, even when 
the gas tank is literally on empty.
  It is too late for the Red Sox to get Babe Ruth back, but we still 
have an opportunity to ensure the readiness of the Coast Guard to 
discharge its lifesaving mission. So I take to the House floor to thank 
some colleagues who recently have helped lead us in that direction, but 
also to warn that we are still sailing into a very stiff wind.
  Last month, the House took historic steps to shore up Coast Guard 
resources to save lives, to prevent pollution, to fight drugs, to help 
the economy, to respond to natural disasters, and to enhance national 
security. Now it is up to us to see these efforts through.
  The fiscal year 2001 transportation appropriation bill, passed 
recently by the full House, would reverse more than a decade of chronic 
underfunding that has made it nearly impossible, nearly impossible, for 
the Coast Guard to do the work the Congress has mandated that it do. 
For the first time in recent memory, there is now genuine hope that we 
can adequately safeguard the lives and livelihoods of those who live 
and work on or near the water, from the small harbors of New England to 
the ice flows of Alaska; from the Great Lakes to the gulf coast to the 
banks of the Mississippi.
  I particularly want to commend the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Young), the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, and the 
ranking member, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey); as well as the 
chairman of the Subcommittee on Transportation, the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Wolf), and the ranking member, the gentleman from 
Minnesota (Mr. Sabo). Their leadership has underscored the stark fact 
that the demands on the Coast Guard have vastly outpaced its resources. 
There is no longer margin for error, and the consequence of any such 
error is literally a life and death matter.
  Despite the fact that there are no more Coast Guard personnel today 
than there were in 1967, it is indisputable that day in and day out no 
public agency works harder or smarter. As a reminder, during the 1990s, 
the Coast Guard reduced its workforce by nearly 10 percent and operated 
within a budget that rose by only 1 percent in actual dollars. Actual 
dollars. Not dollars adjusted for inflation, but actual dollars. Over 
this period, it has also responded to a half million SOS calls, an 
average of approximately 65,000 each year, and, in the process, has 
saved 50,000 lives.
  Every year the Coast Guard performs 50,000 inspections of U.S. and 
foreign merchant vessels. It ensures the safe passage of a million 
commercial vessels through our ports and waterways. Every year it 
responds to 13,000 reports of water pollution. Every year it inspects 
1,000 offshore drilling platforms. Every year it conducts 12,000 
fisheries enforcement boardings. And every year it prevents 100,000 
pounds of cocaine from reaching American shores and infecting the 
streets and neighborhoods of our communities.
  Two centuries of experience have taught us to rely on the 
professionalism, judgment, compassion, commitment and courage of the 
Coast Guard. From hurricane to airplane crashes; from drug smugglers to 
foreign factory trawlers, the Coast Guard is always, always, on call, 
just as it has been for some 200 years. We have learned to trust the 
Coast Guard with all we hold dear: our property, our natural resources, 
and our lives. In Washington, a long way from the sea and the wind and 
the whitecaps, it has been tempting to task the Coast Guard with new 
and multiple and burdensome missions. Far too tempting.
  As co-chair of the Congressional Coast Guard Caucus, along with my 
colleagues, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble) and the 
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor), I have had grave concerns for 
a long time. Most recently, much has been made of the demands on the 
Coast Guard for their work in the area of illegal drug interdiction. As 
a former prosecutor, I am all for fighting the drug war, and have fully 
supported calling upon the Coast Guard to step up its interdiction 
efforts, but not at the expense of its core mission, the saving of 
human lives.
  We just cannot wish away the costs, and I am not ready to start 
treating search and rescue like a luxury we can do without, any more 
than we can move cops off the beat and then complain about street 
crime. We have stretched the Coast Guard so thin for so long that it 
can barely be expected to fulfill its credo, Semper Paratus, ``Always 
Prepared.'' And there are scores and scores of new missions waiting in 
the wings.
  This year, the Coast Guard was the only Federal agency to earn an A 
from the Independent Government Performance Project for operating with 
unusual efficiency and effectiveness. That assessment placed the Coast 
Guard at

[[Page 12151]]

the very top of 20 executive branch agencies because, and I am quoting 
now, ``because its top notch planning and performance budgeting 
overcame short staffing and fraying equipment.'' It all came down, they 
concluded, to what I mentioned earlier, the curse. The ``Curse of the 
Can-Do.'' ``The Coast Guard,'' they said, ``is a can-do organization 
whose `can' is dwindling while its `do' is growing.''
  This just simply cannot continue, not when the average age of its 
deep water cutters is 27 years old, making this the second oldest naval 
fleet on the planet; not when fixed-wing aircraft deployments have more 
than doubled, and helicopter deployments are up more than 25 percent 
without any increase in the number of aircraft, pilots or crews; not 
when duty officers suffer chronic fatigue because staffing constraints 
permit only 4 hours of sleep at night; and not when the United States 
Coast Guard commandant testifies before Congress that there is not 
enough fuel to power the United States Coast Guard fleet; and not when 
the Coast Guard radio communication units are 30 years old, like the 
one described in a recent news account that began this way, and again I 
am quoting: ``If you dial 911, say the word `fire' and run outside, a 
fire engine will show up at your driveway. If you pick up the handset 
on your VHF-FM radio, say the word `Mayday' and jump overboard, you 
could very well drown or die of hypothermia.''
  Study after study has documented these hazards. A recent interagency 
task force concluded that obsolescence presents a threat that the Coast 
Guard could soon be overwhelmed by a mismatch between its missions and 
the quantity and quality of the assets necessary to carry them out.

                              {time}  1515

  A 1997 General Accounting Office review was even more blunt. It 
projected $90 million in annual reductions in operating expenses just 
to bridge the gap. The GAO was alarmed by the sheer size of the gap and 
the dwindling number of available efficiency-related options.
  Well, where I am from, a marine distress call is an urgent plea for 
emergency law enforcement and rescue personnel. When oil spills 
jeopardize economic as well as environmental resources, when frozen 
rivers trap heating oil barges, when the well-being of both fish and 
fishermen are threatened, when offshore danger strikes, we know where 
to turn, to the United States Coast Guard.
  That is why when the ink dried on the House Department of 
Transportation appropriation, there was reason for new and genuine 
hope. It was like having Pedro Martinez in the starting rotation, it 
felt like this really could be the year.
  Well, the bill approved recently for next year increases Coast Guard 
accounts by nearly $600 million, a 15-percent boost. It also includes 
$125 million to help modernize aging planes, helicopters, and motor 
lifeboats and upgrade rather than abandon Coast Guard stations in the 
communities that they serve.
  Years from now, the 395 Members of this House who voted for that bill 
can look back and take satisfaction from the knowledge that they helped 
save a life, a coastal community, an international alliance, and maybe 
even a marine species or two. But that old curse still hovers over the 
Coast Guard, the curse of the ``can do.''
  Just this week, the Senate came in at $250 million less than the 
House appropriation. The timing could not be worse. The Senate action 
followed two recent rounds of Coast Guard cutbacks for the current 
fiscal year, reducing cutter days and flight hours by 10 percent.
  I wonder if the men on the fishing vessel that are being rescued in 
this picture to my right would approve of a 10-percent reduction, 
meaning a slower response time. I ask my colleagues and the American 
people to reflect on this photo and the reduction that I just 
mentioned.
  Why? Because the Coast Guard responded to natural disasters but the 
Congress failed to pass emergency supplemental funding and because a 
variety of overdue personnel benefits for everything from housing to 
health care were mandated by the current defense authorization but with 
no money to pay for those increased costs.
  There is more. The good news is a new effort through the pending 
military construction bill to restore $800 million in supplemental 
funds. But since only a third of that is designated as emergency 
expenses, the baseline for future Coast Guard budgets next year and 
beyond would be seriously compromised.
  So I rise today to express gratitude for the progress made in this 
chamber so far but also to raise a warning flag about the two 
challenges immediately ahead.
  Specifically, I urge my colleagues to hold firm in conference on the 
House approved allocation in the transportation appropriation bill and 
then to recede to Senate conferees regarding the $800 million in the 
MILCON measure. That is what it will take for the Coast Guard to do the 
job we have assigned to it, to contain oil spills, to catch smugglers, 
and, most important of all, to save lives.

                          ____________________